I asked Gemini AI to create a profile on me, so I could have it compare candidates for office in California’s primary election, and recommend who would be good choices for me to select for my votes. Here’s what it came up with.
This is the political profile I have developed for you, based strictly on the content and commentary found on your blogs, primarily jimmiejoe.com and alternatingcurrents.net. I have used this specific set of values and priorities to analyze candidate platforms and determine which individuals most closely align with your viewpoints in the 2026 California primary.
Here’s how I’m voting in the California primary election for 2026.
With sixtyone(!) candidates on the ballot just for Governor, and sixteen for Lieutenant Governor, this ballot is a mess. The top two vote-getters for each office will move on to the general election in November. (For some offices on the ballot)
Since I recognize exactly zero of the candidates for many of these offices, I tried something I’ve never done before. I asked Gemini AI to create a political profile of me based on my blog posts here on Jimmiejoe.com, and at AlternatingCurrents.net. I then had it compare the profile of me it created to the public information of some of these candidates, and suggest which ones best match my politics. On some of the suggestions, it was difficult to choose between the top candidates who it said matched.
Here’s what we have. Not all of the candidates I’ve chosen were chosen with AI help.
I know it’s been going on for a long time, now, but I still find it annoying. Republicans in Congress are attacking transgender children, again, and trying to hide it in a misleading bill title.
H.R. 2616 is the “Parental Rights Over The Education and Care of Their Kids Act or the PROTECT Kids Act”. It of course does exactly the opposite of that.
This bill requires public elementary and middle schools, as a condition of receiving certain federal funds for elementary and secondary education, to obtain parental consent before changing a student’s gender on school forms or changing a student’s sex-based accommodations.
Specifically, an elementary school or a school consisting of only grades 5-8 must obtain parental consent before changing a minor student’s (1) gender markers, pronouns, or preferred name on any school form; or (2) sex-based accommodations, including locker rooms or bathrooms.
A BILL
To require public elementary and middle schools that receive funds under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to obtain parental consent before changing a minor’s gender markers, pronouns, or preferred name on any school form or sex-based accommodations, including locker rooms or bathrooms.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1.Short title.
This Act may be cited as the “Parental Rights Over The Education and Care of Their Kids Act ” or the “PROTECT Kids Act”.
SEC. 2. Parental consent requirement related to gender markers, pronouns, and preferred names on school forms and sex-based accommodations.
(a) Requirement.—As a condition of receiving funds under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.), a public school that receives funds under such Act shall obtain parental consent before changing a covered student’s—
(1) gender markers, pronouns, or preferred name on any school form; or
(2) sex-based accommodations, including locker rooms or bathrooms.
(b) Definitions.—In this section:
(1) COVERED STUDENT.—The term “covered student” means a minor who is—
(A) an elementary school student; or
(B) a student in any of the middle grades.
(2) ESEA TERMS.—The terms “elementary school”, “middle grades”, and “parent” have the meanings given such terms in section 8101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
That’s it. That’s the entire bill. The entire intent is to out trans kids, regardless of the student’s wishes. Regardless of the hostility from family or the community. The child’s needs are irrelevant. Only the political points gained by the Republicans matter.
I sent a message to my Congressman, Vince Fong (R) about this bill, urging a NO vote. Here’s his response:
Dear Jim,
Thank you for reaching out to me regarding LGBTQ Americans. I understand that many people have strong and differing opinions about this issue. I take all of these views seriously and value the diversity of thought in our district.
While I am opposed to policies that ignore the fundamental biological differences between men and women and have supported legislation to protect the integrity of Title IX, I believe those in Congress should respect the dignity of all citizens when debating legislation.
Over the last few decades, our political discourse across America has worsened. Instead of having productive negotiations, lawmakers have turned policy debates into uncontrollable arguments, opting instead for whatever gets the most retweets or soundbite coverage on network news.
For too long, we have denied one another the chance to be seen not as a member of a particular political party, but as men and women with values, families and loved ones, and experiences that have shaped who we are and what we stand for. We must recommit ourselves to civility and respect one another as human beings no matter where we fall on the political spectrum.
Thank you again for contacting me. Hearing about what is most important to you and your family helps me represent California’s 20th Congressional District to the best of my ability. It is a great honor to serve you in the U.S. House of Representatives. Should you have additional comments or questions, please feel free to contact me at my Bakersfield, Clovis, or Washington, D.C. offices.
If you would like to receive regular updates to learn more about my legislative work on behalf of our neighbors and communities, please sign up for my newsletter below.
