“Pride” and Prejudice

 Bredefeld’s Homophobia Drives Policy

Following the June 10 Fresno County Board of Supervisors (BOS) meeting, when Supervisor Garry Bredefeld (District 2) melted down over the Pride Parade and his discovery of the County’s alleged expenditures of about $5,000 on condoms distributed among parade attendees, the BOS agreed, at Bredefeld’s insistence, that future departmental financial contributions to community events be subject to BOS approval—that policy (“Policy 80”) was approved on July 8.

At that time, the consensus (3-2, with District 3 Supervisor Luis Chavez and District 1 Supervisor Brian Pacheco the “no” votes) was to direct County Administrative Officer (CAO) Paul Nerland to recommend yet another policy to determine what community events the various County departments would be permitted to participate in, also a demand urged by Bredefeld.

Until now, there has been no written policy regarding events in which County employees could officially participate. On Aug. 5, Nerland presented three options:

• Board approval. County departments can celebrate only those events formally approved by the BOS, including federal holidays.
• CAO approval. County departments can celebrate only a list of events already approved by the BOS, including federal holidays. Anything else requires CAO approval.
• County holidays and BOS resolution/proclamations only. County departments can celebrate only events approved by the BOS, including county or federal holidays. Any other event must be recognized by BOS resolution or proclamation.

When public comment was opened, several speakers were opposed and only one in favor of such a policy. Some, such as progressive activist Brandi Nuse-Villegas, noted that professional staff should not be micromanaged. Others, such as Fresno State music professor Russ Zokaites, called out Bredefeld’s hostility to the gay community.

In support, reactionary activist and schoolteacher Tammy Gorans echoed Bredefeld’s homophobia in histrionic tones, rambling about “gender identity” as a “belief system.”

As a final speaker stepped up to talk, impatient Chair Buddy Mendes (District 4), who had declared the previous speaker last, lost his self-control, yelled, jabbed his finger and threatened to throw her out.

Discussion resumed among the supervisors. Nathan Magsig (District 5) momentarily reduced the tension in the room after Mendes’ nasty outburst by thanking all the speakers.

The issue, he said, was “what the County celebrates.” He reasoned that celebrations must be “inclusive” of everyone and gave federal holidays such as July 4 as an example.

However, by “inclusive,” he appeared to mean that no distinctive community celebrations—such as Pride or the Hmong New Year—should be recognized. His reasoning implied that anything specific to one community was, by definition, “exclusive,” an argument that effectively promotes exclusion.

Chavez said that he did not support restrictions on staff discretion—let our professional staff, “trained and capable,” do their jobs, he said.

Noting that pre-approved lists of events could fail to include celebrations such as the Hmong New Year, for example, he said he did not want to discriminate. He could not support what he called “censorship” and was concerned about potential liability issues.

Addressing Bredefeld, he said that participation in Pride celebrations was done under the management of the health department and that the condoms distributed at the parade prevent disease. “I trust our staff,” he concluded.

Pacheco said that he agreed with Chavez. “We should be neutral, not political,” he noted.

He remarked that he and other County employees had attended a Fresno Area Hispanic Foundation event in central Fresno the previous week; would the group or the event appear on any future sanctioned list? If not, would they be barred from attending?

Though he personally did not agree with everything staff might support, department heads and employees are professionals and should not be micromanaged based on a single individual’s personal beliefs, he said, adding that he would not “default to the CAO to be the fall guy.”

Pretzel Logic

Bredefeld, quiet up to this point, seemed to have been plotzing for some time, judging by how quickly he became heated and histrionic. He began by pointing out that he supported the flying of only two flags on County properties, the U.S. flag and California’s—an oblique reference to the banning of the Pride flag several years ago.

He cited the flag issue using the same fallacious reasoning as Magsig’s, straining to sound reasonable. By this logic, if flying the Pride flag doesn’t represent “inclusion,” neither does recognition of the Hmong New Year, the Hispanic Foundation or any number of groups and events.

Bredefeld quickly pivoted to his real gripe—community visibility and recognition of LGBTQ+ people—and began bellowing again about “thousands spent on rainbow condoms.” The health department can be at the Pride parade, he said, but they should not use taxpayer money to hand out “condoms and lube!” His voice lowered to a growl: “That’s advocacy!”

On July 8, the BOS passed the policy making it a requirement for staff to apply to the BOS for approval for such expenditures, and now, per Bredefeld, the BOS had to determine the very community events that staff would be permitted to recognize, much less spend money on.

Bredefeld’s complaints, made in a bitter tone, lacked a clear line of reasoning: “Over the last four years [an allusion to the Biden presidency?], radical ideologies have been injected into the country: gender identity, the stupidity of choosing your own pronouns,” he read from a prepared statement.

