Agenda packet — Newman City Council, April 22, 2025 (part 1 of 2)

AGENDA

NEWMAN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING APRIL 22, 2025
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7:00 P.M., 938 FRESNO STREET
NOTICE: THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT (CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54950, ET SEQ.) AND THE FEDERAL AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT

1. Call To Order.

2. Pledge Of Allegiance.

3. Invocation.

4. Roll Call.

5. Declaration Of Conflicts Of Interest.

6. Ceremonial Matters.

7. Items from the Public - Non-Agenda Items.

8. Consent Calendar
a. Waive All Readings Of Ordinances And Resolutions Except By Title. b. Approval Of Warrants. (View Warrant/Check Register)
c. Approval Of Minutes Of The March 25, 2025 Meeting. (View Minutes) d. Adopt Resolution No. 2025- , A Resolution Of Concurrence And Support Of The Consolidated Plan For Fiscal Years 2025-2029 And The Annual Action Plan For Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Prepared For The Stanislaus Urban County And Stanislaus Home Consortium. (View Report)

9. Public Hearings.
a. Adopt Resolution No. 2025- , A Resolution Approving The 2025 Citywide Capital Facilities Development Impact Fees Nexus Study Update. (View Report)

10. Regular Business
a. Adopt Resolution No. 2025- , A Resolution Initiating Proceedings For The Levy And Collection Of Assessments For The Lighting And Landscape Maintenance District For Fiscal Year 2025/2026 And Ordering The Preparation Of The Engineer’s Report. (View Report)

11. Items From District Five Stanislaus County Supervisor.

12. Items From The City Manager And Staff.

13. Items From City Council Members.

14. Adjournment.

Calendar of Events
April 17 – Planning Commission – 7:00 P.M.

April 20 – Easter Day.

April 22 – City Council - 7:00 P.M.

May 11 – Mother’s Day.

May 13 – City Council - 7:00 P.M.

May 15 – Planning Commission – 7:00 P.M.

May 26 – Memorial Day Holiday – City Offices Closed.

May 27 – City Council - 7:00 P.M.

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
1 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description AAA Business Supplies & Interiors 10-22-6300 $ 120.65 126050 4/2/2025 Batteries, Pens, Post Its, Paper AAA Business Supplies & Interiors 60-50-6300 $ 89.00 126050 4/2/2025 Paper AAA Business Supplies & Interiors 10-14-6300 $ 89.00 126050 4/2/2025 Paper AAA Business Supplies & Interiors 63-56-6300 $ 88.99 126050 4/2/2025 Paper AAA Business Supplies & Interiors 10-21-6300 $ 110.21 126050 4/2/2025 Coffee Cups, Paper, Binder Clips AAA Business Supplies & Interiors 10-22-6300 $ 65.09 126050 4/2/2025 Sharpies, Certificate Holder $ 562.94 126050 Total
Amaya Cierra 10-00-2841 $ 80.00 126043 3/24/2025 Sherman Park Rental Deposit Refund/ Amaya $ 80.00 126043 Total
Amazon Capital Services 10-22-6300 $ 97.96 125986 3/20/2025 Blanket Amazon Capital Services 10-22-6300 $ 78.72 125986 3/20/2025 Hinges $ 176.68 125986 Total
Amazon Capital Services 10-22-6300 $ 34.50 126051 4/2/2025 Battery $ 34.50 126051 Total
AMERICAN WATER WORKS 63-56-6635 $ 130.20 126052 4/2/2025 Training/ PW $ 130.20 126052 Total
Animal Damage Management, Inc 69-47-6200 $ 810.00 126053 4/2/2025 Gopher, Ground Squirrel, Vole Control@ Sherman, Barrington Pa $ 810.00 126053 Total
Anthieny Brianna 10-21-6695 $ 473.00 126054 4/2/2025 Animal Care Conference Per Diem/ Anthieny $ 473.00 126054 Total
Anthieny Brianna 10-21-6695 $ 226.96 126112 4/11/2025 Reimbursement for Airfare/ Anthieny Anthieny Brianna 10-21-6695 $ 548.81 126112 4/11/2025 Reimbursement for Hotel Stay/ Anthieny $ 775.77 126112 Total
Aquafix, Inc 60-50-6300 $ 9,465.16 126113 4/11/2025 Ana-Zyme G $ 9,465.16 126113 Total
AT&T 10-14-6420 $ 91.84 125988 3/20/2025 Landlines 2-13-25 to 3-12-25 AT&T 60-50-6200 $ 10.55 125988 3/20/2025 Alarm 2-13-25 to 3-12-25 AT&T 63-56-6200 $ 10.55 125988 3/20/2025 Alarm 2-13-25 to 3-12-25 AT&T 10-21-6420 $ 363.78 125988 3/20/2025 Circuit Line Between Fresno St to Ceres 2-13-25 to 3-12-25 AT&T 10-21-6420 $ 32.45 125988 3/20/2025 Landlines 2-13-25 to 3-12-25 AT&T 63-56-6420 $ 92.27 125988 3/20/2025 Landlines 2-13-25 to 3-12-25 AT&T 10-14-6200 $ 10.55 125988 3/20/2025 Alarm 2-13-25 to 3-12-25 AT&T 10-07-6420 $ 30.20 125988 3/20/2025 Landlines 2-13-25 to 3-12-25 $ 642.19 125988 Total
AT&T MOBILITY 10-22-6420 $ 265.64 125987 3/20/2025 Cell Phone Use 2-03-25 to 3-02-25 AT&T MOBILITY 63-56-6420 $ 390.53 125987 3/20/2025 Cell Phone Use 2-03-25 to 3-02-25 AT&T MOBILITY 10-02-6420 $ 19.38 125987 3/20/2025 Cell Phone Use 2-03-25 to 3-02-25 AT&T MOBILITY 10-07-6420 $ 23.67 125987 3/20/2025 Cell Phone Use 2-03-25 to 3-02-25 AT&T MOBILITY 73-70-6420 $ 11.28 125987 3/20/2025 Cell Phone Use 2-03-25 to 3-02-25

