March 2, 2026 - 1 - 6:00 PM
Agenda • City Council Meeting
Council Chamber, 1033 Fifth Street, Clovis, CA 93612 (559) 324-2060 www.clovisca.gov
March 2, 2026 6:00 PM Council Chamber
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to access the City Council Chamber to participate at this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (559) 324-2060 (TTY – 711). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the Council Chamber.
The Clovis City Council meetings are open to the public at the physical address listed above. There are numerous ways to participate in the City Council meetings: you are able to attend in person; you may submit written comments as described below; and you may view the meeting which is webcast and accessed at www.clovisca.gov/agendas.
Written Comments
• Members of the Public are encouraged to submit written comments at:
www.clovisca.gov/agendas at least two (2) hours before the meeting (4:00 PM). You will be prompted to provide Council Meeting Date, Item Number, Name, Email, Comment • Please submit a form for each item you are commenting on. • A copy of your written comment will be provided to the City Council noting the item number.
If you wish to make a verbal comment, please see instructions below. • Please be aware that any written comments received that do not specify a particular agenda item will be marked for the general public comment portion of the agenda. • If a written comment is received after 4:00 PM on the day of the meeting, efforts will be made to provide the comment to the City Council during the meeting. However, staff cannot guarantee that written comments received after 4:00 PM will be provided to City Council during the meeting. All written comments received prior to the end of the meeting will be made part of the record of proceedings.
Campaign Contribution Prohibition and Mandatory Disclosure – Pursuant to Government Code section 84308, a Councilmember shall not accept, solicit, or direct a campaign contribution of more than $500 from any party or their agent, or from any participant or their agent, while a proceeding involving a license, permit, contract, or other entitlement for use is pending before the City or for 12 months after a final decision is rendered in that proceeding. Any Councilmember who has received a campaign contribution of more than $500 within the preceding 12 months from a party or their agent, or from a participant or their agent, must disclose that fact on the record of the proceeding and shall not make, participate in making, or in any way attempt to use their official position to influence the decision.
March 2, 2026 - 2 - 6:00 PM
Pursuant to Government Code section 84308, subdivision (e), any party to a covered proceeding before the City Council is required to disclose on the record of the proceeding any campaign contribution, including aggregated contributions, of more than $500 made within the preceding 12 months by the party or their agent to any Councilmember. The disclosure shall be made as required by Government Code Section 84308, subdivision (e)(1) and California Code of Regulations, Title 2, section 18438.8. No party or their agent, and no participant or their agent, shall make a campaign contribution of more than $500 to any Councilmember during the covered proceeding or for 12 months after a final decision is made in that proceeding. The foregoing statements do not constitute legal advice, and parties and participants are urged to consult with their own legal counsel regarding the applicable requirements of the law.
Call to Order
Flag Salute - Councilmember Basgall
Roll Call
Presentations/Proclamations
1. Presentation of Proclamation Declaring March 6, 2026, as Arbor Day.
2. Presentation of Proclamation Declaring March 2026, as American Red Cross Month.
3. Presentation by City Clerk on the Public Agenda and Meetings Portal.
Public Comments
This is an opportunity for the members of the public to address the City Council on any matter within the City Council’s jurisdiction that is not listed on the Agenda. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to 3 minutes or less, or 10 minutes per topic. Anyone wishing to be placed on the Agenda for a specific topic should contact the City Manager’s office and submit correspondence at least 10 days before the desired date of appearance.
Consent Calendar
Items considered routine in nature are to be placed upon the Consent Calendar. They will all be considered and voted upon in one vote as one item unless a Councilmember requests individual consideration. A Councilmember’s vote in favor of the Consent Calendar is considered and recorded as a separate affirmative vote in favor of each action listed. Motions in favor of adoption of the Consent Calendar are deemed to include a motion to waive the reading of any ordinance or resolution on the Consent Calendar. For adoption of ordinances, only those that have received a unanimous vote upon introduction are considered Consent items.
4. Administration - Approval - Minutes from the February 17, 2026 City Council Meeting.
5. Administration – Receive and File – Economic Development Corporation Serving Fresno County Quarterly Report, Q2 October - December 2025.
6. Administration – Approval – Award the Request for Proposals and approve the purchase of Storage Area Network equipment from vCloud Tech Inc. in the amount of $79,432.13.
March 2, 2026 - 3 - 6:00 PM
7. General Services – Approval – Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Real Property Purchase and Sale Agreement for the Property Located near the intersection of East International Avenue and North Minnewawa Avenue in the City of Clovis, County of Fresno, California, bearing Fresno County Assessor’s Parcel No. 580-072-41s from GV Land Holdings, LLC, a California limited liability company, in the Amount of $4,150,000; and Approval –Res. 26-___, Amending the 2025-2026 General Government Facilities Fund to Allocate Funds in the Amount of $4,150,000 for Purchase of the Property.
8. General Services – Approval - Claim Rejection of the General Liability Claim on behalf of Carmen Garcia.
9. General Services - Approval - Res. 26 -____, Approving a Side Letter Agreement with the Transit Employees Bargaining Unit (TEBU) Establishing a "4-9-4" Work Schedule.
10. Public Utilities - Approval - Waive Formal Bidding Requirements, Award a Contract to Karbonous, Inc. to Purchase and Replace Granular Activated Carbon (GAC) at Well 27 in the Total Amount of $117,011, and authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement.
11. Public Utilities – Approval – Bid Award for CIP 25-20, Sierra Bicentennial Park – Stadium Lighting Upgrade, to Wild Electric, Inc., in the Amount of $85,500, and Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Contract on Behalf of the City.
Administrative Items
Administrative Items are matters on the regular City Council Agenda other than Public Hearings.
12. Workshop: Planning and Development Services Department Update.
Staff: Renee Mathis, Planning and Development Services Director Recommendation: Receive and File
13. Receive and File – Status Report for Facilities Condition Assessment.
Staff: Benjamin Little, Engineer II
Recommendation: Receive and File
14. Receive and File - Report on the 2025 National Community Survey (NCS) results.
Staff: Chad McCollum, Economic Development, Housing, and Communication Director, Taylor Danielson, Communications and Marketing Analyst
Recommendation: Receive and File
City Manager Comments
Council Comments
Adjournment
Future Meetings
Regular City Council Meetings are held at 6:00 PM in the Council Chamber. The following are future meeting dates:
Mar. 9, 2026 (Mon.)
Mar. 16, 2026 (Mon.)
Apr. 6, 2026 (Mon.) To be cancelled
Apr. 13, 2026 (Mon.)
PRELIMINARY - SUBJECT TO APPROVAL
CLOVIS CITY COUNCIL MEETING
February 17, 2026 6:00 P.M. Council Chamber
Meeting called to order by Mayor Mouanoutoua at 6:00
Flag Salute led by Councilmember Ashbeck
Roll Call: Present: Councilmembers Ashbeck, Basgall, Bessinger, Mayor Pro Tem Pearce Mayor Mouanoutoua
PUBLIC COMMENTS – 6:01
Deric McQueen, Fresno resident, expressed concerns with the new Clovis transit system, including text alerts, waiting times, accessibility concerns at bus stops, and difficulty making timely connections to get home from work.
Carol Seibold, spoke in support of the high school students who participated in walkouts and expressed concern about students and adults being intimidated, and questioned by those harassing students who were not being addressed by Clovis Police Department.
Kay Errotabere, resident, thanked the Council for decisions related to displaying the national motto in the Council Chambers, selecting a garbage service provider, supporting transit services, obtaining a zero-emissions bus waiver, and the police response to the high school student walkouts.
Steven Trevino, resident, requested city investment and recognition for his neighborhood and shared concerns about unequal attention to different areas of the city, as well as concerns about recent immigration enforcement and community impact.
Tracy Borne, resident, spoke in support of students’ First Amendment rights during the high school student walkouts and asked that enforcement efforts focus on individuals who threatened student safety rather than those who were supporting and protecting students.
Kyla Mitchell, spoke in support of teaching students’ civic engagement and standing up for what is right, and encouraged unity within the community.
Mayor Mouanoutoua noted for the record, that written public comments for the Council Chamber signage were received by Amanda Woody and David Weber and written public comments regarding the high school student walkout related to First Amendment Rights received from Dr.
Jeni-Ann Kren and Rachel Youdelman.
CONSENT CALENDAR – 6:24
Bill Scott, resident, raised concerns about Consent Calendar items 2-7 regarding proposed pay increases for city employees.
PRELIMINARY - SUBJECT TO APPROVAL
Motion by Councilmember Ashbeck, seconded by Councilmember Bessinger, that the items on the Consent Calendar be approved. Motion carried by unanimous vote.
1. Administration - Approval - Minutes from the February 9, 2026, Council Meeting.
2. General Services – Approval – Res. 26-15, Approving a Side Letter Agreement with the Clovis Public Works Employees Association (CPWEA) to Establish a Modified Salary Structure Methodology.
3. General Services – Approval – Res. 26-16, Approving a Side Letter Agreement with the Clovis Police Officers Association (CPOA) to Establish a Modified Salary Structure Methodology.
4. General Services – Approval – Res. 26-17, Approving a Side Letter Agreement with the Clovis Public Safety Employees Association (CPSEA) to Establish a Modified Salary Structure Methodology.
5. General Services – Approval – Res. 26-18, Approving a Side Letter Agreement with the Clovis Employee Association (CEA) to Establish a Modified Salary Structure Methodology.
6. General Services – Approval – Res. 26-19, Approving a Side Letter Agreement with the Clovis Firefighters Association (CFFA) to Establish a Modified Salary Structure Methodology.
7. General Services – Approval – Res. 26-20, Approving a Side Letter Agreement with the Clovis Professional and Technical Association (CPTA) to Establish a Modified Salary Structure Methodology.
8. Planning and Development Services – Approval – Bid Award for CIP 26-02 ADA Curb Return Ramps - 2026 to Tosted Asphalt, Inc., in the amount of $171,673.58 and Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City.
9. Police – Approval – Waive Formal Bidding Requirements and Authorize the Purchase of a New Tait Public Safety Radio Infrastructure System in the Amount of $2,201,415.40, Utilizing the NASPO ValuePoint Cooperative Contract.
ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS – 6:27
6:27 ITEM 10 - Discussion and Direction – City Gateway Entry Feature and Signage, Theme and Design Guidance.
The following residents addressed Council on the above item: Steven Trevino.
Council provided direction to staff to develop conceptual gateway sign designs that use a consistent, universal sign structure at major entry points, incorporate Clovis’ history and identity, establish a clear hierarchy of sign types for primary and secondary locations, and evaluate placement, neighborhood integration, cost, and feasibility and return with concepts following public outreach, prior to Council consideration for approval in August 2026.
7:03 ITEM 11 - Workshop: Fire Department Update.
Upon call, there was no public comment.
Received and filed.
PRELIMINARY - SUBJECT TO APPROVAL
7:25 ITEM 12 - Receive and File – Informational Update on the Annual Tobacco Retailer License Fee.
The following residents addressed Council on the above item: Bao Xiong with Asian Pacific Islander Partners & Advocates Countering Tobacco Program.
Received and filed.
7:36 ITEM 13 - Consider Approval - Res. 26-21, Adopting a Modified Salary Structure Methodology for City of Clovis Unrepresented Management Employees and Changes to Wages.
Upon call, there was no public comment.
Motion for approval by Councilmember Bessinger, seconded by Councilmember Basgall. Motion carried by unanimous vote.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS – 7:39
City Manager Haussler announced there will be a Planning Commission meeting on February 26, 2026. Clovis’ 114th birthday is on February 27, 2026, and staff are exploring ways to celebrate this occasion in a more meaningful way.
COUNCIL COMMENTS – 7:39
There was a consensus of the Council to place a future agenda item to discuss potential ways to recognize or invest in the Stanford Addition neighborhood.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Mouanoutoua adjourned the meeting of the Council to March 2, 2026.
Meeting adjourned: 7:46 p.m.
______________________________ ________________________________ Mayor City Clerk
Report to the City Council
To: City Council
From: Administration
Date: March 2, 2026
Staff: Chad McCollum, Economic Development, Housing, and Communication Director
Subject: Administration – Receive and File – Economic Development Corporation Serving Fresno County Quarterly Report, Q2 October - December 2025.
Recommendation: Receive and File
Attachments:
1. EDC Quarterly Report, Q2 Oct - Dec 2025 ATT 1 Report
Recommendation:
That the City Council receive and file the Quarter 2 Report, October – December 2025, from the Economic Development Corporation serving Fresno County.
Executive Summary:
The Economic Development Corporation serving Fresno County (EDC) has submitted their Quarter 2 Report of activities for the City Council to receive and file, as required per the 2025-2026 Agreement with the City.
Background:
In August 2025, the City of Clovis and the EDC entered into a contract for the 2025-2026 fiscal year to provide regional marketing and business services to Clovis businesses. In exchange, the City will pay the EDC $12,500 quarterly. In addition, the City may pay an amount up to $15,000 annually for initiatives and special project needs which may arise during the contract term. Attached is a report detailing the progress of their activities in Q2 serving Clovis businesses.
Fiscal Impact:
The City will forward the Quarter 2 installment payment to EDC. The funds were budgeted in the fiscal year budget.
Reason for Recommendation:
The attached report meets the requirements established in the 2025-2026 Agreement between the EDC and the City of Clovis.
Actions Following Approval:
Staff will file the report and send payment to the EDC.
Conflict of Interest:
None.
CITY OF CLOVIS
QUARTERLY SUMMARY
Quarter 2, Oct. - Dec. 2025
Growing the California Dream
Attachment 1
FRESNO COUNTY EDC | Q2 2026
2 SEMICON WEST CONFERENCE
The Fresno County Economic Development Corporation (EDC), in partnership with the City of Fresno, the City of Clovis, and California State University, Fresno, led a regional delegation to the 2025 SEMICON West Conference held in Phoenix, Arizona, from October 7–9, 2025. The three-day event brought together global leaders from across the semiconductor industry, providing a high-impact platform for Fresno County to showcase its readiness for advanced manufacturing investment.
Throughout the conference, the Fresno County EDC and its partners promoted the region’s strategic advantages—including its central California location, skilled and growing workforce, and strong academic alignment through Fresno State’s engineering and research programs. With the semiconductor industry expanding rapidly—from roughly $400 billion less than a decade ago to $603 billion last year and an expected $679 billion in 2025—the delegation emphasized Fresno County’s potential as a cost-effective, innovation-friendly hub for new and expanding semiconductor companies. This coordinated effort reflects the region’s long-term commitment to diversifying its economy and positioning Fresno County as a key player in the global semiconductor supply chain.
REBORNE BREWING
In Q2, EDC connected with Reborne Brewing owner Ryan Parsley to support the project and ensure he was plugged into key EDC and partner resources.
Staff provided utility rate support to help stabilize energy costs and strengthen cash flow, and coordinated with Reborne, the Clovis Chamber of Commerce, and City of Clovis staff on a formal Grand Opening to drive earned media and local visibility. We also connected Ryan with a local brewery to explore contract brewing as a potential additional revenue stream, and with the Small Business Development Center at Clovis Community College for added business consulting support. Next year, staff will help identify part- time hiring resources to support production as the business scales.
Q2 BY THE NUMBERS
44 CLIENTS SERVED
5 CLOVIS RESIDENTS PLACED IN
NEO SUBSIDIZED EMPLOYMENT
3 NEW AND RENEWED
NEO EMPLOYERS
$30,000+$30,000+REIMBURSED TO CLOVIS NEO BUSINESSES
FRESNO COUNTY EDC | Q2 2026
3 BLUEWHITE ROBOTICS ESTABLISHES OFFICE IN CLOVIS
In Q2 of the fiscal year, Bluewhite Robotics (BWR) finalized its office expansion into Clovis, co-locating with Tellus Agriculture and Consumer Goods and establishing dedicated space for executive leadership, engineering, and sales staff. Since 2024, Economic Development Director Chad McCollum and EDC staff have supported BWR through the expansion process, including helping identify suitable nearby land for product demonstration and testing. The company develops autonomous retrofit kits—distributed through growers and tractor distributors—that help automate key equipment while creating skilled job opportunities in assembly, testing, sales, and ongoing maintenance. As the company evaluates further expansion and additional business verticals, the EDC team will continue working closely with BWR and City of Clovis staff to identify and pursue available resources to help accelerate job growth and investment.
WORKFORCE TRAINING UPDATES
SCCCD TRUCK DRIVING HERNDON CAMPUS
To date, 34 participants have completed Truck Driving Training at the SCCCD Training Institute Herndon Campus, with an additional 16 participants currently enrolled. Of the 34 graduates, 27 have found employment within the industry, resulting in a
79.5% placement rate among graduates.
GOOD JOBS CHALLENGE YEAR-END UPDATE
81 Clovis residents began Good Jobs Challenge training
programs across the Business Services, Manufacturing,
and Transportation and Logistics sectors. Of these, 48
completed training and 18 are currently still enrolled. 36 residents found employment within their chosen industry, resulting in a 75% placement rate.
Over the lifetime of the program, 116 Clovis residents have participated in trainings, with 70 having completed training and 18 currently enrolled. 50 Clovis residents have been placed into industry employment as a result of Good Jobs Challenge programs.
CLIENTS SERVED
Services provided include, but are not limited to: Direct Outreach, Technical Assistance, Retention and Expansion Services, and Workforce Development.
B.B Floral and Gift
Baerg & Associates, Certified Public
Accountants
Central Valley Indian Health
Central Valley Indian Health-Behavioral
Clovis Appliance
Clovis Laser Center
Colorado Grill Clovis, Inc.
Complete Home Security & Services
Concierge Wealth Management Services
Dedicated Care
Department of Social Services
Hampton Inn & Suites Clovis-Airport North
Hearing Life
Hemb Law Group
High Performance Academy
Hinds Hospice- Thrift Store Clovis
IDLS Sierra Avenue, LLC Ignite Press
Jackson Jewelers
Judy’s Place Thrift Store
Kure Home Health
Larry’s Towing
Lawvex
Lucido Properties
Lucky 13 Embroidery and Design
M. Angel Angulo CPA, Inc
Magnolia Crossing Assisted Living
Main Creek Pest Solutions Inc.
Monkey Dog Coffee
Papa’s Place
Reborne Brewing Co
Rocket Fizz
Rustic Lace Boutique
Sassano’s Mens Wear
Senior Helpers
Sequoia Companion Care
SERVPRO of Clovis, Fresno Northeast,
Shaver Lake
Signature Smiles
SMS Services Inc.
Taylor Design
Taylor Home Design
Valley Partners
Viva Boutique
Wawona Frozen Foods
Well Being Senior Solutions
2025 GJC COMPLETIONS
Report to the City Council
To: City Council
From: Administration
Date: March 2, 2026
Staff: Jesse Velez, Deputy Director of Information Technology Subject: Administration – Approval – Award the Request for Proposals and approve the purchase of Storage Area Network equipment from vCloud Tech Inc. in the amount of $79,432.13.
Recommendation: Approve
Attachments:
1. Storage Area Network Equipment RFP ATT 1 Quote vCloud
Recommendation:
For the City Council to Award the Request for Proposals (RFP) and approve the purchase of Storage Area Network equipment from vCloud Tech Inc. in the amount of $79,432.13.
Executive Summary:
The Information Technology Division is tasked with maintaining equipment and keeping vital technology systems running. In the event of a disaster (e.g. fire, flood, virus infection) to one or more of those systems occurs – an effective and reliable failover datacenter is needed to resume operation of these critical applications.
The current failover system at our Disaster Recovery datacenter is nearing capacity and, with anticipated growth it will be running out of available resources in the near future. Staff went out with a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a replacement system and received two (2) responses with vCloud Tech Inc. provided the most complete and responsive proposal.
Background:
The Information Technology Division maintains all technology servers, storage and data and is tasked with keeping these vital technology systems running. In the event of a disaster (e.g. fire, flood, virus infection) an effective and reliable failover system to support the operation of the city’s 300 plus servers is needed to resume operation of these critical applications.
With the increased use of technology in all departments, the current storage area network (SAN) system at our Disaster Recovery site is running out of available resources, server migrations to/from this failover system are taking longer to complete, and the limited compute time is putting a strain on
data recovery services.
Staff went out with an RFP using the PlanetBids Portal for a replacement system and received two (2) responses. The cost of each of the proposals is as follows:
Vendor Name Bid Amount
vCloud Tech Inc. $79,432.13
AMS.net / MGT $144,553.69
The proposal from vCloud Tech Inc was the lowest cost proposal and it met all system requirements.
Staff is recommending that Council award the RFP for the Storage Area Network equipment to vCloud Tech Inc. for $79,432.13 as shown in their quote (Attachment 1).
Fiscal Impact:
Funds for this failover system are included in the 2025-2026 budget for the IT Division.
Reason for Recommendation:
There has been significant growth in the Disaster Recovery datacenter storage and computing needs.
Maintaining a secure and reliable failover system for the city’s 300-plus servers and data is critical.
Finally, staff has worked with vCloud Tech Inc. on previous projects and they provided the most complete and responsive proposal.
Actions Following Approval:
Staff will order the storage and network equipment. When it arrives, it will be configured and seamlessly integrated into the City’s data center.
Conflict of Interest:
None.
BILL TO
City Of Clovis
Patrick Linares
1033 Fifth Street
Clovis , CA 93612
[email protected]
(559) 324-2000
SALES REPRESENTATIVE
vCloud Tech Inc. Aiden Scott
609 Deep Valley Drive Suite 200. Rollin
g Hills Estates. CA 90274
[email protected]
(833) 482-5683 x 713
CONTRACT NAME
OM
CONTRACT NO
N/A
PAYMENT TERM
Net 30
RFQ NUMBER
IT-RFP0226-1
UEI
LBTHZ1LB1RQ3 (vCloud Tech Inc)
GRAND TOTAL
$79,432.13
Quote
Q1AS43326826 2026-02-25 Expires: 2026-03-05 FTIN: 46-3104792 | Cage: 77T86 | DUNS: 079508688 CONTRACT & QUOTE DETAILS
# PART NO DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT PRICE EXTENDED
1 4662-7H2-0000 4662-7H2 #1:IBM Storage FlashSystem 5300 NVMe Control Enclosure 1 $8,904.21 $8,904.21 2 4662-7H2-8S2009 256GB Base Cache - Resiliency Bundle 1 $0.00 $0.00 3 4662-7H2-9730 Power Cord - PDU Connection 1 $13.24 $13.24 4 4662-7H2-ACHQ 10 GbE Shortwave SFP+ Transceivers (Four) 1 $47.31 $47.31 5 4662-7H2-ADN1 Order Type 1 Indicator - CTO 1 $0.00 $0.00 6 4662-7H2-AGSG 19.2TB FCM 4 6 $7,107.97 $42,647.82
7 4662-7H2-AHPG AC Power Supply (100-240v) (Pair) 1 $0.00 $0.00 8 4662-7H2-AHZD All Flash Solution Indicator 1 $0.00 $0.00 9 4662-7H2-AKNC Premium S&H Indicator 1 $0.00 $0.00
10 4662-7H2-ALBR 10 Gb Ethernet 4 Port Adapter Cards (Pair) 1 $2,081.36 $2,081.36 11 4662-7H2-ALE0 Encryption Enablement 1 $1,182.60 $1,182.60 12 4662-7H2-ALEC Encryption USB Flash Drives (Four Pack) 1 $94.61 $94.61 13 4662-7H2-ALH0 IBM Storage Expert Care Indicator 1 $0.00 $0.00 14 4662-7H2-ALJ5 EC Basic 5 Year 1 $0.00 $0.00
15 4862-B05-0000 4662-7H2 #1:5 year IBM Storage Expert Care Basic 1 $13,352.37 $13,352.37 16 5608-B22-0000 3-Year Registration SWMA for 5608-PC2 1 $0.00 $0.00 17 5608-B22-0001 Per Storage Device SWMA 3 Year Reg 1 $1,117.22 $1,117.22 18 5608-PC2-0000 IBM Storage Intelligence Control 1 $0.00 $0.00 19 5608-PC2-0001 Per Storage Device with 1 Year SW Maint 1 $3,020.74 $3,020.74 20 5775-STG-0000 Support Line for Storage - 5 Year 1 $0.00 $0.00 21 5775-STG-0526 Support per Server (N/C) 1 $0.00 $0.00 22 0000-S&H-0000 undefined 1 $428.75 $428.75
Subtotal $72,890.23
Sales Tax $6,541.90
ATTACHMENT 1
TOTAL $79,432.13
Additional Notes
Please note that IBM has announced price increases for this solution effective next week.
