Hate In A Small Town 5 (Visalia Edition)

February 15, 2026

Jim Reeves Gay, News, Personal , , , , , , , , 1 Comment

Since the Pride Month proclamation fiasco in Porterville, California, in the summer of 2013, I’ve written several blogs on ‘Hate In A Small Town’. You can find them here: Hate In A Small Town (1) 9-18-2014, Hate In A Small Town (2) 6-18-2014, Porterville City Council Still Snubbing LGBTQ Community 9-24-2014, and Hate In A Small Town 4 – It’s Déjà vu all over again 3-19-2025. The first blog was printed in the Weekend Edition of the Visalia Times Delta on September 21-22, 2013. Those blogs all dealt with a nearby city, Porterville, California. My city, Visalia, has been better about LGBTQ issues, for the most part, until this incident. (Not that Visalia has been a gay beacon, by any means. In 2002, the ACLU settled a lawsuit against the Visalia Unified School District, in which the District “agreed to adopt sweeping reforms to address anti-gay harassment, including groundbreaking measures to train staff and students with the goal of preventing harassment before it happens,” *see below for the Consent order)

The picture above started making the rounds on social media on Thursday, February 12, 2026. Here’s the background, as I know it at the time of this publication.

A class picture was taken in an auditorium, with some of the ASB officers wearing white t-shirts with lettering, designed to spell out “Always Legit Class of 2026”. See the image below.

The event was apparently also hosting freshman orientation, with students from feeder middle schools on campus. The current story circulating is that two eighth grade boys were seen holding hands, triggering the students in the above picture to spell out a homophobic slur, and have other students take pictures. It’s not known if the targets of the slur saw it in the moment, but they have certainly seen it on social media since. It’s also not clear where Redwood High School staff and teachers were during this incident, as they appear not to have put a stop to the students posing for the picture.

Students immediately posted to Instagram and other social media sites, and the shit hit the fan. “Going viral” doesn’t do justice to how those posts took off, and how they were received by the community.

Visalia Unified School District began immediate damage control. Click on ‘more’ for the rest of the story.

More

Part 2: Visalia City Charter – is the City following it’s “Constitution”?

February 12, 2026

Jim Reeves geek, News, Personal , , , , , , Leave a comment

Visalia’s City Charter was adopted in 1923. It was updated in 1974, but only one change is obvious in the text. “Article XVI Miscellaneous Provisions Section 21. (Deleted November 4, 1974)” If anything else was changed, there are no indications in the current Charter. (That was a prohibition on city employees supporting a candidate for municipal office. I suspect that runs afoul of Constitutional rights): ARTICLE XVI. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
(Section 21. Neither the City Manager nor any person in the employ of the City shall take any active part in securing, or shall contribute money toward the nomination or election of any candidate for a municipal office.)

As I’ve been reading through it, I have some questions. They were originally triggered by the sections dealing with the city library, which we no longer have (it’s now a branch of the Tulare County Library). There are a few other things, too.

Ready to dive in? Click on ‘more’.

More

Visalia’s Charter: Time for a Library Trustee Update?

February 10, 2026

Jim Reeves commentary, News, Personal , , , , , , Leave a comment

I was perusing the Charter of the City of Visalia, as one does, and I ran across a bit of a mystery, and a conundrum. I think it’s time for an update. It was last modified in 1974, and some of the things in it need some changes. For starters, it needs to become gender neutral:

Article VIII
City Manager
Section 1. The City Manager need not be a resident of the State of California at
the time of his appointment. His powers and duties shall be:

The City of Visalia has had a woman as city manager for some time, now. The Municipal Code does, at least, cover itself in this situation, with the following:

1.04.030 Grammatical interpretation.
The following grammatical rules shall apply in the ordinances of the city unless it is apparent from the context that a different construction is intended:
A. Gender. Each gender includes the masculine, feminine and neuter genders.
B. Singular and Plural. The singular number includes the plural and the plural includes the singular.
C. Tenses. Words used in the present tense include the past and the future tenses and vice versa, unless manifestly inapplicable. (Ord. 9605 § 2 (part), 1996: prior code § 111)

But that’s not what this blog is about. This is:

Article VI
Legislative. The Council. Powers and Duties
(5) Appoint a City Attorney, a City Manager, a City Clerk, and five Library
Trustees.

