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

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: City of Visalia

January 9, 2026

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

Legacy Visalia City Logo
Visalia

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.

Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,
Jim J. Reeves, Jr.

jim.visalia@gmail.com

Visalia, CA 93277

The Missing Video – VUSD update

December 7, 2025

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

On November 9, 2025, I posted about my attempts to obtain a video recording of the joint Visalia City Council / Visalia Unified School District meeting of October 23, 2025. In that post, I included the school district’s response, which was “After conducting a reasonable search, the District determines that it has no public records that are subject to disclosure under the PRA and responsive to the request. Accordingly, no records will be produced.”

I thought that was a strange way to put it.

I’ve decided to pursue the matter further, since it’s not clear to me if the District means there is no recording at all, or that there is but is not “subject to disclosure”.

I sent an email on November 4, 2025, to the Board Chairman and the trustee covering my area regarding clarification. The Chairman sent me a response on November 5, 2025, indicating she would forward it to the appropriate person in the District administration, but I’ve not heard back from anyone about it.

I’ve sent the following request as of December 6, 2025:

Sara Sanchez,

This confirms receipt of your email dated November 4, 2025, regarding my request for a copy of any recording of the October 23, 2025 special meeting between the Visalia Unified School District Board of Trustees and the Visalia City Council. 

In that response, you said “…the District determines that it has no public records that are subject to disclosure under the PRA and responsive to the request. Accordingly, no records will be produced.” 

Please consider this email another request for information under the California Public Records Act.

Does this mean that there are no video recordings of this meeting created by VUSD, or that video recordings of this meeting made by VUSD do exist, but will not be released?

Looking at the “recent meetings” list on the District’s website, it appears that “special meetings” are not recorded. However, the meeting between the District and the Visalia City Council was held in the Boardroom of the District and utilized the same video equipment as regular Board meetings. Did staff not record this meeting, even though the same video systems were, apparently, used?

If there is a policy of not recording “special meetings”, I would like to receive a copy of that policy, or be directed to its location if online access is available. If there is no specific policy in place, I would like 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. 

Thank you for your attention in this matter.

Jim Reeves

I’ve sent this email so that it should be in the district’s possession start of business, Monday, December 8, 2025. We’ll see what happens.

Visalia Unified School District/Visalia City Council joint meeting not recorded?

November 9, 2025

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

A previous Visalia Unified School District Board meeting.

On October 23, 2025, the Visalia Unified School District held a special joint meeting with the Visalia City Council. This was the second such meeting held in 2025, and was held in the District’s Board room.

The following is a part of the posted agenda for that meeting:

Members of the public may address the Board on any agenda item when the item comes to the Board for consideration. At regular meetings of the Board, members of the public may also address the Board regarding non-agenda items that are nonetheless within the Board’s jurisdiction during the general public comment portion of the agenda. Pursuant to Board Bylaw 9323, the Board will limit individual comments to no more than 3 minutes and individual topics to 20 minutes.

The District reserves the right to not hear comments, or portions of comments, that violate meeting guidelines.

I was the only member of the public to take advantage of the public comments section of the meeting. In it, I updated the School Board and the City Council on the recent Pride Visalia festival, held on October 11, 2025. During the remarks, I reminded and invited both the City Council members and the Board of Directors for the school district that The Source LGBT+ Center was available to consult with them on LGBTQ+ issues, and provide resources and information they might find useful in both their professional and personal lives.

The Visalia Unified School District takes video and audio recordings of the meetings, and posts them to a YouTube channel for the public to view. No post of this special meeting occurred.

I waited several days for the video to appear, as sometimes delays in posting can occur, sometimes the posters fault, sometimes YouTube’s. No recording of the meeting appeared.

I sent an email to the school district, asking if a recording was made, and when it would be available.

From: Jim Reeves jim.visalia@gmail.com
Date: October 28, 2025 at 5:32:34 PM PDT
To: cgutierrez04@vusd.org
Subject: Board special meeting video

Hi,
Does a video recording of the October 23, 2025 joint meeting between the School Board and the Visalia City Council exist? I’ve checked the YouTube channel, and found no video. I’ve noticed in the listing of meetings that special meetings don’t show a video.
Is there a video available that I can get a copy of? Or an audio recording?
Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Jim Reeves
Jim.visalia@gmail.com
Sent from my iPad

After several days, I received the following response:

“After conducting a reasonable search, the District determines that it has no public records that are subject to disclosure under the PRA and responsive to the request. Accordingly, no records will be produced.”

That’s a strange way to phrase it, at least to us non-lawyers.

I’ve followed up with the following email to the Board President, and the Board member for my area:

President Naylor, Boardmember DeJong,

I attended the Special Meeting of October 23, 2025. On October 28, I emailed a request for a copy of the video, or an audio recording, of the meeting since it had not been posted on YouTube. On November 4, I received the attached email, indicating “that it has no public records that are subject to disclosure under the PRA and responsive to the request”.
I have noticed in the listing of prior meetings, that ‘Special Meetings’ often do not have a video recording. Is this a formal policy of the District? If so, can I be directed to that policy?
It seems odd that no recording is made of the meeting, despite it being held in the Board room, and utilizing the audio/video equipment there.
I would like to understand why the District does not record these meetings, and I hope you can clear this up for me.
Mr. DeJong, I’m CCing you on this because I reside in your area.