Report to the City Council
To: City Council
From: General Services
Date: March 2, 2026
Staff: Bethany Berube, Deputy General Services Director Subject: General Services – Approval – Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Real Property Purchase and Sale Agreement for the Property Located near the intersection of East International Avenue and North Minnewawa Avenue in the City of Clovis, County of Fresno, California, bearing Fresno County Assessor’s Parcel No. 580-072-41s from GV Land Holdings, LLC, a California limited liability company, in the Amount of $4,150,000; and Approval –Res. 26-___, Amending the 2025-2026 General Government Facilities Fund to Allocate Funds in the Amount of $4,150,000 for Purchase of the Property.
Recommendation: Approve and Authorize
Attachments:
1. Real Property Purchase ATT 1 Budget Amendment Res. 26-__
2. Real Property Purchase ATT 2 Sale Agreement - APN 580-072-41s
3. Real Property Purchase ATT 3 Vicinity Map
Recommendation:
1. For the City Council to authorize the City Manager to execute the real property purchase and sale agreement for the property located near the intersection of East International Avenue and North Minnewawa Avenue in the City of Clovis, County of Fresno, California, bearing Fresno County Assessor’s Parcel No. 580-072-41s from GV Land Holdings, LLC, a California limited liability company, in the Amount of $4,150,000; and
2. For the City Council to approve a resolution amending the 2025-2026 General Government Facilities Fund to allocate $4,150,000 to purchase the property.
Executive Summary:
Approval of this request would authorize the City Manager to execute a Real Property Purchase and Sale Agreement and complete the acquisition of real property located near the intersection of East International Avenue and North Minnewawa Avenue in the City of Clovis, Fresno County, California, identified as Fresno County Assessor’s Parcel No. 580-072-41s (the “Property”), from GV Land Holdings, LLC, a California limited liability company, in the amount of $4,150,000.
The Property has been identified as the site for the development of the Clovis Transit Operations
Center (Phase 1), which will support Clovis Transit’s transition to a zero-emission fleet in compliance with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Innovative Clean Transit (ICT) regulation. Acquisition of the Property is a critical first step in delivering the Transit Operations Center project, which will accommodate fleet expansion, operational needs, and the installation of future zero-emission vehicle infrastructure under Phase 3.
Funding for the acquisition will be provided through Senate Bill 125 (SB 125) formula-based allocations administered by the Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG), including Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) funds. The purchase price of $4,150,000.00, along with minor escrow and incidental closing costs, will be funded through the General Government Facilities Fund.
Staff has confirmed that sufficient funding is available within the General Government Facilities Fund to complete the acquisition.
The City retained LSA Associates, Inc., to conduct an environmental review of the proposed acquisition under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on that analysis, LSA has determined that the proposed project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), commonly referred to as the “Common Sense” exemption. The proposed activity is limited to the acquisition of a single parcel, with no physical changes proposed as part of this action.
Therefore, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the acquisition would result in a significant effect on the environment.
Approval of the accompanying resolution will amend the 2025-2026 General Government Facilities Fund to allocate $4,150,000 for the purchase of the Property. There will be no fiscal impact to the General Fund.
Background:
In 2014 the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) was created by Senate Bill (SB) 862 and modified by SB 9 in 2015 to provide grants from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) to fund transformative capital improvements that modernize California’s intercity, commuter, and urban rail systems, and bus and ferry transit systems, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, vehicle miles traveled, and congestion. The California State Transportation Agency (CALSTA) administers the TIRCP program. CALSTA offers competitive and formula-based grant opportunities for projects that support greenhouse gas emission reductions.
In 2023, SB 102 and SB 125 created the Zero Emission Transit Capital Program (ZETCP) and provided direction for appropriated funding. The Budget Acts of 2023 and 2024 established specific categories of funding to be allocated to Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPAs) and passed through to local transit operators within their respective regions. TIRCP funds are now issued on a formula basis to transit agencies throughout California for capital and operations assistance.
The Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG) serves as the RTPA for Fresno County. As the designated RTPA, FCOG is responsible for administering and disbursing allocations, as well as overseeing and meeting reporting requirements under SB 125. CALSTA required RTPAs to submit a list of project proposals representing the total allocation for their region. On August 22, 2024, CALSTA approved FCOG’s allocation of $119,707,058 for four fiscal years (FY 2023/24 through FY 2026/27) of the program and authorized initial disbursements for TIRCP and ZETCP funds.
Subsequent program disbursements are subject to adopted policy and guidelines.
Under FCOG’s SB 125 funding program, the City of Clovis submitted one capital project: the Clovis Transit Operations Center (Phase 1 and Phase 3). Clovis Transit requires a new operations center to
support the transition and conversion of its existing fleet to comply with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Innovative Clean Transit (ICT) regulation. The new operations center will also accommodate future service expansion to meet the needs of the growing community.
SB 125 funding will support Phase 1, including the acquisition of real property located near the intersection of East International Avenue and North Minnewawa Avenue for construction of the new Clovis Transit Operations Center. Phase 3 will include the purchase and installation of zero-emission infrastructure to support zero-emission vehicles. TIRCP formula funds will provide $12,890,942 toward Phase 1, and ZETCP funds will support Phase 3 with $2,099,516, for a total project allocation of $14,990,458.
To date, the City has received $10,490,854.67 in TIRCP funding. The remaining installment is scheduled to be disbursed in 2026 in accordance with the adopted SB 125 program schedule and guidelines. All funds are subject to CALSTA requirements under the January 10, 2025 SB 125 formula-based TIRCP and ZETCP guidelines, including deposit into an interest-bearing account and compliance with reporting and program eligibility requirements.
Acquisition of the subject property represents Phase 1 implementation and is necessary to advance development of the Clovis Transit Operations Center in compliance with CARB’s ICT regulation and the City’s Zero Emission Bus Rollout Plan.
Fiscal Impact:
The purchase price of the property is $4,150,000. Minor incidental escrow and closing costs are anticipated to be less than $5,000 and will be paid from existing Transit Fund authorizations.
Funding for the acquisition will be provided through SB 125 formula-based TIRCP allocations administered by FCOG. The City has received $10,490,854.67 in TIRCP funds to date, and sufficient funding is available within the General Government Facilities Fund to complete this property purchase. The remaining SB 125 installment is scheduled for disbursement in 2026.
Approval of the attached resolution will amend the 2025-2026 General Government Facilities Fund to appropriate $4,150,000 for the purchase of the property. There will be no fiscal impact to the General Fund.
Reason for Recommendation:
Acquisition of the property would provide a site to develop a Transit Center to meet the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB’s) Innovative Clean Transit (ICT) regulation, as designated in the 2025 CARB ICT ZEB Rollout Plan.
Actions Following Approval:
1. The City Manager will execute the property purchase agreement and all other necessary documents to close escrow.
2. Funds will be appropriated in the City of Clovis 2025-2026 General Government Facilities Fund for purchase of the property as specified in the attached Budget Amendment (Attachment 3).
Conflict of Interest:
None.
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION 26-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS
APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE FY2025-26
GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT BUDGET
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the FY2025-26 city budget on June 9, 2025; and
WHEREAS, additional funding for Transit became available throughout the year; and
WHEREAS, these revenues and expenditures were not included in the original adopted budget; and
WHEREAS, the additional funds are intended for the Transit fund.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Clovis hereby approves the budget amendment as shown in the “Summary of Expenditures/Revenues by Department” and “Summary of Expenditures/Revenues by Fund” as Attachment A.
* * * * *
The foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on March 2, 2026, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
DATED: March 2, 2026
________________________ ___________________________
Mayor City Clerk
ATTACHMENT A
SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES BY DEPARTMENT
DEPARTMENT
General Services – 90000-71468 $4,150,000
TOTAL $4,150,000
SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES BY FUND
General Government Facilities – 90000-71468 $4,150,000
TOTAL $4,150,000
___________________________________________________________________
SUMMARY OF REVENUES BY DEPARTMENT
DEPARTMENT
General Services – 90000-45076 $4,150,000
TOTAL $4,150,000
SUMMARY OF REVENUES BY FUND
General Government Facilities – 90000-45076 $4,150,000
TOTAL $4,150,000
ATTACHMENT 2
58007241S
E International Ave
N Minnewawa Ave
SWC of International & Minnewawa
0 220 440110
Feet
Wednesday, February 18, 2026
GV LAND HOLDINGS LLC | APN: 580-072-41S
ATTACHMENT 3
VICINITY MAP
Report to the City Council
To: City Council
From: General Services
Date: March 2, 2026
Staff: Charles Johnson, Senior Management Analyst
Subject: General Services – Approval - Claim Rejection of the General Liability Claim on behalf of Carmen Garcia.
Recommendation: Approve
Attachments: None
Recommendation:
Reject the General Liability Claim filed on behalf of Carmen Garcia.
Executive Summary:
On behalf of Carmen Garcia (claimant), the City received a revised claim on February 11, 2026, alleging the City of Clovis failed to maintain its public property, which caused her to trip and fall. Ms.
Garcia is seeking compensation in excess of the minimal civil court limits. It is recommended that the City reject the claim at this time, send notice of rejection, and refer the matter to the City’s third-party administrator for liability claims for further investigation and handling.
Background:
On September 11, 2025, Ms. Carmen Garcia allegedly fell and injured herself on a cement parking block in the parking lot of the Fresno County Department of Social Services located at 3500 Never Forget Lane after exiting her vehicle.
On February 11, 2026, a revised General Liability Claim was filed against the City of Clovis on behalf of Ms. Garcia. The claim alleges the City of Clovis property condition constituted a hazardous condition to pedestrians, which the City is directly and legally liable for Ms. Garcia personal injuries and damages. The claim was considered legally sufficient and timely.
Fiscal Impact:
Rejection of the claim does not result in any fiscal impact.
Reason for Recommendation:
It is recommended that the claim be rejected. The City’s liability is disputed, and although the claim is legally sufficient, the amount of the alleged damages sustained by the claimant may also be disputed.
Rejecting the claim and sending notice of rejection in accordance with the Government Claims Act will commence the time in which claimant may file a lawsuit against the City based on the claim.
Actions Following Approval:
A rejection notice letter will be sent to the claimant informing her that the claim has been rejected.
Conflict of Interest:
None.
Report to the City Council
To: City Council
From: General Services
Date: March 2, 2026
Staff: Amy Hance, General Services Director
Subject: General Services - Approval - Res. 26 -____, Approving a Side Letter Agreement with the Transit Employees Bargaining Unit (TEBU) Establishing a "4-9-4" Work Schedule.
Recommendation: Approve
Attachments:
1. TEBU Side Letter 4-9-4 Schedule ATT 1 Res.26 -___
Recommendation:
For the City Council to approve a resolution approving a side letter agreement with the Transit Employees Bargaining Unit (TEBU) to establish a "4-9-4" work schedule.
Executive Summary:
In November 2025, Clovis Transit implemented an updated transit route system designed to improve mobility, efficiency, and connectivity throughout the City and surrounding areas. The addition of a "4- 9-4" work schedule has been determined as necessary to support continuous and seamless transit operations under the updated transit system.
Background:
In November 2025, Clovis Transit implemented an updated transit route system designed to enhance mobility, improve operational efficiency, and strengthen connectivity throughout the City of Clovis and surrounding areas. The updated system reflects the City’s ongoing commitment to providing reliable, accessible, and responsive public transportation that meets the evolving needs of residents, employees, and visitors. The revised routes improve service coverage, reduce travel times where feasible, and better align transit service with key activity centers, including employment hubs, schools, medical facilities, and regional connections.
Following implementation, staff conducted an operational assessment to ensure the long-term sustainability and effectiveness of the updated transit system. Based on this evaluation, the addition of a “4-9-4” work schedule has been identified as necessary to support continuous and seamless transit operations. This schedule structure allows for expanded staffing availability during peak service hours, improved shift coverage, and greater flexibility to respond to service demands without
disruption. It also supports operational continuity by aligning staffing patterns more closely with the enhanced service span and frequency of the updated routes.
The adoption of the "4-9-4" schedule is expected to improve overall service reliability, reduce scheduling gaps, and enhance the City’s ability to maintain consistent transit operations. By proactively aligning staffing schedules with operational needs, the City can ensure the updated transit system functions as intended while maintaining high standards of service delivery. This adjustment represents an operational refinement necessary to fully realize the benefits of the updated route system and to support Clovis Transit’s mission of providing safe, efficient, and dependable public transportation.
Through the meet and confer process, the City and TEBU mutually agreed upon the terms in the Side Letter Agreement.
Fiscal Impact:
None.
Reason for Recommendation:
A resolution by the City Council is required to authorize the execution of a Side Letter Agreement between the City and TEBU.
Actions Following Approval:
The Side Letter Agreement between the City and TEBU will be executed.
Conflict of Interest:
None.
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION 26-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS APPROVING A SIDE
LETTER AGREEMENT WITH THE TRANSIT EMPLOYEES BARGAINING UNIT (TEBU)
WHEREAS, Clovis Transit is responsible for providing safe, reliable, and efficient public transportation services to the community; and
WHEREAS, in November 2025, Clovis Transit implemented an updated transit route system designed to improve mobility, efficiency, and connectivity throughout the City and surrounding areas; and
WHEREAS, the implementation of an additional “4-9-4” work schedule has been identified as necessary to support continuous and seamless transit operations under the updated transit system; and
WHEREAS, representatives of TEBU and the City representatives met and conferred regarding the side letter and have reached a mutual agreement on its terms.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Clovis approves the Side Letter Agreement with TEBU (Attachment A) and authorizes the City Manager to sign the agreement.
* * * * * *
The foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on March 2, 2026, by the following vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
DATED: March 2, 2026
___________________________ __________________________ Mayor City Clerk
ATTACHMENT A
Side Letter Agreement to the 2025-2028 Memorandum of
Understanding Between the City of Clovis and the
Transit Employees Bargaining Unit (TEBU).
The City of Clovis (“The City”) and the TEBU mutually agree to this Side Letter Agreement.
This Side Letter Agreement will be incorporated into the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Clovis and TEBU(“MOU”). Except as amended herein, each and every term and condition of the MOU shall remain in full force and effect.
The City has determined that an additional work schedule for full-time employees is necessary to provide timely and efficient transit service. The additional work schedule, “4-9- 4,” will be included among the existing work schedule options. Under the “4-9-4” schedule, employees work a total of forty (40) fixed hours per week, consisting of four (4) nine-hour workdays and one (1) four-hour workday. For this work schedule, the workweek shall begin at 0700 hours on Sunday and end at 0700 hours on the following Sunday.
TEBU agrees to the adoption of the “4-9-4” work schedule option for full-time employees.
This Side Letter Agreement will become effective March 3, 2026, when approved by the City Council and fully executed by the parties.
For the CITY: For the UNIT:
___________________________ _____________________________ Andrew Haussler, City Manager Kenneth Lee, TEBU/OE3 President
___________________________ _____________________________ Scott G. Cross, City Attorney Stacey Leggett, TEBU/OE3 Negotiator
_____________________________
Allen Dunbar, TEBU/OE3 Negotiator
ATTEST: ________________________
Briana Parra, City Clerk
Report to the City Council
To: City Council
From: Public Utilities
Date: March 2, 2026
Staff: Nicholas Torstensen, Deputy Public Utilities Director Subject: Public Utilities - Approval - Waive Formal Bidding Requirements, Award a Contract to Karbonous, Inc. to Purchase and Replace Granular Activated Carbon (GAC) at Well 27 in the Total Amount of $117,011, and authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement.
Recommendation: Approve
Attachments:
1. GAC at Well Site 27 ATT 1 Vicinity Map
Recommendation:
For the City Council to waive the City’s formal bidding requirements and authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Karbonous, Inc., for the amount of $117,011 to remove and replace granular activated carbon (GAC) at City Well 27, located at 611 Peach Avenue.
Executive Summary:
Included in the 2025-2026 Water Enterprise budget are funds to remove and install GAC at various well sites in the City. Three carbon suppliers were contacted through an informal bid process and three quotes were received for Well 27. Karbonous, Inc., provided the lowest responsible quote in the amount of $117,011 (including tax). The work includes removing the existing carbon vessel contents, transporting the contents to a reactivation/destruction facility, and then installing virgin coal-based carbon in vessels at the well site.
Background:
Granular Activated Carbon (GAC) is currently utilized at 5 separate City well sites to absorb contaminants in the drinking water. Over time, the carbon loses its adsorptive capacity and no longer captures contaminants, at which point they begin to pass through into the drinking water system.
Once the carbon has reached its capacity, it must be removed and either replaced or regenerated.
This will typically occur between one and three years, depending on the contaminants and production of the well.
Well 27 has GAC treatment to remove contaminants from drinking water to stay below the maximum contaminant level (MCL) set by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Division of
Drinking Water (DDW). The contaminant found in Well 27 is called 1,2 Dibromo-3-Chloropropane (DBCP). Treatment was first installed in 1998, and carbon was most recently replaced in April 2023.
Fiscal Impact:
Sufficient funds were included in the Water Enterprise budget for the 2025-2026 fiscal year. The City received a remediation settlement for DBCP in 1997. Funds from these settlements are budgeted each year to maintain compliance of the well sites requiring treatment.
Reason for Recommendation:
Karbonous, Inc., provided the lowest responsible quote for Well site 27 and has extensive experience in this type of work. There are sufficient funds available in this fiscal year’s budget for the cost of this project. Additionally, in order to continue to run the wells as permitted by DDW, replacement of the carbon is required to meet SWRCB drinking water standards.
Actions Following Approval:
A contract will be prepared and executed by the City Manager, subject to the contractor providing performance security that is satisfactory to the City.
Conflict of Interest:
None.
0 1 20.5
Miles
International
Shaw
Gettysburg
Copper
Dakota
Behymer
Perrin
Shepherd
T eague
Nees
Sierra
Bullard
Barstow
Ashlan
DockeryThompsonHighlandLeonardDeWolfLocanT emperanceArmstrongFowlerSunnysideClovisMinnewawaPeachWillow Shields
Alluvial
Herndon
McCall
VICINITY MAP
Legend
City Limits
Sphere of Influence
Matthew Morillas
Print Date: January 14, 2026
CIP XX-XX [Project Name]
Well Site 27
ATTACHMENT 1
Report to the City Council
To: City Council
From: Public Utilities
Date: March 2, 2026
Staff: Sarai Yanovsky, Principal Utilities Engineer
Subject: Public Utilities – Approval – Bid Award for CIP 25-20, Sierra Bicentennial Park – Stadium Lighting Upgrade, to Wild Electric, Inc., in the Amount of $85,500, and Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Contract on Behalf of the City.
Recommendation: Approve
Attachments:
1. CIP 25-20 Stadium Lighting Upgrade ATT 1 Vicinity Map
Recommendation:
1. For the City Council to award a contract for CIP 25-20, Sierra Bicentennial Park - Stadium Lighting Upgrade, to Wild Electric, Inc., in the amount of $85,500; and
2. For the City Council to authorize the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City.
Executive Summary:
Staff is recommending that Council authorize the City Manager to execute the contract with Wild Electric, Inc., in the amount of $85,500. Wild Electric, Inc., was the lowest responsible bidder from the bid opening that took place on February 3, 2026.
This is a maintenance project to replace the degrading and failing existing stadium lights at Sierra Bicentennial Park and upgrade the stadium lighting to LED lights. This will enhance safety and security, and the new lights will also improve playability. The work consists of the removal and disposal of the existing stadium lights, and the purchase and installation of new LED stadium lights.
Background:
The following is a summary of the bid results of February 3, 2026:
BIDDERS BASE BID
Wild Electric, Inc. $85,500.00
Electric Motor Shop $89,216.00
James Day Construction, Inc. $179,649.00
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE $100,000.00
All bids were examined and the bid from Wild Electric, Inc., was found to be in order. The bid from James Day Construction, Inc., was found with clerical errors that were corrected to establish an appropriate total base bid. Wild Electric, Inc., is the lowest responsible bidder. Staff have validated the bidder’s contractor’s license and bid bond.
Fiscal Impact:
This project is budgeted in the 2025-2026 fiscal year and funded by Measure Y to improve park safety and security, and to provide better lighting for evening and nighttime users.
Reason for Recommendation:
Wild Electric, Inc., is the lowest responsible bidder. There are sufficient funds available for the cost of this project.
Actions Following Approval:
The contract will be prepared and executed, subject to the contractor providing performance security that is satisfactory to the City.
Conflict of Interest:
None.
0 1 20.5
Miles
International
Shaw
Gettysburg
Copper
Dakota
Behymer
Perrin
Shepherd
T eague
Nees
Sierra
Bullard
Barstow
Ashlan
DockeryThompsonHighlandLeonardDeWolfLocanT emperanceArmstrongFowlerSunnysideClovisMinnewawaPeachWillow Shields
Alluvial
Herndon
McCall
VICINITY MAP
Legend
City Limits
Sphere of Influence
Benjamin Little
Print Date: February 13, 2026
PUD 25-20 Sierra Bicentennial Park - Stadium Lighting Upgrade Project Site Location:
84 N Sunnyside Ave.,
Clovis, CA 93611.
Dan Lumeya
ATTACHMENT 1
Report to the City Council
To: City Council
From: Planning and Development Services
Date: March 2, 2026
Staff: Renee Mathis, Planning and Development Services Director Subject: Workshop: Planning and Development Services Department Update.
Recommendation: Receive and File
Planning and Development Services Director Renee Mathis will give a verbal presentation on this item.
Please direct questions to City Manager’s office at 559-324-2060.
Report to the City Council
To: City Council
From: Planning and Development Services
Date: March 2, 2026
Staff: Benjamin Little, Engineer II
Subject: Receive and File – Status Report for Facilities Condition Assessment.
Recommendation: Receive and File
Attachments:
1. Facilities Update ATT 1 Community Center Facilities Conditions Assessment
2. Facilities Update ATT 2 Fire Station 2 Facilities Conditions Assessment
Recommendation:
For the Council to receive and file the report on the status of the Facilities Condition Assessment.
Executive Summary:
On April 7, 2025, the City Council approved the awarding of a consultant services agreement to Bureau Veritas and for the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City. The data provided to the City by the consultant has been organized into the status report for the Facilities Condition Assessment.
Background:
On April 7, 2025, the City Council approved the awarding of a consultant services agreement to Bureau Veritas and for the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City. To support the assessment, City staff provided the consultant with as-built drawings, maintenance records, and answers to multiple questionnaires to help identify current building maintenance needs. The consultant conducted non-invasive inspections of the City-owned buildings and their components.
The facilities included in the assessment are those serviced and maintained with General Government Services Funds.
Data collected during these inspections was compiled into a comprehensive report outlining both current and future maintenance needs, along with associated cost estimates. The attachments included here provide a portion of the report for two facilities featured in the Facilities Condition Assessment status report and serve as examples of the type of information provided for each facility.
Fiscal Impact:
The Facilities Condition Assessment project was funded in the City's 2024-2025 Community Investment Program using General Government Services Funds. The status report documents the current condition of City-owned facilities, identifies future maintenance needs, and outlines the estimated costs to address them. Any additional funding needed for facility maintenance will be reviewed and considered as part of future City budget processes.
Reason for Recommendation:
Receiving and filing this report provides City Council and City staff with a comprehensive understanding of current facility conditions, enabling informed prioritization of repairs and upgrades, development of strategic and preventive maintenance plans, and effective budgeting for future improvements. The status report for the Facilities Condition Assessment is for information only and no action is required.
Actions Following Approval:
Staff will file the report and copies of the report will be made available upon request. Funding needs for facility maintenance will be reviewed and considered as part of future City budget processes.
Conflict of Interest:
None.
FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
Bureau Veritas
6021 University Boulevard, Suite 200 | Ellicott City, MD 21043 | www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Former Senior Center
850 4th Street
Clovis, CA 93612
prepared for
City of Clovis
1033 Fifth Street
Clovis, CA 93612
Mr. Benjamin Little
PREPARED BY:
Bureau Veritas
6021 University Boulevard, Suite 200
Ellicott City, MD 21043
800.733.0660
www.bvna.com
BV CONTACT:
Aspen Arnthorsdottir
Program Manager
800.733.0660 x7296006
thorgerdur.arnthorsdottir@bureauverit
as.com
BV PROJECT #:
172616.25R000-037.468
DATE OF REPORT:
December 4, 2025
ON SITE DATE:
May 14, 2025
Attachment 1
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Executive Summary .................................................................................................
Property Overview and Assessment Details ..............................................................
Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies .........................................................
Facility Condition Index (FCI) .....................................................................................
Immediate Needs .......................................................................................................
Key Findings ..............................................................................................................
Plan Types .................................................................................................................
2. Building Systems and Site Elements ...................................................................
3. ADA Accessibility ..................................................................................................
4. Purpose and Scope ...............................................................................................
5. Opinions of Probable Costs ..................................................................................
Methodology ............................................................................................................
Definitions ................................................................................................................
6. Certification ............................................................................................................
7. Appendices ............................................................................................................ .. 1
.. 1
.. 2
.. 3
.. 5
.. 6
.. 9
10 14
16 18
18 19
20 21
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
1 www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
1. Executive Summary
Property Overview and Assessment Details
General Information
Property Type Community Center
Number of Buildings 1
Main Address Former Senior Center, 850 4th Street, Clovis, CA 93612
Site Developed 1982
Renovated 2013
Outside Occupants / Leased
Spaces
None
Date(s) of Visit May 14, 2025
Management Point of Contact City of Clovis, Community Investment Program Mr. Benjamin Little, Engineer II
559.324.2365
[email protected]
On-site Point of Contact (POC) Steven
Assessment & Report Prepared By Jordy Osborne
Reviewed By Everett Kyniston for,
Aspen Arnthorsdottir
Program Manager
800.733.0660 x7296006
[email protected]
AssetCalc Link Full dataset for this assessment can be found at:
https://www.assetcalc.net/
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
2 www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies
Historical Summary
This Clovis Community Center was formally a senior center. Hence the name, Former Senior Center. It is currently being used as a Community Center. It was established in 1982 and went through a limited ADA renovation in 2013. This renovation targeted ADA areas, such as the entrance and bathrooms, and renovated superficial assets such as fixtures and finishes. Also, there was a renovation that was added to the south side of the building. However, this renovation year is unknown and is closer to the original construction date than the present date.
Architectural
This building has masonry bearing walls and wood roofs. No structural related issues, such as foundation settling or cracking, were observed at the time of the assessment. The only issue related to the structure is the roof. It is leaking in multiple places and needs to be replaced. Only typical lifecycle interior finish, exterior finish, and roof membrane replacements are budgeted and anticipated.
Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Fire (MEPF)
The building's mechanical equipment mainly consists of a boiler, chiller, and air handlers supplying forced air throughout the building. The renovated southern part of the building has VAV boxes supplying air to terminal units. Supplemental components consist of an evaporative cooler and furnaces with heat pumps. Many of these pieces of equipment have been replaced in recent years, however, the air handlers are original and in poor condition.
The electrical system is mostly original to the building and in fair condition. However, it has reached its expected useful life. Most of the light fixtures were recently replaced with LED for energy efficiency.
The plumbing system is original to the building. Most of the fixtures have been replaced such as the toilets, sinks, and the water heater. No issues were observed at the time of the assessment.
The building has a fire suppression system throughout the building. This consists of fire extinguishers, a kitchen hood, and a sprinkler system. The fire alarm system is a standard system throughout the building. No issues were observed at the time of the assessment. The MEPF infrastructure itself is generally in good working condition with some major expenditures anticipated in the short term.
Site
The site was in fair working order, and no issues were observed at the time of the assessment. The building's site is shared with other Clovis buildings as well as San Joaquin College. The area of the site that was assessed was the immediate area surrounding the building. The shared parking lot was not assessed at this time.
Recommended Additional Studies
No additional studies recommended at this time.
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
3 www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Facility Condition Index (FCI)
One of the major goals of the FCA is to calculate the Facility Condition Index (FCI), which provides a theoretical objective indication of a facility’s overall condition. The FCI is defined as the ratio of the cost of current needs divided by the current replacement value (CRV) of the facility. The chart below presents the industry standard ranges and cut-off points.
FCI Ranges and Description
0 – 5% In new or well-maintained condition, with little visual evidence of wear or deficiencies. 5 – 10% Subjected to wear but is still in a serviceable and functioning condition. 10 – 30% Subjected to hard or long-term wear. Nearing the end of its useful or serviceable life. 30% and above Has reached the end of its useful or serviceable life. Renewal is now necessary.
The deficiencies and lifecycle needs identified in this assessment provide the basis for a portfolio-wide capital improvement funding strategy. In addition to the current FCI, extended FCI’s have been developed to provide owners the intelligence needed to plan and budget for the “keep-up costs” for their facilities. As such the 3- year, 5-year, and 10-year FCI’s are calculated by dividing the anticipated needs of those respective time periods by current replacement value. As a final point, the FCI’s ultimately provide more value when used to relatively compare facilities across a portfolio instead of being over-analyzed and scrutinized as stand-alone mathematical values. The table below presents the current, 3-year, 5-year, and 10-year FCI’s for this facility:
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
4 www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
NEEDS OVER TIME: The vertical blue bars in the graphic below represent the year-by-year needs identified for the facility. The orange line forecasts what would happen to the FCI (left Y axis) over time, assuming zero capital expenditures over the next ten years. The dollar amounts allocated for each year are associated with the values along the right Y axis.
Needs by Year with Unaddressed FCI Over Time
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
5 www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Immediate Needs
Location UF Code Description Condition Plan Type Cost
Former Senior Center B2051 Exterior Door, Steel, Commercial, Replace
Poor Performance/Int
egrity
$12,600
Former Senior Center D3055 Air Handler, Exterior AHU, Replace Poor Performance/Int egrity
$17,100
Former Senior Center D3051 HVAC System, Hydronic Piping, 2-Pipe, Replace
Poor Performance/Int
egrity
$74,500
Former Senior Center D3021 Furnace, Gas, Replace Poor Performance/Int egrity
$9,600
Former Senior Center D3055 Air Handler, Exterior AHU, Replace Poor Performance/Int egrity
$17,100
Former Senior Center D3055 Air Handler, Exterior AHU, Replace Poor Performance/Int egrity
$17,100
Former Senior Center D3055 Air Handler, Exterior AHU, Replace Poor Performance/Int egrity
$17,100
Former Senior Center D3055 Air Handler, Exterior AHU, Replace Poor Performance/Int egrity
$17,100
Former Senior Center D3037 Split System, Condensing Unit/Heat Pump, Replace
Poor Performance/Int
egrity
$5,300
Former Senior Center D3037 Split System, Condensing Unit/Heat Pump, Replace
Poor Performance/Int
egrity
$11,000
Former Senior Center D3055 Air Handler, Exterior AHU, Replace Poor Performance/Int egrity
$17,100
Former Senior Center D3021 Furnace, Gas, Replace Poor Performance/Int egrity
$6,500
Former Senior Center D3063 Exhaust Fan, Centrifugal, 24" Damper, Replace
Poor Performance/Int
egrity
$4,700
TOTAL (13 items) $226,700
6 www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Key Findings
Furnace in Poor condition.
Gas
Former Senior Center
Furnace mechanical room
Uniformat Code: D3020
Recommendation: Replace in 2025
Plan Type:
Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $9,600
Double its expected useful life. - AssetCALC ID: 9370036
Boiler Supplemental Components
in Poor condition.
Expansion Tank
Former Senior Center
Boiler Room
Uniformat Code: D3020
Recommendation: Replace in 2027
Plan Type:
Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $3,400
Past its expected useful life. - AssetCALC ID: 9370022
Boiler Supplemental Components
in Poor condition.
Expansion Tank
Former Senior Center
Exterior Mechanical Space
Uniformat Code: D3020
Recommendation: Replace in 2027
Plan Type:
Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $3,400
Past its expected useful life. - AssetCALC ID: 9369995
HVAC System in Poor condition.
Hydronic Piping, 2-Pipe
Former Senior Center
Throughout Building
Uniformat Code: D3050
Recommendation: Replace in 2025
Plan Type:
Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $74,500
Original. Rusted and old. - AssetCALC ID: 9370060
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
7 www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Air Handler in Poor condition.
Exterior AHU
Former Senior Center
Roof
Uniformat Code: D3050
Recommendation: Replace in 2025
Plan Type:
Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $17,100
Very old, needs to be replaced. - AssetCALC ID: 9370023
Air Handler in Poor condition.
Exterior AHU
Former Senior Center
Roof
Uniformat Code: D3050
Recommendation: Replace in 2025
Plan Type:
Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $17,100
Very old, needs to be replaced. - AssetCALC ID: 9370007
Air Handler in Poor condition.
Exterior AHU
Former Senior Center
Roof
Uniformat Code: D3050
Recommendation: Replace in 2025
Plan Type:
Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $17,100
Very old, needs to be replaced. - AssetCALC ID: 9370032
Air Handler in Poor condition.
Exterior AHU
Former Senior Center
Roof
Uniformat Code: D3050
Recommendation: Replace in 2025
Plan Type:
Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $17,100
Very old, needs to be replaced. - AssetCALC ID: 9369988 FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
8 www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Air Handler in Poor condition.
Exterior AHU
Former Senior Center
Roof
Uniformat Code: D3050
Recommendation: Replace in 2025
Plan Type:
Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $17,100
Very old, needs to be replaced. - AssetCALC ID: 9370004
Exterior Door in Poor condition.
Steel, Commercial
Former Senior Center
Furnace mechanical room
Uniformat Code: B2050
Recommendation: Replace in 2025
Plan Type:
Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $12,600
Rusted and breaking down - AssetCALC ID: 9370002
Flooring in Poor condition.
Carpet, Commercial Standard
Former Senior Center
Throughout Building
Uniformat Code: C2030
Recommendation: Replace in 2026
Plan Type:
Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $4,700
Worn and stained. - AssetCALC ID: 9370054
BAS/HVAC Controls in Poor
condition.
Extensive/Robust BMS or Smart Building
System
Former Senior Center
Throughout Building
Uniformat Code: D8010
Recommendation: Install in 2026
Plan Type:
Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $89,400
Old pneumatic system controlled by air compressor. Needs to be replaced. - AssetCALC ID: 9370043
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Plan Types
Each line item in the cost database is assigned a Plan Type, which is the primary reason or rationale for the recommended replacement, repair, or other corrective action. This is the “why” part of the equation. A cost or line item may commonly have more than one applicable Plan Type; however, only one Plan Type will be assigned based on the “best” fit, typically the one with the greatest significance and highest on the list below.
Plan Type Descriptions & Distribution
Safety An observed or reported unsafe condition that if left unaddressed could result in injury; a system or component that presents potential liability risk.
Performance/Integrity Component or system has failed, is almost failing, performs unreliably, does not perform as intended, and/or poses risk to overall system stability.
Accessibility Does not meet ADA, UFAS, and/or other accessibility requirements.
Environmental Improvements to air or water quality, including removal of hazardous materials from the building or site.
Retrofit/Adaptation Components, systems, or spaces recommended for upgrades in order to meet current standards, facility usage, or client/occupant needs.
Aged But Functional Any component or system that has aged past its industry-average expected useful life (EUL) but is not currently deficient or problematic.
Lifecycle/Renewal Any component or system that is neither deficient nor aged past EUL but for which future replacement or repair is anticipated and budgeted.
9
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
2. Building Systems and Site Elements
Building Systems Summary
Address 850 4th Street, Clovis, CA 93612
GPS Coordinates 36.824924, -119.6981979
Constructed/Renovated 1982 Renovated 2013
Building Area 9,600 SF
Number of Stories 1 above grade
System Description Condition
Structure Masonry bearing walls with wood roof deck supported by wood joists on a concrete slab
Fair
Facade Primary Wall Finish: Brick
Secondary Wall Finish: EIFS
Windows: Wood
Fair
Roof Primary: Hip construction with clay/concrete tiles Secondary: Flat construction with foam finish over built up finish
Poor
Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board, ceramic tile
Floors: Carpet, VCT, faux wood plank LVT, ceramic tile
Ceilings: Painted gypsum board, ACT, wood paneling
Fair
Elevators None
n/a
10
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Building Systems Summary
Plumbing Distribution: Galvanized iron supply and cast-iron waste & venting
Hot Water: Gas water heater with integral tank
Fixtures: Toilets, urinals, and sinks in all restrooms
Fair
HVAC Central System: Boiler, chiller and air handlers feeding VAV boxes and terminal units
Non-Central System: Furnaces with split-system condensing units
Supplemental components: Evaporative cooler
Fair
Fire Suppression Dry-pipe sprinkler system, fire extinguishers, and kitchen hood system
Fair
Electrical Source & Distribution: Main switchboard with copper wiring Interior Lighting: LED
Emergency Power: Diesel generator with automatic transfer switch
Fair
Fire Alarm Alarm panel with smoke detectors, heat detectors, alarms, strobes, pull stations, back-up emergency lights, and exit signs
Fair
Equipment/Special None
n/a
Accessibility Presently it does not appear an accessibility study is needed for this building. See the appendix for associated photos and additional information.
Additional Studies No additional studies are currently recommended for the building.
Areas Observed The interior spaces were observed to gain a clear understanding of the facility's overall condition. Other areas accessed and assessed included the exterior equipment and assets directly serving the building, the exterior walls of the facility, and the roof.
Key Spaces Not
Observed
All key areas of the facility were accessible and observed.
11
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Site Information
Site Area 0.7 acres
Parking Spaces 32 total spaces in shared open lot; 10 of which are accessible.
System Description Condition
Site Pavement Asphalt lots with adjacent concrete sidewalks, curbs, and ramps
Fair
Site Development Building-mounted signage; CMU wall mechanical enclosures Limited park benches, picnic tables, trash receptacles
Fair
Landscaping &
Topography
Limited landscaping features including lawns, trees, bushes, and planters
Irrigation: present
Concrete retaining walls
Low to moderate site slopes throughout
Fair
Utilities Municipal water and sewer
Local utility-provided electric and natural gas
Fair
Site Lighting Building-mounted: LED
Pedestrian walkway and landscape accent lighting
Fair
Ancillary Structures None
n/a
Site Accessibility Presently it does not appear an accessibility study is needed for the exterior and site areas. See the appendix for associated photos and additional information.
Site Additional Studies No additional studies are currently recommended for the site areas.
Site Areas Observed The exterior areas within the property boundaries were observed to gain a clear understanding of the site's overall condition.
Site Key Spaces Not
Observed
All key areas of the exterior site were accessible and observed.
12
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
The table below shows the anticipated costs by trade or building system over the next 20 years.
Former Senior Center: System Expenditure Forecast
System Immediate
Short Term
(1-2 yr)
Near Term
(3-5 yr)
Med Term
(6-10 yr)
Long Term
(11-20 yr)
TOTAL
Facade $12,607 $0 $88,717 $387,065 $69,279 $557,668
Roofing $0 $271,865 $108,631 $0 $0 $380,496
Interiors $0 $4,796 $164,205 $205,742 $111,786 $486,529 Plumbing $0 $0 $196,765 $78,350 $85,735 $360,850
HVAC $214,099 $7,180 $6,310 $270,253 $342,147 $839,989
Fire Protection $0 $0 $37,352 $0 $0 $37,352
Electrical $0 $0 $282,818 $90,140 $0 $372,958
Fire Alarm &
Electronic Systems
$0 $92,113 $6,785 $40,062 $196,583 $335,543
Equipment &
Furnishings
$0 $0 $24,486 $87,636 $38,149 $150,271
Sitework $0 $0 $8,275 $224,631 $139,849 $372,755
TOTALS $226,800 $376,000 $924,400 $1,383,900 $983,600 $3,894,700
13
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
3. ADA Accessibility
Generally, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination by entities to access and use of “areas of public accommodations” and “public facilities” on the basis of disability. Regardless of their age, these areas and facilities must be maintained and operated to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG).
A public entity (i.e. city governments) shall operate each service, program, or activity so that the service, program, or activity, when viewed in its entirety, is readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities.
However, this does not:
1. Necessarily require a public entity to make each of its existing facilities accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities;
2. Require a public entity to take any action that would threaten or destroy the historic significance of an historic property; or
3. Require a public entity to take any action that it can demonstrate would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of a service, program, or activity or in undue financial and administrative burdens. In those circumstances where personnel of the public entity believe that the proposed action would fundamentally alter the service, program, or activity or would result in undue financial and administrative burdens, a public entity has the burden of proving that compliance with 35.150(a) of this part would result in such alteration or burdens. The decision that compliance would result in such alteration or burdens must be made by the head of a public entity or his or her designee after considering all resources available for use in the funding and operation of the service, program, or activity, and must be accompanied by a written statement of the reasons for reaching that conclusion. If an action would result in such an alteration or such burdens, a public entity shall take any other action that would not result in such an alteration or such burdens but would nevertheless ensure that individuals with disabilities receive the benefits or services provided by the public entity.
Removal of barriers to accessibility should be addressed from a liability standpoint in order to comply with federal law, but the barriers may or may not be building code violations. The Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines are part of the ADA federal civil rights law pertaining to the disabled and are not a construction code. State and local jurisdictions have adopted the ADA Guidelines or have adopted other standards for accessibility as part of their construction codes.
During the FCA, Bureau Veritas performed a limited high-level accessibility review of the facility non-specific to any local regulations or codes. The scope of the visual observation was limited to the same areas observed while performing the FCA and the categories set forth in the material included in the appendix. It is understood by the Client that the limited observations described herein do not comprise a full ADA Compliance Survey, and that such a survey is beyond the scope of this assessment. A full measured ADA survey would be required to identify more specific potential accessibility issues. Additional clarifications of this limited survey:
This survey was visual in nature and actual measurements were not taken to verify compliance Only a representative sample of areas was observed
Two overview photos were taken for each subsection regardless of perceived compliance or non- compliance
Itemized costs for individual non-compliant items are included in the dataset For any “none” boxes checked or reference to “no issues” identified, that alone does not guarantee full compliance
The facility was originally constructed in 1982. The facility was substantially renovated in 2013, and widespread accessibility improvements appear to have been implemented at that time. 14
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
No detailed follow-up accessibility study is currently recommended since no major or moderate issues were identified at the subject site. Reference the appendix for specific data, photos, and tables or checklists associated with this limited accessibility survey.
15
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
4. Purpose and Scope
Purpose
Bureau Veritas was retained by the client to render an opinion as to the Property’s current general physical condition on the day of the site visit.
Based on the observations, interviews and document review outlined below, this report identifies significant deferred maintenance issues, existing deficiencies, and material code violations of record, which affect the Property’s use. Opinions are rendered as to its structural integrity, building system condition and the Property’s overall condition. The report also notes building systems or components that have realized or exceeded their typical expected useful lives.
The physical condition of building systems and related components are typically defined as being in one of five condition ratings. For the purposes of this report, the following definitions are used:
Condition Ratings
Excellent New or very close to new; component or system typically has been installed within the past year, sound and performing its function. Eventual repair or replacement will be required when the component or system either reaches the end of its useful life or fails in service.
Good Satisfactory as-is. Component or system is sound and performing its function, typically within the first third of its lifecycle. However, it may show minor signs of normal wear and tear. Repair or replacement will be required when the component or system either reaches the end of its useful life or fails in service.
Fair Showing signs of wear and use but still satisfactory as-is, typically near the median of its estimated useful life. Component or system is performing adequately at this time but may exhibit some signs of wear, deferred maintenance, or evidence of previous repairs. Repair or replacement will be required due to the component or system’s condition and/or its estimated remaining useful life.
Poor Component or system is significantly aged, flawed, functioning intermittently or unreliably; displays obvious signs of deferred maintenance; shows evidence of previous repair or workmanship not in compliance with commonly accepted standards; has become obsolete; or exhibits an inherent deficiency. The present condition could contribute to or cause the deterioration of contiguous elements or systems. Either full component replacement is needed or repairs are required to restore to good condition, prevent premature failure, and/or prolong useful life.
Failed Component or system has ceased functioning or performing as intended.
Replacement, repair, or other significant corrective action is recommended or required.
Not Applicable Assigning a condition does not apply or make logical sense, most commonly due to the item in question not being present.
16
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Scope
The standard scope of the Facility Condition Assessment includes the following:
Visit the Property to evaluate the general condition of the building and site improvements, review available construction documents in order to familiarize ourselves with, and be able to comment on, the in-place construction systems, life safety, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, and the general-built environment.
Identify those components that are exhibiting deferred maintenance issues and provide cost estimates for Immediate Costs and Replacement Reserves based on observed conditions, maintenance history and industry standard useful life estimates. This will include the review of documented capital improvements completed within the last five-year period and work currently contracted for, if applicable. Provide a full description of the Property with descriptions of in-place systems and commentary on observed conditions.
Provide a high-level categorical general statement regarding the subject Property’s compliance to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This will not constitute a full ADA survey but will help identify exposure to issues and the need for further review.
Obtain background and historical information about the facility from a building engineer, property manager, maintenance staff, or other knowledgeable source. The preferred methodology is to have the client representative or building occupant complete a Pre-Survey Questionnaire (PSQ) in advance of the site visit.
Common alternatives include a verbal interview just prior to or during the walk-through portion of the assessment.
Review maintenance records and procedures with the in-place maintenance personnel. Observe a representative sample of the interior spaces/units, including vacant spaces/units, to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition. Other areas to be observed include the exterior of the property, the roofs, interior common areas, and the significant mechanical, electrical and elevator equipment rooms.
Provide recommendations for additional studies, if required, with related budgetary information. Provide an Executive Summary at the beginning of this report, which highlights key findings and includes a Facility Condition Index as a basis for comparing the relative conditions of the buildings within the portfolio.
17
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
5. Opinions of Probable Costs
Cost estimates are embedded throughout this report, including the very detailed Replacement Reserves report in the appendix. The cost estimates are predominantly based on construction rehabilitation costs developed by the RSMeans data from Gordian. While the RSMeans data from Gordian is the primary reference source for the Bureau Veritas cost library, secondary and supporting sources include but are not limited to other industry experts’ work, such as Marshall & Swift and CBRE Whitestone. For improved accuracy, additional research integrated with Bureau Veritas’s historical experience with past costs for similar properties, city cost indexes, and assumptions regarding future economic conditions also come into play when deemed necessary.