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
2 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description AT&T MOBILITY 10-33-6420 $ 93.17 125987 3/20/2025 Cell Phone Use 2-03-25 to 3-02-25 AT&T MOBILITY 10-44-6420 $ 89.00 125987 3/20/2025 Cell Phone Use 2-03-25 to 3-02-25 AT&T MOBILITY 69-47-6420 $ 84.74 125987 3/20/2025 Cell Phone Use 2-03-25 to 3-02-25 AT&T MOBILITY 60-50-6420 $ 470.68 125987 3/20/2025 Cell Phone Use 2-03-25 to 3-02-25 AT&T MOBILITY 10-06-6420 $ 60.75 125987 3/20/2025 Cell Phone Use 2-03-25 to 3-02-25 AT&T MOBILITY 10-21-6420 $ 605.87 125987 3/20/2025 Cell Phone Use 2-03-25 to 3-02-25 AT&T MOBILITY 10-45-6420 $ 31.56 125987 3/20/2025 Cell Phone Use 2-03-25 to 3-02-25 AT&T MOBILITY 22-20-6420 $ 9.02 125987 3/20/2025 Cell Phone Use 2-03-25 to 3-02-25 AT&T MOBILITY 10-03-6420 $ 92.23 125987 3/20/2025 Cell Phone Use 2-03-25 to 3-02-25 $ 2,247.52 125987 Total
AutoZone MS #1 10-22-6300 $ 54.99 126114 4/11/2025 Windshield Wipers AutoZone MS #1 10-22-6300 $ (27.50) 126114 4/11/2025 Return of Windshield Wipers AutoZone MS #1 10-22-6300 $ 27.50 126114 4/11/2025 Windshield Wipers AutoZone MS #1 10-46-6300 $ 34.50 126114 4/11/2025 Chamois, Meguiar's AutoZone MS #1 63-56-6530 $ 22.03 126114 4/11/2025 Circuit Tester $ 111.52 126114 Total
AvidWater, LLC 63-56-6300 $ 43.95 126115 4/11/2025 Cap, Glue AvidWater, LLC 60-50-6300 $ 23.25 126115 4/11/2025 Boots $ 67.20 126115 Total
Baker Dorothy June 10-46-6300 $ 40.78 125989 3/20/2025 Oil $ 40.78 125989 Total
Balance Hydrologics, Inc 17-36-7779 $ 7,711.20 125990 3/20/2025 Construction Observation $ 7,711.20 125990 Total
Bertolotti Newman Disposal 10-33-6220 $ 1,249.15 126117 4/11/2025 26 Yard Trash Bin & Street Sweeping Debris/ March 2025 Bertolotti Newman Disposal 69-47-6220 $ 470.06 126117 4/11/2025 40 Yard Trash Bin Dumping@ Corp Yard/ March 2025 Bertolotti Newman Disposal 69-47-6220 $ 1,249.15 126117 4/11/2025 26 Yard Trash Bin & Street Sweeping Debris/ March 2025 Bertolotti Newman Disposal 10-33-6220 $ 470.06 126117 4/11/2025 40 Yard Trash Bin Dumping@ Corp Yard/ March 2025 $ 3,438.42 126117 Total
Bertolotti Newman Disposal, Inc 10-41-6200 $ 85,974.55 126116 4/11/2025 Monthly Contract Garbage Service/ March 2025 Bertolotti Newman Disposal, Inc 10-00-5080 $ (16,048.58) 126116 4/11/2025 Monthly Contract Garbage Service/ March 2025 Bertolotti Newman Disposal, Inc 10-00-5733 $ (5,731.64) 126116 4/11/2025 Monthly Contract Garbage Service/ March 2025 Bertolotti Newman Disposal, Inc 10-00-5730 $ 21,780.22 126116 4/11/2025 Monthly Contract Garbage Service/ March 2025 $ 85,974.55 126116 Total
BJ's Consumers Choice Pest Control, Inc 63-56-6200 $ 280.00 126118 4/11/2025 Pest Control Services/City Wells BJ's Consumers Choice Pest Control, Inc 10-07-6665 $ 62.99 126118 4/11/2025 Pest Control Services/ City Hall/ March 2025 BJ's Consumers Choice Pest Control, Inc 10-07-6200 $ 147.99 126118 4/11/2025 Pest Control Services/ City Hall/ March 2025 BJ's Consumers Choice Pest Control, Inc 10-21-6200 $ 62.98 126118 4/11/2025 Pest Control Services/ City Hall/ March 2025 BJ's Consumers Choice Pest Control, Inc 10-07-6200 $ 52.99 126118 4/11/2025 Pest Control Services/ City Hall/ March 2025 BJ's Consumers Choice Pest Control, Inc 60-50-6200 $ 33.03 126118 4/11/2025 Pest Control Services/ City Hall/ March 2025 BJ's Consumers Choice Pest Control, Inc 63-56-6200 $ 88.09 126118 4/11/2025 Pest Control Services/ City Hall/ March 2025

