Parlier council approves mayor per diem conditional on outside coverage after heated debate over reimbursement

Mayor Alma Beltran will receive a city per diem for an April trip to Washington, D.C., to represent Parlier at a Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG) “One Voice” delegation — but only if Fresno COG does not provide a per diem, the City Council decided Thursday.

The funding decision followed an hours-long, sometimes heated discussion that also included a separate dispute over a check (No. 64085) on the council warrant. Council approved paying the warrant as a whole with that one check removed and a later attempt to pay that single check failed for lack of a second.

City staff presented a staff report saying the Fresno COG trip covers the mayor’s flight and hotel; the requested city expenditure — estimated at $550 — covers the mayor’s per diem (meals and incidentals) per the city’s travel policy. “The Fresno COG One Voice trip provides valuable opportunities for elected officials from the Fresno region to meet with federal officials and advocate for issues of local importance,” the report said.

Mayor Alma Beltran defended the trip and the request. She told the council the regional advocacy work has helped bring federal and state funding to Parlier, and said she was seeking only meal per diem so she would not have to rely on Fresno COG staff credit cards while in Washington. “They’re paying for the hotel. They’re paying for the flight. All I’m asking is for the per diem that I’m asking for is for the cover of my meals,” Beltran said.

Council Member Diego Garza and Council Member Kathy Salorio pressed for clarity about what Fresno COG pays. Garza said he had understood from prior meetings that “COG is paying for all your stuff” and questioned whether approving a city per diem would be “double dipping.” Salorio repeatedly raised budget concerns, saying the city’s travel budget was limited. Residents in the audience also voiced objections and asked the council to tighten oversight of travel spending.

City legal counsel advised the council that approving a per diem is legally permissible provided the mayor does not receive duplicate per diem payments from another organization. “From a legal point of view, it’s legally sufficient if you wish to approve her per diem as long as there’s no other reimbursement,” counsel said.

Council Member Garza made a motion to approve the mayor’s per diem on the condition that Fresno COG does not provide a per diem; Council Member Janie Molina seconded. The council then approved the motion by roll call: Molina — yes; Rodriguez — yes; Garza — yes; Salorio — yes; Beltran — yes.

Separately, Council considered the city warrant (payment list) and one contested check, No. 64085. Council voted to approve the warrant excluding that check. Council discussion showed disagreement about whether an individual travel expense should be reimbursed; the mayor contended it was a city business cost. A motion to pay that single check later failed for lack of a second, so the council did not approve payment of check No. 64085, and the item remains unresolved.

The votes addressed immediate logistics for the mayor’s planned advocacy trip while leaving the contested warrant item unresolved. City staff said they would confirm with Fresno COG whether a meal stipend would be provided; the mayor’s per diem approval is conditioned on the city not duplicating any outside per-diem payment.

The council did not take any additional action on other travel reimbursements during the same meeting.

Votes at a glance: - Motion to approve mayor Alma Beltran’s per diem for the Fresno COG One Voice trip (estimated $550), conditional on no duplicate per diem from Fresno COG — PASSED (roll call: Molina, Rodriguez, Garza, Salorio, Beltran — all yes). - Motion to approve city warrant excluding check No. 64085 — PASSED (voice vote; tally not recorded). Attempt to pay check No. 64085 separately — FAILED (motion died for lack of second).

What’s next: Staff will confirm Fresno COG’s coverage for meals and report back; the disputed check may be revisited when more information or a second is available.