Invoice or bid documents provided either by the owner or facility construction resources may be reviewed early in the process or for specific projects as warranted.
Opinions of probable costs should only be construed as preliminary, order of magnitude budgets. Actual costs most probably will vary from the consultant’s opinions of probable costs depending on such matters as type and design of suggested remedy, quality of materials and installation, manufacturer and type of equipment or system selected, field conditions, whether a physical deficiency is repaired or replaced in whole, phasing or bundling of the work (if applicable), quality of contractor, quality of project management exercised, market conditions, use of subcontractors, and whether competitive pricing is solicited, etc. Certain opinions of probable costs cannot be developed within the scope of this guide without further study. Opinions of probable cost for further study should be included in the FCA.
Methodology
Based upon site observations, research, and judgment, along with referencing Expected Useful Life (EUL) tables from various industry sources, Bureau Veritas opines as to when a system or component will most probably necessitate replacement. Accurate historical replacement records, if provided, are typically the best source of information. Exposure to the elements, initial quality and installation, extent of use, the quality and amount of preventive maintenance exercised, etc., are all factors that impact the effective age of a system or component. As a result, a system or component may have an effective age that is greater or less than its actual chronological age. The Remaining Useful Life (RUL) of a component or system equals the EUL less its effective age, whether explicitly or implicitly stated. Projections of Remaining Useful Life (RUL) are based primarily on age and condition with the presumption of continued use and maintenance of the Property similar to the observed and reported past use and maintenance practices, in conjunction with the professional judgment of Bureau Veritas’s assessors. Significant changes in occupants and/or usage may affect the service life of some systems or components.
Where quantities could not be or were not derived from an actual construction document take-off or facility walk-through, and/or where systemic costs are more applicable or provide more intrinsic value, budgetary square foot and gross square foot costs are used. Estimated costs are based on professional judgment and the probable or actual extent of the observed defect, inclusive of the cost to design, procure, construct and manage the corrections.
To account for differences in prices between locations, the base costs are modified by geographical location factors to adjust for to market conditions, transportation costs, or other local contributors. When requested by the client, the costs may be further adjusted by several additional factors including; labor rates (prevailing minimum wage), general contractor fees for profit and overhead, and insurance. If desired, costs for design and permits, and a contingency factor, may also be included in the calculations.
18
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Definitions
Immediate Needs
Immediate Needs are line items that require immediate action as a result of: (1) material existing or potential unsafe conditions, (2) failed or imminent failure of mission critical building systems or components, or (3) conditions that, if not addressed, have the potential to result in, or contribute to, critical element or system failure within one year or will most probably result in a significant escalation of its remedial cost.
For database and reporting purposes the line items with RUL=0 and commonly associated with Safety or Performance/Integrity Plan Types, are considered Immediate Needs.
Replacement Reserves
Cost line items traditionally called Replacement Reserves (equivalently referred to as Lifecycle/Renewals) are for recurring probable renewals or expenditures, which are not classified as operation or maintenance expenses. The replacement reserves should be budgeted for in advance on an annual basis. Replacement Reserves are reasonably predictable both in terms of frequency and cost. However, Replacement Reserves may also include components or systems that have an indeterminable life but, nonetheless, have a potential for failure within an estimated time period.
Replacement Reserves generally exclude systems or components that are estimated to expire after the reserve term and are not considered material to the structural and mechanical integrity of the subject property.
Furthermore, systems and components that are not deemed to have a material effect on the use of the Property are also excluded. Costs that are caused by acts of God, accidents, or other occurrences that are typically covered by insurance, rather than reserved for, are also excluded.
Replacement costs are solicited from ownership/property management, Bureau Veritas’s discussions with service companies, manufacturers' representatives, and previous experience in preparing such schedules for other similar facilities. Costs for work performed by the ownership’s or property management’s maintenance staff are also considered.
Bureau Veritas’s reserve methodology involves identification and quantification of those systems or components requiring capital reserve funds within the assessment period. The assessment period is defined as the effective age plus the reserve term. Additional information concerning system or component replacement costs (in today's dollars), typical expected useful lives, and remaining useful lives were estimated so that a funding schedule could be prepared. The Replacement Reserves Schedule presupposes that all required remedial work has been performed or that monies for remediation have been budgeted for items defined as Immediate Needs.
For the purposes of ‘bucketizing’ the System Expenditure Forecasts in this report, the Replacement Reserves have been subdivided and grouped as follows: Short Term (years 1-3), Near Term (years 4-5), Medium Term (years 6-10), and Long Term (years 11-20).
Key Findings
In an effort to highlight the most significant cost items and not be overwhelmed by the Replacement Reserves report in its totality, a subsection of Key Findings is included within the Executive Summary section of this report. Key Findings typically include repairs or replacements of deficient items within the first five-year window, as well as the most significant high-dollar line items that fall anywhere within the ten-year term. Note that while there is some subjectivity associated with identifying the Key Findings, the Immediate Needs are always included as a subset.
19
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
6. Certification
City of Clovis (the Client) retained Bureau Veritas to perform this Facility Condition Assessment in connection with its continued operation of Former Senior Center, 850 4th Street, Clovis, CA 93612, the “Property”. It is our understanding that the primary interest of the Client is to locate and evaluate materials and building system defects that might significantly affect the value of the property and to determine if the present Property has conditions that will have a significant impact on its continued operations.
The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the brief review of the plans and records made available to our Project Manager during the site visit, interviews of available property management personnel and maintenance contractors familiar with the Property, appropriate inquiry of municipal authorities, our Project Manager’s walk-through observations during the site visit, and our experience with similar properties.
No testing, exploratory probing, dismantling or operating of equipment or in-depth studies were performed unless specifically required under the Purpose and Scope section of this report. This assessment did not include engineering calculations to determine the adequacy of the Property’s original design or existing systems. Although walk-through observations were performed, not all areas may have been observed (see Section 1 for specific details). There may be defects in the Property, which were in areas not observed or readily accessible, may not have been visible, or were not disclosed by management personnel when questioned. The report describes property conditions at the time that the observations and research were conducted.
This report has been prepared for and is exclusively for the use and benefit of the Client identified on the cover page of this report. The purpose for which this report shall be used shall be limited to the use as stated in the contract between the client and Bureau Veritas.
This report, or any of the information contained therein, is not for the use or benefit of, nor may it be relied upon by any other person or entity, for any purpose without the advance written consent of Bureau Veritas.
Any reuse or distribution without such consent shall be at the client's or recipient's sole risk, without liability to Bureau Veritas.
If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact Program Manager Aspen Arnthorsdottir at [email protected] or at 800.733.0660 x7296006.
Prepared by:
Jordy Osborne
Project Assessor
Reviewed by:
Everett Kyniston
Technical Report Reviewer
20
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
7. Appendices
Appendix A: Photographic Record
Appendix B: Site Plan(s)
Appendix C: Pre-Survey Questionnaire(s)
Appendix D: Accessibility Review and Photos
Appendix E: Component Condition Report
Appendix F: Replacement Reserves
Appendix G: Equipment Inventory List
21
FORMER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix A:
Photographic Record
Photographic Overview
BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
FORMER SENIOR CENTER
1 - FRONT ELEVATION 2 - LEFT ELEVATION
3 - REAR ELEVATION 4 - RIGHT ELEVATION
5 - ROOF OVERVIEW 6 - LOBBY
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Photographic Overview
BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
FORMER SENIOR CENTER
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
7 - FRONT OFFICES 8 - OFFICE
9 - MULTIPURPOSE ROOM 10 - INTERIOR
11 - INTERIOR 12 - INTERIOR
Photographic Overview
BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-037.468
FORMER SENIOR CENTER
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
13 - RESTROOM 14 - SINGLE RESTROOM
15 - BOILER ROOM 16 - UTILITY CLOSET
17 - EXTERIOR MECHANICAL SPACE 18 - WALKWAYS
FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
Bureau Veritas
6021 University Boulevard, Suite 200 | Ellicott City, MD 21043 | www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Fire Station 2
2300 Minnewawa Avenue
Clovis, CA 93612
prepared for
City of Clovis
1033 Fifth Street
Clovis, CA 93612
Mr. Benjamin Little
PREPARED BY:
Bureau Veritas
6021 University Boulevard, Suite 200
Ellicott City, MD 21043
800.733.0660
www.bvna.com
BV CONTACT:
Aspen Arnthorsdottir
Program Manager
800.733.0660 x7296006
thorgerdur.arnthorsdottir@bureauverit
as.com
BV PROJECT #:
172616.25R000-013.468
DATE OF REPORT:
to be filled in by CD
ON SITE DATE:
July 29, 2025
Attachment 2
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Executive Summary .................................................................................................
Property Overview and Assessment Details ..............................................................
Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies .........................................................
Facility Condition Index (FCI) .....................................................................................
Immediate Needs .......................................................................................................
Key Findings ..............................................................................................................
Plan Types .................................................................................................................
2. Building Systems and Site Elements .....................................................................
3. ADA Accessibility ..................................................................................................
4. Purpose and Scope ...............................................................................................
5. Opinions of Probable Costs ..................................................................................
Methodology ............................................................................................................
Definitions ................................................................................................................
6. Certification ............................................................................................................
7. Appendices ............................................................................................................ ..
1 1
2 3
5 6
7 8
12 14
16 16
17 18
19
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
1 www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
1. Executive Summary
Property Overview and Assessment Details
General Information
Property Type Fire Station
Number of Buildings 1
Main Address Fire Station 2, 2300 Minnewawa Avenue, Clovis, CA 93612
Site Developed 2025
Outside Occupants / Leased
Spaces
None
Date(s) of Visit July 29, 2025
Management Point of Contact City of Clovis, Community Investment Program Mr. Benjamin Little, Engineer II
559.324.2365
[email protected]
On-site Point of Contact (POC) Ben
Assessment & Report Prepared By Jordy Osborne
Reviewed By Rashad Alnial for,
Aspen Arnthorsdottir
Program Manager
800.733.0660 x7296006
[email protected]
AssetCalc Link Full dataset for this assessment can be found at:
https://www.assetcalc.net/
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
2 www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies
Historical Summary
Fire Station 2 is in excellent condition because it was just built in 2025. The original building was built many years ago but was demolished and the new station was built and completed this year.
Architectural
This building is constructed with traditional wood framing throughout. No structural related issues were observed at the time of the assessment.
Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Fire (MEPF)
The building's mechanical equipment consists of evaporative coolers and a VRV heat pump feeding fan coils and VRV terminal units. Supplementary units, for the utility spaces, consist of ductless split systems and unit heaters.
The electrical system is in excellent condition and is sufficient for the building’s needs. No issues were observed at the time of the assessment.
The plumbing system and fixtures are in excellent condition. No issues were observed at the time of the assessment.
The building has standard fire alarm and suppression equipment. Which include, but are not limited to, alarms, strobes, pull stations, a sprinkler system, and fire extinguishers. No issues were observed at the time of the assessment.
Site
The site has excellent concrete driveways and parking lot. The front of the building has driveways and walkways to allow access to the building. On the south side of the building there are vehicle gates securing the back parking lot and rear access to the building. No issues were observed at the time of the assessment.
Recommended Additional Studies
No additional studies recommended at this time.
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
3 www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Facility Condition Index (FCI)
One of the major goals of the FCA is to calculate the Facility Condition Index (FCI), which provides a theoretical objective indication of a facility’s overall condition. The FCI is defined as the ratio of the cost of current needs divided by the current replacement value (CRV) of the facility. The chart below presents the industry standard ranges and cut-off points.
FCI Ranges and Description
0 – 5% In new or well-maintained condition, with little visual evidence of wear or deficiencies. 5 – 10% Subjected to wear but is still in a serviceable and functioning condition. 10 – 30% Subjected to hard or long-term wear. Nearing the end of its useful or serviceable life. 30% and above Has reached the end of its useful or serviceable life. Renewal is now necessary.
The deficiencies and lifecycle needs identified in this assessment provide the basis for a portfolio-wide capital improvement funding strategy. In addition to the current FCI, extended FCI’s have been developed to provide owners the intelligence needed to plan and budget for the “keep-up costs” for their facilities. As such the 3- year, 5-year, and 10-year FCI’s are calculated by dividing the anticipated needs of those respective time periods by current replacement value. As a final point, the FCI’s ultimately provide more value when used to relatively compare facilities across a portfolio instead of being over-analyzed and scrutinized as stand-alone mathematical values. The table below presents the current, 3-year, 5-year, and 10-year FCI’s for this facility:
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
4 www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
NEEDS OVER TIME: The vertical blue bars in the graphic below represent the year-by-year needs identified for the facility. The orange line forecasts what would happen to the FCI (left Y axis) over time, assuming zero capital expenditures over the next ten years. The dollar amounts allocated for each year are associated with the values along the right Y axis.
Needs by Year with Unaddressed FCI Over Time
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
5 www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Immediate Needs
There are no immediate needs to report.
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
6 www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Key Findings
There are no key findings to report.
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Plan Types
Each line item in the cost database is assigned a Plan Type, which is the primary reason or rationale for the recommended replacement, repair, or other corrective action. This is the “why” part of the equation. A cost or line item may commonly have more than one applicable Plan Type; however, only one Plan Type will be assigned based on the “best” fit, typically the one with the greatest significance and highest on the list below.
Plan Type Descriptions & Distribution
Safety An observed or reported unsafe condition that if left unaddressed could result in injury; a system or component that presents potential liability risk.
Performance/Integrity Component or system has failed, is almost failing, performs unreliably, does not perform as intended, and/or poses risk to overall system stability.
Accessibility Does not meet ADA, UFAS, and/or other accessibility requirements.
Environmental Improvements to air or water quality, including removal of hazardous materials from the building or site.
Retrofit/Adaptation Components, systems, or spaces recommended for upgrades in order to meet current standards, facility usage, or client/occupant needs.
Aged But Functional Any component or system that has aged past its industry-average expected useful life (EUL) but is not currently deficient or problematic.
Lifecycle/Renewal Any component or system that is neither deficient nor aged past EUL but for which future replacement or repair is anticipated and budgeted.
7
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
2. Building Systems and Site Elements
Building Systems Summary
Address 2300 Minnewawa Avenue, Clovis, CA 93612
GPS Coordinates 36.8057208, -119.7095258
Constructed/Renovated 2025
Building Area 8,488 SF
Number of Stories 1 above grade
System Description Condition
Structure Conventional wood frame structure over concrete slab foundation
Excellent
Facade Primary Wall Finish: Wood siding
Secondary Wall Finish: Brick
Windows: Aluminum
Excellent
Roof Primary: Flat construction with single-ply TPO/PVC membrane Secondary: Gable and hip construction with metal finish
Excellent
Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board, vinyl, and ceramic tile Floors: Carpet, ceramic tile, rubber tile, and sealed concrete Ceilings: Painted gypsum board and ACT
Excellent
Elevators None
n/a
Plumbing Distribution: PEX supply and PVC waste & venting Hot Water: Gas water heater with integral tank
Fixtures: Toilets, urinals, and sinks in restrooms
Excellent
8
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Building Systems Summary
HVAC Non-Central System: Evaporative coolers, VRV heat pump feeding fan coils and VRV terminal units
Supplemental components: Ductless split-systems, suspended unit heaters
Excellent
Fire Suppression Wet-pipe sprinkler system and fire extinguishers, and kitchen hood system
Excellent
Electrical Source & Distribution: Main switchboard with aluminum wiring Interior Lighting: LED
Emergency Power: Diesel generator with automatic transfer switch
Excellent
Fire Alarm Alarm panel with smoke detectors, heat detectors, alarms, strobes, pull stations, back-up emergency lights, and exit signs
Excellent
Equipment/Special None
n/a
Accessibility Presently it does not appear an accessibility study is needed for this building. See the appendix for associated photos and additional information.
Additional Studies No additional studies are currently recommended for the building.
Areas Observed The interior spaces were observed to gain a clear understanding of the facility's overall condition. Other areas accessed and assessed included the exterior equipment and assets directly serving the building, the exterior walls of the facility, and the roofs.
Key Spaces Not
Observed
All key areas of the facility were accessible and observed.
9
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Site Information
Site Area 0.86 acres
Parking Spaces 11 spaces in a gated lot; 1 non-gated accessible parking space.
System Description Condition
Site Pavement Concrete lots with adjacent concrete sidewalks, curbs, and ramps
Excellent
Site Development Building-mounted and property entrance signage; CMU wall fencing; CMU wall dumpster enclosures
Excellent
Landscaping &
Topography
Significant landscaping features including lawns, trees, and bushes
Irrigation present
Low to moderate site slopes throughout
Excellent
Utilities Municipal water and sewer
Local utility-provided electric and natural gas
Excellent
Site Lighting Pole-mounted: LED
Building-mounted: LED
Pedestrian walkway and landscape accent lighting
Excellent
Ancillary Structures None
n/a
Site Accessibility Presently it does not appear an accessibility study is needed for the exterior and site areas. See the appendix for associated photos and additional information.
Site Additional Studies No additional studies are currently recommended for the site areas.
Site Areas Observed The exterior areas within the property boundaries were observed to gain a clear understanding of the site's overall condition.
Site Key Spaces Not
Observed
All key areas of the exterior site were accessible and observed.
10
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
The table below shows the anticipated costs by trade or building system over the next 20 years.
Fire Station 2: System Expenditure Forecast
System Immediate
Short Term
(1-2 yr)
Near Term
(3-5 yr)
Med Term
(6-10 yr)
Long Term
(11-20 yr)
TOTAL
Facade $0 $0 $0 $0 $71,652 $71,652
Roofing $0 $0 $0 $0 $220,130 $220,130
Interiors $0 $0 $0 $73,548 $115,772 $189,320
Plumbing $0 $0 $0 $0 $93,424 $93,424
HVAC $0 $0 $0 $0 $487,161 $487,161
Fire Protection $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 $333,093 $333,093
Fire Alarm &
Electronic Systems
$0 $0 $0 $0 $188,024 $188,024
Equipment &
Furnishings
$0 $0 $0 $14,605 $261,397 $276,002
Sitework $0 $0 $0 $0 $206,208 $206,208
TOTALS $0 $0 $0 $88,200 $1,976,900 $2,065,100
11
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
3. ADA Accessibility
Generally, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination by entities to access and use of “areas of public accommodations” and “public facilities” on the basis of disability. Regardless of their age, these areas and facilities must be maintained and operated to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG).
A public entity (i.e. city governments) shall operate each service, program, or activity so that the service, program, or activity, when viewed in its entirety, is readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities.
However, this does not:
1. Necessarily require a public entity to make each of its existing facilities accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities;
2. Require a public entity to take any action that would threaten or destroy the historic significance of an historic property; or
3. Require a public entity to take any action that it can demonstrate would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of a service, program, or activity or in undue financial and administrative burdens. In those circumstances where personnel of the public entity believe that the proposed action would fundamentally alter the service, program, or activity or would result in undue financial and administrative burdens, a public entity has the burden of proving that compliance with 35.150(a) of this part would result in such alteration or burdens. The decision that compliance would result in such alteration or burdens must be made by the head of a public entity or his or her designee after considering all resources available for use in the funding and operation of the service, program, or activity, and must be accompanied by a written statement of the reasons for reaching that conclusion. If an action would result in such an alteration or such burdens, a public entity shall take any other action that would not result in such an alteration or such burdens but would nevertheless ensure that individuals with disabilities receive the benefits or services provided by the public entity.
Removal of barriers to accessibility should be addressed from a liability standpoint in order to comply with federal law, but the barriers may or may not be building code violations. The Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines are part of the ADA federal civil rights law pertaining to the disabled and are not a construction code. State and local jurisdictions have adopted the ADA Guidelines or have adopted other standards for accessibility as part of their construction codes.
During the FCA, Bureau Veritas performed a limited high-level accessibility review of the facility non-specific to any local regulations or codes. The scope of the visual observation was limited to the same areas observed while performing the FCA and the categories set forth in the material included in the appendix. It is understood by the Client that the limited observations described herein do not comprise a full ADA Compliance Survey, and that such a survey is beyond the scope of this assessment. A full measured ADA survey would be required to identify more specific potential accessibility issues. Additional clarifications of this limited survey:
This survey was visual in nature and actual measurements were not taken to verify compliance Only a representative sample of areas was observed
Two overview photos were taken for each subsection regardless of perceived compliance or non- compliance
Itemized costs for individual non-compliant items are included in the dataset For any “none” boxes checked or reference to “no issues” identified, that alone does not guarantee full compliance
12
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
The facility was originally constructed in 2025. The facility has not since been substantially renovated. Based on the relatively recent construction date/s, most accessibility considerations were incorporated into the original design and construction.
No costs or detailed follow-up study are currently recommended since this facility is neither accessible to the general public nor a place where employees regularly work or reside. Accessibility accommodations will reportedly be made when and if use changes or specific needs arise. Reference the appendix for specific data, photos, and tables or checklists associated with this limited accessibility survey.
13
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
4. Purpose and Scope
Purpose
Bureau Veritas was retained by the client to render an opinion as to the Property’s current general physical condition on the day of the site visit.
Based on the observations, interviews and document review outlined below, this report identifies significant deferred maintenance issues, existing deficiencies, and material code violations of record, which affect the Property’s use. Opinions are rendered as to its structural integrity, building system condition and the Property’s overall condition. The report also notes building systems or components that have realized or exceeded their typical expected useful lives.
The physical condition of building systems and related components are typically defined as being in one of five condition ratings. For the purposes of this report, the following definitions are used:
Condition Ratings
Excellent New or very close to new; component or system typically has been installed within the past year, sound and performing its function. Eventual repair or replacement will be required when the component or system either reaches the end of its useful life or fails in service.
Good Satisfactory as-is. Component or system is sound and performing its function, typically within the first third of its lifecycle. However, it may show minor signs of normal wear and tear. Repair or replacement will be required when the component or system either reaches the end of its useful life or fails in service.
Fair Showing signs of wear and use but still satisfactory as-is, typically near the median of its estimated useful life. Component or system is performing adequately at this time but may exhibit some signs of wear, deferred maintenance, or evidence of previous repairs. Repair or replacement will be required due to the component or system’s condition and/or its estimated remaining useful life.
Poor Component or system is significantly aged, flawed, functioning intermittently or unreliably; displays obvious signs of deferred maintenance; shows evidence of previous repair or workmanship not in compliance with commonly accepted standards; has become obsolete; or exhibits an inherent deficiency. The present condition could contribute to or cause the deterioration of contiguous elements or systems. Either full component replacement is needed or repairs are required to restore to good condition, prevent premature failure, and/or prolong useful life.
Failed Component or system has ceased functioning or performing as intended.
Replacement, repair, or other significant corrective action is recommended or required.
Not Applicable Assigning a condition does not apply or make logical sense, most commonly due to the item in question not being present.
14
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Scope
The standard scope of the Facility Condition Assessment includes the following:
Visit the Property to evaluate the general condition of the building and site improvements, review available construction documents in order to familiarize ourselves with, and be able to comment on, the in-place construction systems, life safety, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, and the general built environment.
Identify those components that are exhibiting deferred maintenance issues and provide cost estimates for Immediate Costs and Replacement Reserves based on observed conditions, maintenance history and industry standard useful life estimates. This will include the review of documented capital improvements completed within the last five-year period and work currently contracted for, if applicable. Provide a full description of the Property with descriptions of in-place systems and commentary on observed conditions.
Provide a high-level categorical general statement regarding the subject Property’s compliance to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This will not constitute a full ADA survey, but will help identify exposure to issues and the need for further review.
Obtain background and historical information about the facility from a building engineer, property manager, maintenance staff, or other knowledgeable source. The preferred methodology is to have the client representative or building occupant complete a Pre-Survey Questionnaire (PSQ) in advance of the site visit.
Common alternatives include a verbal interview just prior to or during the walk-through portion of the assessment.
Review maintenance records and procedures with the in-place maintenance personnel. Observe a representative sample of the interior spaces/units, including vacant spaces/units, to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition. Other areas to be observed include the exterior of the property, the roofs, interior common areas, and the significant mechanical, electrical and elevator equipment rooms.
Provide recommendations for additional studies, if required, with related budgetary information. Provide an Executive Summary at the beginning of this report, which highlights key findings and includes a Facility Condition Index as a basis for comparing the relative conditions of the buildings within the portfolio.
15
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
5. Opinions of Probable Costs
Cost estimates are embedded throughout this report, including the very detailed Replacement Reserves report in the appendix. The cost estimates are predominantly based on construction rehabilitation costs developed by the RSMeans data from Gordian. While the RSMeans data from Gordian is the primary reference source for the Bureau Veritas cost library, secondary and supporting sources include but are not limited to other industry experts’ work, such as Marshall & Swift and CBRE Whitestone. For improved accuracy, additional research integrated with Bureau Veritas’s historical experience with past costs for similar properties, city cost indexes, and assumptions regarding future economic conditions also come into play when deemed necessary.
Invoice or bid documents provided either by the owner or facility construction resources may be reviewed early in the process or for specific projects as warranted.
Opinions of probable costs should only be construed as preliminary, order of magnitude budgets. Actual costs most probably will vary from the consultant’s opinions of probable costs depending on such matters as type and design of suggested remedy, quality of materials and installation, manufacturer and type of equipment or system selected, field conditions, whether a physical deficiency is repaired or replaced in whole, phasing or bundling of the work (if applicable), quality of contractor, quality of project management exercised, market conditions, use of subcontractors, and whether competitive pricing is solicited, etc. Certain opinions of probable costs cannot be developed within the scope of this guide without further study. Opinions of probable cost for further study should be included in the FCA.
Methodology
Based upon site observations, research, and judgment, along with referencing Expected Useful Life (EUL) tables from various industry sources, Bureau Veritas opines as to when a system or component will most probably necessitate replacement. Accurate historical replacement records, if provided, are typically the best source of information. Exposure to the elements, initial quality and installation, extent of use, the quality and amount of preventive maintenance exercised, etc., are all factors that impact the effective age of a system or component. As a result, a system or component may have an effective age that is greater or less than its actual chronological age. The Remaining Useful Life (RUL) of a component or system equals the EUL less its effective age, whether explicitly or implicitly stated. Projections of Remaining Useful Life (RUL) are based primarily on age and condition with the presumption of continued use and maintenance of the Property similar to the observed and reported past use and maintenance practices, in conjunction with the professional judgment of Bureau Veritas’s assessors. Significant changes in occupants and/or usage may affect the service life of some systems or components.
Where quantities could not be or were not derived from an actual construction document take-off or facility walk-through, and/or where systemic costs are more applicable or provide more intrinsic value, budgetary square foot and gross square foot costs are used. Estimated costs are based on professional judgment and the probable or actual extent of the observed defect, inclusive of the cost to design, procure, construct and manage the corrections.
To account for differences in prices between locations, the base costs are modified by geographical location factors to adjust for to market conditions, transportation costs, or other local contributors. When requested by the client, the costs may be further adjusted by several additional factors including; labor rates (prevailing minimum wage), general contractor fees for profit and overhead, and insurance. If desired, costs for design and permits, and a contingency factor, may also be included in the calculations.
16
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Definitions
Immediate Needs
Immediate Needs are line items that require immediate action as a result of: (1) material existing or potential unsafe conditions, (2) failed or imminent failure of mission critical building systems or components, or (3) conditions that, if not addressed, have the potential to result in, or contribute to, critical element or system failure within one year or will most probably result in a significant escalation of its remedial cost.
For database and reporting purposes the line items with RUL=0 and commonly associated with Safety or Performance/Integrity Plan Types, are considered Immediate Needs.
Replacement Reserves
Cost line items traditionally called Replacement Reserves (equivalently referred to as Lifecycle/Renewals) are for recurring probable renewals or expenditures, which are not classified as operation or maintenance expenses. The replacement reserves should be budgeted for in advance on an annual basis. Replacement Reserves are reasonably predictable both in terms of frequency and cost. However, Replacement Reserves may also include components or systems that have an indeterminable life but, nonetheless, have a potential for failure within an estimated time period.
Replacement Reserves generally exclude systems or components that are estimated to expire after the reserve term and are not considered material to the structural and mechanical integrity of the subject property.
Furthermore, systems and components that are not deemed to have a material effect on the use of the Property are also excluded. Costs that are caused by acts of God, accidents, or other occurrences that are typically covered by insurance, rather than reserved for, are also excluded.
Replacement costs are solicited from ownership/property management, Bureau Veritas’s discussions with service companies, manufacturers' representatives, and previous experience in preparing such schedules for other similar facilities. Costs for work performed by the ownership’s or property management’s maintenance staff are also considered.
Bureau Veritas’s reserve methodology involves identification and quantification of those systems or components requiring capital reserve funds within the assessment period. The assessment period is defined as the effective age plus the reserve term. Additional information concerning system or component replacement costs (in today's dollars), typical expected useful lives, and remaining useful lives were estimated so that a funding schedule could be prepared. The Replacement Reserves Schedule presupposes that all required remedial work has been performed or that monies for remediation have been budgeted for items defined as Immediate Needs.
For the purposes of ‘bucketizing’ the System Expenditure Forecasts in this report, the Replacement Reserves have been subdivided and grouped as follows: Short Term (years 1-3), Near Term (years 4-5), Medium Term (years 6-10), and Long Term (years 11-20).
Key Findings
In an effort to highlight the most significant cost items and not be overwhelmed by the Replacement Reserves report in its totality, a subsection of Key Findings is included within the Executive Summary section of this report. Key Findings typically include repairs or replacements of deficient items within the first five-year window, as well as the most significant high-dollar line items that fall anywhere within the ten-year term. Note that while there is some subjectivity associated with identifying the Key Findings, the Immediate Needs are always included as a subset.
17
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
6. Certification
City of Clovis (the Client) retained Bureau Veritas to perform this Facility Condition Assessment in connection with its continued operation of Fire Station 2, 2300 Minnewawa Avenue, Clovis, CA 93612, the “Property”. It is our understanding that the primary interest of the Client is to locate and evaluate materials and building system defects that might significantly affect the value of the property and to determine if the present Property has conditions that will have a significant impact on its continued operations.
The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the brief review of the plans and records made available to our Project Manager during the site visit, interviews of available property management personnel and maintenance contractors familiar with the Property, appropriate inquiry of municipal authorities, our Project Manager’s walk-through observations during the site visit, and our experience with similar properties.
No testing, exploratory probing, dismantling or operating of equipment or in-depth studies were performed unless specifically required under the Purpose and Scope section of this report. This assessment did not include engineering calculations to determine the adequacy of the Property’s original design or existing systems. Although walk-through observations were performed, not all areas may have been observed (see Section 1 for specific details). There may be defects in the Property, which were in areas not observed or readily accessible, may not have been visible, or were not disclosed by management personnel when questioned. The report describes property conditions at the time that the observations and research were conducted.
This report has been prepared for and is exclusively for the use and benefit of the Client identified on the cover page of this report. The purpose for which this report shall be used shall be limited to the use as stated in the contract between the client and Bureau Veritas.
This report, or any of the information contained therein, is not for the use or benefit of, nor may it be relied upon by any other person or entity, for any purpose without the advance written consent of Bureau Veritas.
Any reuse or distribution without such consent shall be at the client's or recipient's sole risk, without liability to Bureau Veritas.
If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact Program Manager Aspen Arnthorsdottir at [email protected] or at 800.733.0660 x7296006.
Prepared by:
Jordy Osborne
Project Assessor
Reviewed by:
Rashad Alnial
Technical Report Reviewer
18
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
7. Appendices
Appendix A: Photographic Record
Appendix B: Site Plan(s)
Appendix C: Pre-Survey Questionnaire(s)
Appendix D: Accessibility Review and Photos
Appendix E: Component Condition Report
Appendix F: Replacement Reserves
Appendix G: Equipment Inventory List
19
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468
www.bvna.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix A:
Photographic Record
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468 Photographic Overview www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 - FRONT ELEVATION
2 - LEFT ELEVATION
3 - REAR ELEVATION
4 - RIGHT ELEVATION
5 - ROOF OVERVIEW
6 - FRONT OFFICE
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468 Photographic Overview www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
7 - DORM ROOM
8 - HALLWAY
9 - APPARATUS BAY
10 - TURN OUT ROOM
11 - WORK ROOM
12 - GYM
FIRE STATION 2 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 172616.25R000-013.468 Photographic Overview www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
13 - LAUNDRY ROOM
14 - KITCHEN
15 - RESTROOM
16 - ELECTRICAL ROOM
17 - RISER ROOM
18 - REAR PARKING LOT
Report to the City Council
To: City Council
From: Administration
Date: March 2, 2026
Staff: Chad McCollum, Economic Development, Housing, and Communication Director, Taylor Danielson, Communications and Marketing Analyst Subject: Receive and File - Report on the 2025 National Community Survey (NCS) results.
Recommendation: Receive and File
Attachments:
1. 2025 NCS Results ATT 1 Report
Recommendation:
That the City of Clovis City Council receive and file the National Community Survey for Clovis, CA, Report of Results, 2025.
Executive Summary:
The National Community Survey, conducted September 5, 2025, to October 17, 2025, seeks to gauge public sentiment on issues related to the quality of life for residents in the City of Clovis.
Results from the survey are included in this staff report as an attachment.
Background:
Every two years since 2013, the City of Clovis has partnered with the National Research Center/Polco to conduct a comprehensive, scientific survey of randomly selected residents. The survey focuses on the livability of Clovis, including public safety, utilities, economy, parks & recreation, etc., and how we compare to similar cities.
Fiscal Impact:
The City of Clovis budgets for this survey to be conducted every two years. Funds for the 2025 National Community Survey were budgeted in the 2025-2026 fiscal year budget.
Reason for Recommendation:
City Departments will utilize the information gathered in decision-making for the next two years.
Actions Following Approval:
No action is requested.
Conflict of Interest:
None.
Clovis, CA
The National Community Survey
Report of Results
2025
Visit us online!
www.polco.us
National Research Center at Polco
is a charter member of the AAPOR
Transparency Initiative, providing
clear disclosure of our sound and
ethical survey research practices.
Report by:
Attachment 1
About The NCS™
The National Community Survey™ (The NCS™) report is about the “livability” of Clovis. A livable community is a place that is not simply habitable, but that is desirable. It is not only where people do live, but where they want to live. The survey was developed by the experts from National Research Center at Polco.
Great communities are partnerships of the government, private sector, community-based organizations and residents, all geographically connected. The NCS captures residents’ opinions considering ten central facets of a community:
•
Economy
•
Mobility
•
Community Design
•
Utilities
•
Safety
•
Natural Environment
•
Parks and Recreation
•
Health and Wellness
•
Education, Arts, and Culture
•
Inclusivity and Engagement
How the results are reported
For the most part, the percentages presented in the following tabs represent the “percent positive.” Most commonly, the percent positive is the combination of the top two most positive response options (i.e., excellent/good, very safe/somewhat safe, etc.). On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer “don’t know.” The proportion of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in the tab “Complete data.” However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in most of the tabs. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item.
Comparisons to benchmarks
NRC’s database of comparative resident opinion is comprised of resident perspectives gathered in surveys from over 500 communities whose residents evaluated the same kinds of topics on The National Community Survey.
The comparison evaluations are from the most recent survey completed in each community in the last five years.
NRC adds the latest results quickly upon survey completion, keeping the benchmark data fresh and relevant. The communities in the database represent a wide geographic and population range. In each tab, Clovis's results are noted as being “higher” than the benchmark, “lower” than the benchmark, or “similar” to the benchmark, meaning that the average rating given by Clovis residents is statistically similar to or different (greater or lesser) than the benchmark. Being rated as “higher” or “lower” than the benchmark means that Clovis's average rating for a particular item was more than 10 points different than the benchmark. If a rating was “much higher” or “much lower,” then Clovis's average rating was more than 20 points different when compared to the benchmark.
In addition to these national benchmarks, comparisons were also made to a smaller cohort of communities that aligned more closely to the demographics in Clovis . This cohort included communities within western states with populations between 60,000 and 130,000 and a median household income of or below $110,000. Comparisons to these communities can be found throughout the report and in a separate table in the Custom Benchmarks tab.
Trends over time
Trend data for Clovis represent important comparison data and should be examined for improvements or declines.¹ Deviations from stable trends over time represent opportunities for understanding how local policies, programs, or public information may have affected residents' opinions. Changes between survey years have been noted with an arrow and the percent difference. If the difference is greater than seven percentage points between the 2023 and 2025 surveys, the change is statistically significant.
1.In 2020, The NCS survey was updated to include new and refreshed items. Consequently, some of the trends may be impacted due to wording modifications that could have potentially altered the meaning of the item for the respondent.
The report provides the opinions of a representative sample of 333 residents of the City of Clovis collected from September 5th, 2025 to October 17th, 2025. The margin of error around any reported percentage is 5% for all respondents and the response rate for the 2025 survey was 11%. Survey results were weighted so that the demographic profile of respondents was representative of the demographic profile of adults in Clovis. 1
About The NCS™
The National Community Survey™ (The NCS™) report is about the “livability” of Clovis. A livable community is a place that is not simply habitable, but that is desirable. It is not only where people do live, but where they want to live. The survey was developed by the experts from National Research Center at Polco.
Great communities are partnerships of the government, private sector, community-based organizations and residents, all geographically connected. The NCS captures residents’ opinions considering ten central facets of a community:
• Economy
• Mobility
• Community Design
• Utilities
• Safety
• Natural Environment
• Parks and Recreation
• Health and Wellness
• Education, Arts, and Culture
• Inclusivity and Engagement
Howthe results are reported
For the most part, the percentages presented in the following tabs represent the “percent positive.” Most commonly, the percent positive is the combination of the top two most positive response options (i.e., excellent/good, very safe/somewhat safe, etc.). On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer “don’t know.” The proportion of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in the tab “Complete data.” However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in most of the tabs. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item.
Comparisons to benchmarks
NRC’s database of comparative resident opinion is comprised of resident perspectives gathered in surveys from over 500 communities whose residents evaluated the same kinds of topics on The National Community Survey.
The comparison evaluations are from the most recent survey completed in each community in the last five years.
NRC adds the latest results quickly upon survey completion, keeping the benchmark data fresh and relevant. The communities in the database represent a wide geographic and population range. In each tab, Clovis's results are noted as being “higher” than the benchmark, “lower” than the benchmark, or “similar” to the benchmark, meaning that the average rating given by Clovis residents is statistically similar to or different (greater or lesser) than the benchmark. Being rated as “higher” or “lower” than the benchmark means that Clovis's average rating for a particular item was more than 10 points different than the benchmark. If a rating was “much higher” or “much lower,” then Clovis's average rating was more than 20 points different when compared to the benchmark.
In addition to these national benchmarks, comparisons were also made to a smaller cohort of communities that aligned more closely to the demographics in Clovis . This cohort included communities within western states with populations between 60,000 and 130,000 and a median household income of or below $110,000. Comparisons to these communities can be found throughout the report and in a separate table in the Custom Benchmarks tab.
Trends over time
Trend data for Clovis represent important comparison data and should be examined for improvements or declines.¹ Deviations from stable trends over time represent opportunities for understanding how local policies, programs, or public information may have affected residents' opinions. Changes between survey years have been noted with an arrow and the percent difference. If the difference is greater than seven percentage points between the 2023 and 2025 surveys, the change is statistically significant.
1.In 2020, The NCS survey was updated to include new and refreshed items. Consequently, some of the trends may be impacted due to wording modifications that could have potentially altered the meaning of the item for the respondent.
The report provides the opinions of a representative sample of 333 residents of the City of Clovis collected from September 5th, 2025 to October 17th, 2025. The margin of error around any reported percentage is 5% for all respondents and the response rate for the 2025 survey was 11%. Survey results were weighted so that the demographic profile of respondents was representative of the demographic profile of adults in Clovis. 2
Conducting the survey
The 3,000 randomly selected households received mailings beginning on September 5th, 2025 and data collection for the survey remained open for 6 weeks. The first mailing was a postcard inviting the household to participate in the survey. The next mailing contained a cover letter with instructions, the survey questionnaire, and a postage-paid return envelope. All mailings included a web link to give residents the opportunity to respond to the survey online, as well as QR codes to further encourage participation. All follow-up mailings asked those who had not completed the survey to do so, and those who had already done so to refrain from completing the survey again.
The survey was available in English, Spanish, and Hmong. All mailings contained paragraphs in all languages instructing participants on how to complete the survey in their preferred language.
About 2% of the 3,000 mailed invitations or surveys were returned because the household address was vacant or the postal service was unable to deliver the survey as addressed. Of the remaining 2,935 households that received the invitations to participate, 333 completed the survey, providing an overall response rate of 11%. The response rate was calculated using AAPOR’s response rate #2 for mailed surveys of unnamed persons.² It is customary to describe the precision of estimates made from surveys by a “level of confidence” and accompanying “confidence interval” (or margin of error). A traditional level of confidence, and the one used here, is 95%. The 95% confidence interval can be any size and quantifies the sampling error or imprecision of the survey results because some residents’ opinions are relied on to estimate all residents’ opinions. The margin of error for the City of Clovis survey is no greater than plus or minus five percentage points around any given percent reported for all respondents (333 completed surveys).
In addition to the randomly selected “probability sample” of households, a link to an online open-participation survey was publicized by the City of Clovis. The open-participation survey was identical to the random sample survey, with two small updates; it asked a question to confirm the respondent was a resident of Clovis and also a question about where they heard about the survey. The open-participation survey was open to all city residents and became available on October 3rd, 2025. The survey remained open for 2 weeks. The data presented in the following tabs exclude the open participation survey data, but a tab at the end provides the complete frequency of responses to questions by the open-participation respondents.
The survey datasets were analyzed using all or some of a combination of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), R, Python and Tableau. For the most part, the percentages presented in the reports represent the “percent positive.” The percent positive is the combination of the top two most positive response options (i.e., excellent/good, very safe/somewhat safe, essential/very important, etc.), or, in the case of resident behaviors/participation, the percent positive represents the proportion of respondents indicating “yes” or participating in an activity at least once a month.
On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer “don’t know.” The proportion of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in the tab “Complete data”. However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in the reports. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item.
Contact
The City of Clovis funded this research. Please contact Chad McCollum of the City of Clovis at [email protected] if you have any questions about the survey.
StudyLimitations
All public opinion research is subject to unmeasured error. While the methodologies employed for this survey were designed to minimize this error as much as possible, these other sources of potential error should be acknowledged.Non-responseerror arises when those who were selected to participate in the survey did not do so, and may have different opinions or experiences than those who did respond.Coverageerror refers to the possibility that some respondents that should have been included in the surveyed population were not (e.g., for a general resident survey, USPS mailing lists may exclude certain types of housing units, such as multi-family buildings where mail is delivered to a common area rather than to a specific unit (though this is rare), or where mail is received at a PO box instead of the at household's physical location. Finally,recallbias occurs when respondents may not perfectly remember their experiences in the past year (such as participation in social or civic events), andsocialdesirabilitybias may cause respondents to answer in ways they think cast their responses in a more favorable light.
SurveyValidity
See the Polco Knowledge Base article on survey validity athttps://blog.polco.us/polco-knowledgebase/margin-of- error-and-confidence-level-in-survey-results
2.See AAPOR's Standard Definitions for more information athttps://aapor.org/standards-and-ethics/standard-definitions/
3.Pasek, J. (2014). ANES Weighting Algorithm. Retrieved fromhttps://surveyinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Full-anesrake-paper.pdf
4.Targets come from the 2020 Census and 2023 American Community Survey Unweighted Weighted Target ⁴
Age 18-34
35-54
55+
Area Area 1 : North Herndon
Area 2 : SE Herndon & East of Fowler
Area 3 : SW of Herndon & West of Fowler
Hispanic
origin
No, not of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin
Yes, I consider myself to be of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin
Housing
tenure
Own
Rent
Housingtype Attached
Detached
Race&
Hispanic
origin
Not white alone
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino
Sex Man
Woman
Sex/age Man 18-34
Man 35-54
Man 55+
Woman 18-34
Woman 35-54
Woman 55+
Analyzing the data
Responses from mailed surveys were entered into an electronic dataset using a “key and verify” method, where all responses are entered twice and compared to each other. Any discrepancies were resolved in comparison to the original survey form. Range checks as well as other forms of quality control were also performed. Responses from surveys completed on Polco were downloaded and merged with the mailed survey responses.
The demographics of the survey respondents were compared to those found in the 2020 Census and 2023 American Community Survey estimates for adults in the City of Clovis. The primary objective of weighting survey data is to make the survey respondents reflective of the larger population of the community. The characteristics used for weighting were age, sex, race, Hispanic origin, housing type, housing tenure, and area. No adjustments were made for design effects. Weights were calculated using an iterative, multiplicative raking model known as the ANES Weighting Algorithm.³ The results of the weighting scheme for the probability sample are presented in the following table.
NRC aligns demographic labels with those used by the U.S. Census for reporting purposes, when possible. Some categories (e.g., age, race/Hispanic origin, housing type, and length of residency) are combined into smaller subgroups.
Methods
Selecting survey recipients
All households within the City of Clovis were eligible to participate in the survey. A list of all households within the zip codes serving Clovis was purchased from Polco's mailing vendor, Go-Dog Direct, based on updated listings from the United States Postal Service. Since some of the zip codes that serve the City of Clovis households may also serve addresses that lie outside of the community, the exact geographic location of each housing unit was compared to community boundaries using the most current municipal boundary file. Addresses located outside of the City of Clovis boundaries were removed from the list of potential households to survey. Each address identified as being within city boundaries was further identified as being within one of the three areas. From that list, addresses were randomly selected as survey recipients, with multi-family housing units (defined as those with a unit number) sampled at a rate of 5:3 compared to single family housing units.
An individual within each household was randomly selected using the "birthday method". The birthday method selects a person within the household by asking the “person who most recently had a birthday” to complete the questionnaire. The underlying assumption in this method is that day of birth has no relationship to the way people respond to surveys. This instruction was contained in the introduction of the survey. 3
Conductingthesurvey
The 3,000 randomly selected households received mailings beginning on September 5th, 2025 and data collection for the survey remained open for 6 weeks. The first mailing was a postcard inviting the household to participate in the survey. The next mailing contained a cover letter with instructions, the survey questionnaire, and a postage-paid return envelope. All mailings included a web link to give residents the opportunity to respond to the survey online, as well as QR codes to further encourage participation. All follow-up mailings asked those who had not completed the survey to do so, and those who had already done so to refrain from completing the survey again.
The survey was available in English, Spanish, and Hmong. All mailings contained paragraphs in all languages instructing participants on how to complete the survey in their preferred language.
About 2% of the 3,000 mailed invitations or surveys were returned because the household address was vacant or the postal service was unable to deliver the survey as addressed. Of the remaining 2,935 households that received the invitations to participate, 333 completed the survey, providing an overall response rate of 11%. The response rate was calculated using AAPOR’s response rate #2 for mailed surveys of unnamed persons.² It is customary to describe the precision of estimates made from surveys by a “level of confidence” and accompanying “confidence interval” (or margin of error). A traditional level of confidence, and the one used here, is 95%. The 95% confidence interval can be any size and quantifies the sampling error or imprecision of the survey results because some residents’ opinions are relied on to estimate all residents’ opinions. The margin of error for the City of Clovis survey is no greater than plus or minus five percentage points around any given percent reported for all respondents (333 completed surveys).
