Berkeley is a punching bag for conservatives everywhere. They love calling it “Berserkeley,” mocking the city’s progressive agenda.

Thus, I wasn’t surprised when a few conservative friends suggested that a wave of newly elected progressive city council members would turn Fresno into Berkeley’s southern annex.

That won’t happen. I guarantee it. And here’s why.

The Mayor Has Veto Power

Under Fresno’s strong-mayor form of government, the council must muster five votes to override a mayoral veto. And regardless of how the Naindeep Singh-Rob Fuentes race turns out, the progressive bloc can only count to four (Joaquin Arambula, Ariana Martinez Lott, Singh or Fuentes, and incumbent Brandon Vang).

Fresno Mayor Jerry Dyer has used his veto sparingly, but he’ll deploy it frequently if progressive council members pursue Crazy Town spending and legislation.

Not that Dyer wants to bring out the hammer more often. His favored response when losing a political fight is “disappointed, but not discouraged.” Throughout his tenure, he has compromised in bids to keep moving Fresno forward.

This tactic has upset conservatives and continues to do so, particularly those flying the MAGA banner. They expected Dyer to piledrive liberals to the ground, rubbing their faces in hardpan. The last thing they envisioned was Dyer keeping his “One Fresno” campaign pledge.

How Progressive Will the Newcomers Be?

Now let’s look at the progressives entering or likely to enter office in January.

In a GV Wire livestreamed chat with me, Joaquin Arambula said that he wanted to team with the mayor to ignite an economic boom in Fresno. He also pointed to his help as an assemblymember in designating $250 million in state funding for downtown Fresno.

In our conversation, Arambula sounded very much like his father, Juan, who championed clean air and helping farmworkers as a business-oriented Democrat. If Joaquin Arambula is to keep his word on economic development, he’ll have to abandon progressive orthodoxy.

If Singh is elected, he’ll also be under immense pressure to adopt pro-business positions. His constituency includes hundreds, if not thousands, of business owners. Anti-ICE, pro-immigrant declarations might garner headlines, but Singh’s performance will be judged closely by business stakeholders who supported him.

In addition, Singh promised to be City Hall’s No. 1 corruption fighter. Voters expect results, and they will remind him if he doesn’t deliver the goods. I have a suggestion. He should author a resolution funding a watchdog position to help all council corruption fighters bring sunlight to the darkest corners of City Hall.

Should Fuentes win the race, he’s likely to position himself to benefit constituents (and campaign contributors) as a free agent of sorts, the perennial swing vote on tightly contested issues. This, too, will require shedding the cloak of progressive orthodoxy when needed. Just as Vang does now.

Martinez Lott’s Promises

And there’s Ariana Martinez Lott, who dispatched Nav Gurm for the District 7 seat. She made a ton of promises during her campaign, some of which can be easily fulfilled, others not so much.

Let’s examine some of these pledges: Safe Routes to Schools, better parks, stopping utility rate increases, and increasing the supply of homes families can afford.

Community leaders have promoted Safe Routes to Schools for more than three decades with minimal progress. And, with the Measure S transportation tax apparently going down in flames, funding is a challenge.

However, Fresno children should walk and cycle to school on clean, safe, well-lit sidewalks. I am with her on this one. Perhaps she can convince her colleagues to tap the city’s Measure D tax, should it pass, to make it happen.

Better parks? That’s what Measure P is for. It should and will happen.

Stopping utility rate hikes? This can happen, too. But how willing is Martinez Lott to tell union garbage collectors and water and sewer workers that their next contract won’t include a raise? This pledge is DOA.

Even with California voters approving $11.25 billion in homeownership assistance bonds on Tuesday, increasing the number of homes that families can afford is a complex assignment.

Especially if the council expects that to happen via infill. Market-rate infill rarely pencils out financially. Unless Martinez Lott figures out how to remove the red tape strangling infill (the last five mayors have flunked this task), the goal is a nonstarter.

The council member-elect also will learn about NIMBYs. These are the folks who send chocolates and flowers to the Status Quo every Valentine’s Day.

The only way to make housing more affordable is to build more of it and all kinds of it everywhere, including the “green fields” progressives love to hate.

One more thing: Martinez Lott attacked “City Hall insiders” during her campaign. Now she’s one of the ultimate insiders at City Hall.

Rent Control, Soda Tax?

One standard in the progressive playbook is rent control. The problem is, rent control doesn’t work. It picks winners and losers while serving as a brake on rental housing supplies.

“Rent control appears to help affordability in the short run for current tenants, but in the long-run decreases affordability, fuels gentrification, and creates negative externalities on the surrounding neighborhood,” concluded research published by the nonpartisan Brookings Institution.

A soda tax is another progressive chestnut, and one I favor. Why should Fresnans who don’t gulp soda subsidize the huge public health costs of diabetes?

Soda tax proceeds could fund mobile health clinics, public gardens, and the paid youth internships Martinez Lott wants.

She should write up a soda sales tax measure and get it on the ballot for voters to decide.

If it passes, then Fresno will be Berkeley. On soda taxes, anyway.