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
3 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description BJ's Consumers Choice Pest Control, Inc 10-22-6200 $ 62.98 126118 4/11/2025 Pest Control Services/ City Hall/ March 2025 BJ's Consumers Choice Pest Control, Inc 10-44-6660 $ 52.97 126118 4/11/2025 Pest Control Services/ City Hall/ March 2025 BJ's Consumers Choice Pest Control, Inc 10-44-6200 $ 52.98 126118 4/11/2025 Pest Control Services/ City Hall/ March 2025 $ 897.00 126118 Total
Borba Ed 10-00-2840 $ 500.00 126056 4/2/2025 Memorial Building Rental Deposit Refund/ Borba $ 500.00 126056 Total
Borrelli Travis 69-47-6200 $ 185.74 126140 4/11/2025 Portable Restroom Rental Service $ 185.74 126140 Total
Bowen Trista 10-22-6300 $ 179.75 126057 4/2/2025 Reimbursement for Uniforms/ Bowen $ 179.75 126057 Total
BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-21-6300 $ 0.40 126058 4/2/2025 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-46-6300 $ 0.20 126058 4/2/2025 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-22-6300 $ 0.20 126058 4/2/2025 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-07-6665 $ 0.20 126058 4/2/2025 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-07-6300 $ 0.40 126058 4/2/2025 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-44-6660 $ 1.60 126058 4/2/2025 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-44-6300 $ 0.20 126058 4/2/2025 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies BRADY INDUSTRIES 10-44-6670 $ 0.80 126058 4/2/2025 Miscellaneous Cleaning Supplies $ 4.00 126058 Total
CAL TRAFFIC SIGNS 69-47-6300 $ 52.26 125991 3/20/2025 Street Signs $ 52.26 125991 Total
CALIFORNIA CONSULTING, INC 60-50-6200 $ 1,166.66 126119 4/11/2025 Grant writing/Lobbying CALIFORNIA CONSULTING, INC 63-56-6200 $ 1,166.67 126119 4/11/2025 Grant writing/Lobbying CALIFORNIA CONSULTING, INC 10-02-6200 $ 1,166.67 126119 4/11/2025 Grant writing/Lobbying $ 3,500.00 126119 Total
Canon Financial Services, Inc. 63-56-6200 $ 101.77 125992 3/20/2025 Contract Charges March 2025/Copy Charges February 2025 Canon Financial Services, Inc. 10-21-6200 $ 268.09 125992 3/20/2025 Contract Charges March 2025/Copy Charges February 2025 Canon Financial Services, Inc. 10-22-6200 $ 253.98 125992 3/20/2025 Contract Charges March 2025/Copy Charges February 2025 Canon Financial Services, Inc. 60-50-6200 $ 97.87 125992 3/20/2025 Contract Charges March 2025/Copy Charges February 2025 Canon Financial Services, Inc. 63-56-6200 $ 97.88 125992 3/20/2025 Contract Charges March 2025/Copy Charges February 2025 Canon Financial Services, Inc. 10-14-6200 $ 97.87 125992 3/20/2025 Contract Charges March 2025/Copy Charges February 2025 Canon Financial Services, Inc. 60-50-6200 $ 101.76 125992 3/20/2025 Contract Charges March 2025/Copy Charges February 2025 $ 1,019.22 125992 Total
Cardmember Service 10-45-6739 $ 6.58 126059 4/2/2025 Teen Center Snack Bar Supplies Cardmember Service 10-45-6739 $ 71.54 126059 4/2/2025 Teen Center Snack Bar Supplies Cardmember Service 10-22-6300 $ 286.15 126059 4/2/2025 Thermal Imaging Camera Cardmember Service 10-22-6300 $ 97.06 126059 4/2/2025 Thermal Imaging Camera Cardmember Service 10-45-6739 $ 163.45 126059 4/2/2025 Teen Center Snack Bar Supplies Cardmember Service 10-06-6300 $ 134.79 126059 4/2/2025 Wireless Keyboard Cardmember Service 10-21-6300 $ 767.32 126059 4/2/2025 Radio