More

Change is inevitable – except from vending machines

February 2, 2026

Jim Reeves commentary, News, Personal , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

Change has come to Visalia. Specifically, on Tulare Avenue. From Demaree east to Cotta, new lane configurations have upset a lot of people.

I put a video up on Facebook and Instagram about these new lane configurations, and it’s garnered over 11 thousand views in just one day. (You can view the YouTube version, here.)

Change doesn’t come easily for some folks. My Facebook post has 55 comments so far in the 24 hours since I posted it. (That’s a lot for a post by me.) Most were not favorable towards the new layout.

Change doesn’t come easily for some folks. Here are some comments made, and my response to some of them.

More

The system works, if you werk it. (Ususally)

January 29, 2026

Jim Reeves News, Personal , , , , , , Leave a comment

On the left, before. On the right, after.

On Monday, January 26, 2026, I’d finally decided to do something. I’ve been having to try to remember to avoid a ‘pothole’ every time I went through the intersection of Mooney and Visalia Parkway. In the westbound lane, I’d more often than not “thump thump” as I was returning home from Costco or Lowe’s. I kept thinking, “they really need to fix that. Don’t Caltrans people ever drive through this intersection? It’s been like this for months! When are they going to fix it??”

When it became clear that they remained blissfully unaware of this nuisance, I decided I would have to report it myself. So I did.

The repair is not perfect, but it is better than it was.

More

Public Records Request: Visalia Unified School District – update 1/21/2026

January 21, 2026

Jim Reeves News, Personal , , , , , , Leave a comment

So.

What are we to assume with this response? Here are the previous posts about this situation.

  1. The first post. No recording?
  2. The second post. Requesting a clarification.
  3. The third post. No, we don’t have that, and where do you want us to look?
  4. The fourth post. I get a bit detailed about my request.

They don’t have a specific Board policy to not record “special meetings” when they are held in the Board room at VUSD headquarters. They also don’t have any documentation such as emails or memos, from January 1st, 2021 directing these meetings not be video recorded and posted to YouTube.

So. Again. What are we to assume with this response?

Either the decision was made prior to January 1, 2021, so VUSD is not going to provide any documentation, or someone made a decision and informed relevant staff verbally, and left no documentation. Or, perhaps, my specific job titles and descriptions didn’t cover who made such a decision, and VUSD will not step out of the parameters of the specifics in my latest email to provide a response.

At any rate, the practical effect is that VUSD does not video record and make available to the public “special meetings” of the Board of Trustees, regardless of the ability to do so.

Someone, somewhere, sometime, made this decision.

My next step will be questioning the Board of Trustees directly, during public comments at a Board meeting.

We’ll see if that rattles any cages anywhere, and gets me an actually responsive answer.

Stay tuned.

(In case it’s a bit difficult to read the response letter, here’s the text)