Jim Reeves
jim.visalia@gmail.com

Board President Naylor responded:

Jim,
Thank you for your email regarding the recording of the special board session with the city. I have forwarded your email to the district office to look into this matter.
Again, thank you for bringing this to our attention.

Joy

We’ll see what the next week brings, and if the District responds further.

My goal now is to find out if a recording was not made of the special meeting, why not? Is there a District policy prohibiting it? If so, I want to see that policy, and when and how it was implemented. If it’s just a “we just don’t do that”, I want to know the reasoning why, and under whose authority.

Stay tuned.

It’s a bit disappointing

October 23, 2024

Jim Reeves commentary, News , , , Leave a comment

I’m disappointed in the Visalia CIty Council. They basically vetoed the Planning Commission’s decision to revoke the Conditional Use Permit that allowed Rookies Sports Bar and Grill to have live entertainment. After years of escalating police responses to the sports bar, the council did not support the findings of city staff and the police department, and decided to “re-negotiate” (my term, not the Council’s) the rules under which Rookies will be allowed to continue (resume?) live entertainment.

The bar was declared a “public nuisance” back in 2021, and even after numerous contacts since with the city about the problems, it has been experiencing increasing numbers of incidents requiring police response. The process of dealing with Rookies has been ongoing, resulting with the Planning Commission’s decision recently to revoke the Conditional Use Permit (first issued in 2011) to allow live entertainment. The revocation does not close Rookies, it can still operate as a restaurant and bar, which is its primary, legally permitted, business model. Only the live entertainment is affected.

It sure looks to me, standing here on the outside looking in, like the owner of Rookies has had plenty of time to correct the problems the city has been dealing with since before 2021, but has failed to do so. Some think his position on downtown association boards (private entities, not part of City government) has granted him special status, allowing him to use those positions to get special treatment. I don’t know if that’s true, but it’s easy to suspect something is going on. There’s a lot of smoke around this situation, and you know what they say about smoke.

To “renegotiate” the deal with Rookies after the Planning Commission did it’s due diligence in acting to revoke the CUP (Conditional Use Permit), sends a message to other potential trouble spots downtown that they can get away with thumbing their nose at the city.

Kudos to Councilman Soto for being the only ‘no’ vote on the motion to “renegotiate” the CUP. (Nelsen recused himself, and left the Council chambers while the issue was being discussed and voted on.)

We’ll have to see how this shakes out. Stay tuned.

Run, Forrest, Run!

September 2, 2024

Jim Reeves commentary , , , Leave a comment

It’s said that if you want to change the way your local government operates, run for office. Most of us prefer to kvetch from the sidelines, so kudos to anyone willing to jump up and try to make things better by holding office. Keyboard warriors, and I don’t exclude myself from that designation, can burn up the interwebs with criticisms of this that or the other if we take a disfavorable view of something, filling up our timelines on Facebook and Instagram (am I aging myself with only listing those two?). It’s easy and quick. Tappity tap tap, click on ‘send’, and it’s done. “Oh, did I say that a week ago? I don’t even remember what I was on about!”

It’s a big step to run for city council. It’s often a thankless job, and will get you chastised, sometimes politely, but sometimes not, for things that are often not within your power to change. It comes with the territory. The old adage “if you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen” really applies to local government. And, while I’m at it, since you asked for the job, you really shouldn’t chastise the public for being on about whatever they’re on about right now. A couple of city councilmen got called out recently for their perceived poor behavior while on the dais during public comments. Much of what was directed at the council was valid. I hope those it was directed at take it to heart, and behave a bit more respectfully in the future.

Anyway, I said all that to talk about the following:

If you’re going to run for public office, don’t be like Trump was/is, and not have a clue about the job.

Recently, I was speaking with a candidate for one of the seats up for election this cycle here in Visalia. His talking points were not accurate.

He was complaining about the city council raising taxes, specifically property taxes, and utility fees. When I asked about it, he was certain in his position that the city council was raising taxes. I was a bit confused, because I could not recall any taxes on my property tax bills that could be layed at the feet of the Visalia City Council. When I followed up with him about what taxes he was talking about, I did not get a real explanation.

I asked him about utility fees, sewer and trash, he said they have been climbing, as well. Again, I could not recall any hikes on my bills, so I asked him for clarification. He basically backed down a bit and said he was going on what his father told him, because he lived on property owned by his parents.

Well, that conversation was not very enlightening, and frankly, based on conversations I’ve either briefly had with him, or on comments he’s made during public commentary sections of City Council meetings, and things he’s posted online, I was left wondering what the facts were.

So I grabbed my property tax bills for the past five years, and had a look.

