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.

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

Visalia Unified School District and unrecorded meetings – update

December 28, 2025

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

The Visalia Unified School District responded to my request for information. There were two parts to that response.

Part One:

So, if I’m reading this correctly, there is no policy that says ‘special meetings’ will not be video recorded. That seems odd. If it’s routine to record Board meetings when held in the Boardroom, why aren’t ‘special meetings’ video recorded? Does this mean some manager told staff to not record the meetings? On what basis was that order, if it happened, made? If no such order was made, is the staff member making the decisions themselves? I rather doubt that.

Part Two:

They want the name or title of the District personnel that I’m requestion information about in order to search email or other records. Unfortunately, the District does not list employee positions online. I am unable to determine who might be the person(s) whose records would be appropriate to check for information with an online search.

They also want a date range to search, but how do I determine what time frame would be appropriate, since they do not include all of the past agendas and minutes on their web pages.

I’m currently researching online documents from the District to see if I can figure out just why they don’t record ‘special meetings’, but if I can’t find anything I may have to start making phone calls.

Seems like a lot of work for such a simple request.

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 meeting not recorded? Follow up –

November 9, 2025

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

Jim Reeves & The Missing Meeting: An Analysis of Transparency, Accountability, and the Curious Case of Visalia Unified’s Unrecorded Oct 23, 2025 Session

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.

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.

Older Entries