Mega development in southeast Fresno faces setback as residents strongly oppose
An ambitious, controversial plan to build 45,000 homes in southeast Fresno appears far from becoming a reality any time soon, despite having Mayor Jerry Dyer’s support and clearing a key regulatory hurdle.
That much was underscored in a tense, eight-hour hearing at City Hall Thursday evening, in which hundreds of residents and advocates turned out in opposition. They criticized the plan as a poorly thought project that would create expensive urban sprawl and divert resources from existing neighborhoods.
The $4.3 billion proposed large-scale expansion known as SEDA has been decades in the making and faces a projected $3 billion shortfall. The plan aims to develop 9,000 acres of mostly agricultural land east of Temprance Avenue and south of Jensen Avenue into residential neighborhoods.
Amid the public opposition Thursday, Dyer asked the City Council not to pass the plan, but to provide direction to city staff for a section of the plan he calls south SEDA.
“I do not support sprawl or leapfrog development,” Dyer said. “But I do support smart growth and incremental development that will allow Fresno to remain competitive in the housing and employment market.”
In a 5-2 vote, the council sent the plan back to the Dyer administration with a long list of demands and potential revisions, including new studies on SEDA’s financial viability.
Dyer admin does not intend to develop all of SEDA at once
Dyer said he does not intend to develop the entire 9,000 acres of SEDA at once. To alleviate concerns about leapfrog development, he recommended a safeguard requiring 70% of residential land in south SEDA be developed before opening up new areas in the sphere.
South SEDA is around 1,963 acres, located at the bottom portion of the SEDA area. Around 469 of those acres would be used for up to 4,800 residential units, with the rest for flexible research and development without housing involved, Dyer said.
He also recommended requiring a supplemental environmental impact report for any future phase or to launch a voter referendum prior to any future phases being developed after south SEDA.
Dyer touted that this plan would increase property tax revenues for the city, which comprises 40% of all general fund dollars, that support Fresno’s police and fire departments, roads and parks. Additionally, he believes the plan would keep Fresno residents from buying homes in Madera or Clovis and will allow for the creation of manufacturing jobs.
A city-commissioned report projected that developer fees will cover only about $1 billion of the full SEDA plan, leaving a $3 billion gap that the private sector is unlikely to finance.
Once the council decides on a preferred alternative for south SEDA, a financial analysis will be conducted.
“I am 100% convinced that not only will the new development in the south SEDA pay for itself, I believe it will free up existing resources to better serve existing neighborhoods within the city,” Dyer said.
Council members criticize SEDA plan, open to “responsible growth”
Each of the Fresno Council members, except Mike Karbassi, criticized the plan in its current form. All members said they had no intention of passing the plan Thursday, but would support “responsible growth” for the city.
Councilmember Annalisa Perea, along with many residents during public comment, pointed to part of her district west of Highway 99, an area with a deep history of redlining and segregation, where a specific plan was recently passed.
“I need to know that approving a new growth area on the complete opposite side of West of the 99 is not going to hurt the residents that are just now starting to get a glimpse of hope for what could be,” Perea said.
Councilmember Brandon Vang, who represents southeast Fresno, said he does not support the plan as it stands because it is not financially feasible.
“It would be a grave disservice to my predecessors, and more importantly, a disservice to the residents who I represent to rush a decision of this magnitude today,” Vang said.
Council chambers overflowed with SEDA opposers
The council chambers overflowed into the lobby with residents from each council district. Many people were wearing matching red shirts with “no on SEDA” in bold white letters on the front.
Public comment lasted hours. Many residents worried the plan’s yawning funding gaps would drain resources from existing neighborhoods, force school closures in Fresno Unified and take away agricultural land.
“It is a choice to prioritize profit over people,” Von Garcia Balanon, engagement coordinator with the Central Labor Council, said. “SEDA will burden working families with the consequences of more congestion, more pollution and the destruction of farmland. This isn’t about growth, it’s about greed.”
Advocates pushed for the growth of Fresno’s current neighborhoods in need of support instead of expanding into new territory.
“We do need more housing,” Rhonda Dueck, executive director of Jackson Community Development Corporation, said. “So, then let’s be smart about the housing. Let’s make the affordable housing. Let’s put it in the midst of neighborhoods where there’s already sidewalks and plumbing and buses and all kinds of robust infrastructure already.”
“Why go over and take over farmland? And frankly, we and just going to go over into Sanger and Clovis and support them as opposed to supporting our neighborhood,” she said.
Many of those in attendance are part of a coalition made up of around 20 organizations, politicians and residents against SEDA. The coalition has said it would either file a lawsuit or initiate a citywide referendum that would outlaw growth on the land planned for SEDA if the plan is passed in the future.
Major opponents include the Central Labor Council, State Assemblymember Joaquin Arambula, the Greenfield Coalition, representatives from the Fresno DRIVE initiative and various neighborhood groups.
Before the meeting closed at nearly midnight, Karabassi made it clear that the council did not approve SEDA or the environmental impact report. The plan received the Fresno Planning Commission’s recommendation in November.
“What we did do is we chose a specific planning area for them (city staff) to study, a very limited area compared to the whole 9,000 acres, and then with that we gave them specific things to look into,” Karabassi said.
This story was originally published December 19, 2025 at 5:04 PM.