Sincerely,
I suspect if I were to have access to a “politi-speak” AI, and asked it to explain to me what he said in this response, it would return “not much”. He’s going to vote in support, I suspect, regardless of how this bill would hurt kids.
I wonder what the price of a Republican soul is these days? It must be an impressive payoff, as so many of them have signed on the dotted line so easily.
Oh, credit where credit is due. Fong’s office responded quicker to my message than any Representative or Senator, or Assemblyman or state Senator has in the past. It only took a couple of days to get a response. That’s unusual.
Some more License Plate Reader fun. KMPH 26 posted a story about Merced’s Police Department discovering a, shall we say – just to be very understanding of the complexity of computerized systems – a “mis-configuration” of their automated license plate reader system. Although not the Flock ALPR, like Visalia’s, they released a statement on April 23, 2026, saying, in part, the following:
Merced, Calif – In the interest of transparency, the Merced Police Department is addressing recent concerns regarding automated license plate reader (ALPR) data sharing.
Following these reports, the Department conducted a comprehensive internal review of its ALPR system. That review determined that prior system configurations allowed data sharing with certain federal agencies.
Upon identifying this issue, the Department immediately disabled the identified connections and will continue to conduct additional audits to ensure ongoing compliance.
Merced joins Santa Cruz, Oxnard, and Ventura Police Departments to identify (through media reports, not, apparently, through their own oversight) problems with unauthorized access to their databases. Each agency has said they’ve fixed the problems, but one has to wonder how many other instances of unauthorized access have occurred.
I’ve sent the following Public Records Request to the Visalia Police Department:
To: Custodian of Records Visalia Police Department 303 S Johnson St. Visalia, CA 93291 (Or via NextRequest Portal)
Date: April 24, 2026
RE: CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST – FLOCK ALPR DATA SHARING AND SPECIFIC PLATE RECORDS
To the Custodian of Records:
Under the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code § 7920.000 et seq.) and California Civil Code § 1798.90.5 et seq., I am requesting the following public records held by the Visalia Police Department (VPD):
System Access & Inter-Agency Sharing Logs: Any and all records, audit logs, or documentation showing access to data compiled by the VPD via the Flock Safety ALPR system by any agency other than the Visalia Police Department. This request includes, but is not limited to:
Lists of “Hot List” hits shared with outside agencies.
Audit trails showing when outside agencies (federal, state, or local) queried the VPD’s Flock database.
Current lists of all agencies with whom the VPD has a data-sharing agreement for ALPR data.
The time frame for this request is from the initial installation/implementation of the Flock system to the present date.
Specific License Plate Records: All records, images, and data points captured by the VPD ALPR system (including fixed cameras and mobile units) that reference or identify the following California license plate: JJRJR.
This request includes time stamps, location data (GPS coordinates or camera IDs), and associated photographs for every instance this plate was recorded from the time of system installation to the present date.
Redactions and Privacy: If the Department contends that any portion of these records is exempt from disclosure, please provide the non-exempt portions pursuant to Gov. Code § 7922.525. If any portion of the request is denied, please provide a written response citing the specific legal authority for the denial within the ten (10) days required by statute.
Request for Digital Format: Please provide these records in electronic format. If the records exist in a searchable database or spreadsheet (such as CSV or Excel), I request they be provided in that native format.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Jimmie Joe Reeves Visalia, CA
That license plate request is for my own car, and I’m interested how many times the system has seen me while I’m running around town. From what I understand of their operational rules, they should have no images older than 30 days. We’ll see if I get anything, or get buried with data files.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Random thoughts, occasional rants, illuminating commentary, and an odd story now and then from the world of 9-1-1 dispatching. All this and more from a gay liberal atheist living in California’s Bible belt. I recently married, so MAGA beware! I’m your worst nightmare! Some names have been omitted to protect the innocent, but the guilty will be hung out to dry!
JimmieJoe / KC6YRU 
Flock the Lawyers
May 11, 2026
Jim Reeves commentary, News, Personal ai, ALPR, Flock Camera, License Plate Reader, News, politics, technology, visalia, visalia police department Leave a comment
Oh my…
Now the City of Visalia is running it by the lawyers. It also manages to push the “final” date out to June 1, 2026.
As you’ll recall, my first post about it was “What the Flock?“, where I looked at all of the locations where Visalia Police Department (VPD) had installed cameras.
The next post was about a public records request I submitted to VPD concerning the cameras, “Well, Flock me!”
Another blogger, Paul Flores, had the AI system DeepSeek create an interesting look at what I was doing. “More Flock, More Fun“
The first response to my Public Records request was this, “Flock you later“.
Tick Tock
Share this: