CITY OF BISHOP
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
City Council Chambers - 301 West Line Street - Bishop, California TUESDAY, MAY 12, 2026 - 8:00 AM
1. CALL TO ORDER - 8:00 a.m. Tuesday, May 12, 2026
2. ROLL CALL
3. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR SPECIAL MEETINGS
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC: This time is set aside to receive public comment limited to the items listed below on the agenda and that no general public comments on nonagendized items will be permitted. When recognized by the Mayor, please state your name and address for the record and please limit your comments to three minutes.
4. STRATEGIC PLANNING WORKSHOP
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC: Please be advised this meeting is accessible to the public in person. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at 760- 873-5863 Extension 124. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II].
The public is encouraged to participate or observe this meeting by:
1. Attending this meeting in person at the City of Bishop City Council Chambers located at 301 West Line Street in Bishop, California .
Public comments may be made:
1. In person: Members of the public desiring to speak on a matter appearing on the agenda should ask the Mayor for the opportunity to be heard when the item comes up for Council consideration (or complete a speaker card prior to the meeting). Comments for all agenda items are limited to a speaking time of three minutes unless modified by the Mayor.
2. In writing: Go to http://bishop-ca.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=8 to submit an "eComment" for the corresponding meeting. Please note that eComment submissions closes at 3:00 p.m. on Monday, May 11, 2026. You may also hand deliver public comments to the City drop/payment box located at the Church Street entrance to City Hall on or before the deadline noted above. Written public comments received after the deadline will be provided to the Council at the earliest possibility. Please note written public comments received will not be read aloud at the meeting.
Any writing that is a public record that relates to an agenda item for open session distributed less than 72 hours prior to the meeting will be available for public inspection at City Hall, 377 West Line Street, Bishop, California during normal business hours.
Government Code 54957.5(b)(1). Copies will also be provided at the appropriate meeting.
1 A. Strategic Planning Workshop Agenda and Related Documents
5. ADJOURNMENT
Recommended Action: Review Accomplishments, Goals and Set Priorities for Fiscal Year 2026-2027
Strategic Plan Workshop Agenda
Strategic Plan 2023-2028 Updated May 2025
Strategic Plan Two Pager
City of Bishop Department Accomplishments 2025-2026
City of Bishop Department Goals 2026-2027
Strategic Financial Planning 2026-2027
City of Bishop Items for Discussion, Direction and Priority Setting Whitney Alley - Preferred Site Phase1
Whitney Alley - Preferred Site Phase 2
Active Transportation Plan
City of Bishop Proposed Parking Mgmt Strategies
DRAFT Eastern Sierra Regional HousingTookit
DRAFT Bishop Park Master Plan
MEETING CANCELLED: Monday, May 26, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. Regular Meeting in the City Council Chambers
Monday, June 8, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. Regular Meeting in the City Council Chambers 2 Agenda Item: 4.A
Date of Meeting: May 12, 2026
Department: Administration
To: City Council
From: Robin Picken
Subject: Strategic Planning Workshop Agenda and Related Documents Prepared On: May 6, 2026
Attachments: Strategic Plan Workshop Agenda
Strategic Plan 2023-2028 Updated May 2025
Strategic Plan Two Pager
City of Bishop Department Accomplishments 2025-2026
City of Bishop Department Goals 2026-2027
Strategic Financial Planning 2026-2027
City of Bishop Items for Discussion, Direction and Priority Setting Whitney Alley - Preferred Site Phase1
Whitney Alley - Preferred Site Phase 2
Active Transportation Plan
City of Bishop Proposed Parking Mgmt Strategies
DRAFT Eastern Sierra Regional HousingTookit
DRAFT Bishop Park Master Plan
STAFF REPORT
Recommended Action:
Review Accomplishments, Goals and Set Priorities for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 Approved By: Pam Foster 5/6/2026
Approved By:
Approved By:
Approved By:
3 City of Bishop
City Council Strategic Planning Workshop Agenda
Date: May 12, 2026
1. Call to Order & Meeting Overview
2. Department Accomplishments – Year in Review
• Fire
• Police
• Community Services
• Planning
• Public Works
• Finance
• Administration
3. Department Priorities – Looking Ahead
• Fire
• Police
• Community Services
• Planning
• Public Works
• Finance
• Administration
4. Strategic Topics – Discussion & Direction
• Infrastructure, Facilities & Capital Planning
4 • Community & Economic Development
• Transportation & Mobility
• Community Services & Quality of Life
• Housing & Regulatory Environment
• Regional & External Partnerships
5. Additional Council-Identified Topics
6. Council Priority Setting
7. Final Direction & Next Steps
5 1
Updated in May, 2025
STRATEGIC PLAN
6 2
I. Strategic Planning Framework
Proposed Method: Identifying Missions, Objectives, and Key Results (OKRs) Terms:
Missions: five goal areas for the City to pursue over the next five years
Objectives: the OKR framework starts with a goal. Cities can strive for ambitious goals like creating a vibrant, authentic, and pedestrian-friendly downtown. They can also set more immediate achievable goals, like Developing a volunteer program in the next year.
Key Results/ Initiatives: key results are metrics that the City can use to track goal fulfillment. Good OKRs feature frequent check-ins to review these key results and see if team members are on track to meet their objectives. 7 3
2023 – 2028 Objectives and Key Results/Initiatives
Mission 1: Build and create community and support a vibrant, pedestrian-friendly city by investing in public spaces and supporting downtown events and activities.
Objective 1.1: Create a vibrant, authentic, and pedestrian-friendly city that is a destination for residents and visitors.
Planning and Public Works
• Implement Whitney Alley Project FY 2023/2028.
• Improve safe routes to schools and expand the multimodal transportation network.
• Plan and implement sidewalk and bike lane improvements that will connect to the planned Caltrans improvements on State Routes 395 and 168. • Work with Caltrans, ESCOG to investigate options to calm traffic and better the pedestrian and bicycle environment on the downtown portion of 395. • Promote and Enforce Downtown Design Guidelines through Signage Updates and Community Partnerships.
• Partnership: Collaborate with Caltrans, ESCOG, and Inyo County to revisit and evaluate truck bypass alternatives that redirect commercial traffic away from downtown, while preserving access for private motorists. • Develop process for the approval of public art
Administration, Police Department, City Attorney
• Develop code enforcement strategy.
Objective 1.2: Support community spaces; create and maintain partnerships.
Community Services
• Review and update the City Park Master Plan.
• Athletic Field 6 Renovation Project.
8 4
• Partner with the Chamber of Commerce and local organizations: develop a strategy to draw more events downtown, particularly during shoulder seasons. • Partner with Inyo County to develop a plan for athletic facilities improvement at the Millpond recreation area.
• Support Bishop Bike Organization with the construction of a mountain bike facility within the City Park.
• Support the design and construction of the Community Garden Enhancement Project.
• Create a plan to increase City Pool usage during temperatures above 80 degrees.
Police Department
• Address Impacts of Homelessness and Transient Activity. • Work with State Officials on policies and procedures.
Objective 1.3: Enhance walkability, and identify opportunities for multimodal facility expansion while also addressing parking needs.
Planning, Public Works, Police Department
• Develop a City Parking Management Plan outlining strategies to address parking demands and improve walkability.
• Explore the feasibility of implementing paid parking options to manage parking availability effectively.
• Identify opportunities for expanding multimodal facilities to accommodate various transportation modes.
Police Department
• Enforce parking regulations.
Objective 1.4 Implement strategies to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) through improved active transportation.
Planning, Public Works
• Design and construct projects that include sidewalk improvements. 9 5
Mission 2: Facilitate a balanced and diverse economy that helps businesses start, stay, and grow by investing in the
implementation of the Economic Development Plan and Housing Element goals.
Objective 2.1: Address the shortage of affordable housing.
City Administration, Planning Department, Public Works
• Conduct a Parking Demand and Land Use Study to assess existing parking usage, propose parking management strategies, and consider the potential development of opportunity parcels for residential and city facility expansion. • Identify and facilitate the development of City properties eligible for housing under the Surplus Land Act list
• Increase the inventory of affordable housing by actively supporting housing projects with partners in the service area.
• Conduct Regional Housing Needs Assessment and Action Planning, partnership with Inyo and Mono County, Town of Mammoth Lakes
Objective 2.2: Support real estate developments in the city.
Planning Department, City Attorney
• Support market-rate housing development to advance the construction of 147 workforce housing units currently in the pipeline.
• Identify the economic development resources necessary to formulate a strategy aimed at filling commercial vacancies within the City.
Objective 2.3: Incentivize single-family residence and ADU construction for longterm rentals.
Planning Department
• Execute Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program (PLHA). • Update the City website with current zoning and ADU resources. 10 6
• Implement policies to restrict the growth of second home ownership for shortterm rentals to ensure an adequate supply of rental properties.
Objective 2.4: Actively participate in the regional planning efforts and identify projects that are eligible for regional funding.
City Administration and City Council
• Support regional studies, strategic planning efforts.
Objective 2.5: Ensure compliance with state laws and regulatory requirements to maintain eligibility for current and future funding opportunities.
Planning
• Implement General Plan Updates
• Update the Municipal Code to comply with Transitional Housing and Navigation Centers Requirements.
11 7
Mission 3: Sustain public infrastructure by ensuring its safety, functionality, and sustainability while improving residents' and visitors' overall quality of life.
Objective 3.1: Planning and implementing pedestrian and traffic safety mobility improvements, identifying priorities for new sidewalks on streets without sidewalks.
Public Works, Planning Department
• Develop a comprehensive sidewalk and bicycle routes assessment and strategy, including preliminary engineering.
• Develop a City-wide sidewalk assistance program to encourage and facilitate homeowners to improve sidewalk conditions.
• Develop a Capital Improvement Plan for Street Improvements. • Implement pedestrian, bike, and traffic safety improvements by the completion of projects.
• Seek funding for the East Line Street Improvements project to begin the planning and design process.
Objective 3.2: Improve the condition of City streets and parking lots and implement a pavement preservation program.
Public Works Department
• Complete environmental documents and engineering design work on the East Line Street Bridge Replacement project and seek a new source of funds for construction.
• Complete the design and environmental work on the South Warren Street Improvement project and implement construction.
• Develop a cyclical maintenance program for pavement preservation. • Address drainage issues on Johnson Drive.
• Replace the road culvert at South Third and East South Street in partnership with LADWP.
12 8
Objective 3.3: Provide safe, reliable, and affordable drinking water to the City while meeting regulatory requirements.
Public Works
• Develop a Capital Improvement Plan for water infrastructure. • Plan and implement the replacement of the water main under West Line Street from Main Street to Home Street prior to Caltrans implementing the Bishop Pavements Project. This will include isolation valves on the existing line to Well
4. • Modernize cyclical maintenance schedules, and incorporate data management using GIS.
• Implement the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) Upgrade project to modernize this critical automation program and hardware. (paired with objective 3.4)
• Install meters on all service connections to comply with SB 552 • Complete the Lead and Copper Rule Revision mandated service line inventory. • Complete rate study (paired with objective 3.4).
Objective 3.4: Provide sustainable and affordable wastewater collection and disposal to the City while meeting regulatory requirements.
Public Works
• Develop a Capital Improvement Plan for wastewater infrastructure. • Modernize cyclical maintenance schedules, and incorporate data management using GIS.
• Implement the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) Upgrade project to modernize this critical automation program and hardware. (paired with objective 3.3)
• Continue serving as the Bishop Area Wastewater Authority (BAWA) administrator.
• Address inflow and infiltration problems.
• Complete rate study (paired with objective 3.3)
13 9
Objective 3.5: Promote and support the development and use of alternative energy.
Public Works, Planning
• Streamline solar permitting.
• Work with solar companies to investigate the feasibility of converting City facilities to solar (could be part of facilities master planning effort 3.5).
Objective 3.6: Implement Capital Replacement Program
Community Services
• City Park Facilities Maintenance and Upgrades
• Capital Equipment Replacement
Public Works
• New municipal well for primary source, abandoned well 1 • Establish new JPA for BAWA that includes the BPT as a member and advancement of the consolidated treatment plant.
• Develop a capital equipment replacement program.
Administration, Public Works
• Create a plan and timeline for Land Acknowledgement Monument at the City Park.
Objective 3.8: Protection of Critical Infrastructure within the City Police Department
• Protect Critical infrastructure within the City.
The Bishop Schools:
o Provide intensive active shooter training to all officers. o Work with school officials to prevent incidences of criminal activity on school grounds.
o Interact with and inform students of dangerous substances. 14 10
o Work with younger children to educate them on policing and 911 etiquette (911 in school program)
o Implement school resource officer.
Northern Inyo Hospital:
o Increase officer patrols on hospital grounds.
o Conduct site checks with hospital staff.
o Provide intensive active shooter training to all officers.
Water and sewer treatment facilities:
o Increase patrol of infrastructure.
o Integrate with the Public Works Department to learn key areas of exposure.
o Add live camera surveillance to identify breeches/plant failures as they happen.
Fire Department property:
o Regular checks on fire stations.
o Install and monitor cameras at fire stations.
Downtown and City Park:
o Access park cameras and add additional cameras to monitor criminal activity on city park grounds.
o Regularly patrol parks, including on foot.
15 11
Mission 4: Deliver excellent services through collaboration, transparency, and team member support internally and with external stakeholders.
Objective 4.1: Ensure fiscal sustainability and accountability of the City Finance, All Departments
• Continue improving budgeting practices and data analysis. • Implement improved internal controls where feasible.
• Develop systems to effectively forecast City revenues and expenditures. • Develop systems to track encumbrances and obligations. • Develop a plan to fully fund the Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS) Retirement Enhancement Plan, which is closed to new entrants. • Continue to monitor the City’s open pension and Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) plans and collaborate with the City’s actuary to maintain acceptable levels of funding from year to year.
• Maintain fund balances that allow for financial maneuverability to adapt to macroeconomic effects on the City’s long-term liabilities. • Expand the City’s investment portfolio when permissible options are available that provide a return greater than the projected rate of return from a Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) investment.
Objective 4.2: Support a connected and engaged community where all residents feel represented and informed.
Administration
• Update the city website to make it more user-friendly. • Enhance accessibility by providing Spanish translation for City outreach materials and communications.
• Change City Hall address to Church Street
16 12
Administration, City Attorney
• Develop a social media policy and create a unified City social media presence for departments other than Police and Fire.
• Facilitate City branding design
Police Department
• Create a Public relations group for social media and event planning / staffing. • Conduct a citizen academy yearly to educate the public.
Planning & Public Works
• Host public outreach meetings for projects.
Objective 4.3: Ensure City Council Members understand their responsibilities, City policies, City operations, and State
Administration, City Attorney
• Update the City Council Manual and implement a New Council Member Onboarding and Training Plan.
• Implement a travel policy and budget for council member travel.
Objective 4.4: Strengthen the City’s alignment and capacity by nurturing collaboration and communication between departments.
Administration, All Departments
• Develop an employee orientation program.
• Offer leadership training programs for managers, supervisors, and staff.
Objective 4.5: Developing a volunteer program.
Police Department
• Implement a citizen volunteer program for the police department through yearly citizen academies.
17 13
Administration
• Create and develop a Volunteer Manual for the City.
Objective 4.6: Investing in modernizing business functions and streamlining processes.
Public Works
• Deploy cloud-based building permitting, licensing, and code enforcement software with digital inspections and plan reviews.
• Develop a City-wide GIS strategy.
Police Department
• Modernize workflow and implement modern police techniques within the Police Department to increase efficiency.
Administration
• Digitize paper records for all record retention documents and develop standard organizational practices for efficient record storage and retrieval.
Finance
• Develop internal software and host it with CBT or on our own via a service such as AWS. Bishop Municipal Finance Hub.
• Improve the accounts payable process.
Objective 4.7: Update Police and Fire Officer Training to provide a better service to the community.
Police Department
• Move towards advanced officer training.
• Develop a regional approach to perishable skills training. • Include basic Spanish-speaking awareness for all officers. • Update Training.
18 14
Objective 4.8: Officer Wellness Support
Police Department
• Enhance officer well-being and productivity through comprehensive incentive and support programs to promote a healthier work/life balance. 19 15
Mission 5: Enhance Community Safety by maintaining the safety and security of the community, and improve operations of Fire and Police Departments.
Objective 5.1: Develop a Fire Department-specific strategic plan with the Bishop Rural Fire Protection District.
Fire Department
• Evaluate and determine core mission objectives and future staffing needs.
Change organizational structure based on mission and staffing needs.
Objective 5.2: Develop plans and a financing strategy for a combined Police and Fire public safety facility (relates to 3.5)
Fire Department
• Upgrade and/or renovate Police and Fire Department stations.
Objective 5.3: Continue to address crime trends through strategic operations and maintain low crime rates through proactive law enforcement and innovative community policing practices.
Police Department
Increase proactive policing to decrease crime rate:
• Fill current vacancies with qualified lateral officers at a cost saving to the City compared to training new officers.
• Restructure the Department staffing for better supervision and chain of command. Including the addition of a corporal position. • Revitalize our reserve officer program to supplement staffing at a reduced cost. • Use alternative patrol methods for events.
• Increase staffing to support proactive policing.
20 16
Objective 5.4: Ensure long-term EMS planning.
Administration
• Develop a long-term contract for Bishop Fire to assume the Exclusive Operating Area (EOA) and contract with a service provider.
Objective 5.5: Deliver the highest level of fire prevention, suppression, hazard mitigation, and community education services by complying with and exceeding industry standards.
• Improve Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating.
• Identify funding for safety equipment, including fire apparatus, and personal protective equipment (ex. Turnouts, Self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA).
• Implementation of the full Lexipol policy manual.
• Facilitate state-of-the-art training and education for department members. • Develop a program for cyclical testing of fire hydrants for flow and functionality.
Objective 5.6: Form a Joint Powers Authority with the Bishop Rural Fire Protection District.
Fire Department
• Engage the Ad Hoc Committee to create a timeline and create the Joint Powers Authority.
Objective 5.7: Strengthen and invest in the relationship between the Police Department and Bishop Unified School District
Police Department
• Engage the Ad Hoc Committee to create a timeline and create the Joint Powers Authority.
• Develop a long-term solution/agreement for staff funding. • Active Shooter prank call protocol & system improvement, possibly integrate school cameras with dispatch.
21 Mission: A general statement that describes the purposes and objectives of the organization.
Objective: A clear, outcome-focused goal describing what the organization intends to achieve within a mission.
Initiative: A specific project, program, policy action, or tasks undertaken to accomplish an objective. Concrete, measurable actions.
Below is a list of common terms and definitions used in the Strategic Plan:
The City of Bishop Strategic Plan was developed through collaboration between the City Council, staff and community partners to identify priorities that reflect local needs and long-term goals. Existing plans, regulatory requirements, infrastructure needs, public safety considerations, and regional coordination efforts were reviewed to ensure alignment. The plan focuses on clear objectives and measurable outcomes to guide decision-making, resource allocation, and service delivery over the five-year period. The Strategic Plan spans 2023-2028, however, the City simultaneously plans and forecasts for years beyond 2028 in order to make best efforts in thoughtful and prudent fiscal planning and management.To provide reliable public services, maintain critical infrastructure,support sustainable economic and housing opportunities, ensurepublic safety, and operate responsibly to meet the needs of thecommunity.
A welcoming, resilient, and well-managed community where residents enjoy a high quality of life, businesses can thrive, and visitors experience Bishop’s natural beauty and character, supported bydependable services, sustainable stewardship of resources, and the ability to adapt to changing needsfor current and future generations.
The City’s Strategic Plan establishes five priority areas that are approved by the City Council:
Downtown Area Investment and Support Economic and Housing Development Infrastructure Maintenance, Improvement and Replacement Consistently Improve City Services and Functionality Maintain and Enhance Provision of Public Safety 22 DOWNTOWN AREA
ECONOMIC & HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT
INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENT
CITY SERVICES &
FUNCTIONALITY PUBLIC SAFETY
Support a vibrant city by
investing in walkability,
public spaces, events &
activities
Implement an Economic
Development Plan and
achieve housing element
goals
Sustain and improve
infrastructure with a focus
on quality of life of
residents/visitors
Balance consistent
improvement of service to
the public with prudent
fiscal management
Enhance community
safety via improvements
to public safety
departments
OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVES
1.1 Create a vibrant, authentic, and pedestrianfriendly city
2.1 Address the shortage of affordable housing
3.1 Prioritize new sidewalk needs and improve traffic safety mobility
4.1 Ensure fiscal sustainability and accountability of the City
5.1 Develop a Fire Department strategic plan with the Bishop RFPD
1.2 Support community spaces and local partnerships
2.2 Support real estate developments within the city
3.2 Implement a pavement preservation program and improve street conditions
4.2 Support a community where all residents feel represented and informed
5.2 Develop plans for improved public safety facilities
1.3 Identify multimodal facility improvement opportunities, improve walkability and address parking needs
2.3 Incentivize single-family residence and ADU construction for long-term rentals
3.3 Ensure long-term provision of affordable drinking water and compliance with regulations
4.3 Ensure that City Council members understand their responsibilities
5.3 Maintain low crime rates through proactive law enforcement and innovative community policing practices
1.4 Improve active transportation
2.4 Collaborate with regional partners
3.4 Ensure long-term provision of wastewater collection/disposal and compliance with regulations
4.4 Improve collaboration and communication between departments
5.4 Comply with and exceed industry standards relating to Fire Department service
2.5 Pursue external funding opportunities
3.5 Promote and support the development and use of alternative energy
4.5 Develop and maintain volunteer programs
5.5 Form a Joint Powers Authority with the Bishop RFPD
3.6 Implement a Capital Replacement Program
4.6 Modernize City business functions and processes
5.6 Strengthen the relationship between the City PD and BUSD
3.7 Protect Critical City Infrastructure
4.7 Increase training for Police and Fire Departments 4.8 Develop officer wellness support programs 23 City of Bishop Department 2025-2026 Accomplishments
Department Name: Bishop Fire Department
Timeframe: FY 2025/2026
Department Lead: Bret Russell
1. Strategic Project Priorities (3–5 max)
High-level focus areas that guide the department’s efforts.
1. Project 1: Develop staffing model utilizing NFPA ESCI to ensure coverage and apparatus response.
2. Project 2: Type 1 Fire Engine
3. Project 3: Type 3 Fire Engine
4. Project 4: Training- Bolstered Fire Department Capabilities (Wild-Land Fire/Swift Water Rescue).
5. Project 5: Grants (multiple grants have been applied for).
2. Strategic Plan Accomplishments by Project
Project 1: Develop staffing model utilizing NFPA & ESCI Study • Strategic Plan Objective: 5.1 Develop a Fire Department strategic plan with the Bishop RFPD.
o Metric/Success Indicator: 100%
o Description: Budgeted and hired full-time Deputy Fire Chief. o Budget: $95,000
o Deadline: March 2026
Project 2: Type 1 Fire Engine
• Strategic Plan Objective: 5.2 Develop plans for improved public safety facilities. o Metric/Success Indicator: 100%
o Description: Purchase of Type 1 Fire Engine
24 o Budget: $620,000
o Deadline: March 2026
Project 3: Type 3 Fire Engine
• Strategic Plan Objective 1: 5.2 Develop plans for improved public safety facilities. o Metric/Success Indicator: 100%
o Description: Purchase a Type 3 Fire Engine (Wild-Land/Brush Truck) o Budget: $75,000
o Deadline: June 2025
Project 4: Facilitate state-of-the-art training and education for fire department members
• Strategic Plan Objective 1: 4.7 Increase training for Police and Fire Departments. o Metric/Success Indicator: On-going
o Description: Fire Captain has taken and completed strike team leader / 10 BFD members certified in swift-water rescue as technicians / 5 Officers certified in blue card command and control.
o Budget: Training line item
o Deadline: n/a
25 City of Bishop Department 2025-2026 Accomplishments
Department Name: Police
Timeframe: FY 2025/2026
Department Lead: N. Derr
1. Strategic Project Priorities
High-level focus areas that guide the department’s efforts.
1. Project 1: Staffing
2. Project 2: Training
3. Project 3: Community Relations
2. Strategic Plan Accomplishments by Project
Project 1: Staffing
• Strategic Plan Objective: 5.3 Maintain low crime rates through proactive law enforcement and innovative community policing practices. o Metric/Success Indicator: Full staff for first time in over 5 years o Description: Fill vacancies that have existed for over 5 years o Budget (if out of ordinary):
o Deadline: January 2026
Project 2: Training
• Strategic Plan Objective: 4.7 Increase training for Police and Fire Departments. o Metric/Success Indicator: Proper use of training budget and certifying Officers in advance Police Techniques
o Description: We have sent Officers to more advanced training than they have been able to attend in over 5 years. This is possible with increased staffing levels (full staff) and a solid training budget.
26 o Budget (if out of ordinary):
o Deadline: July 2026
Project 3: Community relations
• Strategic Plan Objective 1: 4.2 Support a community where all residents feel represented and informed.
o Metric/Success Indicator: Fewer complaints and better community policing o Description: Better staffing and training provides more component and less burnt out Officers, which in turns provides for better service to the community.
o Budget (if out of ordinary):
o Deadline: July 2026
27 City of Bishop Department 2025-2026 Accomplishments
Department Name: Community Services
Timeframe: FY 2025/2026
Department Lead: Community Services Manager - Daniel McElroy
1. Strategic Project Priorities (3–5 max)
High-level focus areas that guide the department’s efforts.
1. Project 1: Parks Master Plan
2. Project 2: Field 6 Renovation
3. Project 3: Community Garden – Urban Greening Grant
4. Project 4: Capital Equipment
5. Project 5: Parks Facility Upgrades
2. Strategic Plan Accomplishments by Project
Project 1: Park Master Plan
• Strategic Plan Objective: 1.2 Support community spaces and local partnerships. o Metric/Success Indicator: 90%-100%
o Description: Develop future planning for and upgrades for the City Park. o Budget (if out of ordinary): Consultant fee $158,325
o Deadline: May 2026
Project 2: Field 6 Renovation Phase 1
• Strategic Plan Objective: 1.2 Support community spaces and local partnerships. o Metric/Success Indicator: 90%
o Description: Renovate Field 6 with new irrigation system, soil, and turfgrass surface.
28 o Budget (if out of ordinary): Consultant fee $119,540 Construction $1,286,500 o Deadline: 4/2027
____________________________________________________________________________________ Project 3: City Park Equipment and Facility Upgrades
• Strategic Plan Objective: 3.6 Implement a Capital Replacement Program. o Metric/Success Indicator: 100%
o Description: Purchase of new equipment: Tractor, Utility Cart, and Light Truck for Sunrise. Facilities: Field 1,2 parking lot planters, painting of all facilities, East pond repair, and artificial turf on Hambey Street. o Budget (if out of ordinary):
o Deadline: Completed 4/2026
Project 4: Community Garden – Urban Greening Grant
• Strategic Plan Objective 1: 1.2 Support community spaces and local partnerships. o Metric/Success Indicator: 90%
o Description: Administration of the Urban Greening Grant. o Budget (if out of ordinary):
o Deadline: 6/2026
29 City of Bishop Department 2025-2026 Accomplishments
Department Name: Planning
Timeframe: FY 2025/2026
Department Lead: Pam Foster
1. Strategic Project Priorities (3–5 max)
High-level focus areas that guide the department’s efforts.
1. Project 1: Silver Peaks Application
2. Project 2: OpenGov Permitting Software
3. Project 3: Housing Needs Assessment and Housing Toolkit
4. Project 4: Expand and Improve Access to Active Transportation Infrastructure
2. Strategic Plan Accomplishments by Project
Project 1: Silver Peaks Application
• Strategic Plan Objective: 2.1: Address the shortage of affordable housing. o Metric/Success Indicator: Funding for the construction of affordable units. o Description: Staff worked with the developer on the grant application. o Budget (if out of ordinary): N/A
o Deadline: May, 2025
Project 2: OpenGov Permitting Software
• Strategic Plan Objective: 4.6: Investing in modernizing business functions and streamlining processes.
o Metric/Success Indicator: Implement the software for the Planning Department.
o Description: Worked with OpenGov on setting up the forms for cloud-based permitting for Planning Department Applications.
30 o Budget (if out of ordinary): N/A
o Deadline: September, 2025
Project 3: Housing Needs Assessment and Housing Toolkit • Strategic Plan Objective: 2.1: Address the shortage of affordable housing. o Metric/Success Indicator: Conduct Regional Housing Needs Assessment and Action Planning, partnership with Inyo and Mono County, Town of Mammoth Lakes.
o Description: Worked with Inyo and Mono Counties, Town of Mammoth Lakes, ESCOG, and the consultant on Housing Needs Assessment that identified the need for 462 units in the City Limits (see final report published on ESCOG website) and Housing Toolkit that identifies the actions that the jurisdiction can take to increase the supply of housing.
o Budget (if out of ordinary): $54,089.00
o Deadline: May, 2026
Project 4: Secure Funding for Active Transportation
• Strategic Plan Objective 1: Objective 1.1: Create a vibrant, authentic, and pedestrian-friendly city that is a destination for residents and visitors. o Metric/Success Indicator: Improve safe routes to schools and expand the multimodal transportation network, and secure funding.
o Description: Worked with Public Works Director and consultant on project layouts and preliminary budget for sidewalks and bike lanes for 5 streets – Sierra, Hanby, Yaney, Home, Spruce. Secured 9 million in funding for Hanby, Yaney, and Spruce Streets. Staff will continue pursuing funding for the remaining segments under the Cycle 8 Active Transportation Grant Application in 2026.
o Budget (if out of ordinary): N/A
o Deadline: May, 2026
31 City of Bishop Department 2025-2026 Accomplishments
Department Name: Public Works
Timeframe: FY 2025/2026
Department Lead: Nora Gamino
1. Strategic Project Priorities (3–5 max)
High-level focus areas that guide the department’s efforts.
1. Project 1: West Line Water Main Replacement
2. Project 2: South Warren Street Improvement Project
3. Project 3: Water/Sewer Rate Study
4. Project 4: SCADA Upgrade Project
5. Project 5: East Line Bridge Replacement Project
2. Strategic Plan Accomplishments by Project
Project 1: West Line Water Main Replacement Project
• Strategic Plan Objective: 3.3: Provide safe, reliable, and affordable drinking water to the City while meeting regulatory requirements.
o Metric/Success Indicator: Completed engineering, design, awarded contract and will go to construction late May/early June 2026.
o Description: Plan and implement the replacement of the water main under West Line Street from Main Street to Home Street prior to Caltrans implementing the Bishop Pavements Project. This will include isolation valves on the existing line to Well 4.
o Budget (if out of ordinary): $1,429,395
o Deadline: September 2026.
32 Project 2: South Warren Street Improvement Project
• Strategic Plan Objective: 3.2: Improve the condition of City streets and parking lots and implement a pavement preservation program.
o Metric/Success Indicator: Completed the design and environmental work on the South Warren Street Improvement project. Received Caltrans funding authorization (E-76) in Sept 2025, this came too late for construction in 2025. plan to advertise for construction July 2026.
o Description: Construct sidewalks, storm drain, street trees, lighting, and pavement on South Warren, Lagoon, and South Streets.
o Budget (if out of ordinary): $1,419,213
o Deadline: December 31, 2026
Project 3: Complete Water/Sewer Rate Study
• Strategic Plan Objective: 3.3,3.4
o Metric/Success Indicator: Completed
o Description: Work with L&T Consultants to Finalize the recommended Water & Sewer Rate Design option and hod a public meeting as part of the proposition 218 rate setting process.
o Budget (if out of ordinary):
o Deadline: Completed.
Project 4: SCADA System Upgrade
• Strategic Plan Objective: 3.3,3.4
o Metric/Success Indicator: Completed
o Description: Work with Control Point Engineering to replace the existing SCADA System with entirely new computer hardware, programmable logic controllers,(PLC’s), radios, and operator interface terminals. o Budget (if out of ordinary):
o Deadline: Completed.
33 Project 5: East Line Street Bridge Replacement Project • Strategic Plan Objective: 3.1
o Metric/Success Indicator: work in progress
o Description: Continue to work with Helix Environmental and Lumos and Associates on the East Line Bridge Replacement Design and Environmental documents. Helix has prepared the following Aquatic Resource applications for submittals in May 2026: 401 Water Quality Certification, and 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement.
o Budget (if out of ordinary):
o Deadline: On-going project.
34 City of Bishop Department 2025-2026 Accomplishments
Department Name: Finance
Timeframe: FY 2025/2026
Department Lead: Ethan Aukee
1. Strategic Project Priorities (3–5 max)
High-level focus areas that guide the department’s efforts.
1. Project 1: Staffing Re-Configuration
2. Project 2: Audit Feedback Adherence and Internal Control Improvements
3. Project 3: Shift From Conservative Fiscal Management Phase to Semi-Aggressive City Investment Cycle
2. Strategic Plan Accomplishments by Project
Project 1: Staffing Re-Configuration
• Strategic Plan Objective: 4.1, 4.4, 4.6
o Metric/Success Indicator: Decreased frequency of staff errors made, improved workflows throughout the City, optimization of dollars spent to work output.
o Description: Following the retirement of Michele Rhew, many City processes had to be adjusted and absorbed by the Finance Department. The department had to adapt quickly and reconfigure workflows and department responsibilities on the fly, including all workflows associated with utilities billing and Building Department support migrating from Public Works to Finance. The front office structure of the City was adjusted to remove a position from Public Works, increase the capacity and compensation of two existing City positions, and proceed with the hiring of two part-time administrative support positions to achieve the project goals. o Budget (if out of ordinary): The project goals were achieved without experiencing a material overall increase in the Finance Department or associated department budgets.
35 o Deadline: Completed, all success indicators validated.
Project 2: Audit Feedback Adherence and Internal Control Improvements • Strategic Plan Objective: 2.5, 3.3, 3.4, 3.6, 4.1, 4.3, 4.4, 4.6 o Metric/Success Indicator: Year over year decrease in audit findings.
Incorporating financial statement information and audit results into subsequent year management practices and financial strategy. o Description: Each year the City undergoes a financial audit conducted by an independent Certified Public Accountant. There are varying degrees of findings that occur following completion of an audit. Each year, the Finance Director assesses the findings and severity of the findings and ensures that the City responds in an appropriate manner. Internal controls are a longstanding finding on annual audits, mainly due to inability to fully separate duties based on limited staffing. Although we continue to have limited staffing in comparison to the full scope of our administrative operations, the staffing re-configuration referenced in Project 1 allows for some improvement regarding segregation of duties and internal controls.
Additionally, I intend to draft an internal controls manual that can be used City-wide so all involved employees are aware of their duties, necessary segregation of duties, and any interested party could clearly understand how to complete City tasks and understand the safeguards in place. Other than internal controls, some additional items that are being improved pursuant to audit feedback are grant management practices, lease accounting practices, and year end government-wide conversion accounting entries. o Budget (if out of ordinary): No out of the ordinary budget appropriation required to carry out this project.
o Deadline: Annual, recurring, and in perpetuity. Annually, I grade progress against the prior year’s audit. Each year, there will be room for improvement and key focuses to improve City operations. The City can improve in perpetuity based on annual information made available through current processes.
Project 3: Shift From Conservative Fiscal Management Phase to Semi-Aggressive City Investment Cycle
36 • Strategic Plan Objective: 1.1, 2.5, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.6, 4.1, 4.4, 4.6, 5.2 o Metric/Success Indicator: Increased capital outlay. Thoughtful cash management and use forecasting. Benchmarking against forecasts over time to adjust and adapt if reality and assumptions diverge over time. o Description: From the start of my employment in December 2022 until the start of FY 2025-26 in July 2025, the City worked on improving its Finance Department core practices and ensuring that the financial health of the City was optimized. Items such as staffing, pension liabilities and fund balance growth were prioritized. As I improved my understanding and skills within my position, and the City improved its positioning as referenced above, the start of FY 2025-26 was indicated as a point in time to shift from conservative fiscal management to semi-aggressive City investment. Meaning, the City will continue to thoughtfully manage its finances and not over-extend, but instead of focusing on long-term liabilities, operational needs, and optimizing fund balance growth for future use, the focus will shift to capital outlay and investment in infrastructure, equipment, grounds, and other capital intensive areas of investment within the City and in alignment with the Strategic Plan. The shift will be reflected in the Strategic Plan and corresponding budgets throughout the next five years. Constant analysis will be conducted, and if reality and plans diverge over time, analysis and safeguards will alert the City to reassess its approach. In addition to these practices, conservative cash balances will be retained in City accounting funds to ensure that a divergence in reality/plans doesn’t result in critical errors, instead results in an indicator that assessment is needed. o Budget (if out of ordinary): The strategic plan and multiple years of City budgets will be affected by this shift in fiscal management strategy. o Deadline: In progress and fluid.
37 City of Bishop Department 2025-2026 Accomplishments
Department Name: Administration
Timeframe: FY 2025/2026
Department Lead: Pam Foster
Since beginning my role as City Administrator in September 2026, the Administration Department has focused on strengthening organizational alignment, advancing longstanding projects, and building productive relationships both internally and externally.
While some of this work may not yet be reflected in highly visible, tangible outcomes, I am very encouraged by the meaningful progress that has been made across multiple departments on projects that had previously stalled or faced challenges. Much of this progress has required foundational efforts, including coordination, problem-solving, and establishing clear direction to move initiatives forward in a sustainable and thoughtful way.
A key accomplishment during this time has been the completion of the City’s branding project. This effort represents an important step in establishing a cohesive and modern identity for the City of Bishop, and it will serve as a valuable tool in communications, economic development, and community pride.
Significant effort has also been dedicated to advancing major planning and policy initiatives, including the Park Master Plan, Regional Housing Needs Assessment and Housing Toolkit, economic development partnerships, and ongoing coordination related to infrastructure, development projects, and community facilities. These initiatives are now moving forward with greater clarity and momentum.
In addition, I have prioritized relationship-building with City staff, the City Council, regional partners, community organizations, and developers. These relationships are essential to improving communication, fostering collaboration, and positioning the City to respond effectively to both challenges and opportunities.
The Administration Department has also supported organizational stability and operations, coordinating interagency partnerships, and representing the City in regional and statewide discussions, including Legislative Days in Sacramento.
Overall, while much of the work to date has focused on building a strong foundation, aligning priorities, and advancing complex projects, the City is now better positioned to see continued progress and more visible outcomes in the months ahead. 38 City of Bishop Department Goals & Strategic Plan Objectives Department Name: Bishop Fire Department
Timeframe: FY 2026/2027
Department Lead: Bret Russell
1. Strategic Project Priorities (3–5 max)
High-level focus areas that guide the department’s efforts.
1. Project 1: Fire station bathroom/shower upgrades
2. Project 2: Further outfit FD members with complaint PPE (CALFIRE matching grant).
3. Project 3: New programming and platform for reporting, dispatching, prevention items and mapping. (First Due (for Fire & EMS)) is a cloud-based, all-inone software platform used by fire departments and EMS agencies to manage nearly every part of their operations.
4. Project 4: Online training platform for new and seasoned BFD members.
5. Project 5: Continuous specialized training.
2. Strategic Plan Objectives by Project
Project 1: Fire station bathroom/shower upgrades
• Strategic Plan Objective: 5.2 Develop plans for improved public safety facilities o Metric/Success Indicator: Require department budget mapping to secure funds for the upgrades and put out to bid.
o Description: Priority one is male/female bathrooms/locker-rooms. o Budget (if out of ordinary): TBD
o Deadline: Summer 2027 for bathrooms/locker rooms.
39 Project 2: Further outfit FD members with compliant PPE (CALFIRE matching grant) • Strategic Plan Objective: 5.4 Comply with and exceed industry standards relating to Fire Department service
o Metric/Success Indicator: Awarded the grant from CALFIRE o Description: 14 sets of NFPA compliant PPE. If awarded, cost is reduced to halfprice. o Budget: $79,000
o Deadline: Winter 2027
Project 3: New programming and platform for reporting, dispatching, prevention items, and mapping system. (First Due)
• Strategic Plan Objective 1: 5.4 Comply with and exceed industry standards relating to Fire Department service
o Metric/Success Indicator: Purchase and transition platforms from ESO Solutions, Inc. (Emergency Reporting) to First Due.
o Description: First Due (for Fire & EMS) is a cloud-based, all-in-one software platform used by fire departments and EMS agencies to manage nearly every part of their operations. At its core, First Due is a Records Management System + operational platform that replaces multiple separate systems with one unified system. It's designed to help departments run their entire agency from one place – both in the station and in the field.
o Budget: $13,000
o Deadline: September 2026
3. Notes / Risks / Dependencies
Optional section for constraints, cross-department dependencies, or risks. • Risk: Not having a separated male and female shower.
40 City of Bishop Department Goals & Strategic Plan Objectives Department Name: Police
Timeframe: FY 2026/2027
Department Lead: Nate Derr
1. Strategic Project Priorities
High-level focus areas that guide the department’s efforts.
1. Project 1: Infrastructure: Making the Police Department able to operate in modern times with built in resiliency.
2. Project 2: Training: Better trained Officers provide better service to the community and lessen City liability.
3. Project 3: Staffing: Become proactive in hiring practices to stay ahead of pending retirements to avoid Officer burn-out and excessive Overtime.
2. Strategic Plan Objectives by Project
Project 1: Infrastructure
• Strategic Plan Objective: 5.2 Develop plans for improved public safety facilities. o Metric/Success Indicator: Completion of upgrades to building infrastructure to provide consistent service to the community.
o Description: Electrical upgrade and server security / element proofing. o Budget (if out of ordinary): $300,000.00 to $500,000.00 o Deadline: Dispatch electric ASAP remaining within this fiscal year.
Project 2: Training
• Strategic Plan Objective: 4.7 Increase training for Police and Fire Departments. o Metric/Success Indicator: Component educated Officers 41 o Description: Advanced Officer training to advance Officer knowledge and keep up with an ever-changing environment
o Budget (if out of ordinary): Within current training travel budget o Deadline: Ongoing
Project 3: Staffing
• Strategic Plan Objective 1: 5.3 Maintain low crime rates through proactive law enforcement and innovative community policing.
o Metric/Success Indicator: Fewer uncovered shifts caused by open vacancies o Description: Proactive approach to hire / training Officers prior to attrition. o Budget (if out of ordinary): Additional cost for over hire while trainee is employed prior to retirement creating vacancy. Cost depends on how early we can over hire as a new trainee takes approximately 18 months before they are on their own. We would be attempting to over hire for 6 months or less to bridge the gap without excessive costs.
o Deadline: Have 2-3 positions possibly retiring within this fiscal year.
3. Notes / Risks / Dependencies
Optional section for constraints, cross-department dependencies, or risks. • Financial constraints as the Police Department already has the majority of the City budget and does not want or need to take away from other City Departments or projects.
• Staffing is never a given as finding qualified applicants is not always feasible in Law Enforcement and we do not want to lower standards as some departments have. • Liability as lack of infrastructure upgrades puts the City at risk of failing to provide essential services (like dispatch during emergency situations). 42 City of Bishop Department Goals & Strategic Plan Objectives Department Name: Community Services
Timeframe: FY 2026/2027
Department Lead: Daniel McElroy – Community Services Manager
1. Strategic Project Priorities (3–5 max)
High-level focus areas that guide the department’s efforts.
1. Project 1: Implement Park Master Plan
2. Project 2: Develop Budget and Phased Planning for Sunrise Streets Replacement
3. Project 3: Field 6 Construction Phase 1
4. Project 4: City Park Capital Equipment: New Park Mower, and Pool Heater
2. Strategic Plan Objectives by Project
Project 1: Implement Park Master Plan
• Strategic Plan Objective: 1.2 Support community spaces and local partnerships o Metric/Success Indicator: Set priorities based on outcome of public outreach.
o Description: Park Master Plan as a guiding document to enhance the City Park, based on public outreach, current conditions of existing facilities and budget impacts.
o Budget (if out of ordinary): Seek Grant Funding
o Deadline: 1-20 years
Project 2: Develop Phased Planning for Sunrise Streets Replacement • Strategic Plan Objective: 3.6 Implement a Capital Replacement Program o Metric/Success Indicator: Set budget and timeline for phased approach using existing budget.
43 o Description: Phased approach to replace all streets, add drainage, walking paths, and irrigation within Sunrise Mobile Home Park. Use existing budget in a phased approach to plan and execute projects to not use all budget reserves.
o Budget (if out of ordinary): Initial plans drafted, use budget reserves in phased approach.
o Deadline: 2027
Project 3: Field 6 Construction Phase 1
• Strategic Plan Objective: 1.2 Support community spaces and local partnerships o Metric/Success Indicator: 10% with current 90% plans for construction o Description: Renovate existing Field 6. Remove existing field conditions and fencing, relocate field to the south, replace soil for optimal turf grass growing conditions, new irrigation system, new turfgrass with sod method, electrical to site for future lighting, and new fencing.
o Budget (if out of ordinary): $1,286,500
o Deadline: 4/2027
Project 4: City Park Capital Equipment
• Strategic Plan Objective 1: 3.6 Implement a Capital Replacement Program o Metric/Success Indicator: Purchases completed and out into use. o Description: Purchase new park mower, and pool heater. o Budget (if out of ordinary): New Park mower: $40,000, New pool heater $50,000
o Deadline: 2027
3. Notes / Risks / Dependencies
Optional section for constraints, cross-department dependencies, or risks. 44 • Sunrise Mobile Home Park budget is limited and want to ensure proper use of reserves.
• Grants for implantation of Park Master Plan.
45 City of Bishop Department Goals & Strategic Plan Objectives Department Name: Planning
Timeframe: FY 2026/2027
Department Lead: Pam Foster
1. Strategic Project Priorities (3–5 max)
High-level focus areas that guide the department’s efforts.
1. Project 1: Expand and Improve Access to Active Transportation Infrastructure
2. Project 2: Develop and Implement Housing Action Plan
3. Project 3: Downtown Parking and Land Use Study
46 2. Strategic Plan Objectives by Project
Project 1: Expand and Improve Access to Active Transportation Infrastructure • Strategic Plan Objective:
1.3 Enhance walkability, identifying opportunities for multimodal facility expansion while also addressing parking needs. 1.4 Implement strategies to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) through improved active transportation.
3.1 Planning and implementing pedestrian and traffic safety mobility improvements, identifying priorities for new sidewalks on streets without sidewalks.
o Metric/Success Indicator: Develop conceptual projects and secure funding for sidewalks and bike lanes.
o Description: City staff are working with a consultant to update conceptual layouts for Sierra Street and Home Street, and to add 3rd Street to the study area. Efforts include preparing preliminary cost estimates for proposed 47 sidewalk and bike lane improvements to support a 2026 Active Transportation Program (ATP) Cycle 8 grant application.
If funding is awarded, construction is anticipated by 2031. The ATP program is highly competitive and oversubscribed; if the 2026 application is unsuccessful, the City will still have completed preliminary project reports for each corridor and will pursue alternative funding sources.
Council Direction Requested
Sierra Street
Sierra Street is constrained by drainage ditches located on both sides within 60-foot right-of-way. The concept includes:
• 4-foot offsets from the ditches
• Utility pole relocations on the north side
Due to these constraints, providing a separated bicycle facility would require removal of on-street parking on one side of the street.
Council direction is requested on the following options:
1. Remove parking on the north side of Sierra Street from Sierra Path to Home Street
2. Remove parking on the north side from Sierra Path to Crosby Avenue o This option preserves parking for commercial uses between Crosby and Main Street
3. Remove parking on the north side from Home Street onward (noting existing sidewalks in this segment)
4. Retain all parking and provide shared lane conditions for bicyclists Home Street
Council direction is requested on the following options:
1. Remove parking on the west side of Home Street from Sierra Street to W.
Pine Street
2. Retain parking and implement shared lane markings (sharrows) along with traffic calming measures
48 o Budget (if out of ordinary): Consultant and staff time is reimbursed by LTC, no budget impact on the City at this time
o Deadline: Project application is June 2026
Project 2: Develop and Implement Housing Action Plan
• Strategic Plan Objective:
2.1 Address the shortage of affordable housing.
2.3 Incentivize single-family residence and ADU construction for longterm rentals. o Metric/Success Indicator: Implement Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program (PLHA) and other identified programs
o Description: The Eastern Sierra Housing Toolkit identifies a range of strategies that local jurisdictions can pursue to increase housing supply (see attached).
Findings from the Regional Housing Study highlight several key strategic directions, including a significant gap for moderate-income households (80– 150% of Area Median Income). These households earn too much to qualify for traditional affordable housing programs but cannot afford market-rate housing near employment centers. Addressing this gap will require targeted tools such as employer-assisted housing, downpayment assistance, shared equity programs, occupancy restrictions, and robust housing supply expansion.
The Staff is proposing the following action. Council direction on whether this approach aligns with policy goals, or if alternative strategies from the toolkit should be prioritized.
Find Capacity for Launching/Administering Programs with Existing Funding:
Downpayment Assistance Program – repaid HOME funds
Owner-occupied housing rehabilitation – PLHA funds
ADU construction, PLHA funds got allocated for the City to provide loans for low-income households 60-120% AMI.
Find Capacity to Apply for, Manage, and Administer New Programs:
49 Grow/expand downpayment assistance, rehab, and
construction programs as federal, state, and local funding is available
o Budget (if out of the ordinary): TBD, there is interest in collaboration with Inyo County on the above goals.
o Deadline: end of FY2026/27, ongoing after
Project 3: Downtown Parking and Land Use Study
• Strategic Plan Objective:
1.3 Enhance walkability, identifying opportunities for multimodal facility expansion while also addressing parking needs. 2.1 Address the shortage of affordable housing.
o Metric/Success Indicator:
Develop a City Parking Management Plan outlining strategies to address parking demands and improve walkability.
Conduct land use study to consider the potential development of opportunity parcels for residential and city facility expansion.
Identify and facilitate the development of City properties eligible for housing under the Surplus Land Act list
o Description: The goal of the study is to collect parking data and develop a plan for improved parking management in the downtown area. Data collection has been completed, and the proposed Parking Management Plan will be presented to the community on April 29.
o The next phases of the study will include identifying parcels for potential development and establishing a parking in-lieu program for eligible parcels within the Downtown Core Zone. The Council is asked to provide direction on which City-owned parcels should be evaluated for potential future development. Additional information is also needed regarding the development of a parking in-lieu program.
o Budget (if out of the ordinary): $154,140
o Deadline: end of 2026
50 City of Bishop Department Goals & Strategic Plan Objectives Department Name: PUBLIC WORKS
Timeframe: FY 2026/2027
Department Lead: Nora Gamino/Gary Milici
1. Strategic Project Priorities (3–5 max)
High-level focus areas that guide the department’s efforts.
1. Project 1: West Line Water Main Replacement.
2. Project 2: South Warren Street Improvement Project
3. Project 3: Pavement Preservation Projects
4. Project 4: Johnston Drive Improvements
5. Project 5: Johnston Drive Lift Station Building and equipment
2. Strategic Plan Objectives by Project
Project 1: West Line Street Water Main Replacement Project • Strategic Plan Objective: 3.3 Ensure long-term provision of affordable drinking water and compliance with regulations
o Metric/Success Indicator: A construction contract has been awarded to DG Construction Inc. The Public Works Department is in the process of scheduling a pre-construction meeting with the contractor and Caltrans.
Construction is anticipated to start June 2026.
o Description: The proposed project includes replacement of approximately 2,300 feet of existing 8-inch steel water main with a new 12-inch C-900 pipeline installed at a greater depth to improve system reliability, reduce vulnerability at utility crossings, and better protect water quality. All existing service connections along the project corridor will be upgraded to include water meters as part of this work, advancing system-wide metering and regulatory compliance. The project also includes installation of seventeen new isolation valves west of the primary project limits along the existing 12-inch main extending toward Well 4. These valves are strategically located to improve operational flexibility and are specifically intended to 51 preserve continuous water service to critical facilities, including Northern Inyo Hospital, in the event the main must be shut down for repairs or emergency work.
o Budget (if out of ordinary): $1,429,395
o Deadline: August/September 2026
Project 2: South Warren Street improvement Project
• Strategic Plan Objective: 3.2 Implement a pavement preservation program and improve street conditions
o Metric/Success Indicator: 100% design has been completed. Received Caltrans funding authorization in September 2025 (too late to start construction before winter. Plan to advertise for construction in June/July 2026
o Description: Construct sidewalks, storm drain, street trees, lighting, and pavement on South Warren, Lagoon, and South Street.
o Budget (if out of ordinary): $1,419,213
o Deadline: December 31, 2026
Project 3: Pavement Preservation Projects.
• Strategic Plan Objective 3.2 Implement a pavement preservation program and improve street conditions
o Metric/Success Indicator: Well maintained streets
o Description: Develop a cyclical maintenance program for pavement preservation by evaluating the most recent pavement management Program reports PCI index to identify the most effective method for pavement preservation and to identify sections that will require full replacement.
Perform pavement preservation treatments to selected roadways within the City
o Budget (if out of ordinary): TBD
o Deadline: June 2027
52 Project 4: Johnston Drive improvements
• Strategic Plan Objective 3.2 Implement a pavement preservation program and improve street conditions
o Metric/Success Indicator: Improved Conditions
o Description: Public Works contracted with Eastern Sierra engineering (ESE) for engineering and design to improve drainage on Johnston Drive. It was determined during the 30% design that installing a storm drain system was not going to be cost effective and this project was put on hold. Public Works will continue to explore other options to improve drainage. Options include re grading the pasture at the south end of the road (owned by LADWP) or allowing storm water to discharge into the City Sewer Collection System. o Budget (if out of ordinary): TBD
o Deadline: Undefined
Project 5: Johnston Dr. Lift Station Building
• Strategic Plan Objective 3.4 Ensure long-term provision of affordable drinking water and compliance with regulations
o Metric/Success Indicator: Improved Conditions
o Description: Perform extensive remodel or full replacement of the Johnston Drive Lift Station Facility including Pump replacement, Capacity upgrades, control improvements, and backup power. This project is listed on the Sewer Infrastructure Capital Improvement Plan FY26/27.
o Budget (if out of ordinary):$200,000
o Deadline: June 2027
53 City of Bishop Department Goals & Strategic Plan Objectives Department Name: Finance
Timeframe: FY 2026/2027
Department Lead: Ethan Aukee
1. Strategic Project Priorities (3–5 max)
High-level focus areas that guide the department’s efforts.
1. Project 1: Completion of Internal Controls Manual
2. Project 2: Execution of Significant Capital Projects and External/Internal Funding Mechanisms
3. Project 3: Improvement and Synchronization of Internal Processes and Software
2. Strategic Plan Objectives by Project
Project 1: Completion of Internal Controls Manual
• Strategic Plan Objective: 2.5, 4.1, 4.3, 4.4, 4.6
o Metric/Success Indicator: Completion of an internal controls policy manual. o Description: A complete internal controls manual is usually developed by first identifying the City’s major operational and financial processes, assessing risk within each area, documenting current workflows, and then establishing standardized control requirements for approvals, segregation of duties, reconciliations, documentation, safeguarding of assets, and management review. Draft sections are typically reviewed by department heads, finance, administration, and legal as needed, then approved administratively by the City Administrator, with authority for future updates clearly assigned.
The manual would generally include controls for cash handling, disbursements, purchasing, contracting, payroll, receivables, utility billing, journal entries, financial reporting, budget monitoring, capital assets, grants, debt, leases, information technology access, records retention, fraud 54 reporting, and ongoing monitoring. It should also include an approval authority matrix, defined staff responsibilities, required forms and documentation standards, and compensating controls for areas where full segregation of duties is not possible.
o Budget (if out of ordinary): Not applicable.
o Deadline: Tentatively end of 2026-27.
Project 2: Execution of Significant Capital Projects and External/Internal Funding Mechanisms
• Strategic Plan Objective: 1.1, 2.5, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.6, 4.1, 4.4, 4.6, 5.2 o Metric/Success Indicator: The Strategic Plan, adopted budgets, cash forecasting benchmarks, audits, single audits.
o Description: Please refer to the Strategic Plan for an outline of the projects and funding mechanisms associated with this project.
o Budget (if out of ordinary): The execution does not require a budget, however, the significant projects and funding mechanisms are complex and nuanced with regard to their relationship to the budgets and financial statements of the City.
o Deadline: As established by the Strategic Plan and associated budgets.
Project 3: Improvement and Synchronization of Internal Processes and Software • Strategic Plan Objective: 3.6, 4.1, 4.4, 4.6
o Metric/Success Indicator: Navigation from paper records to digital records.
Benchmarking existing process staff time burden against improved process staff time burden.
o Description: Improvement of existing department and City-wide processes by integrating software and technology, both existing and emergent. The City has many existing processes that can be improved by use of software to minimize the use of paper and increase the streamlining of workflows while minimizing the time spent on inefficient clerical focused work. The City maintains existing software that can be more proactively implemented and 55 integrated and will start with those processes. Rather than add any substantial external software in the coming year/years, the City will monitor where the SaaS market moves and assess the best way to approach government software in the wake of the quickly evolving software, ontology, and agentic AI marketplace.
o Budget (if out of ordinary): Nothing out of the ordinary at this time. o Deadline: Fluid.
3. Notes / Risks / Dependencies
Optional section for constraints, cross-department dependencies, or risks. • Cross-department execution will be required.
• Risks of unforeseen events will always affect the Finance Department. Safeguards and monitoring are used to allow for adaptable financial strategy when needed.
Even when aggressive, conservative financial management tools are incorporated to protect against potential “black swan events” that could affect the City. 56 City of Bishop Department Goals & Strategic Plan Objectives Department Name: Administration
Timeframe: FY 2026/2027
Department Lead: Pam Foster
1. Strategic Project Priorities (3–5 max)
High-level focus areas that guide the department’s efforts.
1. Event Policy Manual Development
2. Code Enforcement Strategy & Service Evaluation
3. Policy Updates & Organizational Consistency
4. Operational Review & Continuous Improvement
2. Strategic Plan Objectives by Project
Project 1: Event Policy Manual Development
• Strategic Plan Objective: 1.2 Support Community Spaces and local partnerships. o Metric/Success Indicator: Completion and implementation of an Event Policy Manual.
o Description: Develop a comprehensive Event Policy Manual outlining City roles, responsibilities, permitting procedures, staffing expectations, cost recovery practices, and operational guidelines for events conducted within the City. o Budget (if out of ordinary): Included in operating budget. o Deadline: Draft policy manual presented to Council by Q3 FY 2026/2027.
Project 2: Code Enforcement Strategy & Service Evaluation • Strategic Plan Objective: 1.1 Create a vibrant, authentic, and pedestrian friendly city.
o Metric/Success Indicator: Completion of service evaluation and development of implementation strategy.
o Description: Evaluate current code enforcement practices and review options for how best to provide code enforcement services, including staffing, contracted services, complaint tracking, and enforcement procedures.
57 o Budget (if out of ordinary): To be determined based on Council direction and service model evaluation.
o Deadline: Strategy recommendations presented to Council by Q3 FY 2026/2027.
Project 3: Policy Updates & Organizational Consistency
• Strategic Plan Objective: Improve consistency and accountability in City operations and administration.
o Metric/Success Indicator: Completion of prioritized policy updates and implementation of standardized procedures.
o Description: Review, update, and standardize administrative policies and operational procedures to create greater consistency in how City business is conducted across departments.
o Budget (if out of ordinary): Included in operating budget. o Deadline: Ongoing throughout FY 2026/2027.
Project 4: Operational Review & Continuous Improvement
• Strategic Plan Objective: All of them.
o Metric/Success Indicator: Identification and implementation of operational improvements and process efficiencies.
o Description: Continue learning and evaluating City practices, processes, and workflows to identify opportunities for operational improvements, efficiency, and enhanced service delivery.
o Budget (if out of ordinary): Included in operating budget. o Deadline: Ongoing throughout FY 2026/2027.
3. Notes / Risks / Dependencies
• Several initiatives may require coordination and input from multiple departments. • Certain policy updates or service model changes may require Council direction or budget adjustments.
58 Financial Planning Framework Narrative
The City will use this financial planning framework to align resource decisions with its strategic priorities over both the near term and long term. While the City’s budget is formally adopted and administered by fund, department, and account, long-range financial planning will be evaluated primarily through the lens of the City’s five strategic pillars so that decisionmakers can better assess service goals, capital needs, operating demands, and future financial pressure across the organization. This approach is intended to improve the connection between policy direction, planned projects, and financial sustainability, while still allowing the annual budget to serve as the City’s formal financial implementation document.
Downtown Area
Financial planning for the Downtown Area will focus on sustaining and improving the City’s core activity area through ongoing support for maintenance, public spaces, events, partnership efforts, parking-related planning, and walkability improvements. This pillar may also require periodic capital investment in streetscape, circulation, accessibility, and other improvements intended to strengthen the downtown environment for residents, businesses, and visitors. As projects are developed and refined, the City will need to evaluate the affordability of both initial capital costs and any resulting ongoing maintenance or operational obligations. Long-term financial planning in this area should account for reinvestment needs, project sequencing, grant opportunities, and the potential use of one-time resources where appropriate.
Economic and Housing Development
Financial planning for Economic and Housing Development will focus on supporting housing opportunities, appropriate private investment, regional coordination, and the implementation of projects and actions that strengthen the City’s long-term economic position. This area will likely involve a combination of ongoing planning and staff support, pursuit of grant and partnership opportunities, and selective financial participation in projects or initiatives as warranted. Because needs in this area can vary significantly based on timing, market conditions, and external funding availability, financial planning should remain flexible and project specific. Long-range considerations include the ongoing challenge of supporting housing production, advancing housing element goals, responding to development opportunities, and balancing limited local resources against broader community needs.
Planning Framework Narrative Strategic Financial Planning 59 Infrastructure Improvement
Financial planning for Infrastructure Improvement will remain one of the City’s most significant financial responsibilities. This pillar includes the continued need to support routine maintenance, system planning, regulatory compliance, and operational activities related to streets, sidewalks, water, wastewater, and other essential public infrastructure. It also includes major capital investment in rehabilitation, replacement, system upgrades, and the protection of critical City assets. Financial planning in this area should emphasize project prioritization, timing, affordability, and the coordination of available funding sources, including operating revenues, reserves, grants, enterprise resources, and financing when necessary.
Long-range pressure in this pillar is expected to remain substantial due to aging infrastructure, replacement cycles, regulatory requirements, and construction cost escalation.
City Services and Functionality
Financial planning for City Services and Functionality will focus on sustaining dependable service delivery while supporting sound organizational management and responsible fiscal administration. This includes ongoing support for core administrative functions, staff development, communication, coordination between departments, and the systems and processes necessary for effective public service. It may also include one-time investments in facilities, technology, modernization efforts, and operational improvements that increase efficiency or strengthen internal capacity. Financial planning under this pillar should consider both immediate service needs and the long-term cost of maintaining or improving organizational effectiveness. Key long-range considerations include rising service expectations, future facility and system needs, workforce capacity, and the need to modernize operations without creating unsustainable recurring obligations.
Public Safety
Financial planning for Public Safety will focus on maintaining and strengthening the City’s ability to provide police and fire services, emergency response, and related public safety support to the community. Ongoing financial needs include operations, training, coordination, community-based service efforts, and continued support for partnerships and interagency planning. This pillar also includes substantial capital and one-time needs, such as facilities, vehicles, apparatus, equipment, and other infrastructure necessary to maintain service levels and operational readiness. Financial planning in this area should account for both immediate operational demands and the long-term cost of replacing major assets, maintaining facilities, and responding to evolving service expectations. Long-range pressure is expected to remain significant due to replacement cycles, increasing operating costs, and the continuing need to preserve strong public safety capacity over time.
This framework will be used to inform annual budget development, capital planning, project prioritization, and future financial decision-making as the City continues to implement its strategic plan.
Planning Framework Narrative Strategic Financial Planning 60 Strategic Pillar Primary Cost Drivers Typical Funding Approach Key Financial Pressures Planning Horizon Downtown Area Downtown maintenance, streetscape
improvements, public space enhancements,
walkability and parking-related improvements, active transportation improvements, and support for community activity.
General Fund support, grants, partnership contributions, and onetime resources when available.
Ongoing maintenance burden from completed improvements, reinvestment needs, project sequencing, and construction cost escalation.
Ongoing and multiyear
Economic and Housing Development
Housing planning, development support, regional coordination, grant pursuit, and selective participation in housing or economic development initiatives.
General Fund capacity, grants, restricted housing resources, outside partnerships, and project-specific funding opportunities.
Limited local funding capacity, uncertainty in project timing and scale, affordable housing funding gaps, and reliance on external funding.
Near-term, ongoing, and opportunity-driven
Infrastructure Improvement
Street and sidewalk maintenance and replacement, pavement rehabilitation, water and wastewater improvements, capital replacement, facility and system upgrades, and protection of critical infrastructure.
Operating revenues, enterprise resources, reserves, grants, development-related funding where applicable, and financing for major capital needs when warranted.
Aging infrastructure, replacement cycles, regulatory requirements, affordability constraints, project backlog, and cost escalation.
Ongoing and longrange
City Services and Functionality
Administrative operations, staff development, communication, coordination, facility improvements, technology investments, modernization efforts, and other internal capacity needs.
Primarily ongoing City operating resources, with grants or one-time funding used where available and appropriate.
Rising service expectations, workforce capacity pressures, future facility and system needs, technology replacement needs, and pressure to avoid unsustainable recurring costs.
Ongoing and multiyear
Public Safety Police and fire operations, training, facilities, vehicles, apparatus, equipment, technology, and other service-readiness investments.
General Fund support, special revenues, grants, financing for major capital assets when appropriate, and partnership-based funding approaches where available.
Facility and asset replacement cycles, increasing operating costs, evolving service expectations, equipment modernization needs, and long-term sustainability of service capacity.
Ongoing and longrange
Strategic Financial Planning Framework
Multi-Year Strategic Investment Plan
The following schedules identify major projects, major anticipated outlays, and other significant items currently known or reasonably foreseeable within the City’s planning horizon. The schedules are divided into three categories General City Projects, Sewer Utility Projects, and Water Utility Projects.
Framework & Investment Plan Schedules Strategic Financial Planning 61 General City Projects
!" #
$
%$
&'(()((($
$
*
+ ,
- -.
$/
&0(1&0
1
2
,$ 3&011)(' ((
/) -
$
* !
-
/-* / ,.
!" !" !" #
4$
5!"6 2
,$ 3&
)
1((
2 ,
7
/-* /
,.
&0)
(
)
1((( #
2
+
#
2
+
2/-
/-* /
8
* /-* / !" !" !" #
4$
5!"6 2
,$ 3&)( 1((
/-* /
,
* / , *
!" !" !" #
)#
!
9)
4
$
5!"6
, *
-
-
)-
-
$
/-* /
2
3
/
$,
$:
/
7%
/+ /
&0)((()((((( #
4/
*
)
+$
)+
#
/+ +- $
/
7
/ #
/-* /
2
3
/
$:
/
7%
/+ /
&50)((()(((((6 2$
/
7
/+ /
2$
/
7
/+ / ;
/+ / +
/
/-* /
2
32
2
+
&0)'0<)01(( #
2
-
% *
!
/
7/-* / 2
-
,.
2
+
9 $
/
7
/
Investment Plan Schedules
Strategic Financial Planning
62 General City Projects
/-* /
=
% -
/ 3 =
&0)'<)1<
(( #
/#
!
/
/-* /
=
% -
/ 3 =
% -
/
1(
10 &50)
)1106
#
-
/
-
/ *
*
/
#
!
/
-
/
-
$
+
/-* /
- % -
/
&1(()((((( >
*:?
-/
% -
/
#
!
9
>
*:?
-/ % -
/
-
* /#
!
9
,
(4
(-
+
+
$
,+
,+
2
/-/-* /
,.
--
:9-
,
:9-
<
1(
&1)(0()((((( #
%
,
#
%
,
$-
+
4 /
2
<
,+
0/-* / ,.
&
()((((( #
%
,
#
%
,
, /)
)7 /2/-
Investment Plan Schedules
Strategic Financial Planning
63 General City Projects
,+
-
/ =
!73
;
&0) 1) ''<( #
)%
,
)"
-,
!
+ )2$
:
/
7
2 #
)
*
$%
,
"
-,
!
+ 041
9 $
/
7
/+ /
/
!
@ 2
/
7
/+ /
-
+
--9
/
&0
')' 1(
,+
-
/ =
!73
%
/+ /
&50)
)'<
(6 2$
/+ / )-
+
2 #
)
*
$%
,
"
-,
!
+ 041
9 $
/
7
/+ /
;
/+ / +
/
,+
,
-
/ A
% -
/
<
&' ()((((( #
2;,
#
-
2;,--
&0
()(((-
% -
/ *
-
,
*
?
9
$
/
,+
,
2
:
/;*
&1(()((((( #
#
/
9
$
--
$
-
Investment Plan Schedules
Strategic Financial Planning
64 Sewer Utility Projects
!"#
$
%&$ %&$
'(
)*$
+
,,-*)&*'
! ."
#
$
/0,12$ /0,12$ 3
'4'*$
56'1
&7
8
! "
#
$
/0,12$ /0,12$ 3
'4'*$96
,%6
!
.
#
$
/0,12$ /0,12$ 3
'4'*$3
47
8
!
#
$
/0,12$ /0,12$ 3
'4'*$,
,7
8
! ":
#
$
/0,12$ /0,12$ 3
'4'*$
;*,%6
!
#
$
/0,12$ /0,12$ 3
'4'*$/&,%6
! "
#
$
/0,12$ /0,12$ 3
'4'*$
6%6
'
! "!
#
$
/0,12$ /0,12$ 3
'4'*$+,%6
!
#
$
/0,12$ /0,12$ 3
'4'*$2*42&%6
!
#
$
/0,12$ /0,12$ 3
'4'*$,6
,7
8
! "
#
$
/0,12$ /0,12$ 3
'4'*$1 96
,7
8
!
#
$
/0,12$ /0,12$ 3
'4'*$
8<1'
8=9+'*
.
#
.#
$
/3+,%#
;,3,1&$
/3+,%>2+2)
'$
>2+2$
"
1*),
!
#
$
%&$ %&$
'(
)*$
Investment Plan Schedules
Strategic Financial Planning
65 Sewer Utility Projects
*>)/
! "
#
$
/$ /$
'(
)*$,8*)?1%)*'
!
#
$
%&$ %&$
'(
)*$@**:-6
! .
#
$
%&$ %&$ 3
'4'*$
56'1
&7
=,
>
8
! .
#
$
%&$ %&$ 7
='
$
;7
.
."#
$
%&$ %&$
'(
)*$
,66
,>4%)*
! . :"
#
$
%&$ %&$ 3
'4'*$
72(
'
=*721+=1
')'
'
! . : #
$
%&$ %&$ >2+2$
/&,,6'@*,
.
"
#
$
%&$ %&$ 3
'4'*$
3,,%)*
"
.
:
#
$
%&$ %&$ 3
'4'*$
=
.
.#
$
%&$ %&$
'(
)*$2
3*)''
.
.#
$
%&$ %&$
'(
)*$
Investment Plan Schedules
Strategic Financial Planning
66 Water Utility Projects
! "
#
$
$
%
&
#
'
()*)
+
+
! "
#
, - $
. , - $
%
&
#
%
%
! "
#
!
/
0 1 2 3 456
)*
%
%
7 &#
8 1
$
9) **
:
:
$
&&"
,.
; ' 23 %
-!
%
%
,.
$
< ; <(
#& %
!
$
&
%
-!
*
%
%
$
&&"
$
<
<( / %
&
#
%
!
%
%
$
&&"
Investment Plan Schedules
Strategic Financial Planning
67 Water Utility Projects
$
<( =
%
&
#
%
%
$
&&"
#&0,1
1
2 3
%
%
7 &#
#
>3 & :
9
:
:
7 &#
=
? / @!" 9 *9 :
:
! "
#
,
"
%
&
#
$
<
9
%
%
7 &#
=
9 9
%
%
7 &#
#&
#
+ $
/
; /.
#
,"
#
9) )*
:
:
$
7 "
#&
3+ 9) 9
%
%
7 &#
A '#&
9) 9
%
%
7 &#
A
%
&
#
9 )*
%
%
! "
#
Investment Plan Schedules
Strategic Financial Planning
68 Additional Capital and Strategic Planning Items
The Multi-Year Strategic Investment Plan is intended to identify major projects, major anticipated capital outlays, and other significant investment items that are currently known or reasonably foreseeable within the City’s planning horizon. It is not intended to function as an exhaustive listing of all future capital purchases, facility improvements, equipment replacement needs, technology investments, or operational initiatives that may require funding in subsequent fiscal years. Additional items may be incorporated through future budget development, departmental review, capital planning updates, evolving service needs, and changing funding opportunities.
Examples of additional items that may be evaluated, refined, or budgeted in future years include:
• Smaller capital replacement items not elevated to the level of a major strategic investment.
• Facility repair and improvement items with lower individual cost or shorter planning horizon relevance.
• Vehicle and equipment replacement items below the materiality threshold for inclusion in the primary schedules.
• Technology, communications, cybersecurity, and software-related upgrades. • Planning, design, engineering, feasibility, or predevelopment work associated with future capital projects.
• Departmental operational initiatives or service enhancements that may require future one-time or ongoing financial support.
• Locally funded match requirements or related participation costs associated with future grant opportunities.
• Additional projects or initiatives identified through future Council direction, departmental input, completion of plans in progress, or changing operational conditions.
Inclusion in or omission from the primary investment schedules should not be interpreted as a final determination regarding project priority, future budget authorization, or long-term funding commitment.
Additional Items Strategic Financial Planning
69 Ongoing Review and Adjustment
This financial planning section is intended to function as a living planning tool and will be reviewed and refined over time as part of annual budget development, capital planning updates, and broader organizational decision-making. Project timing, cost estimates, funding assumptions, and implementation priorities may change based on updated information, departmental input, Council direction, regulatory requirements, and the availability of internal and external funding sources. The City will also use ongoing cash flow forecasting, financial benchmarking, and related fiscal analysis to help evaluate affordability, sequencing, reserve impacts, and the practicality of advancing planned investments over time.
Accordingly, this section should be revisited periodically to reflect changing conditions, updated project information, evolving operational needs, and the City’s best judgment regarding long-term financial sustainability.
Ongoing Review Strategic Financial Planning
70 Bishop City Council Strategic Planning Meeting
Discussion, Direction & Priority Setting
The following topics are presented for Council discussion and direction to guide staff work plans, resource allocation, and policy priorities over the coming year(s).
1. Infrastructure, Facilities & Capital Planning
Public Safety Campus Improvement Project
(Includes Fire Station Apparatus Expansion & Police Facility Expansion) Purpose: Plan for expansion and modernization of public safety facilities.
Strategic Plan Objective: 5.2 Develop plans for improved public safety facilities.
Staff Recommended Action: Proceed with planning and refine scope, costs, and phasing.
Direction Requested: Confirm project priority, scope, and approach.
Key Considerations:
• Fire apparatus capacity needs (ladder truck, water tender, response growth) • Police facility space, safety, and operational efficiency • Emergency response time and service level impacts
• Long-term facility scalability and site constraints
• Phasing to align with fiscal capacity and grant opportunities • Coordination with overall City facility strategy
Financial Context:
• Included in Strategic Plan framework at $3,010,000
• $100,000 allocated for planning and initial design. Planned to be allocated 50% to PD, 25% to BFD and 25% to BRFPD.
City Hall Campus Planning (Clark Wing)
Purpose: Plan future use of City Hall Campus, including Clark Wing.
Strategic Plan Objective: 3.6 Implement a Capital Replacement Program.
Staff Recommended Action: Initiate planning study to evaluate options and space needs.
Direction Requested: Provide policy direction on future use and planning scope.
Key Considerations:
• Future space needs of City departments
71 • Opportunity for consolidation and improved service delivery • Adaptive reuse vs. renovation vs. expansion options
• Public access and customer service improvements
• Long-term facility efficiency and cost impacts
• Timing relative to court vacancy transition
Maintenance Plans for City Facilities
Purpose: Establish priorities for maintaining and improving City-owned facilities.
Strategic Plan Objective: 3.6 Implement a Capital Replacement Program.
Staff Recommended Action: Prioritize & formalize a phased maintenance program tied to available funding.
Direction Requested: Set service levels and funding approach for ongoing maintenance.
Key Considerations:
• Deferred maintenance backlog and risk of asset failure • Level of service expectations for public facilities
• Funding sustainability (General Fund vs. dedicated reserves) • Coordination with broader capital improvement planning • Operational impacts of delayed maintenance
Whitney Alley Plans
Purpose: Consider vision and next steps for Whitney Alley improvements.
Strategic Plan Objective: 1.1 Create a vibrant, authentic, and pedestrian friendly city.
1.3 Identify multimodal facility improvement opportunities, improve walkability and address parking needs.
Staff Recommended Action: Advance concept and phasing plan for implementation.
Direction Requested: Confirm preferred concept and implementation strategy.
Key Considerations:
• Public safety and lighting improvements
• Downtown economic activation potential
• Maintenance responsibility and long-term upkeep
• Pedestrian flow and accessibility
• Phasing feasibility and funding availability
72 2. Transportation & Mobility
Sidewalks / Active Transportation Plan (ATP)
Purpose: Identify priorities for pedestrian and bicycle improvements.
Strategic Plan Objective: 1.1 Create a vibrant, authentic, and pedestrian friendly city.
1.3 Identify multimodal facility improvement opportunities, improve walkability and address parking needs. 1.4 Improve active transportation.
Staff Recommended Action: Prioritize projects aligned with grant funding opportunities.
Direction Requested: Confirm priority projects and funding strategy.
Key Considerations:
• Pedestrian safety and injury reduction priorities
• ADA compliance and accessibility gaps
• Grant funding competitiveness and timelines
• Connectivity between neighborhoods, schools, and downtown • Maintenance obligations of expanded infrastructure
Streets & Sidewalks Program
Purpose: Focus on implementation of street and sidewalk improvements.
Strategic Plan Objective: 3.1 Prioritize new sidewalk needs and improve traffic safety mobility. 3.2 Implement a pavement preservation program and improve street conditions. 3.7 Protect critical City infrastructure.
Staff Recommended Action: Implement phased program based on safety and need.
Direction Requested: Identify priority areas and approach.
Key Considerations:
• Highest-risk pedestrian corridors
• School routes and youth safety priorities
• Cost per linear improvement and phased feasibility
• Coordination with utility projects
• Long-term maintenance responsibility
3. Housing & Regulatory Environment
Housing Needs Assessment – Next Steps
Purpose: Identify implementation actions following assessment. 73 Strategic Plan Objective: 2.1 Address the shortage of affordable housing. 2.4 Collaborate with regional partners. 2.5 Pursue external funding opportunities.
Staff Recommended Action: Develop action plan with strategies and partnerships.
Direction Requested: Define City role and next steps.
Key Considerations:
• Housing affordability and workforce retention
• Zoning and regulatory constraints
• Private sector development feasibility
• Infrastructure capacity to support growth
• Regional housing pressures and collaboration
4. Community & Economic Development
Economic Development
Purpose: Establish overarching economic development priorities.
Strategic Plan Objective: 2.2 Support real estate developments within the city. 2.4 Collaborate with regional partners. 2.5 Pursue external funding opportunities.
Staff Recommended Action: Define focus areas and align with staffing and partnerships.
Direction Requested: Identify key focus areas and desired outcomes.
Key Considerations:
• Workforce development and housing availability linkages • Downtown vitality and small business retention
• Diversification of local economy
• Role of incentives and City investment tools
• Coordination with regional partners and agencies
DWP Main Street Vacant Lot Improvement Partnership
Purpose: Discuss improvements or interim uses of vacant lots.
Strategic Plan Objective: 1.1 Create a vibrant, authentic, and pedestrian friendly city.
1.2 Support community spaces and local partnerships. 1.3 Identify multimodal facility improvement opportunities, improve walkability and address parking needs.
Staff Recommended Action: Pursue interim improvements & partnerships with DWP.
Direction Requested: Identify preferred approach and partnerships. 74 Key Considerations:
• Temporary vs. permanent use strategies
• Downtown beautification and activation potential
• Liability and maintenance responsibilities
• Public-private partnership opportunities
• Cost-sharing and funding feasibility
5. Community Services & Quality of Life
Parks Master Plan
Purpose: Confirm priorities for park improvements.
Strategic Plan Objective: 1.1 Create a vibrant, authentic, and pedestrian friendly city.
1.2 Support community spaces and local partnerships. 1.3 Identify multimodal facility improvement opportunities, improve walkability and address parking needs.
Staff Recommended Action: Advance priority projects based on community input.
Direction Requested: Establish top priorities for implementation.
Key Considerations:
• Equity of park access across neighborhoods
• Deferred maintenance in existing parks
• Youth recreation and programming needs
• Water use, sustainability, and long-term maintenance
• Grant funding opportunities for park development
Grants in Support Program
Purpose: Evaluate funding support to community organizations.
Strategic Plan Objective: 1.2 Support community spaces and local partnerships. 2.4 Collaborate with regional partners.
Staff Recommended Action: Refine program criteria & funding levels.
Direction Requested: Provide direction on scope and funding.
Key Considerations:
• Transparency and equity in allocation
• Measurable community outcomes
• Alignment with City priorities
75 • Long-term sustainability of funding pool
• Oversight and accountability requirements
Youth Mental Health Support
Purpose: Explore City role in youth mental health support.
Strategic Plan Objective: 4.2 Support a community where all residents feel represented and informed.
Staff Recommended Action: Partner & advocate with service providers and schools.
Direction Requested: Define City role (partnership, advocacy, funding).
Key Considerations:
• Existing service gaps in the region
• Appropriate limits of municipal involvement
• Partnerships with schools and healthcare providers
• Funding vs. coordination role clarity
• Long-term sustainability of support programs
6. Regional & External Partnerships
Regional Air Service / Airport Subsidy
Purpose: Evaluate participation in regional air service subsidy.
Strategic Plan Objective: 1.1 Create a vibrant, authentic, and pedestrian friendly city.
Staff Recommended Action: Evaluate participation based on cost-benefit and partnerships.
Direction Requested: Confirm participation and funding commitment.
Key Considerations:
• Economic impact of air service on tourism and business • Cost per resident vs. regional benefit
• Stability and reliability of airline partnerships
• Long-term subsidy sustainability
• Regional coordination and shared funding models
76 77
78 E Line
Clarke
Academy willow Warren
E Elm
W Elm
RRFP
PLANNED AND FUNDED SIDEWALKS AND/OR BIKE LANES
EXISTING SIDEWALKS (SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL)
PROPOSED ATP IMPROVEMENTS
PROPOSED SHARROWS (Bike boulevards) AND TRAFFIC CALMING May St W Pine
Class I
Traffic calming,
sharrows on Home St
ATP Project Scope
3rd St and N second:
New sidewalk and
traffic calming.
Closing the gap on
north-south city
connection on the east
side - sharrows on 3rd
St, E. Pine
New sidewalks,
traffic calming on
Sierra St
79 ATP Project Scope
Traffic Calming
80 81
Funded by AHSC:
Multi-use path from
Home St to Lee St,
shared bike lane
with car lane from
Lee to Main.
Sidewalks on the
northern side.
Parking to remain
on both sides
W Yaney St
Proposed
multi-use
path
Considerations for
traffic calming:
• pedestrian-scale
lighting for
improved visibility
and comfort
during early
morning or
evening hours.
• Reducing the speed
limit to 15 mph near
schools
• New Bike racks
• Consider revisiting
all the school
advanced crossing
assembly signs and
school crossing
assembly signs on
Home Street. There
are some school
crossing signs that
don’t have any
marked crosswalk
nearby, which
should be removed.
All advanced
crossing assembly
signs should have
S1-1 and W16-9P
signs and all school
crossing
assemblies should
have the S1-1
and W16-7P signs.
Ensure proper
crossing from
multi-use to
sharrow
82 Vacant
(LADWP)
1 Private Driveways
and on-site parking
(All parcels have
on-site parking)
high-visibility
crosswalks with
yellow ladderstyle markings +
RRFB or similar?
Possible lane width
reduction from 12’ to
10.4’
Traffic calming
on Grove (safe
route to school)
83 Are bulbout
location
84 Sierra St
Curb
extensions or
ped islands?
85 E Line Section (for reference)
Traffic
Calming at
intersections
Is this a good
place for raised
crosswalk?
86 If Parking is removed on W Home
St from W Pine to Sierra St
87 88
13 1
1 10
2 3
Funded by AHSC:
Multi-use path from
Home St to Lee St,
shared bike lane
with car lane from
Lee to Main.
Sidewalks on the
northern side.
Parking to remain
on both sides
W Yaney St
Option to remove ∼60
spaces on
W Home St, from
Sierra to W Pine (a
total of 202 spaces
on both sides of
Home from W Line to
Sierra) to provide
space for a 2-way
bike lane
Propose
d multiuse path
Sharrows on Sierra
due to low traffic
27 spaces
Private Driveways
and on-site parking
(All parcels have
on-site parking)
89 Vacant
(LADWP)
1 2
6 1
1 11
1 1
3 3 Private Driveways
and on-site parking
(All parcels have
on-site parking)
90 7
3 13
15 No Parking removal
Shared sidewalks or
Shared car lane
Private Driveways
and on-site parking
(All parcels have
on-site parking)
91 Parking got in
the red for 2
hours within 9
days
92 C:\Users\Pamfoster\Appdata\Local\Microsoft\Olk\Attachments\Ooa-Dd621ff1-E519-4d17-831a72f7c057c783\2bfb30e3d3ad670383cae90649d1c0a4087234dff66a9fe0aa6a83811b889ff5\COB_Proposed_Parking_Mgmt_Strate gies_05012026.DocxDuration Zones Methodology 1 of 5
Memorandum
To: City of Bishop
Attn. Pam Foster, City Administrator
Anastasia Budnyk, Principal Planner
From: Wood Rodgers, Derek Kirkland
Date: 05/04/2026
Subject: Proposed Parking Management Strategies
Introduction
This document provides recommended parking management strategies to improve parking in the downtown area. A Parking Duration Management Capacity Map is provided in Attachment A. Proposed strategies have been developed based on the findings from the data collection and Parking Demand Memo (Attachment B), as well as input from the technical advisory committee (TAC), online public survey, and public workshop (Public Outreach Summary Attachment C).
Summary of Key Findings:
Overall, there is a surplus of parking available in the downtown area. Certain parking zones have limited parking available during peak times; however, most areas have available parking within a short walking distance.
Creating shorter parking durations in areas with high turnover commercial will help free up more customer parking.
Employees and fleet vehicles appear to take up key parking areas for commercial customers. Clear signage and messaging directing visitors to appropriate parking locations are needed. Enforcement is needed. Currently there is minimal enforcement of parking regulations leading to parking issues in certain parking zones.
Goals for parking management:
Better manage parking to support businesses and visitors in the downtown area. Create additional turnover in high demand commercial areas while clearly indicating where longer term parking is available.
Enforcement with an education first approach to encourage willing compliance with parking management strategies.
Partner with the chamber and business owners to help educate employers, employees, residents, and visitors on where to park based on their need for short term versus long term or overnight parking. Continue to monitor parking in the downtown area to promote economic development and future growth.
93 Proposed Parking Management Strategies
05/04/2026
C:\Users\Pamfoster\Appdata\Local\Microsoft\Olk\Attachments\Ooa-Dd621ff1-E519-4d17-831a72f7c057c783\2bfb30e3d3ad670383cae90649d1c0a4087234dff66a9fe0aa6a83811b889ff5\COB_Proposed_Parking_Mgmt_Strate gies_05012026.Docx 2 of 5
Proposed Parking Management Strategies
1) Short-Term Parking. Address Short-Term parking areas as identified in the map in Attachment A and sign these areas for 2-hour parking from 8am to 6pm.
Proposed Change:
o Expanded or modified short-term parking areas.
o Short-term signage currently allows 3-hour parking, now proposed to 2-hour parking. o Include portions of South Warren Street, Short Street, Church Street, West Elm Street, and East Elm Street into the short-term parking enforcement area. Objectives:
o Create additional parking turnover for downtown businesses and encourage walking, which increases foot traffic for businesses.
o Free up convenient parking for customers who want to frequent a specific business. o Prevent employees and fleet vehicles from occupying the parking spaces intended for customers during peak times.
o Utilize available parking within adjacent parking zones that have a parking surplus. Optional consideration:
o Treat these as prime parking spaces and install parking kiosks, charging for parking to help encourage compliance and offset the cost of enforcement and maintaining the parking. Could allow the first 1 to 2 hours for free parking (depending on peak versus non-peak) and offer a rate per hour after. Parking kiosks allow flexibility in changing pricing by time of day, day of week, peak periods, special events, etc.
2) Day-Use Parking. Address Day-Use parking areas (long-term, no overnight) as identified in the map in Attachment A and sign these areas appropriately.
Proposed Change:
o Modification of lots that currently allow overnight parking. Objectives:
o Create parking for employees, students, residents, and visitors of downtown businesses who are looking for a longer stay to utilize these parking areas which are within walking distance to their destination.
o Improve signage for public parking areas and guide people to utilize these lots during the day. o Eliminate businesses utilizing key downtown business parking lots for fleet storage. o Eliminate visitors from parking during overnight stays or over the weekend. Optional consideration:
o If parking kiosks were utilized for paid short-term parking, these day-use lots could be free to park providing an alternative to paying for prime parking. 3) Long-Term and Overnight Parking. Address Long-Term, over-night parking areas as identified in the map in Attachment A and sign these areas appropriately. Overnight use should be limited to 48-72 hours unless a permit is obtained by the city (residential use or commercial fleet vehicles) to avoid people living in vehicles on a full-time basis. Permits should be required for certain areas or off-street public parking lots. It is recommended to have a permit system in place with the following uses of public parking spaces:
residential use of public off-street lots, commercial fleet vehicles in both on-street and off-street lots, and 94 Proposed Parking Management Strategies
05/04/2026
C:\Users\Pamfoster\Appdata\Local\Microsoft\Olk\Attachments\Ooa-Dd621ff1-E519-4d17-831a72f7c057c783\2bfb30e3d3ad670383cae90649d1c0a4087234dff66a9fe0aa6a83811b889ff5\COB_Proposed_Parking_Mgmt_Strate gies_05012026.Docx 3 of 5
for overnight visitors in off-street lots. Recommend installing a parking kiosk at off-street public lots so visitors can purchase permits on site without having to go to City Hall. Residential and commercial permits would be purchased at City Hall as they would be more long-term. Proposed Change:
o Modification of lots to allow overnight parking.
o Modification of policies and code requirements for overnight parking. o Creation of a permitting system for long-term parking. Objectives:
o Support tourism and the downtown businesses by providing overnight visitors in an RV or similar an opportunity for a safe parking location that can be monitored by the City. Permits would help the City track the need for these types of users as well as help monitor length of stay. o Work with businesses for appropriate locations for fleet vehicle parking that won’t take away more prime parking for downtown businesses and customers. o Create parking opportunities to encourage residential growth in the downtown area helping revitalize downtown.
o Create permitting systems so the City can better monitor long-term parking to improve management strategies as well as overall safety.
4) Enforcement. Add parking enforcement officers to City staff to help ensure parking management strategies can be implemented and maintained for improved parking in the downtown area. Proposed Change:
o Modification of policies and code requirements for parking enforcement including establishing fines, and towing areas.
o Budget for additional enforcement
Objectives:
o Education and presence first approach to better manage parking and willing compliance. o Enforcement to ensure future compliance and ongoing parking management to improve the overall parking for the downtown area.
Optional Considerations:
o Technology such as license plate readers or parking kiosks may be utilized to create more efficient enforcement. These tools can quickly identify non-compliance issues and notify the enforcement team.
5) Wayfinding and Outreach. Implement improved wayfinding signage, new parking lot signs with regulations, and conduct an outreach campaign to ensure all users understand the parking requirements.
Below is an outline of specific strategies for each:
Proposed Change:
o Modification of policies and code requirements for parking signage. o Wayfinding signage:
• Directional Public Parking signs along Main Street and main connection roads directing visitors to public parking lots. Add RV parking signs where appropriate. • Clearly mark Public Parking lots with a sign at main entrance points. o Informational signage:
• Provide parking regulations on easy-to-read signs within public parking lots, including information on where to obtain permits.
95 Proposed Parking Management Strategies
05/04/2026
C:\Users\Pamfoster\Appdata\Local\Microsoft\Olk\Attachments\Ooa-Dd621ff1-E519-4d17-831a72f7c057c783\2bfb30e3d3ad670383cae90649d1c0a4087234dff66a9fe0aa6a83811b889ff5\COB_Proposed_Parking_Mgmt_Strate gies_05012026.Docx 4 of 5
• Update and post all short-term parking areas with 2-hour parking 8am-6pm signs. Add fine and towing information to the signs.
o Outreach Campaign:
• Create a website dedicated to parking information “Park Bishop”. • Create flyers and printed materials to advertise the website, new parking information, and areas to direct users with questions.
• Partner with the businesses and groups such as the Chamber and local news sources to create a media campaign (TV, social media, paper advertisements) to spread the word on new parking requirements.
• Provide a handout to all downtown businesses on employee and fleet vehicle parking opportunities and education.
• Provide a small handout with a map to enforcement officers to handout so people can comply as part of the educations first approach.
Objectives:
o Educate and direct users to appropriate parking locations. o Provide messaging to users before they are driving around looking for parking. Optional Considerations:
o Technology such as parking apps work in conjunction with parking kiosks to let people know where parking is available.
Planning for Future Growth
As identified in the Parking Demand Memo (Attachment B), the downtown area has a surplus of parking that may accommodate future growth for the foreseeable future. As the downtown grows and mixed-use or new commercial development is added, City planning staff should continue to monitor the parking zones to determine when new or modified parking strategies may be required. Below are potential parking strategies that may be utilized or further explored to accommodate future development:
Adding a new or expanding of an existing public parking lot to accommodate a certain development. o Development pays the cost for expansion; City maintains ownership and maintenance responsibilities and issues permit for or dedicates spaces to accommodate new development. Converting portions of underutilized public parking into developable area. o This may require shifting demand to other parking lots or providing vertical parking as part of the development and reserving space available for public parking. Allowing a developer or business owner to purchase parking spaces from other underutilized private parking areas.
o May require documentation such as a recorded agreement, easement, or deed restriction. Creating a parking assessment district or in lieu of fee program for developers and business owners to support the City expanding publicly available parking opportunities opposed to providing private parking.
o Could be used in conjunction with the other strategies. 96 Proposed Parking Management Strategies
05/04/2026
C:\Users\Pamfoster\Appdata\Local\Microsoft\Olk\Attachments\Ooa-Dd621ff1-E519-4d17-831a72f7c057c783\2bfb30e3d3ad670383cae90649d1c0a4087234dff66a9fe0aa6a83811b889ff5\COB_Proposed_Parking_Mgmt_Strate gies_05012026.Docx 5 of 5
Current Action Plan
STRATEGY
(STRATEGY #)
IMPLEMENTATION TIMEFRAME BUDGET REQUIREMENTS
ESTABLISH PARKING
DURATION ZONES (1,
2, & 3)
- Update policies and code
sections
- Update signage
3 – 6 months - Staff time/Consultant time
ENFORCEMENT (4) - Hire parking enforcement
staff
- Establish fines
3 – 6 months - Staff time
- Hire new staff
WAYFINDING (5) - Develop signage plan
- Install new signs
3 – 6 months - Staff time/Consultant time
- Signage cost
OUTREACH CAMPAIGN
PHASE 1 (5)
- Develop Parking Map
- Develop City webpage
- Develop print materials
- Get materials out to
businesses/chamber
3 – 6 months - Staff time/Consultant time
- Print costs
OUTREACH CAMPAIGN
PHASE 2 (5)
- Partner with chamber to
develop campaign
- Advertise
3 months – 1 year - Staff time/Consultant time
- Campaign/ advertisement
cost
PERMITTING
PROGRAM (1)
- Develop permitting
system for residential,
fleet, and overnight use
6 months – 1 year - Staff time/Consultant time
- Potential kiosk cost for
overnight permits
97 bae
urban economics
DRAFT EASTERN SIERRA
REGIONAL HOUSING TOOLKIT
Prepared for the Collective housing Committee
May 6, 2026
98 Table of Contents
Acknowledgments...............................................................................................................................................................i Key Terms..................................................................................................................................................................................ii INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................1
1.1 Purpose of this Document.............................................................................................................................1
1.2 The Case for Regional Collaboration ....................................................................................................1
1.3 How to Use This Toolkit....................................................................................................................................2 HOUSING NEEDS AT A GLANCE.................................................................................................. 3
2.1 Who Needs Housing and How Much.................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Why the Market is Not Meeting the Need..........................................................................................5
2.3 What the Data Tell Us About Effective Strategies .......................................................................6 EXISTING HOUSING POLICY FRAMEWORK............................................................................... 7
3.1 City of Bishop (2021-2029 Housing Element).................................................................................8
3.2 Inyo County (2021-2029 Housing Element).....................................................................................8
3.3 Town of Mammoth Lakes (2019-2027 Housing Element) ......................................................8
3.4 Mono County (2021-2029 Housing Element)..................................................................................9
3.5 How This Toolkit Relates to Housing Element Commitments .............................................9 NEAR-TERM HOUSING TOOLS ..................................................................................................13
4.1 Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Development........................................................16
4.2 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)...........................................................................................................18
4.3 Mobile / Manufactured Home Communities...............................................................................20
4.4 Occupancy and Employment Deed Restrictions......................................................................22
4.5 Downpayment Assistance and Shared Equity Programs...................................................24
4.6 Safe Parking / Camping Site(s).............................................................................................................26
4.7 Adaptive Reuse of Existing Structures...............................................................................................28
4.8 Disaster Preparedness and Recovery.............................................................................................. 30
4.9 Locally Controlled Funding Source(s)...............................................................................................32 LONGER-TERM HOUSING TOOLS..............................................................................................31
5.1 Expanded Housing Sites Inventory......................................................................................................32
5.2 Public/Private Property Owner Negotiations............................................................................... 34 99 5.3 Infrastructure Planning and Investment to Enable Housing............................................ 36
5.4 Fee Waivers, Deferrals, and Other Financial Incentives........................................................37
5.5 Regional Housing Authority or Housing Finance Authority................................................ 39
6. OTHER POTENTIAL HOUSING TOOLS...................................................................................42 List of Figures
Figure 1: Total Unmet Housing Need (in HHs/Units) by Cohort, ≤ 350 percent of AMI, 2025 ............3 Figure 2: Unmet Housing Need by Major Income Category ................................................................................. 4 Figure 3: Unmet Housing Need by Income Category and Jurisdiction......................................................... 5 List of Tables
Table 1: Housing Tools by Implementation Status.....................................................................................................10 Table 2: Select Near-Term Housing Tools ........................................................................................................................13 Table 3: Select Longer-Term Housing Tools....................................................................................................................31 Table 3: Other Potential Housing Tools..............................................................................................................................42 100
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
i
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This Toolkit was prepared by BAE Urban Economics, Inc. under contract with Inyo County on behalf of the Eastern Sierra Collective Housing Committee (CHC). The CHC is comprised of representatives from the following member jurisdictions and agencies:
• Eastern Sierra Council of Governments (ESCOG)
• City of Bishop
• Inyo County
• Town of Mammoth Lakes
• Mono County
Additional project support was provided by SMR Development, under contract with Mono County.
This Toolkit is a companion document to the Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Study (BAE Urban Economics, March 2026), and should be considered in relation to that document.
The tools summarized here were reviewed as part of a collaborative process with CHC members during the Winter and Spring of 2026. This work could not have been completed without the thoughtful engagement of all CHC members and their staff throughout this process.
This toolkit also could not have been completed without the contributions made by stakeholders as part of the Regional Housing Study, including local and regional housing advocates (e.g., Eastern Sierra Community Housing), property owners, real estate developers, local and regional workers and employers, and local government decision makers. 101
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
ii
KEY TERMS
Acronym Description
AB Assembly Bill
ADU Accessory Dwelling Unit
AFFH Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
AHMP Affordable Housing Mitigation Program
AMI Area Median Income
BAE BAE Urban Economics, Inc.
BAHFA Bay Area Housing Finance Authority
BLM U.S. Bureau of Land Management
BRIC Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities
Cal ICH California Interagency Council on Homelessness
CalHFA California Housing Finance Agency
CDBG Community Development Block Grant
CDBG-DR Community Development Block Grant – Disaster Recovery CHC Collective Housing Committee
CLT Community Land Trust
CLUSA Civic Leadership USA
Co-op Cooperative
ESCH Eastern Sierra Community Housing
ESCOG Eastern Sierra Council of Governments
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FHA Federal Housing Administration
HCD California Department of Housing and Community Development HMGP Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
HOME HOME Investment Partnership
102
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
iii
Acronym Description
HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
IIG Infill Infrastructure Grant
JADU Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit
JPA Joint Powers Authority
LACAHSA Los Angeles County Affordable Housing Solutions Agency LADWP Los Angeles Department of Water and Power
LIHTC Low-Income Housing Tax Credits
LTC Local Transportation Commission
MASH Multifamily Affordable Solar Housing Program
MHP Multifamily Housing Program
MLH Mammoth Lakes Housing
MORE Manufactured Housing Opportunity and Revitalization NCBA National Cooperative Business Association
PRICE Preservation and Reinvestment Initiative for Community Enhancement RHNA Regional Housing Needs Allocation
ROC Resident Owned Community
SASH Single-Family Affordable Solar homes Program
SB Senate Bill
STR Short-Term Rental
TCAC California Tax Credit Allocation Committee
The
“Parcel”
A site owned by the Town of Mammoth Lakes that has been master-planned and is being developed with workforce and affordable housing.
TOT Transient Occupancy Tax
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFS U.S. Forest Service
103
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026 0
104
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose of this Document
The Eastern Sierra Workforce Housing Toolkit is a companion document to the Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Study (BAE Urban Economics, March 2026). Where the Regional Housing Study documents the scope and character of the region’s workforce housing challenge, this Toolkit provides a structured menu of programmatic, policy, and funding options that members of the Collective Housing Committee (CHC) may draw upon in response. 1 This document is intentionally designed as a menu, not a mandate. The CHC recognizes that the five member jurisdictions and agencies vary meaningfully in their housing market conditions, staff capacity, fiscal resources, political context, and priorities. No single tool will be appropriate for every jurisdiction, and no jurisdiction is expected to pursue every tool.
Some jurisdictions are already implementing many of these tools, while others are working to consider what additional tools might best fit their circumstances and available resources.
This Toolkit does not duplicate or replace the work each jurisdiction has undertaken through its Housing Element process under California state law. Housing Element compliance is a statutory obligation that each jurisdiction manages independently. The housing tools presented here are intended to go beyond Housing Element minimums, addressing housing needs that the market alone has been unable to resolve independently. However, doing so will be at the discretion of each jurisdiction, subject to staff capacity and available resources.
1.2 The Case for Regional Collaboration
The CHC was formed to address a challenge that transcends any single jurisdictional boundary. Housing markets in the Eastern Sierra do not stop at city limits or county lines:
workers cross between Inyo and Mono counties daily, second-home and short-term rental (STR) demand affect multiple communities simultaneously, and the fiscal and staff resources available to any one jurisdiction are likely insufficient to tackle the challenge alone.
Regional cooperation creates opportunities that individual action cannot. For example, pooled grant applications can access funding thresholds that smaller jurisdictions cannot meet independently. Shared program infrastructure, such as a model deed restriction template, a joint housing trust fund, or a regional downpayment assistance program, can be designed once and adapted by each member jurisdiction. Capacity building is accelerated when jurisdictions can build on one another’s experience (i.e., copy each other’s homework) and collaborate in ways that are more efficient and impactful that “going it alone.” 1 The CHC is comprised of representatives from Inyo County, Mono County, the City of Bishop, and the Town of Mammoth Lakes, plus the Eastern Sierra Council of Governments (ESCOG). 105
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
2 At the same time, the CHC recognizes the limits of regional prescriptiveness. Local land use authority rests with individual jurisdictions. Political will, fiscal resources, and organizational capacity vary widely across the region. This toolkit reflects these realities by presenting housing tools that can be implemented both at the individual-jurisdiction and regional levels.
1.3 How to Use This Toolkit
The Toolkit is organized into five substantive sections:
• Section 2 summarizes housing needs in the Eastern Sierra region, as documented in the March 2026 Regional Housing Study.
• Section 3 summarizes the existing housing policy and program frameworks within each participating jurisdiction, as documented in each jurisdiction’s most recently adopted and certified General Plan Housing Element (6th cycle). • Section 4 presents nine tools that CHC members identified as actionable, near-term options, given current capacity and resources. Each tool is presented in a one- to twopage profile that includes an overview, implementation considerations, comparable examples from peer communities, and the connection to the identified regional housing need.
• Section 5 presents five longer-term housing tools and higher-complexity approaches that the CHC expressed interest in, but recognized require more time, resources, or political groundwork before they can be actively pursued. • Section 6 presents eleven housing tools that were considered, but not prioritized, recognizing existing capacity constraints. These are included for completeness; though some may be appropriate for implementation by jurisdictions, even if they are not a regional focus; and the list may be revisited at any time as the capacity grows.
Section 2, immediately following, provides a concise summary of the key findings from the Regional Housing Study for ease of reference. Readers already familiar with the Regional Housing Study may proceed directly to Section 3.
Each housing tool profile follows a similar format. A summary table is provided at the start of each section, providing page numbers for each tool, so that readers can skip ahead. Each profile includes a “Quick Reference” table at the top summarizing opportunities for collaboration, target population(s), implementation timeline(s), and key funding sources.
Importantly, the absence of a tool from the near-term list is not a judgment about its merit.
The three-tier structure reflects the CHC’s honest assessment of current capacity and appetite, not a final ranking of what matters most. A jurisdiction that has the capacity and motivation to pursue a longer-term or deprioritized housing tool should do so. 106
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026 2
107
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
3 HOUSING NEEDS AT A GLANCE
This section distills the key findings of the Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Study (BAE Urban Economics, March 2026) for quick reference. To read the full analysis, including detailed data tables, survey results, and the quantitative needs model, please visit https://escog.ca.gov/housing-needs. The summary below is intended to ground the discussion of the individual housing tools summarized in Sections 4 through 6.
2.1 Who Needs Housing and How Much
The Regional Housing Study estimates that approximately 3,262 households across the Eastern Sierra region experienced unmet housing needs as of 2025. For the purposes of this research, unmet housing needs are defined to include households paying more than 30 percent of income on housing, living in overcrowded conditions, or occupying substandard housing units that lack adequate kitchen and bathroom facilities. The estimates also include households with workers that commute into the region for work that would prefer to live in the Eastern Sierra if adequate and affordable housing options were available in the market.
These estimates do not necessarily represent the number of new units that must be built or made available, as some unmet housing needs may be addressed through other strategies, such as housing rehabilitation, affordability programs, and better utilization of the existing stock. Figure 1, below, illustrates the distribution of housing needs by household type, including full-time and seasonal resident workforce households, in-commuters, and the unhoused.
Figure 1: Total Unmet Housing Need (in HHs/Units) by Cohort, ≤ 350 percent of AMI, 2025 Sources: BAE, 2025.
108
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
4 Figure 2: Unmet Housing Need by Major Income Category Source: BAE, 2026.
While the largest concentration of identified housing needs summarized in the Regional Housing Study fall into the lower-income tiers (i.e., below 80 percent of the Area Median Income, or AMI), as shown in Figure 2 above, the Regional Housing Study identifies important geographic variation in the nature of the housing challenge. In the Town of Mammoth Lakes, for example, where extreme housing costs require incomes of approximately 350 percent of Area Median Income (AMI) or more to afford the median priced single-family home, and where significant progress has been made towards the provision of new housing at The Parcel that is affordable to households earning 80 percent of AMI and below, the largest unmet need cohort falls in the moderate-income range (80–150 percent of AMI), as illustrated in Figure 3 on the following page. By comparison, both rental and for-sale market rate housing is considerably more affordable in the unincorporated areas of Inyo and Mono counties, as well as in and around the City of Bishop. As a result, the reported unmet need in these areas is more heavily concentrated among lower-income households (below 80 percent of AMI); although important gaps remain among moderate income households earning 80-120 percent of AMI in some areas, such as in the greater Bishop area.
The Regional Housing Study also documents a mismatch between the size of the existing housing stock and the needs of workforce households. The regional housing inventory skews toward larger single-family homes, while the largest concentration of unmet housing needs are among smaller households that may be best served by smaller housing units (i.e., studios and one-bedrooms) given the high cost of housing and prevalence of overpayment. 109
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
5 Figure 3: Unmet Housing Need by Income Category and Jurisdiction Source: BAE, 2026.
2.2 Why the Market is Not Meeting the Need
Several structural factors combine to prevent the private market from resolving the region’s housing challenges without coordinated public intervention:
• Construction Costs vs. Workforce Rents / Home Prices: Development costs range from around $300 per square foot for manufactured housing to $500–$700 per square foot for conventional stick built construction, with the Access Apartments conversion in Mammoth Lakes reaching approximately $850 per square foot. Rental rates and forsale home prices that are affordable to most workforce households are largely insufficient to offset these costs. The Regional Housing Study estimates subsidy requirements ranging from $50,000 per unit for low-cost manufactured housing to $150,000 - $315,000 per unit for market-rate rental construction on urban sites, to as much as $650,000 per unit for deeply affordable multifamily rental housing funded using low-income housing tax credits (LIHTC) and other gap funding sources. • Land Scarcity: Developable land within established communities is limited. A substantial portion of the land base is federally owned (Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service), or owned by outside interests (Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, known as LADWP), and not available for development. Much of the land in the region also has physical constraints. 691
240
385
314
302
134
26 389
560
125 96 0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
Up to 80% AMI 80%-150% AMI 150%-200% AMI 200%-350% AMI
Uninc. Inyo County Uninc. Mono County
City of Bishop Town of Mammoth Lakes
1,767
1,248
151 96
110
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
6 • Locked-Up Inventory: The 2020 Census recorded more than 9,500 vacant housing units across the region, including approximately 7,650 vacant second homes (an inventory two to three times the estimated unmet need), most of which were concentrated in Mammoth Lakes and Mono County. Approximately 3,400 STRs operate in the region, most in Mammoth Lakes. These underutilized, or non-resident-occupied, units constrain the supply available to full-time residents. • Demographic Headwinds: Population and household growth has been flat to negative over the last decade. A shortage of adequate and affordable housing options has contributed to this. The Regional Housing Study documents a possible “turn-over” dynamic in which some lower-income households have been displaced, or have voluntarily moved out of the region, as higher-income / wealth households and remote workers have moved in, exacerbating the mismatch between the workforce and available housing, and contributing to observed labor market constraints.
2.3 What the Data Tell Us About Effective Strategies
The Regional Housing Study findings point toward several potential strategic directions:
• Low-income households (at or below 80 percent of AMI) generally require direct subsidy programs and deed-restricted affordable rental housing, funded through LIHTC, state and federal grants, and local dollars. Housing needs among this cohort can also be supported through direct subsidy programs like ‘rooted renters’ and through efforts to improve the quality of the existing rental housing stock, like rental home inspection programs and rehabilitation grants.
• Moderate-income households (80–150 percent of AMI) are underserved in the region, with incomes that are too high for traditional affordable housing programs, yet who are unable to afford market-rate housing close to jobs. This gap calls for tools like employer-assisted housing, downpayment assistance, shared equity programs, occupancy restrictions, and robust housing supply expansion. • Above-moderate income households (150–350 percent of AMI) in Mammoth Lakes can generally afford market-rate rentals but likely need help entering the Town’s forsale market. Downpayment assistance, shared equity programs, and workforce occupancy restrictions on for-sale housing units are the most relevant approaches, as well as the provision of entry-level for-sale housing options in nearby communities. • Workforce preferences for affordability, quality, and proximity to employment suggest that well-located, modest-sized units, not large luxury homes, are what the workforce needs, despite some stated preferences. Programmatic tools should reflect this. • Employers are strongly motivated partners, with 71 percent of employer respondents to the housing needs survey reporting that housing availability impacts their ability to recruit and retain workers, “somewhat” or “significantly.” This creates a compelling case for employer-assisted housing, and creates opportunities for public-private partnerships, which solve business challenges, while also serving the public interest. 111
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026 6
112
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
7 EXISTING HOUSING POLICY
FRAMEWORK
Each member jurisdiction of the Eastern Sierra CHC operates under a state-certified General Plan Housing Element, which is a legally required component of the General Plan that identifies how the jurisdiction will meet its share of the Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA), as determined by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). Under California Government Code Section 65580 et seq., jurisdictions must periodically update their Housing Elements, have them certified by the HCD, and implement the policies and programs they commit to, with rigorous annual and cyclical reporting requirements. Non-compliance can result in loss of permitting authority, state financial penalties, and exposure to builder’s remedy lawsuits.
Housing Element implementation is not optional. Each of the four jurisdictions profiled below has committed to a specific set of housing policies and programs as a condition of HCD certification. Those commitments are ongoing obligations, not aspirational goals.
This Toolkit is designed to augment Housing Element commitments, not to duplicate or replace them. The RHNA, as defined by HCD, is focused primarily on forward looking housing demand associated with household growth, where the housing need estimates summarized in the Regional Housing Study primarily characterize housing needs among existing resident and in-commuter workforce households, excluding households that do not include employed individuals, such as retiree households.
The housing tools in Sections 4 through 6, in some cases, overlap with policies and programs identified in jurisdictions’ 6th cycle Housing Elements. In other cases, the tools go beyond those committed to as part of Housing Element implementation. In both cases, the emphasis throughout the Toolkit is on describing tools that have the potential add meaningful capacity for some, if not all, of the participating jurisdictions, with limited additional implementation burden on already-stretched jurisdictional staff and resources.
The following section provides a brief narrative summary of the key policies and programs that have been adopted by each jurisdiction. The purpose of this summary is to facilitate identification of gaps and opportunities for information sharing and collaboration. The table at the end of this section then provides a high-level crosswalk (see Appendix A for a more detailed version), identifying the housing tools considered as part of this toolkit which are already being implemented through existing Housing Element policies and programs. 113
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
8 3.1 City of Bishop (2021-2029 Housing Element)
The City of Bishop’s certified 6th Cycle Housing Element covers a RHNA of 118 units across all income levels, against which the city has programmed 157 total unit objectives. Key programs include: acquisition of surplus LADWP parcels for affordable housing development; support for the Silver Peaks senior affordable project (60 units); implementation of a Downtown Specific Plan with mixed-use/residential zoning; an Accessory dwelling unit (ADU) incentive program including free pre-approved plans and expedited processing; a fee waiver program for qualifying affordable and special needs projects (Action 5.11); use of Proposition HHH and PLHA funding in coordination with Inyo County; a local Opportunity Zone designation to attract private investment; and a by-right approval policy for income-restricted projects meeting zoning requirements. Bishop’s Housing Element also establishes explicit targets for grant funding pursuits and documentation of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) compliance.
3.2 Inyo County (2021-2029 Housing Element)
Inyo County’s certified 6th Cycle Housing Element addresses unincorporated county lands stretching from the more urbanized areas in and around the City of Bishop, Big Pine, and Lone Pine, to more sparsely populated rural areas in the south county, including portions of Death Valley National Park. The 6th cycle RHNA for Inyo County totals 82 units, across all income categories. Key programs include: a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funded housing rehabilitation program targeting a minimum of 15 units over the planning period; ADU/JADU promotion including zoning code updates, informational materials, and preapproved plan availability; a safe parking site program (Goal: 25 individuals served within 3 years of HCD certification) for individuals living in vehicles; an employer-assisted housing working group with major employers including Bishop Care and the Eastern Sierra Unified School District; a regional housing working group with the City of Bishop and Tribal governments; outreach and coordination with the LADWP, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) on land availability for housing; a mixed-use “CB” commercial zone update to explicitly allow multifamily residential; by-right permitting for qualifying affordable multifamily projects; SRO allowance in the R-3 zone; energy efficiency programs; and creation of a dedicated housing specialist position.
3.3 Town of Mammoth Lakes (2019-2027 Housing Element)
The Town of Mammoth Lakes operates under its certified 6th Cycle Housing Element, with a RHNA of 313 units. The Town expects to begin preparation of the 7th Cycle Housing Element in 2026. The town’s current housing program is among the most comprehensive in the region, reflecting both the severity of the local housing need and the Town’s established institutional capacity. The centerpiece of the town’s near-term strategy is “The Parcel,” a town-owned site that has been master-planned for workforce and affordable housing development. Other key programs include: the Affordable Housing Mitigation Program (AHMP), which requires 114
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
9 affordable housing contributions from new development; homebuyer assistance programs serving households up to 200 percent of the area median income (AMI); mobile home park preservation measures; deed restriction monitoring and enforcement via Eastern Sierra Community Housing (ESCH);
2 exploration of a local housing tax initiative (ballot measure); a landlord-tenant matching program to connect housing-seeking workers with local property owners; a non-workforce unit conversion program to encourage owners of long-term vacant or market-rate units to convert to workforce use; a minimum of two grant applications per year for state and federal housing funds; and an employer first-and-last-month rent pilot program developed in partnership with Mammoth Resorts.
3.4 Mono County (2021-2029 Housing Element)
Mono County’s certified 6th Cycle Housing Element covers unincorporated areas of the county including a diverse array of communities, ranging from the larger population centers like Bridgeport, Lee Vining, and June Lake, to suburban neighborhoods like Crowley Lake, and more rural outposts like Benton and Chalfant. Key programs include: development and maintenance of an opportunity site database for housing-suitable parcels; regulatory reform to remove barriers to development (minimum lot size reductions, snow storage requirements, tiny home standards); an ADU ordinance update targeting a minimum of five new ADUs over the planning period, with a commitment to update the ordinance within one year of each new state law change; reinstatement of a housing mitigation ordinance for new commercial development (Program 2.3); evaluation of county-owned parcels for housing suitability; a purchase-and-deed-restrict program targeting at least one unit; an employer housing partnership program with a goal of at least one project; density bonus implementation with a goal of at least one award; a fee waiver program for qualifying projects (Program 2.10); a community land trust (CLT) feasibility study (Program 1.7); and coordination with the CPT Land Tenure Subcommittee to facilitate federal land exchanges that may unlock residential development opportunities in constrained rural communities.
3.5 How This Toolkit Relates to Housing Element Commitments The matrix on the following page maps the full set of policy and program tools considered for this Toolkit with each jurisdiction’s current Housing Element policy and program framework:
- “Existing Policy / Program” reflects a commitment in the certified Housing Element or an otherwise active program;
- “Interested / Exploring” reflects a tool the jurisdictions indicated interest in, but have not yet formally committed to.
2 Formerly known as Mammoth Lakes Housing (MLH).
115
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
10 The near-term and longer-term tools, presented in Sections 4 and 5 of this Toolkit, generally reflect those that align with each jurisdiction’s identified housing needs, and which fall within the anticipated capacity and resources expected to be available over the next three to five years. The near- and longer-term tools also reflect those:
1) Where multiple jurisdictions have shown Existing or Interested status, and where a coordinated regional approach can accelerate progress; and / or 2) Tools not yet reflected in any individual Housing Element, but where the jurisdictions expressed sufficient collective interest to warrant joint exploration.
The identified tools are intended to complement, not compete with, the Housing Element work already underway. The identified tools also do not reflect binding commitments. Just because the table identifies a certain tool as being of ‘interest’ does not bind that jurisdiction to implement that tool. Nor does the lack of Existing or Interested status prohibit a jurisdiction from pursuing a certain tool in the future.
As the top priority, jurisdictions indicated a desire to follow through on their existing commitments, with a desire to build their capacity to tackle additional programs and projects over time, while leveraging opportunities to learn from one another and consolidate administrative burdens wherever possible to free up funding for enhanced implementation.
Jurisdictions using this Toolkit to prioritize implementation activities should cross-reference the near-term tools in Section 4 with their respective Housing Element program schedules to ensure that activities are sequenced compatibly and that credit is appropriately claimed for Housing Element implementation. Similarly, jurisdictions should look to the near-term tools in Section 4 and the longer-term strategies in Section 5 as they prepare their 7th Cycle Housing Element updates in the coming years.
Table 1: Housing Tools by Implementation Status
E Existing Policy / Program I Interested / Exploring
Policy / Program Tool Inyo
County
City of
Bishop
Mono
County
Town of
Mammoth
Lakes
Housing Supply Expansion
Housing Sites Inventory E E E E
Publicly Owned Sites for Development E E E E
116
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
11 Policy / Program Tool Inyo
County
City of
Bishop
Mono
County
Town of
Mammoth
Lakes
Safe Parking / Camping Sites E I E
Temporary Reuse of Public Facilities E
Adaptive Reuse of Existing Structures I E I E
Low-Income Tax Credit Development E E
Support Proposed Housing Projects E E
Infrastructure Enhancements E I
Accessory Dwelling Unit Programs E I E
Seasonal Workforce Housing I E
Mobile / Manufactured Home
Communities
E E E
Regulatory & Incentive Reform
By-Right Development and Project
Streamlining
E E E E
Non-Monetary Incentives for Desired
Project Types
E I E
Flexible Development Standards for
Innovation
E
Inclusionary Housing and
Commercial Linkage Policies
E E
Fee Waivers, Deferrals, and Other
Financial Incentives
E E
Utilization & Preservation
No Net Loss Policies E E
Occupancy / Employment Deed
Restrictions
E E
Rental Housing Inspection Programs E I E
Employer Master Leasing Programs I I
Rent Incentive Programs (Lease-toLocals; Rooted Renters) E Purchase and Deed Restriction
Programs
I I E
117
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
12 Policy / Program Tool Inyo
County
City of
Bishop
Mono
County
Town of
Mammoth
Lakes
Downpayment Assistance and
Shared Equity Programs
I I E
Rent-to-Own Housing Programs I I
Rehabilitation, Weatherization, Energy
Efficiency
E I I
Mobile/Manufactured Home
Preservation
E I E
Short-Term Rental (STR) Regulation E E
Disaster Preparedness and Recovery I I E E
Funding & Financing Tools
Locally Controlled Funding Source(s) E E
State/Federal Grants/Loans E E E E
Support Pursuit of Tax Credits and
Other Gap Funding
E E E
Governance & Regional Coordination
Community Land Trust (CLT) I
Housing Cooperative (Co-op) I
Regional Housing Authority I I
Regional Housing Finance Authority I I
Regional Community Foundation I
Regional Transportation Strategies E I E
Coordinated Negotiation with Public
Landowners
E
Coordinated Negotiation with Large
Employers
E
E = Existing Policy / Program (committed in Housing Element or active program) I = Interested / Exploring (identified as a tool to explore) The lack of an ‘E’ or ‘I’ designation does not preclude a given tool from being pursued in the future.
Source: City of Bishop; Inyo County; Mono County; Town of Mammoth Lakes; BAE, 2026. 118
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
12 119
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
13 NEAR-TERM HOUSING TOOLS
The following section summarizes the ten tools that the member jurisdictions indicated that they are ready to explore, or pursue, given current capacity and resources. Near-term is defined generally as implementable within the next one to three years, though timelines will vary across jurisdictions and in line with program complexity and cost, as they relate to available staff capacity and municipal resources.
The jurisdictions are encouraged to consult one another, to learn from prior experience, and leverage existing examples as templates to streamline implementation. Wherever practicable, jurisdictions expressed an interest in collaborating with one another to consolidate administrative capacity and expertise. For example, if one jurisdiction already has a program, the others can use those program guidelines, eligibility criteria, and administrative processes as a starting point for developing their own program. Similarly, in some cases it may not be cost effective for each jurisdiction to develop its own expertise in a certain area, in which case jurisdictions may partner to facilitate more cost efficient administration of desired programs.
Each tool below is presented in a full profile format that includes a Quick Reference table followed by narrative subsections providing an overview of each tool and summarizing its regional relevance, implementation considerations, comparable examples from peer communities, and connection to the regional housing need.
The ten tools are not ranked within this section. Individual member agencies should determine their own prioritization based on local needs, capacity, and context as they prepare their annual work plans on housing and update their Housing Elements.
Table 2: Select Near-Term Housing Tools
Name Description
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
(LIHTC) Development
Pg. 16-17
Support completion of the region's existing affordable
housing pipeline through land contributions, fee waivers, local loans, and letters of support for LIHTC applications to the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC),
and sustained engagement with affordable housing
developers. Includes The Parcel in Mammoth Lakes (220+
additional units of capacity) and Silver Peaks in Bishop. 120
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
14 LIHTC is likely to remain the primary production financing mechanism for low-income affordable housing.
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)
Programs
pg. 18-19
An accessory dwelling unit (ADU) is a self-contained
secondary housing unit on the same lot as a primary
residence. Also known as granny units, they may be built as either detached or attached structures, or can be
created through the conversion of an existing space
within the primary residence, such as a garage. ADUs are advantageous in communities with limited land
availability. ADUs can in some cases offer greater
affordability, as built costs typically exclude land value.
Many communities promote ADUs through zoning, preapproved plan, fee waivers, and low-interest loans.
Mobile / Manufactured Home
Communities
pg. 20-21
Factory-built manufactured housing offer some of the
lowest per-unit costs available in the housing market. For workforce households in the low- and moderate-income
range (60–120 percent of AMI), manufactured housing can provide a realistic pathway to homeownership.
Approaches to expanding the inventory can include zoning and land dedication, as well as financing support.
Occupancy and Employment Deed
Restrictions
pg. 22-23
Record legal covenants on participating housing units
requiring occupancy by persons employed within the
local area. Workforce deed restrictions limit competition from the second home and STR markets. Some programs
also include income restrictions. Can be recorded on
both existing units and new construction.
Downpayment Assistance and
Shared Equity Programs
pg. 24-25
Provide one-time downpayment assistance grants or
deferred-payment loans to help workforce households
earning 100–200 percent AMI bridge the gap from renting to ownership. Shared equity (such as the CalHFA Dream
For All model) allow program funds to recycle to future buyers upon resale. Most impactful in the Bishop area and unincorporated Inyo County, where purchase prices are
more accessible. ESCOG could administer a regional
program across all member jurisdictions.
Safe Parking / Camping Site(s)
pg. 26-27
Create designated safe overnight parking and camping
sites with basic amenities (restrooms, lighting, sanitation, case management access) for vehicle-dwelling workers
— the region's most acutely housing-insecure population. 121
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
15 Among the fastest and lowest-cost interventions
available. Sites can be operational within 3–12 months.
Aligns with existing Inyo County Housing Element
commitments for a 25-person safe parking program.
Adaptive Reuse of Existing Structures
pg. 28-29
Facilitate conversion of underutilized motels, lodges,
commercial buildings, and other non-residential
structures to residential use. Leverages state Project
Homekey funding and LIHTC financing. Particularly
applicable in the Town of Mammoth Lakes — where
developable land is extremely scarce — and along the
Bishop commercial corridor. Requires zoning flexibility and streamlined entitlement processing.
Disaster Preparedness and Recovery
pg. 30-31
Integrate workforce housing into regional emergency
management planning and pre-position jurisdictions to
rapidly access federal and state disaster recovery funding — including FEMA HMGP, HUD CDBG-DR, and USDA
programs — when declared emergencies create housing
displacement. Includes adopting a Housing Recovery Plan, maintaining current housing inventory data for rapid
damage assessment, and developing employer housing
continuity agreements. The Eastern Sierra’s high seismic and wildfire hazard exposure make proactive
preparedness a near-term priority.
Locally Controlled Funding Source(s)
pg. 32-33
Common local funding sources for housing programs
include Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT), sales and use tax, real estate transfer tax, and parcel tax, among other
options. Establishment of a locally controlled funding
source provides a stable, flexible capital base for housing programs that is not dependent on competitive state and federal grant cycles. Some sources necessitate local
control and administration (e.g., real estate transfer tax), while others can facilitate regional collaboration (e.g., TOT, sales tax, parcel tax).
122
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
16 4.1 Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Development (Including follow through on existing planned and proposed projects)
QUICK REFERENCE
Opportunities for
Collaboration
Jurisdictions support LIHTC applications through financial contributions, letters of support, or land dedications across jurisdictional lines.
Target Population Lower-income households (up to 80 percent of AMI).
Implementation
Timeline
Near-term for existing pipeline; mid- to long-term for new projects.
Key Funding Sources 9 percent and 4 percent Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC); Multifamily Housing Program (MHP); Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC); Infill Infrastructure Grant (IIG); Mixed-Income Program (MIP); HOME Investment Partnership (HOME); CDBG; Local Housing Trust Funds; etc.
Funding Requirement Total project cost ~$150m-$200m, or $700k-$750k per unit; local contribution(s) of up ~$10m per project, or ~$75k per unit.
Overview and Regional Relevance
Despite the significant cost and complexity of affordable housing development in the Eastern Sierra, the region has a meaningful pipeline of projects that are underway or in active predevelopment. Supporting the completion of this pipeline is a top CHC priority. The Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program in California is administered by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC), and offers the most effective funding tool available for producing deeply affordable rental housing for households earning up to 80 percent of AMI.
Most of the development pipeline involves projects located at “The Parcel” in the Town of Mammoth Lakes, a long-planned affordable housing development site. As of early 2026, 80 deed-restricted units have been completed, approximately 150 units are under construction, and approximately 220 additional units of capacity remain. In the City of Bishop, the Silver Peak project is in predevelopment, which would include 60 tax credit affordable rental units.
Implementation Considerations
The primary challenge for new affordable housing development is bridging the gap between construction costs and the permanent financing that below market rate rents can support.
The Regional Housing Study estimates total subsidy requirements of up to $650,000 per unit for deeply affordable tax-credit multifamily rental housing in the region. This gap is typically closed through a “financing stack” that combines multiple funding sources: four or nine percent LIHTC equity (the most competitive and valuable source), state gap funding through programs like the Multifamily Housing Program (MHP) and Affordable Housing and 123
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
17 Sustainable Communities (AHSC) programs, federal HOME funds, CDBG, and local contributions (land, fee waivers, grants, and loans).
Local governments can play several critical roles in supporting new affordable development:
• Land: Contributing publicly owned land at no or reduced cost significantly improves project feasibility. The Parcel exemplifies this model. • Fee Waivers: Waiving or deferring development impact fees and utility connection fees can reduce per-unit costs by $20,000–$60,000 or more. • Local Loans and Grants: Loans or grants using General Fund or Housing Trust Fund dollars can help to close the remaining financing gap and often function as matching funds to make projects more competitive for state and federal funding programs. • Political Support: Letters of support from member agencies and active engagement in the TCAC competitive scoring process can improve project rankings.
Comparable Examples
The Parcel is the most relevant example in the region. In the broader northern California context, other resort and gateway communities, like the Town of Truckee, City of South Lake Tahoe, and City of Big Bear Lake, have successfully used the LIHTC program to develop affordable housing, typically through nonprofit developer partnerships with local government support. While sites located in unincorporated areas are often less competitive for tax credits due to reduced access to transit and other essential services, the TAC reserves 20 percent of the annual nine percent LIHTC allocation for rural projects, defined generally as communities outside urbanized areas. A separate ten percent set-aside is reserved for projects located on or near tribal lands or that primarily serve tribal members, providing an additional funding pathway relevant to the many federally recognized tribes within Inyo and Mono counties.
Connection to Regional Need
The Needs Study found that the region currently has approximately 630 existing deedrestricted affordable housing units throughout the Eastern Sierra region, with approximately 200 additional units currently planned, proposed, or under construction. The housing needs analysis identified unmet needs among roughly 1,767 households earning 80 percent of AMI or less. Sustaining the pipeline of new projects to meet the identified will require consistent local financial and political commitment.
124
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
18 4.2 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
QUICK REFERENCE
Opportunities for
Collaboration
Zoning and development standards overseen by participating jurisdictions; shared pre-approved plan library and related programs administered regionally.
Target Population Low- and moderate-income renters and workforce households (60–120 percent of AMI)
Implementation
Timeline
Near-term (6–18 months to launch a basic program)
Key Funding Sources CalHFA ADU Grant Program (up to $40,000/unit); CDBG; local general fund; HOME program
Funding Requirement ~$50,000–$150,000 to develop a pre-approved plan library and launch outreach; ~$500,000–$2M seed capital if a revolving construction loan fund is established.
Overview and Regional Relevance
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are secondary housing units built on residential lots with existing primary structures, such as detached backyard cottages and ‘granny units’. Junior ADUs, also known as JADUs, are ADUs that are attached to the primary structure, and include things like garage conversions, interior unit conversions, or attached additions. Since 2020, a series of California state laws (Assembly Bills 68 and 881, Senate Bill 13, and subsequent legislation) has dramatically streamlined ADU permitting, reduced fees, and removed owneroccupancy requirements, making ADU programs one of the most accessible near-term strategies available to local governments to promote expansion of the housing stock.
Some limitations of ADU programs include challenges with securing financing and a lack of certainty regarding the ultimate use of the unit. For example, many jurisdictions assume as part of their Housing Elements that ADUs will be rented out to lower-income households; though experience shows that at least some ADUs are retained for use by the primary occupant as a home office, visitor accommodations, or rented out on a short-term basis.
For the Eastern Sierra, where land for new development is scarce and construction costs are high, ADUs represent an opportunity to add workforce housing units within established neighborhoods using existing infrastructure, without requiring large land acquisitions or complex financing structures. A property owner who builds an ADU to rent to a local worker is, in effect, adding a modestly priced rental unit to the housing stock at minimal public cost.
ADUs are best suited to serve workforce households in the low- to moderate-income ranges (60–120 percent of AMI) which represent the largest cohort of unmet need across the region. 125
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
19 Implementation Considerations
A robust local ADU program typically combines several components:
• Pre-Approved Plan Library: A menu of two to four pre-designed ADU floor plans that property owners can use without modification, eliminating custom design costs and reducing permit processing times. A shared regional plan library usable by all member jurisdictions can help to spread the design cost across the collective. • Fee Waivers or Reductions: Development impact fee and utility connection fee waivers, deferrals, and reductions for ADUs, particularly for property owners that commit to rent to full-time occupants at or below market rates. California law already restricts certain ADU fees; though local programs can go further. • Financial Assistance: The California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA) ADU Grant Program has historically provided up to $40,000 to eligible property owners for predevelopment costs, though funding has temporarily run out. Some jurisdictions have paired this with low-interest construction loans funded through CDBG grants and local housing trust funds. A regional revolving loan fund could serve all jurisdictions. • Technical Assistance and Outreach: Many property owners are unaware of ADU opportunities, or find the design and permitting process daunting. Targeted outreach in partnership with the regional building departments, local contractors, and community organizations can reduce barriers to participation.
Staff capacity is a real constraint for many smaller jurisdictions. Partnering between jurisdictions to develop shared program materials, a regional plan library, and coordinated outreach can reduce the burden on individual planning departments. Staff from Inyo County, Mono County, and the City of Bishop have already demonstrated interest in this approach.
Comparable Examples
The counties of Amador, Calaveras, Mariposa, and Nevada came together in recent years to form the Mother Lode ADU partnership (https://motherlodeadu.org/), contributing funding to prepare a joint ADU guidebook, cost calculator, pre-approved plans, and development standards. The Town of Truckee similarly developed a pre-approved ADU plan library with three standard designs, reducing design and permitting costs and accelerating permitting.
South Lake Tahoe offers an ADU loan programs funded by the housing trust funds and CDBG.
Connection to Regional Need
The Regional Housing Study identified a regional undersupply of smaller housing units (studios and one-bedrooms). ADUs are often sized to fill this gap. They are particularly valuable in serving the low- and moderate-income workforce cohorts not served by LIHTC projects.
126
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
20 4.3 Mobile / Manufactured Home Communities
QUICK REFERENCE
Opportunities for
Collaboration
Creation of a model manufactured housing ordinance with streamlined and regionally consistent development standards
Target Population Low- and Moderate-income (60-120 percent of AMI) households Implementation
Timeline
Near-term (12–24 months for zoning/policy; 18–36 months to site and develop new parks or subdivisions)
Key Funding Sources Strategic Growth Council Factory-Built Housing Regional Pilot Program; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Preservation and Reinvestment Initiative for Community Enhancement (PRICE); HCD Manufactured Housing Opportunity and Revitalization (MORE); USDA Rural Development Section 502 loans; HUD Title I and Title II; CalHFA loan programs; CDBG; housing trust fund
Funding Requirement Simple CUP and permit without a rezone can cost ~$200k-$500k; ~$750k-$1.5m or more if significant environmental analysis is required; direct subsidy requirements likely to average ~$50k per unit.
Overview and Regional Relevance
Factory-built manufactured housing (built to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD, code) offers some of the lowest per-unit costs available in the housing market, with construction costs as low as $300 per square foot, which is roughly half the cost of site-built construction in the Eastern Sierra. The Regional Housing Study estimates subsidy requirements as low as $50,000 per unit for manufactured for-sale housing, making it one of the most cost-effective tools for expanding the region’s ownership housing stock.
For workforce households in the low- and moderate-income ranges (60–120 percent of AMI), manufactured housing can provide a realistic pathway to homeownership in a region where site-built single-family homes are priced beyond reach in some areas. Modern manufactured homes can offer quality, space, and amenities comparable to site-built homes at a significantly reduced cost.
The Eastern Sierra already has an established mobile and manufactured housing stock in communities throughout Inyo and Mono counties, reflecting a long history of acceptance for this housing type in rural and semi-rural settings. Expanding this inventory through creation of new manufactured home communities, individual lot placements, or mixed-housing subdivisions that include manufactured units, can build on the combination of proven market acceptance and significant cost advantages compared to stick-built construction. 127
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
21 Implementation Considerations
The primary challenges for expanding manufactured housing are land, financing, and zoning:
• Land: Manufactured homes require either ownership of a residential lot or a long-term ground lease. In existing manufactured home parks, residents lease land from the park owner, which creates instability if the park is sold or redeveloped. New developments should prioritize lot ownership or long-term leases that can offer greater cost stability for residents over time.
• Financing: Conventional mortgage financing is available for manufactured homes on permanent foundations (Federal Housing Administration Title II loans, Fannie Mae MH Advantage, Freddie Mac CHOICEHome), but can be more complex than for stick-built homes. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Rural Development Section 502 direct and guaranteed loans are a strong option in eligible rural communities. • Zoning: Some zoning codes restrict or prohibit manufactured housing in residential zones or impose design requirements that add cost. Member jurisdictions can audit their zoning codes to remove unnecessary barriers and ensure manufactured housing is permitted in residential zones consistent with state law.
Comparable Examples
The Eastern Sierra’s existing manufactured housing communities demonstrate that this housing type is already woven into the regional character, with at least one manufactured home community nearing buildout in northern Iyo County. Several other rural California counties, including Shasta, Trinity, and Siskiyou, have also used manufactured housing programs to provide affordable ownership options in communities with high construction costs and limited land availability.
Connection to Regional Need
The Needs Study documented a mismatch between the existing housing stock (which skews toward larger, more expensive single-family homes) and the needs of workforce households seeking smaller, more affordable units. Manufactured housing in the two- to three-bedroom range would be well-suited to the household sizes of most workforce families and can address this gap at subsidy levels far below those required for conventional construction. It is particularly valuable in the unincorporated areas of Inyo and Mono counties, where land costs are lower and the regulatory environment is more accommodating. 128
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
22 4.4 Occupancy and Employment Deed Restrictions
QUICK REFERENCE
Opportunities for
Collaboration
The Town of Mammoth Lakes offers an existing example of an occupancy and employment deed restriction program, which can be used as a template for other jurisdictions, with potential for regional administration.
Target Population Resident and seasonal workforce; any income level depending on program design
Implementation
Timeline
Near-term (6–18 months to develop model template, enabling ordinance, and monitoring program)
Key Funding Sources Administrative costs funded by local general fund or housing trust; local dedicated funding sources (where applicable)
Funding Requirement Model template development and enabling ordinance: ~$50,000– $100,000 in one-time legal and consulting costs (possibly shared across jurisdictions). Ongoing monitoring and compliance for a portfolio of 50– 200 units: $50,000–$100,000/year. Individual unit recording costs: $500– $2,000 per unit. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority model — the national benchmark — operates at roughly $1,500–$2,500 per restricted unit annually for monitoring and administration.
Overview and Regional Relevance
In many rural resort communities, workforce households often struggle to compete for market-rate housing with second-home buyers, vacation rental investors, and higherincome remote workers, who have a greater ability to levy all-cash offers, waive contingencies, and/or offer significantly over list price. While most evident in the for-sale market, these dynamics can also influence the availability and price of housing in the private rental housing market, particularly in areas with a limited supply of dedicated multifamily rental housing. Workforce deed restrictions are specifically designed to address these market dynamics by requiring that units be occupied on a full-time basis by a household that includes local workers. These programs also typically require that the unit be occupied full-time as a primary residence, and prohibit short-term renting.
An occupancy or employment deed restrictions include a legal covenant recorded against a property that restricts who may occupy or purchase the unit. Workforce restrictions typically require that at least one occupant work a minimum number of hours per week (commonly 30 or more) for an employer based within the defined geographic area (e.g., Inyo or Mono County). Unlike income-based deed restrictions, workforce restrictions can be applied to market-rate units without requiring below-market pricing. This can facilitate scaling of the 129
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
23 deed restricted unit inventory at a lower cost compared to income-based deed restrictions and can reduce the disincentive for property owners / buyers to participate in the program.
Implementation Considerations
Workforce deed restrictions must be carefully designed to comply with fair housing laws.
Restrictions based on employment status and geographic work location are generally permissible. Other key design parameters include:
• Definition of ‘Local Worker’: Clearly defining who qualifies as a local worker (e.g., 30+ hours / week employment within Inyo or Mono County, or equivalent self-employment or community service) is essential for both legal clarity and enforcement. • Income Tiers: Some programs combine workforce and income restrictions, allowing a broader range of housing types to qualify (e.g., deed-restricted for local workers earning up to 200 percent of AMI). Others apply workforce-only restrictions to marketrate units and reserve income restrictions for subsidized units. A best practice is to set rents at the desired level (e.g., 120 percent of AMI), but to then set the maximum eligible income at a somewhat higher level (e.g., 200 percent of AMI). • Duration: State law limits deed restrictions to a 55-year term, with many programs requiring automatic renewal upon transfer of ownership. To facilitate preservation, some programs implement restrictions on transfers into a trust or other mechanism that can obfuscate and facilitate a change of ownership without triggering renewal. • Monitoring and Enforcement: Annual employment verification is typically required.
Monitoring can be done by the jurisdiction, a housing agency, or by a designated third party with adequate resources and clear legal authority to enforce restrictions.
Comparable Examples
The Town of Mammoth Lakes has a long established workforce housing deed restriction purchase and management program. The program has taken a number of forms over time, but can function as a valuable local template and resource. Vail and Pitkin County in Colorado operate some of the nation’s oldest and most comprehensive workforce housing programs built on employment deed restrictions. The Town of Truckee and Placer County in California also established similar deed restriction programs in the early 2020’s.
Connection to Regional Need
One of the primary drivers of the regional housing crisis in the Eastern Sierra is competition for housing coming from the second home and STR markets. Workforce housing deed restrictions address this by creating a second market for workforce housing, within which prospective home buyers and renters compete with one another and not with higher income / wealth households from outside the area. Use of income restrictions can provide for deeper affordability, while workforce and occupancy restrictions can help to facilitate scale. 130
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
24 4.5 Downpayment Assistance and Shared Equity Programs
QUICK REFERENCE
Opportunities for
Collaboration
Alignment of eligibility criteria can increase flexibility for participants and create opportunities for consolidation of program administration.
Target Population First-time homebuyers (80-150 percent of AMI) Implementation
Timeline
Near-term (6–18 months to launch a locally administered program) Key Funding Sources CalHFA; CalHome; CalVet; HOME; CDBG; local housing trust funds; employer contributions
Funding Requirement Per-household assistance: up to $150k (structured as deferred loans in shared equity programs). A program serving 10–20 households annually requires a revolving fund of $500k–$2M. Annual program administration:
$75k–$150k. Shared equity structures allow initial capital to recycle upon resale, reducing long-term public cost.
Overview and Regional Relevance
For workforce households who earn enough income to afford monthly mortgage payments, but lack the savings for a down payment, downpayment assistance programs can make homeownership accessible. Building a down payment while paying market-rate rents is extremely difficult in a high-cost housing market, such as the Town of Mammoth Lakes.
Shared equity programs that pair downpayment assistance with resale restrictions can also preserve affordability for the next buyer. When the homeowner eventually sells, they repay the assistance (plus a share of appreciation) to the program, which then recycles the funds for the next eligible buyer. This “revolving” structure allows a relatively modest initial investment to serve multiple households over time. Shared equity and appreciation caps, however, can provide a disincentive to participate due to lost upside potential.
Implementation Considerations
Several key program design considerations apply:
• Loan vs. Grant Structure: Downpayment assistance structured as a deferredpayment loan (no payments until a set date, even sale or refinance) preserves program capital for future buyers, while still being highly valuable to the recipient.
Grant structures are simpler to administer, but do not recycle funds. • Shared Appreciation: CalHFA’s Dream For All Shared Appreciation Loan provides up to 20 percent of the purchase price as a second loan. At repayment (upon sale or 131
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
25 refinance), the borrower repays the principal plus 15–20 percent of the home’s appreciation. This structure has been significantly oversubscribed since launch, indicating strong statewide demand, though shared appreciation limits upside. • Geographic Targeting: A locally administered program can prioritize buyers who live or work in the region, ensuring public investment stays in the community. Income and employment verification is standard.
• Employer Partnerships: Large regional employers, like Mammoth Resorts, hospital systems, school districts, and government agencies, can be encouraged to contribute matching downpayment assistance as an employee benefit. This leverages employer interest in workforce retention at relatively low cost. • Preferred Lenders: Most successful programs maintain a list of approved and participating lenders and provide active community outreach and engagement to inform prospective participants of program requirements and processes.
Comparable Examples
As recently as 2020 and 2021, the Town of Mammoth Lakes offered a Homebuyer Assistance program funded through state CDBG (17-CDBG-12096) and HOME Program (16-HOME-11381) grants. The programs were administered by ESCH on behalf of the Town, with eligibility criteria determined largely by the funding sources. Other well established homebuyer assistance programs in similar markets include programs administered by the Martis Fund, which can also be layered Placer County’s first-time homebuyer loan program to address the region’s exceptionally high housing costs. CalHFA’s Dream For All program is also available statewide, but is currently subject to annual lottery due to high demand and limited funding availability.
Connection to Regional Need
The Regional Housing Study found that for-sale housing in the Town of Mammoth Lakes requires a household income of approximately 250–300 percent of AMI to be affordable on a conventional market-rate basis — far beyond the reach of most workforce households. In the Bishop area, single-family homes require roughly 150–200 percent of AMI, which is more accessible but still beyond the reach of many workers. Downpayment assistance programs are most impactful in the Bishop area and unincorporated Inyo County, where purchase prices are lower and a one-time assistance payment can make a meaningful difference. The workforce preference for homeownership — reflected consistently in the Needs Study survey data — further supports this investment.
132
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
26 4.6 Safe Parking / Camping Site(s)
QUICK REFERENCE
Opportunities for
Collaboration
Funding partnerships recognizing the limited availability of suitable locations and the significant cost associated with providing safety, security, and sanitation improvements, cleaning, and management.
Target Population Vehicle-dwelling workers; unhoused and displaced individuals in the workforce; extremely low- to low-income
Implementation
Timeline
Near-term (3–12 months to establish first site)
Key Funding Sources Senate Bill (SB) 748 Encampment Resolution Funding Program; Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA); CDBG; HOME; Local general fund; housing trust fund; non-profit grants; employer contributions; charitable grants
Funding Requirement Site setup and capital improvements: $50k–$200k per site. Annual operations (case management, sanitation, utilities, security): $150k– $400k per site, with multi-site programs achieving efficiencies.
Overview and Regional Relevance
Vehicle-dwelling has become an increasingly visible and common phenomenon in many rural-resort and on public lands across the American West, including in the Eastern Sierra.
Workers who cannot find or afford conventional housing in the community where they work sometimes accept living in vehicles (i.e., cars, vans, or RVs) as a trade-off against commuting long distances. While this choice may be made voluntarily, it reflects a housing market failure that carries real costs for worker health, safety, and productivity.
A safe parking program provides designated overnight parking areas, sometimes with access to basic amenities like restrooms, trash collection, security lighting, and ideally some level of case management or supportive services. Safe parking programs are among the fastest and lowest-cost housing interventions available to local governments. Some estimates suggest that a basic program can be operational within months, with startup costs in the range of $50,000–$200,000 depending on site conditions and amenities, and ongoing operational costs of $150,000–$400,000 annually depending on capacity.
Implementation Considerations
A safe parking site requires the following elements:
• Site: A suitable parcel with adequate space for vehicles, appropriate lighting, and access to restrooms. Publicly owned parking lots (particularly those that are 133
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
27 underutilized at night), church / temple parking lots, and employer-owned facilities are the most common site types. Zoning authorization, often through a conditional use permit or a specific local ordinance, is often required. • Amenities: At minimum, restroom access (permanent or portable) and trash collection. Security lighting, a potable water source, and access to showers significantly improve program quality and participant retention. • Management Partner: A nonprofit social service agency or faith institution typically manages day-to-day operations, screens residents, establishes program rules (curfews, employment requirements, length-of-stay limits), and connects participants with housing resources and social services. Direct government management is also possible, but requires dedicated staff and funding.
• Participant Criteria: Most programs require participants to have employment or be actively seeking it, maintain the site in a clean and respectful condition, and engage with case management services. Length-of-stay limits (often 60–180 days, but sometimes longer) with an expectation of transitioning to permanent housing are a common best practice, particularly in markets with significant deed restricted housing inventories and availability.
Community acceptance can be a challenge, particularly for visible or high-traffic locations.
Proactive community communication, thoughtful site selection, clear program rules, and a strong management partner are essential for building and maintaining public support.
Comparable Examples
Santa Barbara County operates one of California’s oldest and best-documented safe parking programs (established in 2004), serving over 100 vehicles per night across multiple sites, managed by the nonprofit New Beginnings Counseling Center. Ventura County, San Luis Obispo County, the City of San Jose, and the City of Santa Rosa all have similar programs. In resort contexts, communities in Colorado’s mountain counties (including Pitkin and Eagle counties) have established employer-supported vehicle camping programs for seasonal workers.
Connection to Regional Need
The Regional Housing Study documented a 2025 Point-in-Time Count of approximately 124 unhoused individuals in the region, a figure that likely significantly undercounts the population due to the winter timing of the count. Vehicle-dwelling workers represent the most acute and visible end of the housing need spectrum. A safe parking program is one of the fastest tools available to address this need, and it has an outsized positive impact on worker dignity and community safety relative to its cost. It also positions the region to access state homelessness funding that requires evidence of local investment in solutions. 134
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
28 4.7 Adaptive Reuse of Existing Structures
QUICK REFERENCE
Opportunities for
Collaboration
Opportunities for collaboration are largely dependent on use, with shared gap funding being among the most likely scenarios.
Target Population Lower- and moderate-income households; 60–120 percent of AMI Implementation
Timeline
Near-term to mid-term (12–36 months depending on project complexity) Key Funding Sources State Project Homekey; LIHTC (4 percent with tax-exempt bonds); CDBG; CalHFA; local housing trust funds
Funding Requirement Program setup, feasibility analysis, and site due diligence: $75,000– $200,000. Individual conversion projects are capital-intensive, typically ranging from $5M–$20M+ per project funded through Project Homekey, LIHTC, and gap sources. Local government’s primary role is regulatory facilitation and providing land or gap financing.
Overview and Regional Relevance
Adaptive reuse refers to the conversion of existing non-residential structures, such as underutilized motels, hotels, offices, commercial buildings, or other non-housing uses, to residential occupancy. This approach can be faster than ground-up new construction when the existing building shell is structurally sound, as it avoids much of the site work and foundation costs associated with new development. It also allows communities to leverage underutilized commercial properties that may be economically marginal in their existing use.
The Eastern Sierra has direct experience with adaptive reuse. The Access Apartments project in the Town of Mammoth Lakes converted existing commercial space to 21 affordable residential units. While that project carried a cost of approximately $10 million, or roughly $850 per square foot, which was higher than typical new construction due to the specific complexity of the conversion, it provided local proof-of-concept and produced units that would not otherwise have been built.
In addition to commercial-to-residential conversions, motel and hotel conversions to affordable or workforce housing have been a significant focus of the State of California’s Project Homekey program since 2020. The Eastern Sierra has motel and lodge properties in Mammoth Lakes, Bishop, June Lake, Lee Vining, Bridgeport, Lone Pine, and other unincorporated communities that may be candidates for this approach. 135
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
29 Implementation Considerations
The cost of adaptive reuse varies widely and is highly property specific. Key cost drivers include the structural condition of the existing building, the extent of internal layout realignments and mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) upgrades required, compliance with Title 24 energy efficiency standards, ADA accessibility requirements, and fire / life safety code compliance. A thorough due diligence process, including structural assessment, environmental review, and cost estimation, is essential before committing.
Zoning flexibility is a prerequisite. Local zoning must allow residential use in the zones where candidate properties are located, or local governments must be willing to grant a zone change or conditional use permit. Streamlined entitlement processing for adaptive reuse projects, similar to by-right processing, can reduce project timelines and costs.
State Project Homekey funding has been a primary catalyst for adaptive reuse projects in California in recent years. Rounds 1 through 4 (2020–2024) funded over 15,000 units statewide.
Future rounds, if funded by the Legislature, could support Eastern Sierra projects. Local governments can contacting the State Interagency Council on Homelessness (Cal ICH) and HCD to understand the most program parameters, timelines, and funding availability.
Comparable Examples
Project Homekey has funded motel-to-housing conversions in dozens of California communities, including several in rural and resort contexts. In the Tahoe Basin, adaptive reuse of aging lodging properties along commercial corridors has added workforce housing units in both Truckee and South Lake Tahoe. The Innsbruck Lodge (completed in 2023) and the Access Apartments (completed in 2025) in Mammoth Lakes represent local examples.
Connection to Regional Need
The Regional Housing Study identified limited land availability as one of the primary constraints on housing production in the Eastern Sierra. Adaptive reuse addresses this constraint directly by working with the existing building stock rather than requiring vacant land. It is particularly relevant in the Town of Mammoth Lakes, and other established communities with older and outdated hotel and motel inventory. 136
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
30 4.8 Disaster Preparedness and Recovery
QUICK REFERENCE
Opportunities for
Collaboration
Natural disasters rarely respect jurisdictional boundaries; regional resilience is improved through regional coordination; relevant agencies like Cal OES and FEMA Region IX operate over wider areas.
Target Population All workforce households; mobile/manufactured home residents; renters and owners in hazard-exposed properties
Implementation
Timeline
Near-term (6–24 months for planning and pre-positioning); post-event recovery deployment ongoing
Key Funding Sources FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP); HUD CDBG Disaster Recovery; USDA Section 504 Rural Housing Repair; Cal OES; CalHFA; CalAssist Mortgage Fund; local general funds; housing trust funds Funding Requirement Regional Housing Recovery Plan development: $100k–$500k (consultantled, one-time). Housing inventory and GIS vulnerabilities: $75k–$200k to establish; $30k–$75k/year to maintain. Ongoing CDBG-DR readiness and staff capacity: $75k–$150k/year. FEMA HMGP mitigation projects are grant-funded (75 percent federal, 25 percent local match). Total annual program administration estimated at $150k–$300k for a robust regional effort; costs eligible for reimbursement following a Disaster Declaration.
Overview and Regional Relevance
Disaster preparedness for housing is not merely a risk management exercise. When federal disaster declarations trigger access to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Individual Assistance, FEMA Public Assistance, and, most significantly, HUD Community Development Block Grant – Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) funding, communities with prepositioned plans, data systems, and program capacity move dramatically faster than those that are not ready. Post-disaster recovery funding can total hundreds of millions of dollars at the county or regional scale; the Eastern Sierra’s rural character and limited administrative capacity make pre-positioning critical to capturing and deploying these resources.
Implementation Considerations
Comprehensive housing disaster preparedness and recovery strategies often include:
• Housing Inventory and Vulnerability Data: SB 99 (2019) already requires that jurisdictions review the General Plan Safety Element upon update of the Housing Element to identify residential areas in hazard zones, including wildfire, flood, and seismic hazards, without at least two emergency evacuation routes. In addition, it is advised to prepare and maintain a current, GIS-mapped housing inventory that 137
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
31 includes parcel-level data on structure type, age, occupancy, tenure, and assessed value, overlaid with FEMA flood maps, Cal Fire Tier 2/3 fire hazard severity zones, and seismic hazard maps. This data system, particularly if established at the regional level with jurisdictional contributions, can enable rapid post-disaster damage assessment, quantification of housing needs for federal applications, and identification of the most vulnerable housing stock for pre-disaster mitigation investment. • Housing Recovery Plan: Develop or update a written Housing Recovery Plan for each member jurisdiction that pre-identifies replacement housing sites, pre-approved design types (modular, manufactured, panelized), expedited permitting procedures for post-disaster construction, and targeting criteria for recovery assistance. • CDBG-DR Readiness: HUD’s CDBG-DR program is the largest single source of federal post-disaster housing recovery funding. It is activated by a Presidential Major Disaster Declaration and allocated by Congress or HUD to affected states. Readiness activities include designating a housing recovery point of contact at each jurisdiction; establishing relationships with Cal OES and HCD staff; familiarizing staff with methods for assessing post-disaster housing needs (required for CDBG-DR eligibility); and developing a pre-drafted CDBG-DR program design that can be submitted quickly. • Hazard Mitigation for Housing: FEMA’s HMGP program and Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program provide pre-disaster funding to reduce future disaster losses. Eligible activities include seismic retrofitting, home hardening for properties in Tier 2/3 fire hazard zones, and acquisition-demolition of repetitively flood-damaged structures with land banking.
Comparable Examples
The Town of Paradise and Butte County, following the 2018 Camp Fire, received approximately $633 million in HUD CDBG-DR funding for housing recovery; one of the largest singlejurisdiction CDBG-DR allocations in California history. Communities with pre-existing affordable housing plans and developer relationships recovered housing production faster and with greater affordability outcomes than those starting from scratch. The Lake Tahoe Unified School District developed employer housing continuity agreements following the 2021 Caldor Fire, enabling the district to maintain staffing throughout the recovery period.
Connection to Regional Need
The Eastern Sierra sits at the convergence of multiple significant natural hazard exposures, ranging from seismic risk to wildfire risk, high-wind events, avalanche hazards, and episodic flooding and debris flows. Against this hazard backdrop, the region’s housing market has very little buffer. With significant unmet housing need and vacancy rates in high-demand communities near zero, the loss of even a few dozen housing units can create an immediate crisis for local workers and employers. Mobile and manufactured homes, which provide some of the most affordable workforce housing in the region, are disproportionately vulnerable. 138
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
32 4.9 Locally Controlled Funding Source(s)
Most of the strategies in this Toolkit require capital – for construction subsidies, land acquisition, financial assistance programs, and / or administrative capacity. While state and federal funding sources are essential, they are competitive, cyclical, and subject to policy changes beyond local control. Adoption of a locally controlled housing fund source or sources can provide a stable, flexible pool of capital that jurisdictions and / or a future regional housing entity could a) deploy on their own terms, b) leverage for larger state and federal grants, and c) target to the specific needs of the local workforce and residents.
This is not merely one tool among many. Establishing a reliable local funding source is the financial foundation that can make most of the other strategies in this Toolkit viable at scale.
Without it, the region remains perpetually dependent on grant cycles and competitive processes that may, or may not align, with local priorities, timelines, or needs.
Legal Framework for General vs. Special Taxes
Under existing state law, local jurisdictions and special districts may levy a variety of special taxes, either for general or special purposes. Proposition 218 was passed by voters in 1996, resulting in an amendment to the California Constitution that requires that new local property-related tax measures be approved by public vote. A general tax, which generates revenues which are available for all general governmental purposes at the discretion of the governing body, must be approved by a simple majority vote of the electorate. Under Proposition 13, a special tax, which generates revenues that are reserved for a specified purpose, must be approved by a two-thirds vote. State law also requires that votes regarding new or increased general taxes must be “…consolidated with a regularly scheduled general election for members of the governing body of the local government, except in cases of emergency declared by a unanimous vote of the governing body.”3 These requirements apply to all of the local taxes discussed below. Additional requirements may also apply and are identified, as appropriate, in the relevant subsections.
Sales and Use Tax
The Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law of 1955 formally authorized local jurisdictions to impose local sales and use taxes on the privilege of selling tangible property at retail, as well as on the storage, use, or other consumption of tangible personal property purchased from a retailer. This authority was subsequently augmented by SB 566 in 2003.
While sales tax is imposed on retailers, and then typically passed through to consumers, the use tax is imposed directly on the purchaser. The State of California imposes a sales and use tax rate of six percent and a supplemental uniform local tax of 1.25 percent that is split 3 California Constitution, Article XIIIC, Section 2. Available at:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=CONS&division=&title=&par t=&chapter=&article=XIII%20C
139
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
33 between the city/town and county, for a combined rate of 7.25 percent. SB 566 legally authorized all cities / towns in California to levy other local sales taxes, also known as district taxes, but established a cap on the combined value at two percent over the statutory 7.25 percent. While passage of SB 566 theoretically caps the combined sales and use tax rate at
9.25 percent, the California legislature has routinely allowed local governments to petition for special legislation authorizing local sales taxes above that authorized by SB 566.18 Changing the Sales and Use Tax
Passage of a new local sales and use tax measure is subject to the same voter approval requirements as other local tax measures. Increasing the local sales tax rate beyond the statutory two percent requires the passage of special state legislation.
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)
California Revenue and Taxation Code section 7280, authorizes cities and counties to levy a tax on the “privilege” of occupying a room, or rooms, in a hotel, inn, tourist home or house, motel, or other lodging establishment for 30 nights or less, excluding the right of an owner of a time-share or membership camping contract to occupy their respective unit or space.
Changing the Transient Occupancy Tax
Transient Occupancy Taxes (TOTs) are typically structured as a percentage of the gross nightly room rent collected by the lodging provider. The California Revenue and Taxation Code authorizes all general law cities to institute a TOT. The authority of a charter city (or town) to adopt a TOT is not preempted. While the Revenue and Taxation Code broadly defines the basic levy and exemption framework for a TOT, the specifics of the levy, any additional exemptions, and local administrative procedures are left to local governments to define by ordinance. Voter approval is necessary to establish or increase a TOT.
Real Estate Transfer Tax
The California Documentary Transfer Tax Act of 1967 authorized jurisdictions to impose an excise tax on the privilege of transferring ownership or leasehold rights to real property, which is also commonly known as a real estate or property transfer tax or a documentary transfer tax. The maximum real estate transfer tax that may be levied under General Law is $1.10 per $1,000 of assessed value. This is typically levied at the county level, though general law cities are entitled to share evenly in the proceeds resulting from transfers of real property located within their jurisdiction (i.e., cities and towns receive $0.55 per $1,000 of value). Charter cities in California, such as the City of Bishop, can structure their charter to allow imposition of additional real estate transfer taxes, without special authorizing State legislation.
Changing the Real Estate Transfer Tax
To impose a supplemental real estate transfer tax, an incorporated jurisdiction must be, or become, a charter city or town. To modify an existing charter, the Council or an elected charter commission must draft and adopt amendments to the Charter, which must then 140
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
34 be ratified by a majority vote of the electorate and approved by the California Secretary of State. Charters may also be modified through citizens’ initiative. Charters may be wide ranging in their scope, availing upon all of the rights afforded to cities to manage ‘municipal affairs,’ or may be more limited. While charter cities may enjoy broader taxation powers compared to general law cities, they are still subject to Proposition 218, Article XIIIC of the California Constitution, and any limitations imposed by their charter.
This means that a new or increased tax must receive voter approval.
Parcel Tax
The California Constitution permits only two types of taxes on real property: 1) up to a one percent “ad valorem” tax on the value of the parcel, and 2) a non-value based special tax. As such, a parcel tax can only be special tax and requires two-thirds voter approval under Article XIIIA, Section 4. A parcel tax is a type of excise tax based on either a flat per-parcel rate, or a rate that varies depending on use, size, and/or number of units on each parcel.
Establishing/Changing a Parcel Tax
Parcel taxes are frequently proposed to fund various types of city, county, and special district services. While not as common as other locally imposed taxes (e.g., sales taxes, TOT, etc.), they are commonly used for school and special districts, which have much more limited taxation authority and do not have the ability to pursue general taxes.
Parcel taxes may be levied for general purposes, or restricted to a particular purpose. In either case, parcel taxes require two-thirds voter approval.
Business License Tax
Local jurisdictions in California apply various approaches to generating revenue through taxation of local business activity. Some local governments shy away from taxes that expressly penalize revenue generation and/or jobs creation, others more openly recognize the relationship between business activity, employment generation, and local efforts to address workforce housing and related infrastructure needs. As a result, some local governments levy minimal business license fees intended to offset administrative costs associated with license issuance and compliance monitoring, while others levy other supplemental business taxes.
Establishing/Changing a Business License Tax
Business license fees levied by local jurisdictions with the express goal of offsetting the cost of providing services to businesses in the form of license issuance and compliance monitoring are considered administrative fees, rather than taxes, and may be instituted by ordinance without a public vote. Supplemental business taxes intended to generate general or special purpose revenue for a jurisdiction beyond regulatory cost recovery, whether structured as flat taxes, gross receipts taxes, payroll taxes, or employee headcount taxes, are subject to the same voter approval requirements as other taxes. 141
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
30 142
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
31 LONGER-TERM HOUSING TOOLS
The four strategies in this section were identified by CHC members as being of significant interest but requiring more time, resources, or political groundwork before they can be actively pursued. “Longer-term” does not mean unimportant — in several cases, these strategies have the potential for the highest long-term impact of any tools in the Toolkit. It means that the path to implementation is more complex, and that laying the groundwork now is the appropriate near-term action.
Table 3: Select Longer-Term Housing Tools
Name Description
Expanded Housing Sites Inventory
Pg. 32-33
A substantial portion of the land base in the Eastern Sierra is federally managed and generally unavailable for
private residential development without a complex land
exchange, which makes the identification of privately held, publicly owned, or surplus lands within or adjacent to
existing communities particularly valuable.
Public / Private Property Owner
Negotiations
Pg. 34-35
Uncertainty regarding local asks was cited as a key
concern among the region’s public landowners; a
coordinated strategy may reduce barriers to negotiation.
Infrastructure Planning and
Investment to Enable Housing
Pg. 36
Infrastructure availability is a constraint to new housing production, particularly in the unincorporated areas of Inyo and Mono counties, but also on outlaying sites in and around the incorporated communities. Long-term
infrastructure planning is a necessary step towards
encouraging development of new housing resources.
Fee Waivers, Deferrals, and Other
Financial Incentives
Pg. 37-38
Fee waivers (i.e., the permanent reduction or elimination of certain fees) and deferrals (i.e., payment delayed to certificate of occupancy, reducing upfront capital burden) are among the most common and most accessible local
financial incentives for new housing development.
Regional Housing Authority or
Housing Finance Authority
Pg. 39-40
A regional housing authority or housing finance authority, established as a joint powers authority by member
jurisdictions, provides a dedicated institutional platform for bond issuance, program administration, and access to state and federal funding streams that are difficult or impossible for small jurisdictions to access independently. 143
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
32 5.1 Expanded Housing Sites Inventory
QUICK REFERENCE
Opportunities for
Collaboration
Collaborative funding for a regional sites analysis, constraints evaluation, and infrastructure assessments.
Target Population All housing need categories.
Implementation
Timeline
Near-term (6–12 months for site identification and evaluation) Key Funding Sources Local General Funds; Sustainable Communities Grants; Tribal Housing Pre-Development Fund
Overview and Regional Relevance
Housing Element law already requires each jurisdiction to identify sites adequate to accommodate its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA); however, jurisdictions may go beyond Housing Element compliance to proactively build an inventory of sites that could support workforce housing more broadly, including sites that may not currently be designated for housing but have conversion or densification potential, publicly owned surplus sites, and parcels suitable for land banking (acquisition now for future development).
The Eastern Sierra presents unique challenges for site identification. A substantial portion of the land base in both Inyo and Mono counties is federally managed (by the BLM, USFS, or National Park Service or NPS) and generally unavailable for private residential development without a complex federal land exchange or special authorization. This makes the identification of privately held, publicly owned, or surplus lands within or adjacent to existing communities particularly valuable.
Implementation Considerations
Key activities for building an expanded housing sites inventory include:
• Regional Opportunity Sites Survey: A systematic mapping of underutilized privately held parcels within and adjacent to existing communities, including infill sites, underperforming commercial properties, surface parking lots, and oversized or subdivided single-family lots.
• Surplus Land Act Process: Assembly Bill (AB) 1486 (2019) requires agencies to offer surplus publicly owned land for affordable housing development before disposing of it for other purposes. Member agencies should regularly audit their real property inventories to identify surplus land and proactively leverage the Surplus Land Act. 144
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
33 • Federal Land Engagement: Engaging with BLM and USFS regarding land exchanges for workforce housing purposes is a long-term effort, but has precedent in other gateway communities to national forests and parks. Member jurisdictions should work together to identify candidate federal parcels and begin the interagency relationship-building needed to pursue formal land exchanges.
• Land Banking: Establishing a land banking program, where the local government or a nonprofit land trust opportunistically acquires underutilized parcels for future housing development. This approach requires a funding mechanism (housing trust fund contributions, bond proceeds) and a governance structure for managing the portfolio.
Comparable Examples
The Town of Mammoth Lakes identified The Parcel as its primary housing development site through a long-term planning process, demonstrating the value of proactively securing land for affordable housing. In gateway communities adjacent to national parks (including communities in Yosemite’s gateway region and the Lake Tahoe area), federal land exchanges for workforce housing have been pursued with varying degrees of success. The Surplus Land Act has catalyzed affordable housing development on publicly owned sites across the state, including most recently through the State’s Excess Sites program.
Connection to Regional Need
The Needs Study identified land scarcity as one of the primary constraints on housing production in the Eastern Sierra. Without a pipeline of sites, even the most robust financing and programmatic strategies cannot produce significant new housing inventories. Building an expanded housing sites inventory is the prerequisite for long-term housing production at the scale needed to address the estimated current and future regional housing need. 145
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
34 5.2 Public/Private Property Owner Negotiations
QUICK REFERENCE
Opportunities for
Collaboration
Uncertainty regarding local asks was cited as a key concern by the region’s public landowners; a coordinated strategy may reduce barriers to successful negotiation.
Target Population All housing need categories.
Implementation
Timeline
Medium- to Long-Term (2-4 years to structure and begin negotiations).
Key Funding Sources Local general fund; in kind contributions.
Overview and Regional Relevance
A substantial portion of the land base in both Inyo and Mono counties is publicly owned by agencies like the BLM, USFS, NPS, and the LADWP. Nonetheless, jurisdictions have had limited success negotiating land exchanges and transfers over time. Conversations with representatives of these agencies highlighted an opportunity for improved negotiations through regional coordination and alignment on mutual regional objectives. A similar approach may also offer advantages for negotiations with private property owners.
Implementation Considerations
Effective negotiation with public and private landowners requires a degree of coordination, credibility, and capacity that is difficult for single member jurisdiction to project alone. Key activities include:
• Developing a Coordinated Regional Position: Internal agreement between member jurisdictions on shared objectives prior to negotiation with landowner can improve the odds of achieving a satisfactory outcome.
• Identification of Parcels Near to Existing Communities: A regional strategy should include a collaborative and structured dialogue with property owners to identify parcels within or adjacent to existing communities that may be suitable for workforce and affordable housing development, which have access to required utilities, and to explore lease, land exchange, or transfer mechanisms consistent with the agency’s operational requirements and the long-term resource objectives. • Engagement with Federal Land Agencies: BLM and USFS land exchanges for housing purposes are complex, multi-year processes that require federal legislation or administrative action. Member jurisdictions should identify candidate federal parcels through the expanded housing sites inventory process and continue building the 146
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
35 interagency relationships, with BLM California, USFS Inyo National Forest, and congressional offices.
• Engagement with Private Landowners: Large private landholders may have underutilized parcels adjacent to existing communities that are not currently on the market, but could be made available through a structured negotiation. A regional land acquisition strategy, potentially supported by a land banking fund, could enable opportunistic acquisition of these sites when they become available. • Legal and Technical Assistance: Land negotiations involving public agencies require specialized legal expertise in real property, environmental compliance, and public agency law. Member jurisdictions should consider pooling resources to retain shared legal counsel and real estate advisors, reducing costs while ensuring negotiations are technically sound and legally defensible.
Comparable Examples
In the Lake Tahoe region, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency has facilitated interagency coordination on workforce housing land solutions across two states and multiple jurisdictions — a model of multi-party collaboration that, while more resource-intensive than what the Eastern Sierra CHC currently has capacity for, illustrates the long-term potential. Several rural California counties have successfully negotiated workforce housing agreements with large private agricultural and timber landowners as part of general plan update processes, often securing affordable housing covenants or land dedications in exchange for entitlement certainty. Gateway communities to national parks, including communities in the Yosemite region, have initiated interagency working groups with the National Park Service and USFS specifically to address housing constraints stemming from federal land ownership.
Connection to Regional Need
The Regional Housing Study identified land scarcity and the dominance of public ownership as among the most significant structural constraints on housing production in the region.
Unlike most of the tools in this Toolkit, which work within existing land market conditions, public and private property owner negotiations address the upstream land supply constraint directly. Negotiation progress will require sustained effort across multiple years and multiple administrations, with multiple jurisdictions and governing boards/councils, making early and consistent investment in relationship-building and coordination particularly important. 147
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
36 5.3 Infrastructure Planning and Investment to Enable Housing
QUICK REFERENCE
Opportunities for
Collaboration
Key housing opportunity sites adjacent to established communities require multijurisdictional approaches to identify opportunities for efficient infrastructure enhancements that leverage existing systems.
Target Population All housing need categories.
Implementation
Timeline
Longer-term (3–7 years for planning, design, and construction of infrastructure improvements).
Key Funding Sources IIG; USDA Rural Development Water and Environmental programs; CDBG Public Facilities; State Water Board DWSRF; Prop. 1; Prop. 68; local utility rates / bonds
Overview and Regional Relevance
The ability to build new housing is constrained not only by land availability and construction costs, but by infrastructure capacity, including water supply, wastewater treatment, access roads, and dry utilities. Sites may be effectively unbuildable without costly infrastructure upgrades and/or connectivity improvements. Proactive planning for and investment in infrastructure is a longer-term, but high-leverage, strategy. The right infrastructure investment can unlock multiple housing projects that may otherwise be infeasible.
Implementation Considerations
Mapping the capacity constraints and investment needs in each community is an appropriate first step. Key questions include: Which communities have insufficient water or sewer capacity to support new housing development? What is a realistic yield of new housing units that could be accommodated on available sites within the community? How well are those sites positioned in the market? What are the approximate costs and timelines for addressing identified infrastructure constraints? What funding sources are available? Comparable Examples
Several rural California counties have used USDA Rural Development grants and low-interest loans to upgrade water and sewer systems in support of new housing development. CDBG public facilities grants have funded infrastructure improvements that enabled housing in small communities across the state. In gateway communities to national parks, coordinated federal-local infrastructure investment has unlocked housing sites.
Connection to Regional Need
Infrastructure investment is a prerequisite for housing production in communities where capacity constraints currently limit development.
148
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
37 5.4 Fee Waivers, Deferrals, and Other Financial Incentives
QUICK REFERENCE
Opportunities for
Collaboration
Given the local nature of impact, permitting, and connection fees, opportunities for regional collaboration are limited.
Target Population Housing developers (affordable and workforce); property owners building ADUs.
Implementation
Timeline
Near-term (3–12 months to adopt a fee waiver/deferral ordinance).
Key Funding Sources No new funding required for deferrals, which preserve cash flow; local general fund to backfill waived infrastructure fees, where required.
Overview and Regional Relevance
Local development fees, including impact fees, plan check and permit fees, and utility connection fees, are an unavoidable cost of housing development that can add tens of thousands of dollars per unit to project budgets. For projects with thin margins, fees can be the difference between a project penciling out, and a project remaining unbuilt. Fee waivers (i.e., the permanent reduction or elimination of certain fees) and deferrals (i.e., payment delayed to certificate of occupancy, reducing upfront capital burden) are among the most commonly used and most accessible local financial incentives for new development.
California law already mandates certain fee reductions for affordable housing under AB 602 (effective 2022) and other statutes, though local policies can go further.
Implementation Considerations
Fee waivers must be balanced carefully against the need to fund infrastructure serving new development, and other municipal services. Each member jurisdiction may conduct an analysis of its fee schedule and identify which fees can be waived or deferred:
• Nexus Fees vs. Non-Nexus Fees: Development impact fees tied to specific infrastructure needs (roads, parks, water/sewer) typically require replenishment from general fund sources when waived for affordable or workforce housing. Non-nexus fees (plan check, permit processing) represent foregone revenue but not an infrastructure funding obligation.
• Tiered Structure: A tiered waiver structure, with 100 percent waiver for units serving households at or below 60 percent of AMI; 75 percent for 60–80 percent AMI; 50 percent for 80–120 percent AMI, and so on, provides the strongest incentive at the deepest affordability levels while preserving revenue from up-market projects.. 149
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
38 • Deferrals: Even without waivers, deferring fee collection to certificate of occupancy can reduce a project’s leveraged pre-development cash requirement by hundreds of thousands of dollars, improving feasibility without forfeiting revenue long-term.
Comparable Examples
The Town of Mammoth Lakes has a history of fee waivers for affordable housing projects, including at The Parcel. South Lake Tahoe and Truckee have established tiered fee waiver programs that are aligned with affordability levels. Many California cities and counties waive 100 percent of fees for projects that achieve deed restrictions at 60 percent AMI or below, a threshold that is widely recognized as the standard for maximum local financial support. The City of Bishop, and Inyo and Mono counties currently have limited utility for fee waivers in cases where jurisdictions impose limited fees on new development Connection to Regional Need
The Needs Study estimated subsidy requirements of $150,000 to $315,000 per unit for new market-rate rental construction and up to $650,000 per unit for deeply affordable multifamily housing. While fee waivers alone cannot close gaps of this magnitude, they are an important component of every project’s financing stack. For lower-cost construction types — ADUs, manufactured housing, adaptive reuse — fee waivers can have a proportionally larger impact. Critically, fee waivers are a tool entirely within the control of each member jurisdiction, requiring no external funding approval.
150
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
39 5.5 Regional Housing Authority or Housing Finance Authority
QUICK REFERENCE
Opportunities for
Collaboration
By definition collaborative governance structures; establishment requires active participation and inter-jurisdictional agreement among all member jurisdictions.
Target Population All housing need categories; lower-income (30–60 percent of AMI) and workforce (80–150 percent of AMI) households.
Implementation
Timeline
Longer-term (3–5 years to negotiate enabling JPA agreement, establish governance and board structure, and capitalization).
Key Funding Sources Member jurisdiction general fund contributions; parcel tax; gross receipts / business license tax; inclusionary housing in-lieu and commercial linkage fees; tax-exempt bond proceeds (once authority is established).
Overview and Regional Relevance
A Housing Authority is a public agency created under California's Housing Authorities Law (Health & Safety Code § 34200 et seq.), typically established by a city or county. Its core historic mission is owning and managing affordable housing — primarily public housing units — and administering federal rental assistance programs like Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers. Housing authorities are direct landlords and service providers. They can also develop new affordable housing, but their bread and butter is ongoing program administration and property management.
Housing Finance Authorities, by comparison, are entities established under SB 440 (2024) by two or more local governments to raise, administer, and allocate funding, and provide technical assistance at a regional level for affordable housing development, including new construction and the preservation of existing housing to serve a range of incomes and housing types. Housing Finance Authorities are authorized to raise and allocate new revenue through a wider array of funding mechanisms compared to Housing Authorities, and allocate funds to the various cities, counties, and other public agencies, and to affordable housing projects within the jurisdiction of the authority, private affordable housing developers, and nonprofit corporations to finance affordable housing development projects.
Implementation Considerations
Establishing a regional housing authority, or regional housing finance authority, is a multiyear undertaking that requires legal structuring, governance design, inter-jurisdictional agreement, and initial capitalization. Key implementation steps include:
151
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
40 • Governance Structure and Legal Authorization: A regional housing or finance authority would be established as a joint powers agreement (JPA) executed by all participating member jurisdictions. The structure of the agreement, including board composition, voting rights, fiscal responsibilities, and withdrawal provisions, is a critical early design question that will shape the long-term effectiveness of the authority. • Staffing and Administration: A functional housing authority requires dedicated professional staff, at minimum an executive director and program staff, and a board of directors drawn from member agency elected officials or their appointees. Member jurisdictions may wish to begin by contracting with an existing regional nonprofit, or a fiscal agent, for administrative services, building toward a full staffing over time. • Funding Mechanisms: Housing authorities have somewhat limited funding options, including parcel taxes and business taxes, in addition to grants and member contributions. Housing finance authorities, by comparison, can leverage a wider range of potential funding mechanisms to facilitate program activities. • Bond Issuance Authority: Both housing authorities and housing finance authorities can issue tax-exempt private activity and revenue bonds to finance affordable housing construction and acquisition. Bond programs typically require a demonstrated pipeline of projects and strong legal and financial advisory support.
Comparable Examples
While Mono County established a housing authority in 2005, which still exists in some form, little information is currently available regarding the recent status or activities of the agency.
There are around 100 public housing authorities in California, representing local governments and managing affordable housing and Housing Choice Vouchers. Due to the small number of vouchers in use in the Eastern Sierra, the regional inventory is managed instead by the Stanislaus County Housing Authority.
The California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA) was chartered in 1975 as the state’s affordable housing lender. Prior to passage of SB 440 in 2024, the California legislature passed special legislation authorizing creation of the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (BAHFA) in 2019 (AB 1487), and the Los Angeles County Affordable Housing Solutions Agency (LACAHSA) in 2023 (SB 679).
Connection to Regional Need
The Regional Housing Study documented significant gaps in local government capacity to administer housing programs at the scale needed to address the region’s estimated current and future housing needs. While Mono County has a housing authority, lack of resources and staffing have limited its operations. While housing authorities have the power to levy some local tax measures, housing finance authorities wield significantly expanded powers. 152
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
41 153
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
42 6. OTHER POTENTIAL HOUSING TOOLS
The eleven tools in this section were discussed by CHC members and are recognized as legitimate and potentially effective tools for addressing workforce housing challenges. They are not included in Sections 4 or 5 because CHC members indicated that current capacity, political conditions, or cost-effectiveness considerations make them lower priorities for the regional effort at this time.