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
4 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description Cardmember Service 10-03-6300 $ 3.99 126059 4/2/2025 Blue Host Cardmember Service 63-56-6300 $ 12.94 126059 4/2/2025 Waste Toner Cardmember Service 63-56-6300 $ 12.94 126059 4/2/2025 Waste Toner Cardmember Service 60-50-6300 $ 12.94 126059 4/2/2025 Waste Toner Cardmember Service 60-50-6690 $ 72.28 126059 4/2/2025 Interview Panel Lunch Cardmember Service 60-50-6300 $ 11.78 126059 4/2/2025 Interview Panel Supplies Cardmember Service 63-56-6300 $ 11.78 126059 4/2/2025 Interview Panel Supplies Cardmember Service 10-03-6265 $ 69.00 126059 4/2/2025 Joomatools Cardmember Service 10-22-6300 $ 997.58 126059 4/2/2025 Battery Cardmember Service 10-22-6300 $ 9.35 126059 4/2/2025 Postage Cardmember Service 10-06-7105 $ 57.16 126059 4/2/2025 Hard Drive Cardmember Service 10-22-6690 $ 275.00 126059 4/2/2025 Training/ FD Cardmember Service 10-22-6300 $ 86.24 126059 4/2/2025 Postage Cardmember Service 69-47-6300 $ 337.52 126059 4/2/2025 Toilet Cardmember Service 10-21-6420 $ 171.23 126059 4/2/2025 Internet Service Newman to Ceres/PD/ 2-6-25 to 3-5-25 Cardmember Service 10-21-6200 $ 10.00 126059 4/2/2025 Scheduling Software Cardmember Service 60-50-6690 $ 345.00 126059 4/2/2025 Technical Certification Renewal/ Dumaguing Cardmember Service 10-01-6300 $ 10.78 126059 4/2/2025 Photo Background Cardmember Service 10-22-6300 $ 149.75 126059 4/2/2025 Flags Cardmember Service 10-22-6300 $ 90.60 126059 4/2/2025 Postage Cardmember Service 10-45-6739 $ 284.51 126059 4/2/2025 Teen Center Snack Bar Supplies Cardmember Service 10-45-6739 $ 3.69 126059 4/2/2025 Teen Center Snack Bar Supplies Cardmember Service 10-22-6300 $ 401.43 126059 4/2/2025 Repair/ FD Cardmember Service 63-56-6300 $ 84.99 126059 4/2/2025 Toner Cardmember Service 63-56-6420 $ 211.25 126059 4/2/2025 Telephone Service/Long Distance March 2025 Cardmember Service 10-22-6420 $ 211.25 126059 4/2/2025 Telephone Service/Long Distance March 2025 Cardmember Service 10-45-6420 $ 416.19 126059 4/2/2025 Telephone Service/Long Distance March 2025 Cardmember Service 60-50-6420 $ 211.25 126059 4/2/2025 Telephone Service/Long Distance March 2025 Cardmember Service 10-14-6420 $ 211.25 126059 4/2/2025 Telephone Service/Long Distance March 2025 Cardmember Service 10-22-6615 $ 209.00 126059 4/2/2025 Pager Repair Cardmember Service 10-21-6300 $ 26.96 126059 4/2/2025 Vinyl Roll Cardmember Service 10-45-6739 $ 113.92 126059 4/2/2025 Teen Center Snack Bar Supplies Cardmember Service 10-21-6300 $ 32.73 126059 4/2/2025 Dummy Rounds Cardmember Service 10-21-6300 $ 43.10 126059 4/2/2025 Charger Cardmember Service 10-22-6300 $ 422.57 126059 4/2/2025 Wildland Boots/ Flores, Gil Cardmember Service 10-21-6300 $ 108.27 126059 4/2/2025 Fingerprint Ink Pad Cardmember Service 10-33-6690 $ 2.50 126059 4/2/2025 Parking Cardmember Service 10-22-6300 $ 27.87 126059 4/2/2025 Generator Repair Cardmember Service 10-22-6300 $ 67.95 126059 4/2/2025 Postage Cardmember Service 10-45-6739 $ 414.66 126059 4/2/2025 Teen Center Snack Bar Supplies