January 21, 2026
Sent Via Email Only: jim.visalia@gmail.com
Jim Reeves
Re: Further Response to Public Records Act Request
Dear Mr. Reeves:
This letter serves as the further response of Visalia Unified School District (District) to your
correspondence dated December 6, 2025 (received by the District on December 8, 2025), and
January 11, 2026 (received by the District on January 12, 2026). Your correspondence requests
records pursuant to the California Public Records Act (PRA), Government Code section 7920.000
et seq.
You have requested a copy of the District’s “policy of not recording ‘special meetings'” and “any
internal memos, emails, or other directives of any sort that direct staff not to record ‘special
meetings’ that occur in the Boardroom.”
The District initially responded to your December 6, 2025, request on December 18, 2025,
advising you there were no documents responsive to your request for a “policy of not recording
special meetings” and seeking clarification on both the date range and identifying staff names
and/or titles for your request for “any internal memos, emails, or other directives of any sort
that direct staff not to record ‘special meetings’ that occur in the Boardroom.”
You responded to the District on January 11, 2026, stating that “To limit unnecessary records
searches, I believe that the District employee(s) responsible for recording Board of Trustee
meetings held in the Boardroom of the Visalia Unified School District, or their supervisor(s), are
the most likely sources of the information requested. These job titles may include senior
administrative assistant, technological services; senior information technology technician;
information technology technician; and/or information technology assistant. Please provide
copies of any memos, emails, or other directions to District employees responsible for recording
and posting the regular Board meetings that direct them to not record or post ‘special meetings’
held in the Board Chambers. Since Board meetings have been posted to the District’s YouTube
channel as of 1/25/2022, please limit the search to 1/1/2021 through the present date.”
After conducting a reasonable search, the District determines that it has no records that are
subject to disclosure under the PRA and responsive to the request. Accordingly, no records will
be produced.
The District takes seriously its responsibilities as a guardian of the public’s information and
understands its obligation under the PRA to assist you with making a focused and effective
request that would facilitate identification of responsive records. (Government Code §
7922.600.) If we have not correctly interpreted your request and you believe that records
should be disclosed, please explain your position and assist the District in clarifying your request.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Snrck Sara Sanchez
Legal Coordinator
Human Resources Development

Steven does Dallas

January 17, 2026

Jim Reeves Gay, News , , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

Steven G. “Slade” Childers (Left-circa 1972 – Right-2025)

Wait, no… that’s not right. Steven sued Dallas. The Dallas Police Department.

Why?

Because they didn’t want a homosexual working for them. Really.

Later court and legislative battles are often remembered, like Lawrence V. Texas, California Propositions 22 and 8, and the Supreme Court of the United States case Obergefell V. Hodges. But in 1981, Childers V. Dallas was an early opening salvo in the battle for equality.

It was the 1970’s. Stonewall was just a few years earlier, in June of 1969. The Dallas LGBT community held their first Pride Parade in 1972, and Steven G. “Slade” Childers was there. He was 21 years old at the time, and working for the City of Dallas, Texas, in the city water department.

It had become clear to Slade that he was not being promoted in his current position, so when he saw a job opening listed for “storekeeper seven” with the city, he applied. The listing did not specify it was with the Police Department, so at this time, it could be assumed it was a position with the city administration. Slade took the placement test, making the highest score. He was put on the list for interviews, and was called by the Police Department for a job in their evidence storeroom. He was not hired, and not informed why.

The next year, he applied again, and again scored highest on the written test. He was called in by the Police Department for the same position as before. During this interview, he asked the person conducting the interview, the same person who had interviewed him before, why he hadn’t been hired?

Although it probably didn’t seem like it at the time, the proverbial feces hit the oscillating air mover.

The plot, as they say, thickens.

More

January 16, 2025 – January 16, 2026

January 16, 2026

Jim Reeves Gay, Personal , , , Leave a comment

What can I say about the last year?

“Wow” just doesn’t seem to convey the import in any truly meaningful way.

Today is our 1st anniversary. You can see the wedding video, here, if you like. It was such a fun ceremony, with lots of laughs. Some intentional, some not.

Here’s another picture of us that I like very much, from a couple of years ago.

It’s been a very important year for me. I’ve learned how to be a husband, something I never thought would be a thing. (Not that I think I’m done learning, hopefully that is an ongoing project!)

In our vows, I wrote Kou “always leads with energy, passion, and maybe just a little bit of silliness”, and that remains true today. His love for me is eclipsed only by mine for him.

I could go on about the attention he pays his family, and now mine. How he cares for our dogs as deeply as he would for children. How he takes his role as an educator so seriously, but also that he brings a joy and energy to his profession so often lacking in today’s world. His students justifiably adore him. I don’t doubt that some of his co-workers don’t really know how to take him! Here’s a hint, folks: emulate him, and you too can be a great educator, and a great person!