At the top of the list, the county’s 1% tax on net value led the way. After that, various other taxes were listed:

Visalia Unified School District for a bond in 2012

Kaweah Delta water district

Kaweah Delta hospital

College of the Sequoias

Visalia Unified School District for a bond in 2018

Delta Mosquito control

Hmmmm. Nothing about the City of Visalia listed for any of the five years.

In those five years, my County property tax bill has increased by $105.12. That increase has been driven solely by the Proposition 13 limited increase in my home’s value.

Now, the sewer and trash bill might have gone up a few dollars over the years, but it seems to me it’s been pretty stable. I’ve not noticed any changes of more than a few dollars, which really is to be expected. Other fees and costs that city might impose for various services are not what the conversation was about, so I’m not going to comment on whether it’s valid to include them.

So, what’s that all mean? By all means run for office if you want to serve, and/or make a change. But do some research first, and make your run with something that will improve the community.

I’m not in this person’s district, so I wouldn’t be able to vote for or against him regardless, but after each interaction with him, I’m more certain he’s not a better fit than the person already serving in that seat.

Remember to vote, and to check you voter registration status soon!

Did you know? Planned Parenthood worships Satan!

February 7, 2022

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

I never knew that!

But it must be so, because several people at tonight’s Visalia City Council meeting made sure to speak out against a proposed move by the local Planned Parenthood facility, to a larger building, by telling us that the organization worshipped Satan.

The agenda item was postponed to next month, and plenty of notice of the change was given, but several people stepped up during public comments to vent their spleens. Most of them didn’t realize that Planned Parenthood has been in Visalia for years, and spoke against allowing the medical service “in our city”. Several of them made the “Satan worship” claim during their spiels.

The debunked video of Planned Parenthood selling body parts was also referenced. That woman was very incensed over the notion that we’d let anything like that into our city. (again, they’ve been here for years, this is just about getting approval to move into a larger building.)

The next meeting scheduled to deal with this request, in March, promises to be a maelstrom of anti-abortion nonsense and vitriol. The City has moved the meeting to the Convention Center in anticipation of the crowds.

If you want the facts about Planned Parenthood, here’s their website.

Fair warning: I’m going to do it again

May 16, 2019

Jim Reeves Gay, Personal , , , , , , 2 Comments

visalia_city_hall

Monday, May 20, 2019, I’ll be giving a short presentation to the Visalia City Council during the public comments section of the meeting.

Hopefully, I won’t have to defend against accusations of child pornography as I did last year!

I’ll be giving an update to the Council on Saturday’s Pride Visalia Festival, our recent expansion, and winning our category in the annual Give OUT Day fundraiser.

Since the city changed the rules after our 2012 and 2013 proclamations naming June LGBT Pride Month in Visalia, I won’t be asking for or receiving anything, but I will take the opportunity to bring the Council up to date on our recent achievements.  Our expansion gives us much needed space, as our (already expanded once) center continues to grow.

There’s a ton of stuff that I’d like to tell the council about, but the comments are limited to three minutes, so I’ll just have to do a quick review of this year, and invite the Council and the public to Pride Visalia 2019.

You can attend the Council meeting at City Hall West, 707 W. Acequia, Visalia. The meeting starts at 7pm. You can also watch on Facebook Live, on the city’s Facebook feed.

 

Audio comments, City Council meeting May 21 2018 – Speaker lambastes city, LGBT group

May 24, 2018

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

citycouncil

“THAT’S CHILD PORNOGRAPHY!”

Well, no, it’s not. Not even close. Gabriel Jacquez spoke at the public comments section of the May 21, 2018 Visalia City Council meeting, and took the city to task for allowing our event, Pride Visalia, to take place. During his comments, he drew a really strange connection between drag queens dancing and child porn. Listen to the recording above to see if you can follow his…  “logic”. I can’t.

Immediately following his remarks are mine, given a few minutes after his. I had planned on simply giving a short presentation to the Council about Pride Visalia, and then invite them to attend.

That got thrown out the window after I heard his remarks. I tried to address Mr. Jacquez’s remarks as best I could, without turning my three minutes into a complete mish-mash.

I’m glad it worked out the way it did, it would have been unfortunate had I gone first, and then Mr. Jacquez following. In that scenario, I would not have been able to respond.

Sorry for the poor quality of the image. That’s me, at the podium, in the upper right hand corner of the image. It’s a screen capture of a phone video, which was recording a video feed that was playing on yet another phone. A copy of a copy of a copy of a copy.

Sorry that the audio quality is not the best, either. It’s also a copy of a copy, especially that last few seconds.

You can hear the (almost) complete audio at the article by the Visalia Times Delta, here. My comments are attached to the video at the top of the article, Mr. Jacquez’s in the video further down the page. At some point in the future, the City of Visalia should have an audio recording of the meeting, with the full comments. (only a few seconds have been cut, however. Mostly us introducing ourselves, and possibly a bit at the end of Mr. Jacquez’s remarks.)

All in all, a most upsetting Council meeting for me.