This section is not a rejection of these strategies. Several may be appropriate for individual member jurisdictions to pursue independently of the regional effort. Others may become higher priorities as the CHC’s capacity grows, market conditions change, or state and federal policy creates new opportunities. The section is included for completeness and transparency, to document the full scope of what was considered.
Table 4: Other Potential Housing Tools
Name Description
Inclusionary Housing and Commercial
Linkage Fees
Require market-rate residential and commercial
development to contribute affordable units or pay in-lieu fees. Both tools capture value created by new
development to fund housing. Commercial linkage fees
require a nexus study. The Eastern Sierra's limited pace of large-scale market-rate development constrains nearterm revenue potential, though resort residential and commercial growth could provide community benefits.
Short-Term Rental (STR) Regulation Short-term vacation rentals generate revenue to property owners that increases the value of residential property and can contribute to reductions in the long-term rental pool. Regulatory approaches include licensing caps, fulltime occupancy requirements, good neighbor agreements, and active enforcement. Mammoth Lakes
and Mono County have existing STR programs.
Rent Incentive Programs (Lease-toLocals; Rooted Renters)Provide financial incentives — rent subsidies, security deposits, or guaranteed occupancy agreements — to
property owners who make units available to local
workers at or below market rates. Programs like 'Lease to Locals' (Aspen, Colorado) and 'Rooted Renters' (Truckee) have successfully incentivized conversion of STR units and 154
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
43 second homes to long-term workforce rentals. Requires dedicated ongoing funding and program administration.
Rent-to-Own Housing Programs Create pathways for renters to transition to homeownership through shared equity, land contracts, or lease-purchase structures. Particularly relevant for
moderate-income workforce households (80-150 percent
of AMI) unable to save for a down payment, while paying high rents. Works best in combination with downpayment
assistance programs and requires upfront program
capitalization. Most applicable in the Bishop area and
unincorporated Inyo and Mono counties where purchase
prices are more accessible.
Rehabilitation, Weatherization, and
Energy Efficiency
Fund repair, accessibility improvements, and energy
efficiency upgrades for owner-occupied and rental
housing, particularly aging mobile and manufactured
homes, older single-family residences, and smaller
apartment properties. Reduces housing cost burden
through lower utility bills while preserving existing
affordable stock. USDA Section 504, CDBG, and state
energy programs (SASH, MASH) are potential funding
sources. A useful complement to manufactured housing
expansion and hazard mitigation strategies.
Mobile/Manufactured Home Park
Preservation
Protect existing mobile and manufactured home parks
from closure or conversion through regulatory tools such as park closure ordinances and right-of-first-refusal
requirements, combined with resident ownership
conversion programs. Park closures are among the most
acute sources of affordable housing loss in rural
California. Resident-owned community (ROC)
conversions, supported by programs such as ROC USA
and CalHFA, provide permanent preservation.
Rental Housing Inspection Programs Proactive rental inspection programs can ensure housing meets minimum health and safety standards. Helps
preserve the quality of existing rental stock, protects tenants in older apartments and mobile home units, and
identifies properties at risk of loss. Can be structured as largely self-funding through inspection fees. Requires
enabling ordinances and staffing.
155
Eastern Sierra Regional Housing Toolkit | April 2026
44 Establish a Community Land Trust
(CLT)
A nonprofit community land trust (CLT)can acquire and
permanently hold land outside the speculative market,
providing long-term affordability through ground lease
structures for homeowners and renters. CLTs are
particularly effective in high-cost resort communities
where land values are a primary affordability barrier.
Requires significant capitalization and organizational
capacity and can take several years to establish / scale.
Establish a Community Foundation A regional community foundation could build a dedicated endowment for workforce housing programs. A
foundation can receive charitable contributions,
administer grant programs, and provide flexible capital unavailable through government funding streams.
Requires philanthropic engagement and sustained
fundraising commitments. Could complement and help
capitalize a locally controlled housing fund or CLT.
Encourage Housing Cooperative (Coop) DevelopmentSupport development of limited-equity housing cooperatives, in which residents collectively own and
govern their housing, as an alternative path to
affordability and stability for workforce households. Coops can serve a broad income range and may be particularly effective for seasonal and hospitality workers.
Requires organizational support, specialized financing
(such as NCBA CLUSA and cooperative development
funds), and enabling zoning treatment.
Regional Transportation Strategies Investments in regional transit, rideshare, and active transportation infrastructure can expand the effective
workforce housing market, enabling workers to live in
lower-cost communities while commuting to employment
centers. The Eastern Sierra's dispersed geography and
car-dependent development pattern make
transportation a key lever in housing access. Requires
coordination with Caltrans, the Local Transportation
Commission (LTC), and regional transit providers, and is best pursued in conjunction with transportation planning processes already underway.
156
City of Bishop
City Park Master Plan
DRAFT | May 6, 2026
157
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
The City of Bishop: City Park Master Plan is the result of the collective expertise and passion of the many stakeholders and participants involved in the project. This document is fueled by the community’s deep connection to the park’s history and its vital role in the region. Designed as a living document, it provides a guiding vision intended to serve the evolving needs of the public for years to come.
City Council Members
• Stephen Muchovej, Mayor
• Dennis Freundt, Mayor Pro Tem
• Karen Schwartz, Council Member
• Jose Garcia, Council Member
• Karen Kong, Council Member
Parks and Recreation Commission Members
• Lisa Manuelito
• John Weatherford
• Kim Partridge
• Patty Cummings
• Cheryl Underhill
City of Bishop Government Officials
• Pam Foster, City Administrator
• Dan McElroy, Community Services Director
• Anastasiia Budnyk, Principal Planner
Prepared for:
Prepared By:
Contents
1. Introduction ................................................................ 3
2. Park Master Plan Goals .............................................. 5
3. Existing Conditions .....................................................6
4. Public Outreach Summary.........................................10
5. Park Master Plan........................................................12
6. Implementation Plan ..................................................14 Appendix A: Public Outreach..........................................16 Appendix B: Existing Park Inventory...............................17 Appendix C: Planning Level Cost Estimates...................18 158
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
1. INTRODUCTION
1 Source: US Census Bureau: 2020 Decennial Census, https://bit.ly/48sLs56 2 Source: City of Bishop: Demographics, https://bit.ly/3QSLY6p The City of Bishop, California is located in the Owens Valley serving as a year-round recreation gateway providing access to the Sierra Nevada Mountains on the west and the White Mountains to the east. Bishop is home to 3,819 residents1 within the City limits but serves the larger regional population of over 10,000 people2.
Located on US 395, Bishop sees thousands of visitors each year heading to the surrounding world class recreation opportunities ranging from rock climbing, hiking, mountain biking, fishing, camping, skiing, and more. While many take advantage of the surrounding outdoor recreation opportunities, the City of Bishop also provides local recreation opportunities for the surrounding community and visitors through the park, which is also host to many regional community events.
Populations Within 50 Miles of Bishop Park
Distance Population Within Distance
10 Miles 10,831
20 Miles 13,540
30 Miles 15,006
40 Miles 22,476
50 Miles 23,087
City/Town
(Labeled as “Name: Population”)
Distance Rings (10-mile intervals)
NORTH
Aspen Springs: 70
Benton: 279
Chalfant: 660
Bishop: 3,819
Big Pine: 1,875
Wilkerson: 543
Populations based on 2020 Census Data
West Bishop: 2,754
Crowley Lake: 980
Dixon
Lane-Meadow
Creek: 2,780
June
Lake: 611
Lee Vining: 217
McGee Creek: 45
Mammoth
Lakes: 7,191
Mono City: 224
Paradise: 174
Mesa: 275
Round Valley: 482
Sunny
Slopes: 139
Swall Meadows: 178
Dyer: 232
Figure 1: City of Bishop Vicinity Map 10-Mile with Distance Rings 159
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
The Park includes ±49.5 Acres in the heart of the community providing recreation opportunities such as soccer, softball, baseball, swimming, tennis, pickleball, volleyball, football, playgrounds, skateboarding, mountain biking, and community gardening. Events hosted at the park include Mule Days, Labor Day Arts & Crafts Festival, Community Band Concerts, Earth Day, Trunk or Treat, Softball / Tennis tournaments, Big Day in the Park (4th of July), Tree Lighting Ceremony Christmas Parade, Arbor Day, Bishop Invitational, and Twilight Swim Meet.
Established in the 1970s, the Park has continued to evolve with the City over the last 50+ years with various improvements to support the community and transforming into a recreation hub for the surrounding area.
Previous Master Plans were developed in 1990, 2002, 2008, and 2009. Much of the park land is owned by Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (LADWP) and the City of Bishop has a long-term lease to operate the park on these lands. The City of Bishop owns ±6.5 acres of the Park. The Park is an important element of the community and continues to be a top priority for the City of Bishop. The City of Bishop Park Master Plan provides a guiding vision for implementing future park improvements.
Dixon
Lane-Meadow
Creek
West Bishop
Wilkerson
Bishop City Park
Bishop
Motorcycle
Park
Model
Airplane Field
Bishop Gun
Club
Duck Pond
Izaak
Walton
Park
Buckley Ponds Bishop Golf
Course
Brown’s Town
Campground
Fairgrounds
1 Mile
3 Miles 2 Miles
4 Miles
5 Miles 6 Miles
7 Miles
Owens River
Mill Pond
Recreation Area
Distance Rings (1-mile intervals)
NORTH
Recreation Area
Figure 2: Location of Bishop City Park
E Yaney St
3.2 AC
3.7 AC
0.2 AC
0.6 AC
3.3 AC
28.5 AC
9.5 AC
1.2 AC
Maciver St
W Yaney St
E Elm St
East Pine St
May St
Central Ave
Howard St
N 3rd St
N Main St
Spruce St Spruce St
Hanby Ave
City of Bishop Park Boundary
Commercial
Residential
Open Space Owned by LADWP
Open Space
Figure 3: Zoning and Ownership
160
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
2. PARK MASTER PLAN GOALS
The list of goals are intended to guide the City’s decisionmakers in determining how to adequately serve the recreational needs of Bishops current and future residents as the city continues to grow.
Goal
1 Create an actionable plan for future
development.
Goal
2 Increase outdoor recreational
opportunities and recreational use of the
area’s vast open space network.
Goal
3 Prevent the degradation of the City’s
recreational resources.
Goal
4 Upgrade the existing facilities in Bishop
City Park to reflect the current demand
for recreational activities.
Goal
5 Secure and maintain long-term funding
sources for recreational opportunities
within the community.
161
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
Page6
3. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The following section provides
an overview of the City of Bishop
community profile, who the Park
primarily serves, current Park
budget allocations, existing Park
amenities including who is using
the fields, and key take aways
from field observations, and staff
and stakeholder input that were
considered in developing the updated
Park Master Plan. Existing conditions
and trends help shape decisions for
implementing the Park Master Plan
based on current priorities and future
community needs.
162
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
Demographics & Statistics
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Some other race Two or more races Hispanic or Latino origin (any race) White alone 2020 Race Distribution
State of California Inyo, County California City of Bishop 0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Under 10 years 10-19 Years 20-29 years 30-39 years 40-49 years 50-59 years 60-69 years 70 or older 2020 Age Compositions
State of California Inyo, County California City of Bishop City of Bishop Quick Facts Estimated Age Composition
California Climate Investments Priority Population Map Racial and Ethnic Distribution 3,819
Total Population
51.2 Median Age
2,370
Total Housing Units
2,133
Total Housholds
57%
Bachelor's Degree or Higher
51%
Employment Rate
5.5%
No Health Coverage
2024 Median Household Income
Source: US Census Bureau - American Community
Survey 2024 Estimates
State of California $100,149
Inyo County $73,991
City of Bishop $83,686
Priority Populations
DAC 1/2 mile neighbor: low-income
community
DAC 1/2 mile neighbor: low-income
household eligible
Disadvantaged community: Tribal
land, Low-income community
Low-income community
Not a priority population area:
low-income households are eligible
City/Town Boundary
Priority Populations
DAC 1/2 mile neighbor: low-income
community
DAC 1/2 mile neighbor: low-income
household eligible
Disadvantaged community: Tribal
land, Low-income community
Low-income community
Not a priority population area:
low-income households are eligible
City/Town Boundary
Chalfant
Mesa
nd Valley
Dixon
Lane-Meadow
Creek
Bishop
West Bishop
The priority populations map
contains spatial data identifying
disadvantaged communities
and low-income communities
for the purposes of California
Climate Investments, consistent
with California Environmental
Protection Agency's (CalEPA)
disadvantaged communities
(DAC) designations.
Source: https://bit.ly/48JOzps
163
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
City of Bishop Parks and Recreation Parks and Recreation Standards Adopted Budget, 2025-2026
NRPA Standards
(<20,000 Residents) 1
City of Bishop
(3,819 Residents)
Meets or Exceeds
NRPA Standards
Median Acres of Parkland per 1000
Residents 12.9 13.1
Number of Residents per Park 1,001 3,819
Outdoor Facility Description Number of Facilities
per Residents
Number of Facilities
per Residents
NRPA Recommended Facilities
for City of Bishop Population 2
City Park:
Existing Amenities
Meets or Exceeds
NRPA Standards
Playgrounds 1 per 2000 1 per 1909 1.9 2
Basketball 3 1 per 4479 0 per 3819 0.9 0
Diamond Fields 1 per 1958 1 per 955 2.0 4
Rectangular Fields 1 per 2578 1 per 1909 1.5 2
Tennis Court 3 1 per 3500 1 per 1909 1.1 2
Multi-Use Court 1 per 3900 1 per 1909 1.0 2
Pickleball Court 3 1 per 3483 0 per 3819 1.1 0
Dog Parks 1 per 10188 1 per 3819 0.4 1
Community Gardens 1 per 8800 1 per 3819 0.4 1
Swimming Pools 1 per 9745 1 per 3819 0.4 1
Splash Pads 1 per 13,391 0 per 3819 0.3 0
Skateboard Parks 1 per 10776 1 per 3819 0.4 1
Volleyball Courts 1 per 7075 1 per 1909 0.5 2
Fitness Zones 1 per 8274 1 per 3819 0.5 1
Total Adopted Budget: ~$1.5m
Employee: 50%
Operations: 21%
Maintenance: 17%
Grants: 3%
Other: 1%
1. 2025 NRPA Agency Performance Review
2. NRPA Recommended Facilities: (City of Bishop Population (3,819)) / (NRPA Residents per Facility)
3. Dedicated to a Single Sport (not Multiuse)
164
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
Key Takeaways and Needs
Standards and Funding
Satisfies National Recreation & Parks Association (NRPA) comparative standards for Median Acres of Parkland per 1000 Residents
Does not satisfy NRPA comparative standards for number of residents per Park (Exceeds baseline variable)
Satisfies many NRPA comparative standards for outdoor facilities per resident Does not satisfy NRPA comparative standards for outdoor Basketball, Pickleball, Splashpad
Serves low-income & disadvantaged communities → grant funding opportunity Infrastructure & Facilities
A-Frame needs major rehab or replacement
Parking lots, bike/pedestrian paths need repair + ADA improvements Maintenance staff needs improved facilities
Field 6 needs replacement
Lighting & Fields
Lit fields provide nearly double the use — add lights to all fields New & Expanded Amenities
Indoor recreation facilities remain a top community priority Roller hockey, basketball, replacement of outdated equipment Separate pickleball and tennis courts
Partnership & Safety
Partner with LADWP for land purchase/lease and future expansion Improve park safety — cameras, lighting, safe bike/pedestrian routes Fields
200
0 400
600
800
1000 916
(30%)
Field 1
(lit)
Field 3
(lit as of 2025)
314
(10%)
Field 2
257
(8%)
572
(18%)
Field 4
636
(21%)
Field 5
406
(13%)
Field 6
Field 1 & 3
Only Lit Fields
1,173
scheduled uses
38%
of all park field use
Next highest:
Field 5 — 636
(no lights)
Baseball Softball Soccer Football Frisbee / Other Source: City of Bishop Parks & Recreation 2023 Lighting drives demand.
Lit field
Lit field
Grand total: 3,101 uses
Source: City of Bishop Parks & Recreation 2023
GRAND TOTAL
3,101 Uses
636
(21%)
Field 1 & 3
Only Lit Fields
1,173
scheduled uses
38%
of all park field use
Next highest:
Field 5 — 636
(no lights)
Grand total: 3,101 uses
Field 3
(lit as of 2025)
314
(10%)
Field 2
257
(8%)
572
(18%)
Field 4
636
(21%)
Field 5
406
(13%)
Field 6
Field 1 & 3
Only Lit Fields
1,173
scheduled uses
38%
of all park field use
Next highest:
Field 5 — 636
(no lights)
Softball Soccer Football Frisbee / Other Source: City of Bishop Parks & Recreation 2023 Lighting drives demand.
Lit field
Grand total: 3,101 uses
572
(18%)
636
(21%)
406
(13%)
Field 1 & 3
Only Lit Fields
1,173
scheduled uses
38%
of all park field use
Next highest:
Field 5 — 636
(no lights)
Lighting drives demand.
Grand total: 3,101 uses
572
(18%)
636
(21%)
406
(13%)
Field 1 & 3
Only Lit Fields
1,173
scheduled uses
38%
of all park field use
Next highest:
Field 5 — 636
(no lights)
Lighting drives demand.
Grand total: 3,101 uses
165
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
166
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
4. PUBLIC OUTREACH SUMMARY
The City of Bishop engaged the community through two public outreach efforts to inform the City Park Master Plan. An online survey collected 890 responses from residents, park users, and regional visitors, with 260 participants providing additional written comments. A community workshop provided an opportunity for in-person engagement, drawing 50+ attendees who submitted 72 written comments via activity boards.
Combined, these efforts reached approximately 940 community participants.
Survey respondents were predominantly residents within Bishop city limits (59%), with additional participation from surrounding Inyo and Mono County communities. The largest respondent age group was 31–50 (57%), with strong representation across all age groups. Respondents identified primarily as community members and residents (78%), with significant participation from parents and guardians (46%) and coaches (13%), reflecting the park's importance as a hub for youth sports and family recreation.
Survey Responses: Demographics
Where Do You Live
100 200 300 400 500
Bishop - City Limits 515 (59%)
Bishop Paiute Reservation 55 (6%)
Other (Inyo County) 53 (6%)
Big Pine 51 (6%)
Other 45 (5%)
Chalfant / White Mtn. Estates 45 (5%)
Wilkerson 41 (5%)
Mammoth Lakes 16 (2%)
Mustang Mesa 13 (1%)
100
Round Valley 10 (1%)
Independence 9 (1%)
Crowley Lake 8 (1%)
Paradise 6 (1%)
Lone Pine 4 (0%)
Benton 3 (0%)
Starlight 3 (0%)
Aspen Springs 1 (0%)
Swall Meadows 1 (0%)
What is Your Age Group?
100 200 300 400 500
31 - 50 499 (57%)
51 - 65 131 (15%)
18 - 30 106 (12%)
Over 65 94 (11%)
Under 18 50 (6%)
100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Community Member / Resident 694 (78%)
Parent / Guardian 411 (46%)
Coach 119 (13%)
Visitor 81 (9%)
Student 47 (5%)
What is Your Relationship to Bishop City Park?
167
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
Common Renovation & Improvement Themes Top Amenities The Community Would Like To See Community Voices
How They Feel About the Park Today
• Widely loved: Used daily by residents of all ages
• Safety & cleanliness are top concerns: restrooms, transient activity near family areas • Sports facilities are heavily used but aging: soccer fields, volleyball courts, skate park • Scheduling conflicts frustrate users: pickleball, pool hours, lit field access • Bike park is a regional draw — residents want it protected and expanded How They Feel About the Park Moving Forward
• Year-round usability is a priority: shade, splash pad, and indoor facilities for a high-desert climate • Basketball courts are the #1 requested addition — the only major sport with no public facility in Bishop • Underserved groups need more: girls softball, adult soccer, seniors, low-cost youth options • Infrastructure before new amenities — better lighting and facility upgrades ranked above additions • Visitor Services is a priority for many residents, with community discussion ongoing around the best path forward. 100 200 300 400 500
Community Events 458 (51%)
Indoor Recreation Center 331 (37%)
Roller Hockey Rink 319 (36%)
Splash Pad 308 (35%)
Amphitheater 205 (23%)
Restrooms 187 (21%)
Other 166 (19%)
Expanded Bike Park 164 (18%)
Basketball Court 161 (18%)
Picnic Pavilions 142 (16%)
100 200
Playgrounds 121 (14%)
Pickleball Court 118 (13%)
Expanded Skate Park 98 (11%)
Expanded Exercise Stations 84 (9%)
Softball Field 80 (9%)
Baseball Field 58 (7%)
Soccer Field 57 (6%)
Expanded Dog Park 51 (6%)
Tennis Court 40 (4%)
Football Field 29 (3%)
Lighting
Only two lit fields — causes scheduling bottlenecks and late youth games Tennis & pickleball lights require 48-hr advance reservation and $6/hr fee Surface & Condition
Volleyball sand is dangerous gravel — not actual sand Soccer fields are uneven with hazardous burned field lines Skate park transitions are abrupt and unsafe
Walking paths are uneven tripping hazards — not ADA compliant Bike park jumps deteriorating without irrigation
Facilities
Bathrooms unsafe, dirty, and inadequate — especially near ball fields Pool changing rooms and bathrooms in poor condition
No restrooms near community garden or back fields
Playground equipment dated, lacking shade
Access & Infrastructure
No safe pedestrian crossings on Main Street
No bike lanes connecting to park
Community garden road unpaved and inaccessible
No bike racks at park entrances
Missing Amenities
No basketball courts — only major sport with no public facility in Bishop No year-round pool or indoor recreation space
No splash pad despite extreme summer heat
168
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
5. PARK MASTER PLAN
The Park Master Plan provides a guiding vision
for future park improvements over the next
20+ years. A Master Plan is a living document
and it is understood that the Park Master Plan
may be amended or modified through the
design phases in order to meet current
standards and/or to provide modern amenities
as projects are implemented. The Park Master
Plan should be reviewed every five to ten years
to ensure the proposed improvements reflect
the most current City priorities, changes in
demographics, and continue to compliment
other guiding documents and plans.
Additional Future Considerations • Ongoing sidewalks / shared use pathways / ADA improvements within the park.
• Safety enhancements for bike and
pedestrian connectivity to the park
(crosswalk improvements, connect trail
and sidewalk gaps).
• Add security lighting and cameras. • Add electrical connections for events. • Add playground amenities, shade, improvements for outdated equipment.
• Monitor and rehab skate park as
necessary.
• Ongoing tree removal & replacement for
problematic trees.
• Ongoing pool maintenance, repairs and
replacement.
• Continue coordination with LADWP for
adjacent land and future park expansion
options, e.g., constructing additional fields,
potential relocation of elements such as
dog park to accommodate a larger indoor
recreation facility.
169
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
Proposed Amenities Inspiration
Proposed park amenities are selected based on
community input and availability of park space
and resources. Inspiration images as shown on
this slide are intended to provide general intent
of amenity options and do not reflect actual site
conditions
170
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
Funding Program Funding Type Eligible Projects Funding Information Funding Timeframe CA Statewide Park Program (SPP)
www.parks.ca.gov
State New parks and recreation opportunities in underserved communities; Expand and/or renovate existing park
• Round 5 - $188M;
• Grant Range: $200K - $8M
Applications Summer/Fall 2026
Comment period May 2026
Recreation Trails Program (RTP)
www.parks.ca.gov
State & Federal Development and rehabilitation of trails and trailhead facilities • Annual Program: Varies ±$5-7M • Grants: ±$200K - $1M awards.
• Match on State Funds - 12%
• Federal Funds – 5%
TBD - 2026/2027
CA Active Transportation Program (ATP)
www.catc.ca.gov
State & Federal Capital projects and plans that encourage increased use of active transportation (biking, walking, rolling)
• Annual Program: FY 27 Estimate of $619M
• Grants: ±$250K - $10M awards
• Match: no requirement, leveraging funds a plus
FY 2027 Cycle 8 - June 22, 2026
Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Federal pass-through Outdoor recreation projects • Annual Program: $35M • Grants: Max $6M
• Match: 50%
TBD – Summer/Fall 2026
Outdoor Recreation Legacy Partnership
(ORLP)
www.parks.ca.gov
Federal pass-through Outdoor recreation areas and facilities open to the public, involve land acquisition, development, or both, and located in a disadvantaged census tract • Annual Program: $90M
• Grants: $300K - $15M
• Match: 50%
TBD (Last call was March 2025)
Habitat Conservation Fund
www.parks.ca.gov
State Nature interpretation programs, protection of various plant and animal species, and acquisition and development of wildlife corridors and trails. • Annual Program: Varies ±$2M
• Grants: $100k - $1M awards.
• Match: Dollar for Dollar
TBD – 2026/2027
Local Funding Local All park elements including operations and maintenance. Could include other jurisdictions, schools, to support field use.
• Budget process. Could be used for match to
state/federal funding.
Annual
Private Funding Private Large private donation for specific park amenities (name on a building, dugout, picnic area, court, field, etc.); create smaller donor opportunities (bricks, name on a wall, art)
Donations. Could be used for match to state/
federal funding.
One-time
Park Funding Opportunities
6. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
The implementation plan provides an initial tool for City staff to utilize for initiating grant applications and projects based on current priorities, potential funding available, and a reasonable direction for the next 5+ years working towards the larger vision of the Park Master Plan. Implementation of the Park Master Plan may change over time based on available funding sources, annual budgets and City priorities, ongoing maintenance needs, and other factors that may influence certain improvements over others. Proposed Park amenities may also be modified from the Master Plan through the environmental and design phase based on current standards and budget available.
Priority 1
Near Term
1-5 Years
Preliminary Estimated Cost:
$4,060,900
Priority 2
Medium Term
5-10 Years
As funding becomes
available
Preliminary Estimated Cost:
$6,389,000
Priority 3
Long Term
10+ Years
As funding becomes
available
Preliminary Estimated Cost:
$14,115,000
171
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
172
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
APPENDIX A: PUBLIC OUTREACH
173
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
APPENDIX B: EXISTING PARK INVENTORY
174
City of Bishop | City Park Master Plan
APPENDIX C: PLANNING LEVEL COST ESTIMATES
175