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
5 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description Cardmember Service 10-21-6420 $ 171.25 126059 4/2/2025 Internet Service Newman to Ceres/PD/ 3-6-25 to 4-5-25 Cardmember Service 10-03-6310 $ 81.97 126059 4/2/2025 Access Cards $ 8,033.31 126059 Total
Casteel Ashley 10-00-2841 $ 80.00 126060 4/2/2025 Sherman Park Rental Deposit Refund/ Casteel $ 80.00 126060 Total
CBA (ADMIN FEES) 10-00-2261 $ 299.00 126061 4/2/2025 Dental-Vision Admin Fees/ April 2025 $ 299.00 126061 Total
CBA (Pre-paid Deposits) 10-00-1110 $ 15,000.00 126120 4/11/2025 Pre-Paid Dental-Vision Deposit $ 15,000.00 126120 Total
Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 10-44-6300 $ 56.29 126079 4/2/2025 Mirror Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 10-22-6300 $ 63.79 126079 4/2/2025 Windshield Wipers Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 60-50-6300 $ 358.16 126079 4/2/2025 Battery Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 69-47-6530 $ 2.86 126079 4/2/2025 Armor All Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 10-44-6530 $ 2.85 126079 4/2/2025 Armor All Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 10-46-6300 $ 9.98 126079 4/2/2025 Adapter, Chuck Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 60-50-6225 $ 547.57 126079 4/2/2025 Filter, Oil Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 69-47-6530 $ 6.46 126079 4/2/2025 Oil, Windshield Wash Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 10-44-6530 $ 6.46 126079 4/2/2025 Oil, Windshield Wash Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 69-47-6530 $ 9.70 126079 4/2/2025 Oil Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 10-33-6530 $ 9.71 126079 4/2/2025 Oil Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 10-22-6300 $ 8.63 126079 4/2/2025 Lamps Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 10-21-6530 $ 29.09 126079 4/2/2025 Armor All Cen-Cal Auto & Truck Parts/ NAPA 10-44-6300 $ 4.36 126079 4/2/2025 Fuses $ 1,115.91 126079 Total
Columbia Weather Systems, Inc 17-36-7780 $ 2,256.60 125993 3/20/2025 Wireless Cellular Modem $ 2,256.60 125993 Total
COMCAST CABLE 10-21-6420 $ 163.77 125994 3/20/2025 High Speed Internet 3-6-25 to 4-5-25 /PD COMCAST CABLE 63-56-6200 $ 73.61 125994 3/20/2025 High speed internet/water COMCAST CABLE 60-50-6200 $ 73.58 125994 3/20/2025 High speed internet/sewer COMCAST CABLE 10-21-6200 $ 73.58 125994 3/20/2025 High speed internet/PD $ 384.54 125994 Total
Cordeiro Custom Remodeling & Repair 10-07-6200 $ 490.03 125995 3/20/2025 Painting/ City Hall $ 490.03 125995 Total
CSG Consultants, Inc 10-23-6215 $ 702.00 125996 3/20/2025 Building Permit Issuance/ February 2025 CSG Consultants, Inc 10-23-6215 $ 6,191.50 125996 3/20/2025 Building Services February 2025 $ 6,893.50 125996 Total
CSJVRMA 60-50-6631 $ 24,741.33 125997 3/20/2025 Workers Compensation/Liability Program 2024-2025 4th Quarter CSJVRMA 10-00-2292 $ 79,328.00 125997 3/20/2025 Workers Compensation/Liability Program 2024-2025 4th Quarter CSJVRMA 63-56-6631 $ 24,741.33 125997 3/20/2025 Workers Compensation/Liability Program 2024-2025 4th Quarter CSJVRMA 10-15-6631 $ 24,741.34 125997 3/20/2025 Workers Compensation/Liability Program 2024-2025 4th Quarter

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
6 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description $ 153,552.00 125997 Total
Davey Resource Group, Inc 17-44-7756 $ 6,937.50 126121 4/11/2025 Professional Services Rendered Through 3-29-25 $ 6,937.50 126121 Total
Department of Forestry & Fire Protection 10-22-6690 $ 600.00 125998 3/20/2025 Hazrnat FRO Course $ 600.00 125998 Total
Department of Motor Vehicles 60-50-6675 $ 54.00 126062 4/2/2025 Registration for 2011 Ford F550 Super Duty/ PW $ 54.00 126062 Total
Dittos 10-21-6300 $ 45.95 125999 3/20/2025 Business Card/ Maldonado, Anthieny $ 45.95 125999 Total
Don's Mobile Glass 10-22-6530 $ 380.00 126063 4/2/2025 Windshield Repair $ 380.00 126063 Total
ECONOMIC & PLANNING SYSTEMS, INC. 40-06-6200 $ 7,538.75 126064 4/2/2025 Nexus Study $ 7,538.75 126064 Total
EMC Planning Group, Inc 40-06-6245 $ 8,359.98 126122 4/11/2025 6th Cycle Housing Element $ 8,359.98 126122 Total
Fresno City College 10-21-6695 $ 120.00 126065 4/2/2025 Academy Instructor Cert Course/ Williams $ 120.00 126065 Total
Garcia Bonifacio 10-33-6530 $ 7.30 126055 4/2/2025 Belt Garcia Bonifacio 69-47-6530 $ 7.30 126055 4/2/2025 Belt $ 14.60 126055 Total
GARTON TRACTOR 10-46-6300 $ 196.03 126066 4/2/2025 Nuts $ 196.03 126066 Total
GEOANALYTICAL LAB, INC. 60-50-6200 $ 427.00 126123 4/11/2025 BOD, TSS, Nitrate as N. TKN, Total Nitrogen GEOANALYTICAL LAB, INC. 63-56-6200 $ 192.00 126123 4/11/2025 Bacti GEOANALYTICAL LAB, INC. 60-50-6200 $ 120.00 126123 4/11/2025 BOD, TSS GEOANALYTICAL LAB, INC. 60-50-6200 $ 120.00 126123 4/11/2025 BOD, TSS GEOANALYTICAL LAB, INC. 63-56-6200 $ 230.00 126123 4/11/2025 Bacti, Nitrate as N, EDT Reporting GEOANALYTICAL LAB, INC. 60-50-6200 $ 427.00 126123 4/11/2025 BOD, TSS, Nitrate as N. TKN, Total Nitrogen GEOANALYTICAL LAB, INC. 63-56-6200 $ 192.00 126123 4/11/2025 Bacti GEOANALYTICAL LAB, INC. 60-50-6200 $ 120.00 126123 4/11/2025 BOD, TSS GEOANALYTICAL LAB, INC. 63-56-6200 $ 192.00 126123 4/11/2025 Bacti $ 2,020.00 126123 Total
Gouveia Engineering, Inc 17-36-7779 $ 6,960.00 126044 3/24/2025 Project 555.05C Newman Wetlands $ 6,960.00 126044 Total
Hansford Catherine 60-50-6200 $ 1,782.50 126125 4/11/2025 Sewer Rate Study $ 1,782.50 126125 Total
HINDERLITER, dELLAMAS & ASSOCIATES 10-14-6200 $ 750.00 126068 4/2/2025 Audit Services- Sales Tax 3rd Quarter 2024 $ 750.00 126068 Total
Humphries Lewis 63-56-6690 $ 92.49 126069 4/2/2025 Mileage Reimbursement/ Humphries Humphries Lewis 10-14-6690 $ 92.50 126069 4/2/2025 Mileage Reimbursement/ Humphries