In addition to the randomly selected “probability sample” of households, a link to an online open-participation survey was publicized by the City of Clovis. The open-participation survey was identical to the random sample survey, with two small updates; it asked a question to confirm the respondent was a resident of Clovis and also a question about where they heard about the survey. The open-participation survey was open to all city residents and became available on October 3rd, 2025. The survey remained open for 2 weeks. The data presented in the following tabs exclude the open participation survey data, but a tab at the end provides the complete frequency of responses to questions by the open-participation respondents.
The survey datasets were analyzed using all or some of a combination of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), R, Python and Tableau. For the most part, the percentages presented in the reports represent the “percent positive.” The percent positive is the combination of the top two most positive response options (i.e., excellent/good, very safe/somewhat safe, essential/very important, etc.), or, in the case of resident behaviors/participation, the percent positive represents the proportion of respondents indicating “yes” or participating in an activity at least once a month.
On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer “don’t know.” The proportion of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in the tab “Complete data”. However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in the reports. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item.
Contact
The City of Clovis funded this research. Please contact Chad McCollum of the City of Clovis at [email protected] if you have any questions about the survey.
StudyLimitations
All public opinion research is subject to unmeasured error. While the methodologies employed for this survey were designed to minimize this error as much as possible, these other sources of potential error should be acknowledged.Non-responseerror arises when those who were selected to participate in the survey did not do so, and may have different opinions or experiences than those who did respond.Coverageerror refers to the possibility that some respondents that should have been included in the surveyed population were not (e.g., for a general resident survey, USPS mailing lists may exclude certain types of housing units, such as multi-family buildings where mail is delivered to a common area rather than to a specific unit (though this is rare), or where mail is received at a PO box instead of the at household's physical location. Finally,recallbias occurs when respondents may not perfectly remember their experiences in the past year (such as participation in social or civic events), andsocialdesirabilitybias may cause respondents to answer in ways they think cast their responses in a more favorable light.
SurveyValidity
See the Polco Knowledge Base article on survey validity athttps://blog.polco.us/polco-knowledgebase/margin-of- error-and-confidence-level-in-survey-results
2.See AAPOR's Standard Definitions for more information athttps://aapor.org/standards-and-ethics/standard-definitions/
3.Pasek, J. (2014). ANES Weighting Algorithm. Retrieved fromhttps://surveyinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Full-anesrake-paper.pdf
4.Targets come from the 2020 Census and 2023 American Community Survey Unweighted Weighted Target ⁴
Age 18-34
35-54
55+
Area Area 1 : North Herndon
Area 2 : SE Herndon & East of Fowler
Area 3 : SW of Herndon & West of Fowler
Hispanic
origin
No, not of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin
Yes, I consider myself to be of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin
Housing
tenure
Own
Rent
Housing type Attached
Detached
Race &
Hispanic
origin
Not white alone
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino
Sex Man
Woman
Sex/age Man 18-34
Man 35-54
Man 55+
Woman 18-34
Woman 35-54
Woman 55+
34%
37%
29%
34%
37%
28%
69%
22%
9%
41%
33%
26%
41%
33%
26%
40%
30%
30%
28%
72%
28%
72%
18%
82%
34%
66%
34%
66%
26%
74%
76%
24%
76%
24%
81%
19%
52%
48%
52%
48%
67%
33%
53%
47%
53%
47%
55%
45%
19%
19%
15%
15%
18%
14%
19%
19%
15%
15%
18%
14%
37%
14%
4%
32%
8%
5%
Analyzingthedata
Responses from mailed surveys were entered into an electronic dataset using a “key and verify” method, where all responses are entered twice and compared to each other. Any discrepancies were resolved in comparison to the original survey form. Range checks as well as other forms of quality control were also performed. Responses from surveys completed on Polco were downloaded and merged with the mailed survey responses.
The demographics of the survey respondents were compared to those found in the 2020 Census and 2023 American Community Survey estimates for adults in the City of Clovis. The primary objective of weighting survey dat
a is to make the survey respondents reflective of the larger population of the community. The characteristics used for weighting were age, sex, race, Hispanic origin, housing type, housing tenure, and area. No adjustments were made for design effects. Weights were calculated using an iterative, multiplicative raking model known as the ANES Weighting Algorithm.³ The results of the weighting scheme for the probability sample are presented in the following table.
NRC aligns demographic labels with those used by the U.S. Census for reporting purposes, when possible. Some categories (e.g., age, race/Hispanic origin, housing type, and length of residency) are combined into smaller subgroups.
Methods
Selecti
ngsurveyrecipients
All households within the City of Clovis were eligible to participate in the survey. A list of all households within the zip codes serving Clovis was purchased from Polco's mailing vendor, Go-Dog Direct, based on updated listings from the United States Postal Service. Since some of the zip codes that serve the City of Clovis households may also serve addresses that lie outside of the community, the exact geographic location of each housing unit was compared to community boundaries using the most current municipal boundary file. Addresses located outside of the City of Clovis boundaries were removed from the list of potential households to survey. Each address identified as being within city boundaries was further identified as being within one of the three areas. From that list, addresses were randomly selected as survey recipients, with multi-family housing units (defined as those with a unit number) sampled at a rate of 5:3 compared to single family housing units.
An individual within each household was randomly selected using the "birthday method". The birthday method selects a person within the household by asking the “person who most recently had a birthday” to complete the questionnaire. The underlying assumption in this method is that day of birth has no relationship to the way people respond to surveys. This instruction was contained in the introduction of the survey. 4
Conducting the survey
The 3,000 randomly selected households received mailings beginning on September 5th, 2025 and data collection for the survey remained open for 6 weeks. The first mailing was a postcard inviting the household to participate in the survey. The next mailing contained a cover letter with instructions, the survey questionnaire, and a postage-paid return envelope. All mailings included a web link to give residents the opportunity to respond to the survey online, as well as QR codes to further encourage participation. All follow-up mailings asked those who had not completed the survey to do so, and those who had already done so to refrain from completing the survey again.
The survey was available in English, Spanish, and Hmong. All mailings contained paragraphs in all languages instructing participants on how to complete the survey in their preferred language.
About 2% of the 3,000 mailed invitations or surveys were returned because the household address was vacant or the postal service was unable to deliver the survey as addressed. Of the remaining 2,935 households that received the invitations to participate, 333 completed the survey, providing an overall response rate of 11%. The response rate was calculated using AAPOR’s response rate #2 for mailed surveys of unnamed persons.² It is customary to describe the precision of estimates made from surveys by a “level of confidence” and accompanying “confidence interval” (or margin of error). A traditional level of confidence, and the one used here, is 95%. The 95% confidence interval can be any size and quantifies the sampling error or imprecision of the survey results because some residents’ opinions are relied on to estimate all residents’ opinions. The margin of error for the City of Clovis survey is no greater than plus or minus five percentage points around any given percent reported for all respondents (333 completed surveys).
In addition to the randomly selected “probability sample” of households, a link to an online open-participation survey was publicized by the City of Clovis. The open-participation survey was identical to the random sample survey, with two small updates; it asked a question to confirm the respondent was a resident of Clovis and also a question about where they heard about the survey. The open-participation survey was open to all city residents and became available on October 3rd, 2025. The survey remained open for 2 weeks. The data presented in the following tabs exclude the open participation survey data, but a tab at the end provides the complete frequency of responses to questions by the open-participation respondents.
The survey datasets were analyzed using all or some of a combination of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), R, Python and Tableau. For the most part, the percentages presented in the reports represent the “percent positive.” The percent positive is the combination of the top two most positive response options (i.e., excellent/good, very safe/somewhat safe, essential/very important, etc.), or, in the case of resident behaviors/participation, the percent positive represents the proportion of respondents indicating “yes” or participating in an activity at least once a month.
On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer “don’t know.” The proportion of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in the tab “Complete data”. However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in the reports. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item.
Contact
The City of Clovis funded this research. Please contact Chad McCollum of the City of Clovis at [email protected] if you have any questions about the survey.
Study Limitations
All public opinion research is subject to unmeasured error. While the methodologies employed for this survey were designed to minimize this error as much as possible, these other sources of potential error should be acknowledged. Non-response error arises when those who were selected to participate in the survey did not do so, and may have different opinions or experiences than those who did respond. Coverage error refers to the possibility that some respondents that should have been included in the surveyed population were not (e.g., for a general resident survey, USPS mailing lists may exclude certain types of housing units, such as multi-family buildings where mail is delivered to a common area rather than to a specific unit (though this is rare), or where mail is received at a PO box instead of the at household's physical location. Finally, recall bias occurs when respondents may not perfectly remember their experiences in the past year (such as participation in social or civic events), and social desirability bias may cause respondents to answer in ways they think cast their responses in a more favorable light.
Survey Validity
See the Polco Knowledge Base article on survey validity at https://blog.polco.us/polco-knowledgebase/margin-of- error-and-confidence-level-in-survey-results
2.See AAPOR's Standard Definitions for more information at https://aapor.org/standards-and-ethics/standard-definitions/
3.Pasek, J. (2014). ANES Weighting Algorithm. Retrieved from https://surveyinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Full-anesrake-paper.pdf
4.Targets come from the 2020 Census and 2023 American Community Survey Unweighted Weighted Target ⁴
Age 18-34
35-54
55+
Area Area 1 : North Herndon
Area 2 : SE Herndon & East of Fowler
Area 3 : SW of Herndon & West of Fowler
Hispanic
origin
No, not of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin
Yes, I consider myself to be of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin
Housing
tenure
Own
Rent
Housingtype Attached
Detached
Race &
Hispanic
origin
Not white alone
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino
Sex Man
Woman
Sex/age Man 18-34
Man 35-54
Man 55+
Woman 18-34
Woman 35-54
Woman 55+ 19%
19%
19%
19%
37%
14%
Analyzing the data
Responses from mailed surveys were entered into an electronic dataset using a “key and verify” method, where all responses are entered twice and compared to each other. Any discrepancies were resolved in comparison to the original survey form. Range checks as well as other forms of quality control were also performed. Responses from surveys completed on Polco were downloaded and merged with the mailed survey responses.
The demographics of the survey respondents were compared to those found in the 2020 Census and 2023 American Community Survey estimates for adults in the City of Clovis. The primary objective of weighting survey data is to make the survey respondents reflective of the larger population of the community. The characteristics used for weighting were age, sex, race, Hispanic origin, housing type, housing tenure, and area. No adjustments were made for design effects. Weights were calculated using an iterative, multiplicative raking model known as the ANES Weighting Algorithm.³ The results of the weighting scheme for the probability sample are presented in the following table.
NRC aligns demographic labels with those used by the U.S. Census for reporting purposes, when possible. Some categories (e.g., age, race/Hispanic origin, housing type, and length of residency) are combined into smaller subgroups.
Methods
Selecting survey recipients
All households within the City of Clovis were eligible to participate in the survey. A list of all households within the zip codes serving Clovis was purchased from Polco's mailing vendor, Go-Dog Direct, based on updated listings from the United States Postal Service. Since some of the zip codes that serve the City of Clovis households may also serve addresses that lie outside of the community, the exact geographic location of each housing unit was compared to community boundaries using the most current municipal boundary file. Addresses located outside of the City of Clovis boundaries were removed from the list of potential households to survey. Each address identified as being within city boundaries was further identified as being within one of the three areas. From that list, addresses were randomly selected as survey recipients, with multi-family housing units (defined as those with a unit number) sampled at a rate of 5:3 compared to single family housing units.
An individual within each household was randomly selected using the "birthday method". The birthday method selects a person within the household by asking the “person who most recently had a birthday” to complete the questionnaire. The underlying assumption in this method is that day of birth has no relationship to the way people respond to surveys. This instruction was contained in the introduction of the survey. 5
Key Findings
Highest-performing areas:
Economic strength remains a priority and an asset for Clovis residents. ●Over 9 in 10 residents emphasized the importance of focusing on the economy in the coming two years. ●8 in 10 residents praised both Clovis’s overall economic health and the vibrancy of Old Town/commercial area, both of which ranked higher than the national benchmark average and much* higher than the custom benchmark average.
●Most other items related to the economy also ranked higher than both national and custom benchmarks, including ratings for clovis as a place to work, economic development, overall quality and variety of business and service establishments, and shopping opportunities.
Mobility ratings remained high alongside upward trends for mobility services. ●The overall quality of the transportation system was positively rated by two-thirds of respondents, ranking higher than both national and custom benchmarks.
●Upward trends from 2023 were seen in ratings traffic enforcement and traffic signal timing, both of which rose by about ten points, while the former ranked higher than national and custom averages.
Residents express strong trust and satisfaction with local governance. ●Nearly all assessments of the local government ranked higher than custom benchmark averages, including but not limited to ratings for the overall direction that Clovis is taking, overall confidence in Clovis government, the government generally acting in the best interest of the community, being honest, being open and transparent, and the overall quality of services provided by the City of Clovis.
Respondents shared the highest levels of importance on safety amid very high ratings of safety and safety services.
●Overall safety ranked the highest among the ten facets of livability in terms of importance of focus in the coming two years.
●About 9 in 10 residents gave excellent or good ratings to their overall feeling of safety, ranking much higher than custom benchmark averages.
●Over 9 in 10 residents said they felt very or somewhat safe in their neighborhood during the day as well as in Clovis’s Old Town/commercial area during the day.
●Ratings for crime prevention services climbed by about ten points from 2023, representing an improvement of an already unique strength for Clovis — In both 2023 and 2025 this item was identified as much higher than custom benchmark averages, and also ranked 1st among 19 custom benchmark peer communities in 2023 and 1st among 24 peer communities in 2025.
*Ratings are considered higher or lower than the benchmark if they are more than ten points from the average. Ratings are considered much higher or lower than the benchmark if they are more than twenty points from the average.
Potential areas of focus:
●Although ratings for employment opportunities ranked similar to the national average and higher than the custom benchmark average, the rating experienced a decline of about ten points since 2023. ●Residents’ perceptions of air quality remained stable in 2025 after seeing an upward trend in 2023, though the rating remained lower than both national and custom benchmarks. This item represents the only evaluative item on the survey that ranked lower than average.
●Ratings for the preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community declined by about ten points since 2023 after seeing a climb of a similar amount between 2021 and 2023.
Other notable results (Custom Questions):
●In a custom question developed by the City, residents were asked to identify the severity of several potential problems in Clovis. The following were identified as the largest problems by residents:
Availability of affordable housing (65% major or moderate problem) Too much growth (54%)
Homelessness (53%)
Drugs (51%)
potential focus. Of those included, the following received the highest levels of importance:
§ Protecting natural resources (81% essential or very important) § Improving traffic and road conditions (78%)
§ Planning, development, and growth management (78%)
§ Increasing employment opportunities (77%)
●Residents were also asked to indicate if they felt there were too many, the right amount, or not enough housing options in various categories. The following received the highest levels of potential shortfalls:
§ Housing options for young residents (65% not enough)
§ Housing for people experiencing homelessness (65%)
§ Independent housing options for older adults (52%)
§ Middle-income housing options (52%)
§ Low-income housing options (47%)
§ Senior assisted living (39%)
●About 8 in 10 residents indicated they would support establishing term limits for members of the Clovis City Council. Likewise, 64% of respondents said they would most support a limit of two terms, while 22% said they would support a limit of three terms.
*ThefullrangeofresponsestothesecustomquestionscanbefoundintheCustomQuestionssectionofthereport.
Areas of greatest change since 2023:
Of the 122 evaluative questions included on both the 2023 and current survey iterations, 107 were statistically similar to previous results. Upward trends were seen in 8 items, while 7 ratings decreased since 2023. Changes are considered statistically significant if the 2024 rating was +/- 7% from the previous survey effort. The most significant of those trends are listed below.
Increases
●Traffic enforcement (+13%)
●Opportunities to attend special events and festivals (+11%) ●Traffic signal timing (+9%)
●Crime prevention (+9%)
●Overall quality of the utility infrastructure in Clovis (+8%) Decreases
●Employment opportunities (-11%)
●Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool (-11%) ●Preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community (-10%) ●Preservation of natural areas (-10%)
●Power utility (-10%)
6
KeyFindings
Highest-performing areas:
EconomicstrengthremainsapriorityandanassetforClovisresidents. ●Over 9 in 10 residents emphasized the importance of focusing on the economy in the coming two years. ●8 in 10 residents praised both Clovis’s overall economic health and the vibrancy of Old Town/commercial area, both of which ranked higher than the national benchmark average and much* higher than the custom benchmark average.
●Most other items related to the economy also ranked higher than both national and custom benchmarks, including ratings for clovis as a place to work, economic development, overall quality and variety of business and service establishments, and shopping opportunities.
Mobilityratingsremainedhighalongsideupwardtrendsformobilityservices. ●The overall quality of the transportation system was positively rated by two-thirds of respondents, ranking higher than both national and custom benchmarks.
●Upward trends from 2023 were seen in ratings traffic enforcement and traffic signal timing, both of which rose by about ten points, while the former ranked higher than national and custom averages.
Residentsexpressstrongtrustandsatisfactionwithlocalgovernance. ●Nearly all assessments of the local government ranked higher than custom benchmark averages, including but not limited to ratings for the overall direction that Clovis is taking, overall confidence in Clovis government, the government generally acting in the best interest of the community, being honest, being open and transparent, and the overall quality of services provided by the City of Clovis.
Respondentssharedthehighestlevelsofimportanceonsafetyamidveryhighratingsofsafetyandsafety services.
●Overall safety ranked the highest among the ten facets of livability in terms of importance of focus in the coming two years.
●About 9 in 10 residents gave excellent or good ratings to their overall feeling of safety, ranking much higher than custom benchmark averages.
●Over 9 in 10 residents said they felt very or somewhat safe in their neighborhood during the day as well as in Clovis’s Old Town/commercial area during the day.
●Ratings for crime prevention services climbed by about ten points from 2023, representing an improvement of an already unique strength for Clovis — In both 2023 and 2025 this item was identified as much higher than custom benchmark averages, and also ranked 1st among 19 custom benchmark peer communities in 2023 and 1st among 24 peer communities in 2025.
*Ratingsareconsideredhigherorlowerthanthebenchmarkiftheyaremorethantenpointsfromtheaverage.Ratingsareconsidered muchhigherorlowerthanthebenchmarkiftheyaremorethantwentypointsfromtheaverage.
Potential areas of focus:
●Although ratings for employment opportunities ranked similar to the national average and higher than the custom benchmark average, the rating experienced a decline of about ten points since 2023. ●Residents’ perceptions of air quality remained stable in 2025 after seeing an upward trend in 2023, though the rating remained lower than both national and custom benchmarks. This item represents the only evaluative item on the survey that ranked lower than average.
●Ratings for the preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community declined by about ten points since 2023 after seeing a climb of a similar amount between 2021 and 2023.
Other notable results (Custom Questions):
●In a custom question developed by the City, residents were asked to identify the severity of several potential problems in Clovis. The following were identified as the largest problems by residents:
§ Availability of affordable housing (65% major or moderate problem) § Too much growth (54%)
§ Homelessness (53%)
§ Drugs (51%)
●Another custom question developed by the City sought insight into the importance of several additional areas of potential focus. Of those included, the following received the highest levels of importance:
Protecting natural resources (81% essential or very important) Improving traffic and road conditions (78%)
Planning, development, and growth management (78%)
Increasing employment opportunities (77%)
●Residents were also asked to indicate if they felt there were too many, the right amount, or not enough housing options in various categories. The following received the highest levels of potential shortfalls:
Housing options for young residents (65% not enough)
Housing for people experiencing homelessness (65%)
Independent housing options for older adults (52%)
Middle-income housing options (52%)
Low-income housing options (47%)
Senior assisted living (39%)
●About 8 in 10 residents indicated they would support establishing term limits for members of the Clovis City Council. Likewise, 64% of respondents said they would most support a limit of two terms, while 22% said they would support a limit of three terms.
*The full range of responses to these custom questions can be found in the Custom Questions section of the report.
Areas of greatest change since 2023:
Of the 122 evaluative questions included on both the 2023 and current survey iterations, 107 were statistically similar to previous results. Upward trends were seen in 8 items, while 7 ratings decreased since 2023. Changes are considered statistically significant if the 2024 rating was +/- 7% from the previous survey effort. The most significant of those trends are listed below.
Increases
●Traffic enforcement (+13%)
●Opportunities to attend special events and festivals (+11%) ●Traffic signal timing (+9%)
●Crime prevention (+9%)
●Overall quality of the utility infrastructure in Clovis (+8%) Decreases
●Employment opportunities (-11%)
●Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool (-11%) ●Preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community (-10%) ●Preservation of natural areas (-10%)
●Power utility (-10%)
7
Facets of livability
Every jurisdiction must balance limited resources while meeting resident needs and striving to optimize community livability. To this end, it is helpful to know what aspects of the community are most important to residents and which they perceive as being of higher or lower quality. It is especially helpful to know when a facet of livability is considered of high importance but rated as lower quality, as this should be a top priority to address.
Inclusivity and Engagement
Education, Arts, and Culture
Mobility
Community Design
Health and Wellness
Parks and Recreation
Natural Environment
Utilities
Economy
Safety
61%
66%
69%
73%
74%
74%
79%
89%
66%
79%
70%
79%
76%
82%
80%
81%
82%
87%
93%
94%
Quality and Importance by the Numbers
The table below shows the proportion of residents who rated the community facets positively for quality and the priority (importance) placed on each. Also displayed is whether local quality ratings were lower, similar, or higher than communities across the country (the national benchmark).
Quality
% excellent or good
Importance
% essential or very important
Facet of Livability
Safety Quality
Importance
Economy Quality
Importance
Utilities Quality
Importance
Natural Environment Quality
Importance
Community Design Quality
Importance
Parks and Recreation Quality
Importance
Health and Wellness Quality
Importance
Education, Arts, and
Culture
Quality
Importance
Mobility Quality
Importance
Inclusivity and
Engagement
Quality
Importance
89%
94%
79%
93%
79%
87%
74%
82%
69%
82%
74%
81%
73%
80%
66%
79%
66%
76%
61%
70%
Quality/Importance Gap Analysis
The gap analysis chart below shows the same data as above; however, this chart more clearly illustrates the comparative differences in quality and importance ratings for each facet, as well as the absolute ratings for each.
Quality Importance
vs. national benchmark
Similar
vs. national benchmark
Higher Similar
8
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
38%
50%
10%
3%
The overall quality of life in Clovis, 2025
Quality of Life
Measuring community livability starts with
assessing the quality of life of those who live there,
and ensuring that the community is attractive,
accessible, and welcoming to all.
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Clovis as a place to live
The overall quality of life
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
91%97% 89%
93%91%97% 89%
93%
85%92% 83%
88%
85%92% 83%
88%
Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Clovis. (% excellent or good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Recommend living in Clovis to someone
who asks
Remain in Clovis for the next five years
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
92%83%96% 90%92%83%96% 90%
93% 86%86%
89%93% 86%86%
89%
Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following. (% very or somewhat likely)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Overall image or reputation
Similar Much higherSimilar Much higher85%91% 82%
82%85%91% 82%
82%
Please rate each of the following in the Clovis community. (% excellent or good)
8.Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
9.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
vs. national
benchmark⁸
vs. custom
benchmark⁹
9
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
18%
39%
31%
12%
Overall confidence in Clovis government,
2025
Governance
Strong local governments produce results that
meet the needs of residents while making the best
use of available resources, and are responsive to
the present and future needs of the community as
a whole.
10. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
11.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
The value of services for the taxes paid to
Clovis
The overall direction that Clovis is taking
The job Clovis government does at welcoming
resident involvement
Overall confidence in Clovis government
Generally acting in the best interest of the
community
Being honest
Being open and transparent to the public
Informing residents about issues facing the
community
Treating all residents fairly
Treating residents with respect
Higher HigherHigher Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
63%65%62%
64%
63%65%62%
64%
71% 60% 59%
63%71% 60% 59%
63%
58% 59% 60%
52%
↘58% 59% 60%
52%
↘
58%64% 56%
57%58%64% 56%
57%
64%59%65% 63%64%59%65% 63%
63% 58% 63% 61%63% 58% 63% 61%
62%56% 59%62%56% 59%
55% 55%
57%55% 55%
57%
Please rate the following categories of Clovis government performance. (% excellent or good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Public information services
Overall customer service by Clovis employees
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
76% 75%77% 76%76% 75%77% 76%
81%81% 78%
82%
81%81% 78%
82%
Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Clovis. (% excellent or good)
The City of Clovis
The Federal Government
Overall,howwouldyourate the quality ofthe services providedby eachofthe following? (% excellentor good)
Attended a local public meeting
Contacted Clovis elected officials to express
your opinion
Contacted the City of Clovis for help or
information
Watched a local public meeting
Please indicate whether or notyouhave done eachofthe followinginthe last12 months. (% yes)
vs. national
benchmark¹⁰
vs. custom
benchmark¹¹
10
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Overall confidence in Clovis government,
2025
Governance
Strong local governments produce results that
meet the needs of residents while making the best
use of available resources, and are responsive to
the present and future needs of the community as
a whole.
10. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
11.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
-1 0 1 2
The value of services for the taxes paid to
Clovis
The overall direction that Clovis is taking
The job Clovis government does at welcoming
resident involvement
Overall confidence in Clovis government
Generally acting in the best interest of the
community
Being honest
Being open and transparent to the public
Informing residents about issues facing the
community
Treating all residents fairly
Treating residents with respect
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
60%60% 55%
62%
60%60% 55%
62%
69%62% 72%69%62% 72%
Please rate the followingcategories ofClovis governmentperformance. (% excellentor good)
Public information services
Overall customer service by Clovis employees
Please rate the quality ofeachofthe followingservices inClovis. (% excellentor good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
The City of Clovis
The Federal Government
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
88% 75% 74%
79%88% 75% 74%
79%
34%
30% 27%
38%
↗
34%
30% 27%
38%
↗
Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? (% excellent or good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Attended a local public meeting
Contacted Clovis elected officials to express
your opinion
Contacted the City of Clovis for help or
information
Watched a local public meeting
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
11% 13%8% 13%11% 13%8% 13%
8% 8% 6% 11%8% 8% 6% 11%
42% 50%40%
47%
42% 50%40%
47%
28%
15%
24%
↗
28%
15%
24%
↗
Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. (% yes)
vs.national
benchmark¹⁰
vs.custom
benchmark¹¹
11
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
22%
57%
18%
2%
Overall economic health of Clovis, 2025
Economy
Local governments work together with private and
nonprofit businesses, and with the community at large, to foster sustainable growth, create jobs, and promote a
thriving local economy.
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Clovis as a place to work
Clovis as a place to visit
Higher HigherHigher Higher
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
81%88% 78%
80%81%88% 78%
80%
68%62%73% 68%68%62%73% 68%
Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Clovis. (% excellent or good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
Overall quality of business and service
establishments
Variety of business and service
establishments
Vibrancy of Old Town/commercial area
Employment opportunities
Shopping opportunities
Cost of living
Higher HigherHigher Higher
Higher HigherHigher Higher
81% 82%78%
83%81% 82%78%
83%
74% 75% 72%74% 75% 72%
80%80%
Please rate each of the following in the Clovis community. (% excellent or good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Economic development
Higher HigherHigher Higher70%63%73% 72%70%63%73% 72%
Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Clovis. (% excellent or good)
What impact, if any, do you think the
economy will have on your family
income in the next 6 months? Do you
think the impact will be:
Whatimpact,ifany,doyouthink the economy willhave onyour family income inthe next6 months?Do youthink the impactwillbe:
(% very or somewhatpositive)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Overall economic health
Higher Much higherHigher Much higher83%74%
84% 79%83%74%
84% 79%
Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Clovis as a whole. (% excellent or good)
12. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
13.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
vs. national
benchmark¹²
vs. custom
benchmark¹³
12
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Overall economic health of Clovis, 2025
Economy
Local governments work together with private and
nonprofit businesses, and with the community at large, to foster sustainable growth, create jobs, and promote a
thriving local economy.
Clovis as a place to work
Clovis as a place to visit
Please rate eachofthe followingaspects ofquality oflife inClovis. (% excellentor good)
-1 0 1 2
Overall quality of business and service
establishments
Variety of business and service
establishments
Vibrancy of Old Town/commercial area
Employment opportunities
Shopping opportunities
Cost of living
Higher Much higherHigher Much higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Higher HigherHigher Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
77%73% 80% 80%
77%73% 80% 80%
56%
58% 62% 51%
↘56%
58% 62% 51%
↘
75% 73%76% 72%75% 73%76% 72%
46%
50%
40%
44%46%
50%
40%
44%
Please rate eachofthe followinginthe Clovis community.
(% excellentor good)
Economic development
Please rate the quality ofeachofthe followingservices inClovis. (% excellentor good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
What impact, if any, do you think the
economy will have on your family
income in the next 6 months? Do you
think the impact will be:
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
27%
18%
34% 25%
↗
27%
18%
34% 25%
↗
What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be:
(% very or somewhat positive)
Overall economic health
Please rate eachofthe followingcharacteristics as they relate toClovis as a whole. (% excellentor good)
12. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
13.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
vs.national
benchmark¹²
vs.custom
benchmark¹³
13
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
20%
46%
23%
11%
Overall quality of the transportation system in
Clovis, 2025
Mobility
The ease with which residents can move about
their communities, whether for commuting,
leisure, or recreation, plays a major role in the
quality of life for all who live, work, and play in
the community.
14. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
15.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Traffic flow on major streets
Ease of public parking
Ease of travel by car
Ease of travel by public transportation
Ease of travel by bicycle
Ease of walking
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Higher HigherHigher Higher
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
58% 55%
62%
60%
58% 55%
62%
60%
67%
71% 64% 64%
67%
71% 64% 64%
80%81% 77%
78%80%81% 77%
78%
69%
49% 48%
53%
69%
49% 48%
53%
66%
65%
71% 60%66%
65%
71% 60%
76%73%79% 71%76%73%79% 71%
Please also rate each of the following in the Clovis community. (% excellent or good)
Used public transportation instead of
driving
Carpooled with other adults or children
instead of driving alone
Walked or biked instead of driving
Please indicate whether or notyouhave done eachofthe followinginthe last12 months. (% yes)
Traffic enforcement
Traffic signal timing
Street repair
Street cleaning
Street lighting
Sidewalk maintenance
Bus or transit services
Please rate the quality ofeachofthe followingservices inClovis. (% excellentor good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Overall quality of the transportation
system
Higher HigherHigher Higher68%64% 66%68%64% 66%
Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Clovis as a whole. (% excellent or good)
vs. national
benchmark¹⁴
vs. custom
benchmark¹⁵
14
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Overall quality of the transportation system in
Clovis, 2025
Mobility
The ease with which residents can move about
their communities, whether for commuting,
leisure, or recreation, plays a major role in the
quality of life for all who live, work, and play in
the community.
14. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
15.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
Traffic flow on major streets
Ease of public parking
Ease of travel by car
Ease of travel by public transportation
Ease of travel by bicycle
Ease of walking
Please alsorate eachofthe followinginthe Clovis community. (% excellentor good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Used public transportation instead of
driving
Carpooled with other adults or children
instead of driving alone
Walked or biked instead of driving
Similar LowerSimilar Lower
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
12% 14%
9% 16%12% 14%
9% 16%
48%51%42%
56%
↗48%51%42%
56%
↗
55% 59%52%
61%
55% 59%52%
61%
Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. (% yes)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Traffic enforcement
Traffic signal timing
Street repair
Street cleaning
Street lighting
Sidewalk maintenance
Bus or transit services
Higher HigherHigher Higher
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Higher HigherHigher Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Higher SimilarHigher Similar
68% 61%
80% 74%
↗68% 61%
80% 74%
↗
61%
53%53%
62%
↗
61%
53%53%
62%
↗
56%
50%
58%
54%
56%
50%
58%
54%
79% 77%84% 74%79% 77%84% 74%
73%69%76% 75%
73%69%76% 75%
66%
65%70% 64%
66%
65%70% 64%
61%
50%
70% 63%61%
50%
70% 63%
Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Clovis. (% excellent or good)
Overall quality of the transportation
system
Please rate eachofthe followingcharacteristics as they relate toClovis as a whole. (% excellentor good)
vs.national
benchmark¹⁴
vs.custom
benchmark¹⁵
15
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
25%
44%
24%
7%
Overall design or layout of Clovis's residential and
commercial areas, 2025
Community Design
A well-designed community enhances the
quality of life for its residents by
encouraging smart land use and zoning,
ensuring that affordable housing is
accessible to all, and providing access to
parks and other green spaces.
16. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
17.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
Well-planned residential growth
Well-planned commercial growth
Well-designed neighborhoods
Preservation of the historical or cultural
character of the community
Public places where people want to spend
time
Variety of housing options
Availability of affordable quality housing
Overall quality of new development
Overall appearance
Higher HigherHigher Higher
Higher HigherHigher Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
60%60% 62%
60%60% 62%
62%
58%
62%62%
58%
62%
66%
68% 66%66%
68% 66%
71% 80%
70%
↘
71% 80%
70%
↘
73%78% 66%
70%73%78% 66%
70%
Please also rate each of the following in the Clovis community. (% excellent or good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Your neighborhood as a place to live
Similar HigherSimilar Higher87%86%88% 87%87%86%88% 87%
Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Clovis. (% excellent or good)
Land use, planning and zoning
Code enforcement
Please rate the quality ofeachofthe followingservices inClovis. (% excellentor good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Overall design or layout of residential and
commercial areas
Similar HigherSimilar Higher68%76% 66%
69%
68%76% 66%
69%
Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Clovis as a whole. (% excellent or good)
vs. national
benchmark¹⁶
vs. custom
benchmark¹⁷
16 Higher HigherHigher Higher50% 50%65% 65%49% 49%
54% 54%
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Overall design or layout of Clovis's residential and
commercial areas, 2025
Community Design
A well-designed community enhances the
quality of life for its residents by
encouraging smart land use and zoning,
ensuring that affordable housing is
accessible to all, and providing access to
parks and other green spaces.
16. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
17.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
-1 0 1 2
Well-planned residential growth
Well-planned commercial growth
Well-designed neighborhoods
Preservation of the historical or cultural
character of the community
Public places where people want to spend
time
Variety of housing options
Availability of affordable quality housing
Overall quality of new development
Overall appearance
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
50%49% 50%49%
37%51% 31% 34%
37%51% 31% 34%
71% 61% 61% 62%71% 61% 61% 62%
85%85% 80% 86%85%85% 80% 86%
Please alsorate eachofthe followinginthe Clovis community. (% excellentor good)
Your neighborhood as a place to live
Please rate eachofthe followingaspects ofquality oflife inClovis. (% excellentor good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Land use, planning and zoning
Code enforcement
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
58%62% 56%
56%58%62% 56%
56%
57% 58%60% 50%57% 58%60% 50%
Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Clovis. (% excellent or good)
Overall design or layout of residential and
commercial areas
Please rate eachofthe followingcharacteristics as they relate toClovis as a whole. (% excellentor good)
vs.national
benchmark¹⁶
vs.custom
benchmark¹⁷
17
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
26%
53%
17%
5%
Overall quality of the utility infrastructure in
Clovis, 2025
Utilities
Services such as water, gas, electricity, and
internet access play a vital role in ensuring the
physical and economic health and well-being
of the communities they serve.
18. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
19.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Affordable high-speed internet access
Garbage collection
Drinking water
Sewer services
Storm water management
Power (electric and/or gas) utility
Utility billing
Higher HigherHigher Higher
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
62%60% 68%
62%60% 68%
87%91% 85%
88%
87%91% 85%
88%
67%
69%
64%
66%67%
69%
64%
66%
85% 79%87% 87%
↗
85% 79%87% 87%
↗
77%81% 75%
78%77%81% 75%
78%
73%74%78%
63%
↘73%74%78%
63%
↘
66%
66%
74% 62%66%
66%
74% 62%
Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Clovis. (% excellent or good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Overall quality of the utility infrastructure
Similar HigherSimilar Higher81%
71%
79%
↗
81%
71%
79%
↗
Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Clovis as a whole. (% excellent or good)
vs. national
benchmark¹⁸
vs. custom
benchmark¹⁹
18
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
41%
48%
10%
2%
Overall feeling of safety in Clovis, 2025
Safety
Public safety is often the most important task
facing local governments. All residents should
feel safe and secure in their neighborhoods
and in the greater community, and providing
robust safety-related services is essential to
residents' quality of life.
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Overall feeling of safety
Similar Much higherSimilar Much higher84%88% 80%
89%
84%88% 80%
89%
Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Clovis as a whole. (% excellent or good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
In your neighborhood during the
day
In Clovis's Old Town/commercial
area during the day
From property crime
From violent crime
From fire, flood, or other natural
disaster
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
94% 95% 94% 94%94% 95% 94% 94%
92%91%95% 95%
92%91%95% 95%
77%73% 83%
77%73% 83%
84%82% 89%
84%82% 89%
90%
86%
90%90%
86%
90%
Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel:
(% very or somewhat safe)
Police services
Crime prevention
Animal control
Ambulance or emergency medical
services
Fire services
Fire prevention and education
Emergency preparedness
Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Clovis. (% excellent or good)
20. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
21. Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
vs. national
benchmark²⁰
vs. custom
benchmark²¹
19
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Overall feeling of safety in Clovis, 2025
Safety
Public safety is often the most important task
facing local governments. All residents should
feel safe and secure in their neighborhoods
and in the greater community, and providing
robust safety-related services is essential to
residents' quality of life.
Overall feeling of safety
Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Clovis as a whole. (% excellent or good)
In your neighborhood during the
day
In Clovis's Old Town/commercial
area during the day
From property crime
From violent crime
From fire, flood, or other natural
disaster
Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel:
(% very or somewhat safe)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Police services
Crime prevention
Animal control
Ambulance or emergency medical
services
Fire services
Fire prevention and education
Emergency preparedness
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar Much higherSimilar Much higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
83%92% 78%
87%
83%92% 78%
87%
86% 73%73%
82%
↗
86% 73%73%
82%
↗
75%
77%69%
80%75%
77%69%
80%
91%95% 88%
90%91%95% 88%
90%
94%93%95% 92%94%93%95% 92%
81% 82%84% 78%81% 82%84% 78%
66%
51%
70% 62%
↘
66%
51%
70% 62%
↘
Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Clovis. (% excellent or good)
20. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
21. Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
vs. national
benchmark²⁰
vs. custom
benchmark²¹
20
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
21%
53%
21%
5%
Overall quality of natural environment in
Clovis, 2025
Natural Environment
The natural environment plays a vital role in the health and well-being of residents. The natural spaces in which residents live and experience their communities has a
direct and profound effect on quality of life.2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2 -1 0 1 2
Cleanliness
Water resources
Air quality
Similar Much higherSimilar Much higher
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Much lower LowerMuch lower Lower
80% 79% 78%
84%80% 79% 78%
84%
58%
48% 56%
58%
48% 56%
32% 24% 40%
39%32% 24% 40%
39%
Please also rate each of the following in the Clovis community. (% excellent or good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
Preservation of natural areas
Clovis open space
Recycling
Yard waste pick-up
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
50%
56% 56% 46%
↘50%
56% 56% 46%
↘
57%
54%
60%
58%57%
54%
60%
58%
79%87% 77% 77%79%87% 77% 77%
Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Clovis. (% excellent or good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Overall quality of natural environment
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar77%68%81% 74%77%68%81% 74% Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Clovis as a whole. (% excellent or good)
22. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
23.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
vs. national
benchmark²²
vs. custom
benchmark²³
21
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Overall quality of natural environment in
Clovis, 2025
Natural Environment
The natural environment plays a vital role in the health and well-being of residents. The natural spaces in which residents live and experience their communities has a
direct and profound effect on quality of life.
Cleanliness
Water resources
Air quality
Please alsorate eachofthe followinginthe Clovis community. (% excellentor good)
-1 0 1 2
Preservation of natural areas
Clovis open space
Recycling
Yard waste pick-up
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Higher HigherHigher Higher
79%87% 77% 77%79%87% 77% 77%
86%90% 84%
87%86%90% 84%
87%
Please rate the quality ofeachofthe followingservices inClovis. (% excellentor good)
Overall quality of natural environment
Please rate eachofthe followingcharacteristics as they relate toClovis as a whole. (% excellentor good)
22. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
23.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
vs.national
benchmark²²
vs.custom
benchmark²³
22
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
30%
44%
23%
4%
Overall quality of parks and recreation
opportunities, 2025
Parks and Recreation
"There are no communities that pride themselves on
their quality of life, promote themselves as a
desirable location for businesses to relocate, or
maintain that they are environmental stewards of
their natural resources, without such communities
having a robust, active system of parks and
recreation programs for public use and enjoyment."
- National Recreation and Park Association
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Availability of paths and walking trails
Fitness opportunities
Recreational opportunities
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
78%72%83% 80%78%72%83% 80%
76% 75%75% 79%76% 75%75% 79%
64% 61% 69% 68%
64% 61% 69% 68%
Please also rate each of the following in the Clovis community. (% excellent or good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
City parks
Recreation programs or classes
Recreation centers or facilities
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
78%82% 71%
75%78%82% 71%
75%
71%66%75% 72%71%66%75% 72%
67%74% 66%
70%
67%74% 66%
70%
Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Clovis. (% excellent or good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Overall quality of parks and recreation
opportunities
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar76% 80% 74%76% 80% 74%
Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Clovis as a whole. (% excellent or good)
24.Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
25.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. vs. national
benchmark²⁴
vs. custom
benchmark²⁵
23
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
27%
46%
23%
4%
Overall health and wellness opportunities in
Clovis, 2025
Health and Wellness
The characteristics of and amenities available
in the communities in which people live has a
direct impact on the health and wellness of
residents, and thus, on their quality of life
overall.
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Availability of affordable quality food
Availability of affordable quality health
care
Availability of preventive health
services
Availability of affordable quality
mental health care
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
74% 63%
77% 63%74% 63%
77% 63%
62%
60%78% 57%62%
60%78% 57%
64%64%
79% 62%64%64%
79% 62%
44%
43%
60%
40%44%
43%
60%
40%
Please also rate each of the following in the Clovis community. (% excellent or good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Health services
Similar HigherSimilar Higher73%80% 70% 70%73%80% 70% 70% Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Clovis. (% excellent or good)
Please rate your overall health.
Please rate your overall health.
(%excellentorverygood)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Overall health and wellness
opportunities
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar72%75% 71%
73%
72%75% 71%
73%
Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Clovis as a whole. (% excellent or good)
26. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
27.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
vs. national
benchmark²⁶
vs. custom
benchmark²⁷
24
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Overallhealthandwellnessopportunitiesin
Clovis,2025
HealthandWellness
The characteristics of and amenities available
in the communities in which people live has a
direct impact on the health and wellness of
residents, and thus, on their quality of life
overall.
Availability of affordable quality food
Availability of affordable quality health
care
Availability of preventive health
services
Availability of affordable quality
mental health care
PleasealsorateeachofthefollowingintheCloviscommunity.
(%excellentorgood)
Health services
PleaseratethequalityofeachofthefollowingservicesinClovis. (%excellentorgood)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Please rate your overall health.
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar65% 70%63% 64%65% 70%63% 64% Please rate your overall health.
(% excellent or very good)
Overall health and wellness
opportunities
PleaserateeachofthefollowingcharacteristicsastheyrelatetoClovisasawhole. (%excellentorgood)
26. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
27.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
vs.national
benchmark²⁶
vs.custom
benchmark²⁷
25
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
24%
42%
25%
9%
Overall opportunities for education,
culture and the arts, 2025
Education, Arts, and Culture
Participation in the arts, in educational opportunities, and in cultural activities is linked to increased civic
engagement, greater social tolerance, and enhanced
enjoyment of the local community. 2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2 -1 0 1 2
Opportunities to attend
cultural/arts/music activities
Community support for the arts
Availability of affordable quality
childcare/preschool
K-12 education
Adult educational opportunities
Opportunities to attend special
events and festivals
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Higher Much higherHigher Much higher
Higher Much higherHigher Much higher
Higher HigherHigher Higher
57%61%
51%
54%
57%61%
51%
54%
53%
57%
55%53%
57%
55%
61%
55%70%
50%
↘
61%
55%70%
50%
↘
86%78%87% 81%86%78%87% 81%
79% 73% 82% 78%79% 73% 82% 78%
78% 71%71%
82%
↗
78% 71%71%
82%
↗
Please also rate each of the following in the Clovis community. (% excellent or good)
Public library services
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 2
-1 0 1 2
Overall opportunities for education,
culture, and the arts
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
71%83%
61%
66%
71%83%
61%
66%
Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Clovis as a whole. (% excellent or good)
28. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
29.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
vs. national
benc0hmark²⁴
vs. custom
benc1hmark²⁵
26
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Overallopportunitiesforeducation,
cultureandthearts,2025
Education,Arts,andCulture
Participation in the arts, in educational opportunities, and in cultural activities is linked to increased civic
engagement, greater social tolerance, and enhanced
enjoyment of the local community.
Opportunities to attend
cultural/arts/music activities
Community support for the arts
Availability of affordable quality
childcare/preschool
K-12 education
Adult educational opportunities
Opportunities to attend special
events and festivals
PleasealsorateeachofthefollowingintheCloviscommunity.
(%excellentorgood)
PleaseratethequalityofeachofthefollowingservicesinClovis. (%excellentorgood)
Overall opportunities for education,
culture, and the arts
PleaserateeachofthefollowingcharacteristicsastheyrelatetoClovisasawhole. (%excellentorgood) vs.nationalbench..vs.custom
benchmark²⁹
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Public library services S Siim miilla ar rS Siim miilla ar r8 80 0% %7 76 6% %8 85 5% %8 81 1% %
28. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
29.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Clovis. (% excellent or good)
27
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
17%
44%
30%
9%
Residents' connection and engagement with
their community, 2025
Inclusivity and Engagement
Inclusivity refers to a cultural and environmental
feeling of belonging; residents who feel invited to
participate within their communities feel more
included, involved, and engaged than those who do
not.
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Clovis as a place to raise children
Clovis as a place to retire
Sense of community
Higher Much higherHigher Much higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
91%91%94% 90%91%91%94% 90%
73%
66%
77% 77%73%
66%
77% 77%
74%
68%
76%
73%
74%
68%
76%
73%
Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Clovis. (% excellent or good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Residents' connection and engagement
with their community
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar63%63% 61%63%63% 61%
Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Clovis as a whole. (% excellent or good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
Making all residents feel welcome
Attracting people from diverse
backgrounds
Valuing/respecting residents from
diverse backgrounds
Taking care of vulnerable residents
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
76%65% 74%76%65% 74%
64%
50% 59%
64%
50% 59%
Please rate the job you feel the Clovis community does at each of the following. (% excellent or good)
Sense of civic/community pride
Neighborliness of residents
Opportunities to participate in social
events and activities
Opportunities to volunteer
Opportunities to participate in
community matters
Openness and acceptance of the
community toward people of diverse
backgrounds
PleasealsorateeachofthefollowingintheCloviscommunity.
