In my previous blog, “Hate In A Small Town 5 (Visalia Edition)“, I talked about the how the community responded to ten Redwood High School seniors taking a picture of themselves in tshirts that spelled out “2FAG6OTS”. It’s caused quite the dust-up in our community, and has become international news.
You can read my previous post about the situation to see what the Visalia Unified School District has done about the situation, but I wanted to highlight a particular response by one of the Visalia Unified School District Board of Trustees, Paul Belt.
In a Facebook post on 2/17/26, Belt says the incident was a “student mistake”. Then in the comments, he blames it all on being part of a “spiritual battle”, rather than young people being raised in an environment that condones such actions. He seems much more bothered by the uproar in the community than he is with the students actions. “Hatred and vitriolic language have no place for young minds to grow and flourish”. Does he think the students should be free to express hatred and vitriolic language, since it’s just a “mistake”.
I wonder if he would think it was a “mistake” if the students had spelled out “SATAN ROCKS”, or something similar. I’m suspecting not, but, hey, you never know, right?
I think we can tell what Mr. Belt thinks about the LGBTQIA+ community, when he says a deliberately committed act of making and posting a derogatory image to social media is a “student mistake”.
Screenshot
The March 10, 2026 School Board meeting promises to be a packed affair. A lot of folks have a lot to say to the Board and the District. I think it will be a long night, unless the Board moves to limit comments.
The regular session begins at 5:30pm, at the Board room of VUSD, 5000 W. Cypress, Visalia.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Perusing the Visalia City Council agenda can be tedious, at times. Monotonous, filled with, frankly, less than enlightening information. Generally, there’s not much to grab your attention, as it’s the nuts and bolts of running a city. I often refer to it as “the sausage making” of city government. Sometimes, though…
Last November, I noticed consent calendar entries for new police cars (SUVs, actually. Seems nobody is producing sedans for police work anymore). Included in the agenda packet information was an approval request for:
“Award a Contract for 14 New Police Patrol Vehicles – Request authorization to award a purchase contract for fourteen (14) fully marked Police patrol units with National Auto Fleet Group located in Watsonville, CA, in the amount of $1,281,193 for 2026 Dodge Durango’s, appropriate $14,130 from General Fund, $106,395 from Measure T, and $122,674 from the Replacement Fund for total appropriations of $243,200.”
Each Durango had a purchase price of $57,193.47, with an equipment “upfit” of $33,895.03 each.
Now, we can ponder about a $1.3 million purchase being included in a “consent calendar” item, relegating it to the shadows and holding no public discussion on the expense. (You should see some of the “consent calendar” items and the associated dollar amounts that float through the Tulare County Board of Supervisors meetings. Yikes. And some retro-active, at that! – but that’s maybe for a different discussion.)
I’m a bit torn between the idea of not bogging down meetings with endless procedure, and I also firmly believe in hiring good people, setting their parameters and goals, and then getting out of their way and let them do their jobs, but… that’s a lot of money for important city assets.
Here’s my public records request to the City of Visalia (sent late on a Friday, so no action until next week at the earliest):
To: City of Visalia City Clerk cityclerk@visalia.city 01/09/2026
Dear City Clerk,
This is a request under the California Public Records Act (Government Code § 6250 et seq.).
I request that the following records be made available for public inspection and/or that copies be provided:
On 11/17/2025, the Visalia City Council passed consent item #8, “Award a Contract for 14 New Police Patrol Vehicles”. The agenda packet includes quotes from National Auto Fleet Group for 14 new Dodge Durango Pursuit AWD vehicles, at $57,193.47 per vehicle. Also included in the quote are twelve “upfit” specifications, at $33,895.03 per vehicle. These vehicles are listed as available under Sourcewell Contract 091521-NAF.
I would like documentation on the “stock” equipment level of the vehicles being purchased. This would be satisfied by the information included in the “Monroney” sticker attached to new vehicles. I would also like a detailed listing of the equipment to be installed in the “upfit” of the vehicle prior to delivery to the City of Visalia.
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.
Paul Flores does a deep dive into the situation regarding Visalia Unified School District and the Visalia City Council’s unrecorded joint meeting on October 23, 2025.
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 
Visalia’s Charter: Time for a Library Trustee Update?
February 10, 2026
Jim Reeves commentary, News, Personal joint powers, Library, Tulare County Public Library, visalia, Visalia City Charter, Visalia Municipal Code, Visalia Public Library 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
MoreLegislative. The Council. Powers and Duties
(5) Appoint a City Attorney, a City Manager, a City Clerk, and five Library
Trustees.
Share this: