After four years of controversy surrounding the renewal of Fresno County’s multibillion-dollar transportation tax and facing a deadline next week to decide whether it will be on the November ballot, a judge agreed to issue a ruling by Monday.

Fresno County Superior Court Judge Jonathan Skiles — the fourth judge in the matter — held a status conference Tuesday in county supervisors’ lawsuit against the state of California and Measure S claiming the road tax should not appear on the ballot until March 2028.

Attorneys last Friday learned that despite having a ballot printing deadline of Sept. 9, any changes would need to be made by Sept. 3, further shortening the time for any court ruling.

Legal responses from the state, Measure S proponents, and Fresno County Clerk/Registrar of Voters James Kus are now expected by Wednesday afternoon, and the county’s reply must be submitted by Thursday afternoon.

The hearing is scheduled for Friday.

“If I look a little sleep-deprived on the 28th, we’ll know why,” Skiles told the courtroom.

Skiles Agrees to Attorneys’ Requests to Expedite Case

Attorneys representing the state and Measure S proponents convinced Skiles to issue a ruling Monday after he originally said he would rule on the county’s request for a preliminary injunction by Sept. 3, the printing deadline for Kus to have the ballot submitted.

Attorney Kristen Rogers with Olson Remcho, representing Measure S proponents, said attorneys will need as much time as possible to review if an appeal is needed.

“These stakes are very high,” Rogers said.

The county asked for three things out of the expedited case: A preliminary injunction keeping Measure S off the November ballot, declaratory relief on the constitutionality of AB 1923 — the state law that forced Measure S onto the ballot — and a writ of mandate executing the judge’s order.

Skiles originally said he would only weigh in on the likelihood that the county’s request for an injunction to keep Measure S off the ballot would prevail. However, attorney Brian Hildreth, representing the county, convinced Skiles to weigh in on the merits of the case as well.

How We Got Here

The latest round of controversy on Measure S began when supervisors ordered a study on the effect the half-cent sales tax would have on the county, pushing their approval of the measure past the Aug. 7 deadline to have petitions on the November ballot.

Organizers for Measure S had too many duplicate signatures and needed a full review, delaying approval to the 11th hour.

Assemblymember Esmeralda Soria, D-Fresno, and Sen. Anna Caballero, D-Merced, got the state to weigh in through AB 1923, which singled out Fresno County and forced the measure onto the ballot as an urgent matter, meaning it would take effect immediately.

Supervisors sued the state, Measure S proponents, and Kus — who said state law directed him to put the measure on the ballot — on the legality of calling AB 1923 “urgent.”