(%excellentorgood)
Campaigned or advocated for a local
issue, cause, or candidate
Pleaseindicatewhetherornotyouhavedoneeachofthefollowinginthelast12months. (%yes)
30. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
31.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
vs. national
benchmark³⁰
vs. custom
benchmark³¹
28
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Residents'connectionandengagementwith
theircommunity,2025
InclusivityandEngagement
Inclusivity refers to a cultural and environmental
feeling of belonging; residents who feel invited to
participate within their communities feel more
included, involved, and engaged than those who do
not.
Clovis as a place to raise children
Clovis as a place to retire
Sense of community
PleaserateeachofthefollowingaspectsofqualityoflifeinClovis. (%excellentorgood)
Residents' connection and engagement
with their community
PleaserateeachofthefollowingcharacteristicsastheyrelatetoClovisasawhole. (%excellentorgood)
-1 0 1 2
Making all residents feel welcome
Attracting people from diverse
backgrounds
Valuing/respecting residents from
diverse backgrounds
Taking care of vulnerable residents
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
64%
50% 59%
64%
50% 59%
66%53% 61%66%53% 61%
61%
58% 62%61%
58% 62%
PleaseratethejobyoufeeltheCloviscommunitydoesateachofthefollowing. (%excellentorgood)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Sense of civic/community pride
Neighborliness of residents
Opportunities to participate in social
events and activities
Opportunities to volunteer
Opportunities to participate in
community matters
Openness and acceptance of the
community toward people of diverse
backgrounds
Higher HigherHigher Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar HigherSimilar Higher
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
Similar SimilarSimilar Similar
71%71% 75%
71%71% 75%
66%69% 65%
67%
66%69% 65%
67%
66%70% 61%
71%
66%70% 61%
71%
69%64%75% 74%
69%64%75% 74%
66% 64% 70% 68%
66% 64% 70% 68%
57%
64% 51%
53%
57%
64% 51%
53%
Please also rate each of the following in the Clovis community. (% excellent or good)
2019 2021 2023 2025 -1 0 1 2
-1 0 1 2
Campaigned or advocated for a local
issue, cause, or candidate SimilarSimilar SimilarSimilar 15%
15%
10%
18% 15%
15%
10%
18%
Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. (% yes)
30. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
31.Comparison to the custom benchmark is shown. A description of the custom benchmark cohort can found in the About section of the report. If no comparison is available, this is left blank.
vs.national
benchmark³⁰
vs.custom
benchmark³¹
29
Not a
problem
Traffic Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Crime Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Drugs Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Pleaseratehow
important,ifatall,
eachofthe
followingisfor
Clovistoaddress
inthecomingtwo
years.
Increasing the
amount of activities
for seniors, such as
group exercise
classes, arts and
history classes,
pickleball courts, e..
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Increasing the
amount of activities
for youth
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Providing more
affordable housing
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Providing additional
community
recreation facilities
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Planning,
development, and
growth
management
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Increasing
employment
opportunities
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Protecting natural
resources (rivers
and lakes, open
space, etc.)
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Improving traffic
and road conditions
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Pleaseindicate
whetheryoufeel
therearetheright
amount,toomany,
ornotenoughof
eachintheCityof
Clovis.
Single-family
detached homes
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Townhouses Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Multi-family
residential housing
(apartments/
condominiums)
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Independent
housing options for
older adults
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Housing options for
young residents
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Middle-income
housing options
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Low-income
housing options
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Housing for people
experiencing
homelessness
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Senior assisted
living
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Would you support
establishing term
limits for members..
No - Keep the current system
with no term limits
Yes - I support establishing
term limits
If you support term
limits, please
indicate which term
limit you most
support:
Two terms (eight years)
Three terms (12 years)
More than three terms (12+
years)
I do not support term limits
Custom questions
Below are the complete set of responses to each custom question on the survey. By default, “don’t know” responses are excluded.
30 Please indicate
how much, if at all,
each of the
following are a
problem in Clovis.
Homelessness Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Availability of
affordable housing
Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Too much growth Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Lack of growth Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Run-down
buildings, weed
lots, or junk
vehicles
Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Availability of public
transportation
8%
39%
43%
10%
13%
22%
35%
30%
20%
26%
31%
23%
65%
19%
14%
1%
29%
45%
21%
5%
19%
11%Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem 29%
Pleaseindicate
howmuch,ifatall,
eachofthe
followingarea
probleminClovis.
Homelessness Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Availability of
affordable housing
Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Too much growth Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Lack of growth Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Run-down
buildings, weed
lots, or junk
vehicles
Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Availability of public
transportation
Major problem
Moderate problem
Not a problem
Traffic Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Crime Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Drugs Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Please rate how
important, if at all,
each of the
following is for
Clovis to address
in the coming two
years.
Increasing the
amount of activities
for seniors, such as
group exercise
classes, arts and
history classes,
pickleball courts,
etc.
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Increasing the
amount of activities
for youth
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Providing more
affordable housing
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Providing additional
community
recreation facilities
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Planning,
development, and
growth
management
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Increasing
employment
opportunities
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Protecting natural
resources (rivers
and lakes, open
space, etc.)
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Improving traffic
and road conditions
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Pleaseindicate
whetheryoufeel
therearetheright
amount,toomany,
ornotenoughof
eachintheCityof
Clovis.
Single-family
detached homes
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Townhouses Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Multi-family
residential housing
(apartments/
condominiums)
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Independent
housing options for
older adults
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Housing options for
young residents
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Middle-income
housing options
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Low-income
housing options
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Housing for people
experiencing
homelessness
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Senior assisted
living
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Would you support
establishing term
limits for members..
No - Keep the current system
with no term limits
Yes - I support establishing
term limits
If you support term
limits, please
indicate which term
limit you most
support:
Two terms (eight years)
Three terms (12 years)
More than three terms (12+
years)
I do not support term limits
42%
19%
11%
24%
36%
32%
8%
16%
46%
32%
7%
20%
28%
39%
12%
7%
46%
32%
15%
3%
27%
40%
30%
14%
22%
31%
34%
9%
44%
31%
16%
Customquestions
Below are the complete set of responses to each custom question on the survey. By default, “don’t know” responses are excluded, but may be added to the table using the response filter below.
Include "don't know"
No
31
Pleaseindicate
howmuch,ifatall,
eachofthe
followingarea
probleminClovis.
Homelessness Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Availability of
affordable housing
Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Too much growth Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Lack of growth Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Run-down
buildings, weed
lots, or junk
vehicles
Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Availability of public
transportation
Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Traffic Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Crime Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Drugs Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Pleaseratehow
important,ifatall,
eachofthe
followingisfor
Clovistoaddress
inthecomingtwo
years.
Increasing the
amount of activities
for seniors, such as
group exercise
classes, arts and
history classes,
pickleball courts, e..
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Increasing the
amount of activities
for youth
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Providing more
affordable housing
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Providing additional
community
recreation facilities
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Planning,
development, and
growth
management
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Increasing
employment
opportunities
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Protecting natural
resources (rivers
and lakes, open
space, etc.)
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Improving traffic
and road conditions
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Please indicate
whether you feel
there are the right
amount, too many,
or not enough of
each in the City of
Clovis.
Single-family
detached homes
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Townhouses Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Multi-family
residential housing
(apartments/
condominiums)
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Independent
housing options for
older adults
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Housing options for
young residents
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Middle-income
housing options
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Low-income
housing options
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Housing for people
experiencing
homelessness
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Senior assisted
living
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Would you support
establishing term
limits for members..
No - Keep the current system
with no term limits
Yes - I support establishing
term limits
If you support term
limits, please
indicate which term
limit you most
support:
Two terms (eight years)
Three terms (12 years)
More than three terms (12+
years)
I do not support term limits
9%
44%
31%
16%
4%
18%
44%
34%
3%
19%
50%
28%
1%
18%
37%
44%
2%
20%
43%
35%
23%
68%
9%
21%
59%
20%
22%
49%
29%
52%
45%
4%
Customquestions
Below are the complete set of responses to each custom question on the survey. By default, “don’t know” responses are excluded, but may be added to the table using the response filter below.
Include "don't know"
No
32
Pleaseindicate
howmuch,ifatall,
eachofthe
followingarea
probleminClovis.
Homelessness Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Availability of
affordable housing
Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Too much growth Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Lack of growth Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Run-down
buildings, weed
lots, or junk
vehicles
Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Availability of public
transportation
Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Traffic Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Crime Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Drugs Major problem
Moderate problem
Minor problem
Not a problem
Pleaseratehow
important,ifatall,
eachofthe
followingisfor
Clovistoaddress
inthecomingtwo
years.
Increasing the
amount of activities
for seniors, such as
group exercise
classes, arts and
history classes,
pickleball courts, e..
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Increasing the
amount of activities
for youth
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Providing more
affordable housing
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Providing additional
community
recreation facilities
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Planning,
development, and
growth
management
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Increasing
employment
opportunities
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Protecting natural
resources (rivers
and lakes, open
space, etc.)
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Improving traffic
and road conditions
Essential
Very important
Somewhat important
Not at all important
Pleaseindicate
whetheryoufeel
therearetheright
amount,toomany,
ornotenoughof
eachintheCityof
Clovis.
Single-family
detached homes
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Townhouses Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Multi-family
residential housing
(apartments/
condominiums)
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Independent
housing options for
older adults
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Housing options for
young residents
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Middle-income
housing options
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Low-income
housing options
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Housing for people
experiencing
homelessness
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Senior assisted
living
Too many
Right amount
Not enough
Would you support
establishing term
limits for members
of the Clovis City
Council?
No - Keep the current system
with no term limits
Yes - I support establishing
term limits
If you support term
limits, please
indicate which term
limit you most
support:
Two terms (eight years)
Three terms (12 years)
More than three terms (12+
years)
I do not support term limits
52%
65%
33%
3%
52%
47%
1%
47%
33%
20%
65%
23%
12%
39%
58%
3%
79%
21%
13%
1%
22%
64%
Customquestions
Below are the complete set of responses to each custom question on the survey. By default, “don’t know” responses are excluded, but may be added to the table using the response filter below.
Include "don't know"
No
33
The National Community Survey™ • © 2001-2025 National Research Center, Inc.
The City of Clovis 2025 Community Survey
Please complete this survey if you are the adult (age 18 or older) in the household who most recently had a birthday (the year of birth does not matter). Your responses are confidential and no identifying information will be shared.
1. Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Clovis.
Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know
q1a Clovis as a place to live .......................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q1b Your neighborhood as a place to live .............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q1c Clovis as a place to raise children ..................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q1d Clovis as a place to work ....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q1e Clovis as a place to visit ......................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q1f Clovis as a place to retire ...................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q1g The overall quality of life in Clovis ................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q1h Sense of community ................................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5
2. Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Clovis as a whole.
Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know
q2a Overall economic health of Clovis ..................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q2b Overall quality of the transportation system (auto, bicycle, foot, bus) in Clovis .................................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q2c Overall design or layout of Clovis’s residential and commercial areas (e.g., homes, buildings, streets, parks, etc.) ............................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q2d Overall quality of the utility infrastructure in Clovis.................................................. (water, sewer, storm water, electric/gas, broadband) ..................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q2e Overall feeling of safety in Clovis ...................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q2f Overall quality of natural environment in Clovis ....................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q2g Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities ............................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q2h Overall health and wellness opportunities in Clovis ................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q2i Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts..................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q2j Residents’ connection and engagement with their community .......................... 1 2 3 4 5
3. Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following.
Very Somewhat Somewhat Very Don’t
likely likely unlikely unlikely know
q3a Recommend living in Clovis to someone who asks .............................1 2 3 4 5 q3b Remain in Clovis for the next five years ...................................................1 2 3 4 5
4. Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel:
Very Somewhat Neither safe Somewhat Very Don’t
safe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe know
q4a In your neighborhood during the day ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 q4b In Clovis’s Old Town/commercial area
during the day .............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 q4c From property crime ....................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 q4d From violent crime ........................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 q4e From fire, flood, or other natural disaster ............................. 1 2 3 4 5 6
5. Please rate the job you feel the Clovis community does at each of the following.
Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know
q5a Making all residents feel welcome ................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q5b Attracting people from diverse backgrounds .............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q5c Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q5d Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.) ........... 1 2 3 4 5
6. Please rate each of the following in the Clovis community.
Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know
q6a Overall quality of business and service establishments in Clovis ....................... 1 2 3 4 5 q6b Variety of business and service establishments in Clovis ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q6c Vibrancy of Old Town/commercial area........................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q6d Employment opportunities ................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q6e Shopping opportunities ........................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q6f Cost of living in Clovis ............................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q6g Overall image or reputation of Clovis ............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5
The National Community Survey™ • © 2001-2025 National Research Center, Inc.
7. Please also rate each of the following in the Clovis community.
Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know
q7a Traffic flow on major streets ............................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7b Ease of public parking ............................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q7c Ease of travel by car in Clovis ............................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q7d Ease of travel by public transportation in Clovis ....................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7e Ease of travel by bicycle in Clovis ..................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7f Ease of walking in Clovis....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7g Well-planned residential growth ...................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7h Well-planned commercial growth .................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7i Well-designed neighborhoods ........................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7j Preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community ............ 1 2 3 4 5 q7k Public places where people want to spend time ........................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q7l Variety of housing options ................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7m Availability of affordable quality housing ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7n Overall quality of new development in Clovis ............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q7o Overall appearance of Clovis ............................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7p Cleanliness of Clovis ............................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7q Water resources (lakes, ponds, riverways, etc.) ........................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q7r Air quality .................................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7s Availability of paths and walking trails .......................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7t Fitness opportunities (including exercise classes and paths or trails, etc.) ... 1 2 3 4 5 q7u Recreational opportunities .................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q7v Availability of affordable quality food ............................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q7w Availability of affordable quality health care ............................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7x Availability of preventive health services ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7y Availability of affordable quality mental health care ............................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7z Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities .......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7aa Community support for the arts ........................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q7bb Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool ............................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q7cc K-12 education .......................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7dd Adult educational opportunities ....................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7ee Sense of civic/community pride ........................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q7ff Neighborliness of residents in Clovis .............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q7gg Opportunities to participate in social events and activities .................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q7hh Opportunities to attend special events and festivals ............................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q7ii Opportunities to volunteer .................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q7jj Opportunities to participate in community matters ................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q7kk Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds ................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5
8. Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months.
No Yes
q8a Contacted the City of Clovis (in-person, phone, email, or web) for help or information ................................... 1 2 q8b Contacted Clovis elected officials (in-person, phone, email, or web) to express your opinion ...................... 1 2 q8c Attended a local public meeting (of local elected officials like City Council or County Commissioners, advisory boards, town halls, HOA, neighborhood watch, etc.) ............................................ 1 2 q8d Watched (online or on television) a local public meeting ............................................................................................... 1 2 q8e Volunteered your time to some group/activity in Clovis ................................................................................................ 1 2 q8f Campaigned or advocated for a local issue, cause, or candidate .................................................................................. 1 2 q8g Voted in your most recent local election ................................................................................................................................ 1 2 q8h Used bus, rail, subway, or other public transportation instead of driving ............................................................... 1 2 q8i Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone .............................................................................. 1 2 q8j Walked or biked instead of driving ........................................................................................................................................... 1 2
The National Community Survey™ • © 2001-2025 National Research Center, Inc.
The City of Clovis 2025 Community Survey
9. Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Clovis.
Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know
q9a Public information services ............................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q9b Economic development ..................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9c Traffic enforcement ............................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q9d Traffic signal timing ............................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q9e Street repair ........................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9f Street cleaning ....................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9g Street lighting ........................................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q9i Sidewalk maintenance ....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9j Bus or transit services ....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9k Land use, planning, and zoning ...................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9l Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9m Affordable high-speed internet access ....................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9n Garbage collection ............................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9o Drinking water ...................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9p Sewer services ....................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9q Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees, etc.) .................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9r Power (electric and/or gas) utility ............................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9s Utility billing .......................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9t Police services ....................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9u Crime prevention ................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q9v Animal control ....................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9w Ambulance or emergency medical services ............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q9x Fire services ........................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9y Fire prevention and education ....................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9z Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural disasters or other emergency situations) ................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9aa Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts) ..... 1 2 3 4 5 q9bb Clovis open space ................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q9cc Recycling .................................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q9dd Yard waste pick-up.............................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q9ee City parks................................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q9ff Recreation programs or classes .................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9gg Recreation centers or facilities ...................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9hh Health services ...................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9ii Public library services ....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q9jj Overall customer service by Clovis employees
(police, receptionists, planners, etc.) ................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5
10. Please rate the following categories of Clovis government performance.
Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know
q10a The value of services for the taxes paid to Clovis .................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q10b The overall direction that Clovis is taking................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q10c The job Clovis government does at welcoming resident involvement ............... 1 2 3 4 5 q10d Overall confidence in Clovis government .................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q10e Generally acting in the best interest of the community ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q10f Being honest ........................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q10g Being open and transparent to the public ................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q10h Informing residents about issues facing the community ................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q10i Treating all residents fairly ............................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q10j Treating residents with respect .................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5
11. Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know
q11a The City of Clovis .................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q11b The Federal Government .................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5
The National Community Survey™ • © 2001-2025 National Research Center, Inc.
12. Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Clovis community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Very Somewhat Not at all
Essential important important important
q12a Overall economic health of Clovis ........................................................................................1 2 3 4 q12b Overall quality of the transportation system (auto, bicycle, foot, bus) in Clovis ....1 2 3 4 q12c Overall design or layout of Clovis’s residential and commercial areas (e.g., homes, buildings, streets, parks, etc.) ..................................................1 2 3 4 q12d Overall quality of the utility infrastructure in Clovis (water, sewer, storm water, electric/gas, broadband) .......................................1 2 3 4 q12e Overall feeling of safety in Clovis .........................................................................................1 2 3 4 q12f Overall quality of natural environment in Clovis ..........................................................1 2 3 4 q12g Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities ...............................................1 2 3 4 q12h Overall health and wellness opportunities in Clovis ...................................................1 2 3 4 q12i Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts........................................1 2 3 4 q12j Residents’ connection and engagement with their community .............................1 2 3 4
13. Please indicate how much, if at all, each of the following are a problem in Clovis.
Major Moderate Minor Not a Don’t
problem problem problem problem know
q13a Homelessness ................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q13b Availability of affordable housing .......................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q13c Too much growth ........................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q13d Lack of growth ................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q13e Run-down buildings, weed lots, or junk vehicles ............................ 1 2 3 4 5 q13f Availability of public transportation .................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q13g Traffic ................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q13h Crime .................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q13i Drugs .................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5
14. Please rate how important, if at all, each of the following is for Clovis to address in the coming two years.
Very Somewhat Not at all Don’t
Essential important important important know
q14a Increasing the amount of activities for seniors, such as group exercise classes, arts and history classes, pickleball courts, etc. ......................... 1 2 3 4 5 q14b Increasing the amount of activities for youth .................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q14c Providing more affordable housing ........................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q14d Providing additional community recreation facilities ................................. 1 2 3 4 5 q14e Planning, development, and growth management ........................................ 1 2 3 4 5 q14f Increasing employment opportunities ............................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 q14g Protecting natural resources (rivers and lakes, open space, etc.) .......... 1 2 3 4 5 q14h Improving traffic and road conditions ................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5
15. Please indicate whether you feel there are the right amount, too many, or not enough of each in the City of Clovis.
Too many Right amount Not enough Don’t know
q15a Single-family detached homes ............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 q15b Townhouses ................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 q15c Multi-family residential housing (apartments/condominiums) ........... 1 2 3 4 q15d Independent housing options for older adults .............................................. 1 2 3 4 q15e Housing options for young residents ................................................................ 1 2 3 4 q15f Middle-income housing options .......................................................................... 1 2 3 4 q15g Low-income housing options ............................................................................... 1 2 3 4 q15h Housing for people experiencing homelessness .......................................... 1 2 3 4 q15i Senior assisted living ................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4
16. Would you support establishing term limits for members of the Clovis City Council? 1 Yes – I support establishing term limits 2 No – Keep the current system with no term limits
17. If you support term limits, please indicate which term limit you most support:
1 Two terms (eight years) 3 More than three terms (12+ years) 2 Three terms (12 years) 4 I do not support term limits
The National Community Survey™ • © 2001-2025 National Research Center, Inc.
The City of Clovis 2025 Community Survey
Our last questions are about you and your household.
Again, all of your responses to this survey are confidential and no identifying information will be shared.
D1. In general, how many times do you: Several Once A few times Every Less often Don’t times a day a day a week few weeks or never know
d1a Access the internet from your home using
a computer, laptop, or tablet computer ....................1 2 3 4 5 6 d1b Access the internet from your cell phone .......................1 2 3 4 5 6 d1c Visit social media sites such as Facebook,
X (formerly Twitter), Nextdoor, etc. ..........................1 2 3 4 5 6 d1d Use or check email ....................................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 d1e Share your opinions online ...................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 d1f Shop online ..................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 D2. Please rate your overall health.
1 Excellent 2 Very good 3 Good 4 Fair 5 Poor D3. What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be:
1 Very positive 2 Somewhat positive 3 Neutral 4 Somewhat negative 5 Very negative D4. How many years have you lived in Clovis?
1 Less than 2 years
2 2-5 years
3 6-10 years
4 11-20 years
5 More than 20 years
D5. Which best describes the building you live
in?
1 Single-family detached home
2 Townhouse or duplex (may share walls but
no units above or below you)
3 Condominium or apartment (have units
above or below you)
4 Mobile home
5 Other
D6. Do you rent or own your home?
1 Rent
2 Own
D7. About how much is your monthly housing
cost for the place you live (including rent,
mortgage payment, property tax, property
insurance, and homeowners’ association
(HOA) fees)?
1 Less than $300 6 $2,500 to $3,999
2 $300 to $599 7 $4,000 to $6,999
3 $600 to $999 8 $7,000 to $9,999
4 $1,000 to $1,499 9 $10,000 or more
5 $1,500 to $2,499
D8. Do any children 17 or under live in your
household?
1 No 2 Yes
D9. Are you or any other members of your
household aged 65 or older?
1 No 2 Yes
D10. How much do you anticipate your household’s total
income before taxes will be for the current year?
(Please include in your total income money from all
sources for all persons living in your household.)
1 Less than $25,000 5 $100,000 to $149,999
2 $25,000 to $49,999 6 $150,000 to $199,999
3 $50,000 to $74,999 7 $200,000 to $299,999
4 $75,000 to $99,999 8 $300,000 or more
D11. Are you of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin? 1 No 2 Yes
D12. What is your race? (Mark one or more races to
indicate what race you consider yourself to be.)
d12a ❑ American Indian or Alaskan Native
d12b ❑ Asian
d12c ❑ Black or African American
d12d ❑ Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
d12e ❑ White
d12f ❑ A race not listed
D13. In which category is your age?
1 18-24 years 5 55-64 years
2 25-34 years 6 65-74 years
3 35-44 years 7 75 years or older
4 45-54 years
D14. What is your gender?
1 Woman
2 Man
3 Identify in another way → go to D14a
D14a. If you identify in another way, how would you
describe your gender?
1 Agender/I don’t identify with any gender
2 Genderqueer/gender fluid
3 Non-binary
4 Transgender man
5 Transgender woman
6 Two-spirit
7 Identify in another way
Thank you! Please return the completed survey in the postage-paid envelope to:
National Research Center, Inc., PO Box 14050, Houston, TX 77221-9904