He continued, now attacking the County library system: “Libraries promote the gay lifestyle, right at library entrances!” Libraries are corrupting children ‘as young as four years old,’” he claimed. “That’s not OK!”

He bellowed on: “Pride Month promotion is promoting ideology. Kids are innocent, and we want to keep them innocent.” It was “radical gender ideology” and “woke BS” he was upset about, yelling and thumping the desktop for emphasis. “We gotta stop indoctrinating children!”

Pride Month is a federally recognized event, and the June library book displays entail no costs.

Clearly, Bredefeld’s target was the LGBTQ+ community, and if he wanted to make the case for fiscal moderation, he could have done so without so much as mentioning Pride, not to speak of singling it out. The subject clearly put him in a lather.

Pacheco asked Bredefeld, “I realize you are focused on Pride Month, but would a proclamation be required for Board members or staff to participate in any event?”

Bredefeld replied, but his logic was elusive: Staff can participate in the Pride Parade, the Hmong New Year or the like, but “promotions” in the library “will not be allowed.”

Pacheco, objecting to what he felt would result in staff confusion about what required approval or a proclamation and what didn’t, pressed Bredefeld a bit more: Bredefeld was opposed to distributing condoms at the Pride Parade but was OK with distributing literature.

Pacheco pointed out that even informative literature was produced with taxpayer money and reiterated that the proposed policy would burden staff with confusion, at which point Bredefeld, fresh out of arguments, now simply blamed staff for “creating the confusion themselves.” That caused some audience members to cry out, and security guards were seen cautioning attendees, while Mendes threatened to throw people out.

Mendes then mused that spending money to distribute literature was “not the same” as spending it on other things.

Chavez asked Bredefeld, “Yes to outreach, no to condoms and lube?” The reply from Bredefeld was, “You got it.”

Questions about process remained unanswered. Mendes said, “Thank you for clarifying that,” but nothing could be said to be clear.

Clear as Mud

Nerland attempted to summarize: Departmental staff would use discretion “consistent with the mission and values of the County” and, if there was a cost involved, they must come to the BOS for approval, “per Admin Policy 80.”

When it comes to a display theme in the library, Nerland said his expectation was that it would be “consistent with our values,” adding equivocally that “we do reach out to various communities.” What did that mean? It was unclear.

Using “good judgment” was “the current policy,” said Nerland.

Mendes: “So, it’s a little ambiguous?”

Nerland referred to Admin Policy 80 regarding costs to participate in events, but otherwise said that staff should “use judgment,” reiterating that whatever entails a cost must come before the BOS. That seemed to leave the question of library displays open, BOS hostility toward the library notwithstanding.

Chavez then mentioned the possibility that state law could end up prevailing over the BOS’s decisions, as it did when the proposed citizens’ book-banning committee in the spring of 2024 could not ultimately be formed because a state law in the fall of 2024 prohibited it.

He repeated that he trusted staff’s judgment and that approving or rejecting sets of ideals was “counterproductive to a representative democracy,” adding that he did not expect staff to promote a “porn week” or a “hamburger day.”

Magsig, however, questioned “what’s to keep anything from happening?” He feared a “porn week,” he’d had complaints about Halloween in the past and, hence, he supported the policy. The BOS should have the final say on what departments celebrate, he said.

Mendes wanted to look “deeper” at Nerland’s Option 1. He suggested that at the beginning of each year departments submit a list of events or celebrations for approval and added that “this thing has been blown out of proportion.” Was he suggesting that this was Bredefeld’s fault for wasting time and resources on a solution looking for a problem?

Nerland said he could work Option 1 into a policy, incorporating Mendes’ suggestion. That seemed to satisfy Bredefeld, who appeared to consider the matter now settled, until Nerland pointed out there had not yet been a vote.

Chavez and Pacheco voted “no,” so, with the 3-2 victory, Nerland promised to bring a draft policy to a future meeting.

Conclusion: Harm Already Done

As evidence of the harm already caused by Bredefeld’s aggressive attack on the LGBTQ+ community—amplified by the support of Magsig and Mendes—a Clovis City Council member allied with Bredefeld announced on social media that there would be “no more shoving radical LGBTQ displays down everyone’s throats at Fresno County libraries,” even though no official policy has yet been issued. The statement not only misrepresents the truth but also leaves no doubt that Bredefeld’s true target is the gay community.

While officially framed as a procedural fix for budgeting, the debate exposed Bredefeld’s deep ideological extremism.

For Supervisors Chavez and Pacheco—and many members of the public—the proposed policy represents a dangerous drift toward censorship, exclusion and micromanagement.

For Bredefeld and his allies, it’s another battle in their broader culture war, with LGBTQ+ visibility squarely in the crosshairs. The question ahead is not only what events the County recognizes, but whom it includes—and who gets left out.