In short, he is an amazing person, and I love him very much. Happy Anniversary, Kou! Love you!

Follow Up – Public Records Request – City of Visalia – Dodge Durangos & “upfit”

January 14, 2026

Jim Reeves commentary, News, Personal , , , , , , , Leave a comment

My request for information regarding the purchase and “upfit” of 14 new Dodge Durango Police SUVs landed in the Visalia City Clerk’s email Monday, 1/12/2026, and the response landed in my email Tuesday, 1/13/2026, shortly after 5pm. Talk about quick service!

If you’d like to follow me down this particular rabbit hole, click on ‘more’ below, and you’ll see the pages of information about the Durangos, and the “upfit” equipment to be installed in each.

If you don’t want to fall down that hole, then I’ll just say that it takes a lot of equipment to outfit a modern police vehicle, and while I think $33,000 each is making someone a lot of money, I doubt this is a case of “we can get it cheaper somewhere else”.

Thank you to the City Clerk for the rapid response to my request.

Images of the vehicle invoices next:

More

Public Records Request: Visalia Unified School District – the next step

January 11, 2026

Jim Reeves News, Personal , , , , , , , Leave a comment

I’m still trying to find out why “special meetings” held in the Visalia Unified School District’s Boardroom are not recorded and posted to YouTube, as are their regular meetings. (“Special meetings” held elsewhere I don’t expect to see video recorded, simply due to the equipment not being available at remote locations. That doesn’t apply to the Board room, since the equipment is all right there.)

Here’s my latest email to the District:

1/11/2026
Sara Sanchez, Legal Coordinator, Human Resources Development
Visalia Unified School District

Dear Sara Sanchez,

This is a request under the California Public Records Act (Government Code § 6250 et seq.).

Background:
On December 18, 2025, you responded to my prior correspondence regarding:
Request No. 1
A copy of the District’s “policy of not recording ‘special meetings'”.
You responded:
“After conducting a reasonable search, the District determines that it has no records that are
subject to disclosure under the PRA and responsive to the request. Accordingly, no records will
be produced.”
Request No. 2
“This request seeks copies of “any internal memos, emails, or other directives of any sort that
direct staff not to record ‘special meetings’ that occur in the Boardroom.””
You responded:
“Pursuant to Government Code section 7922.600, the District seeks clarification regarding your
request in order to have a focused and effective request that reasonably describes identifiable
records. The clarification will help us narrow the search in our email and other records systems
and retrieve a more manageable number of communications that can be reviewed by District
staff. In particular, please specify the date range of the “internal memos, emails, or other
directives of any sort that direct staff not to record ‘special meetings’ that occur in the
Boardroom.” Additionally, please identify the names or titles of District personnel regarding
whom you are seeking the requested correspondence.”

To limit unnecessary records searches, I believe that the District employee responsible for recording Board of Trustee meetings held in the Boardroom of the Visalia Unified School District, or their supervisor(s), are the most likely sources of the information requested. Those job titles may include senior administrative assistant, technological services; senior information technology technician; information technology technician; and/or information technology assistant.

Please provide copies of any memos, emails, or other directions to District employees responsible for recording and posting the regular Board meetings that direct them to not record or post ‘special meetings’ held in the Board Chambers. Since Board meetings are posted to the District’s YouTube channel as of 1/25/2022, please limit the search to 1/1/2021 through the present date.

If any portion of these records is deemed exempt from disclosure, I request that you redact only those portions and provide the remainder of the records, citing the specific legal justification for each redaction as required by the CPRA.

Please inform me in advance of any fees associated with compiling or copying these records. If the estimated costs exceed $20, please contact me for approval before proceeding.

As provided by the CPRA, I look forward to your response within 10 calendar days regarding the availability of these records.

Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,
Jim J. Reeves, Jr.
jim.visalia@gmail.com

They’ll get the email Monday morning. We’ll see what happens. Cross your fingers.

Older Entries