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
7 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description Humphries Lewis 60-50-6690 $ 92.49 126069 4/2/2025 Mileage Reimbursement/ Humphries $ 277.48 126069 Total
Hydrofocus, Inc 17-44-7757 $ 585.00 126001 3/20/2025 Wetland Restoration Grant Agreement $ 585.00 126001 Total
IDEXX LABORATORIES, INC. 63-56-6300 $ 621.76 126045 3/24/2025 Water Testing Supplies $ 621.76 126045 Total
INFOSEND, INC 63-56-6200 $ 1,385.67 126126 4/11/2025 Utility Bill & Late Notice Mailing March 2025 INFOSEND, INC 60-50-6200 $ 1,385.67 126126 4/11/2025 Utility Bill & Late Notice Mailing March 2025 $ 2,771.34 126126 Total
Jantzen Colby 10-21-6695 $ 95.00 126070 4/2/2025 POST Training Per Diem/ Jantzen $ 95.00 126070 Total
JOCELYN ROLAND, Ph.D. 10-21-6235 $ 500.00 126019 3/20/2025 Pre-Employment Psychological Screening/ Justice $ 500.00 126019 Total
JOE'S LANDSCAPING & CONCR 69-47-6200 $ 12,022.00 126002 3/20/2025 Maintenance Service For The Month of February $ 12,022.00 126002 Total
Jones Bruce 10-22-6690 $ 34.00 126071 4/2/2025 Reimbursement for EMR Certification/ Jones $ 34.00 126071 Total
Lou's Gloves, Inc 60-50-6300 $ 262.00 126005 3/20/2025 Nitrile Gloves $ 262.00 126005 Total
Lozada Floyd 10-00-2840 $ 300.00 126127 4/11/2025 Memorial Building Rental Deposit Refund/ Lozada Lozada Floyd 10-00-5510 $ 25.00 126127 4/11/2025 Memorial Building Rental Deposit Refund/ Lozada $ 325.00 126127 Total
Lucas Austin 10-22-6690 $ 34.00 126072 4/2/2025 Reimbursement for EMR Certification/ Lucas $ 34.00 126072 Total
MACHADO BACKHOE, INC 60-50-6200 $ 21,366.24 126073 4/2/2025 Repair on Gates $ 21,366.24 126073 Total
Martinez Automotive Garage LLC 69-47-6530 $ 94.24 126074 4/2/2025 Service on Chevy Silverado Martinez Automotive Garage LLC 10-33-6530 $ 94.24 126074 4/2/2025 Service on Chevy Silverado $ 188.48 126074 Total
Martinez Automotive Garage LLC 60-50-6530 $ 444.17 126006 3/20/2025 Service on Ford F150 Martinez Automotive Garage LLC 10-33-6530 $ 444.17 126006 3/20/2025 Service on Ford F150 $ 888.34 126006 Total
Martinez Automotive Garage LLC 69-47-6530 $ 104.17 126074 4/2/2025 Repair of Boom Truck Martinez Automotive Garage LLC 10-44-6530 $ 104.17 126074 4/2/2025 Repair of Boom Truck Martinez Automotive Garage LLC 10-33-6530 $ 104.16 126074 4/2/2025 Repair of Boom Truck $ 312.50 126074 Total
Maverick Data Systems 10-21-6200 $ 2,250.00 126075 4/2/2025 Warrant Builder Annual Subscription $ 2,250.00 126075 Total
McKesson Medical-Surgical 10-22-6300 $ 302.29 126128 4/11/2025 Defibrillator Pads $ 302.29 126128 Total

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
8 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description McKesson Medical-Surgical 10-22-6300 $ 68.74 126007 3/20/2025 Nitrile Gloves McKesson Medical-Surgical 10-22-6300 $ 72.38 126007 3/20/2025 Safety Glass McKesson Medical-Surgical 10-22-6300 $ 239.78 126007 3/20/2025 Gloves, Lancets, Narcan $ 380.90 126007 Total
Mckinnis Orvil 10-00-2840 $ 75.00 126008 3/20/2025 Memorial Building Rental Deposit Refund/ SJVDA $ 75.00 126008 Total
Mechanics Bank 63-56-6120 $ 561.00 126129 4/11/2025 HSA 2nd Half Deposit/ Ribeiro Mechanics Bank 10-14-6120 $ 544.50 126129 4/11/2025 HSA 2nd Half Deposit/ Ribeiro Mechanics Bank 60-50-6120 $ 544.50 126129 4/11/2025 HSA 2nd Half Deposit/ Ribeiro $ 1,650.00 126129 Total
Mello Justin 10-22-6690 $ 250.00 126076 4/2/2025 Reimbursement for Training/ Mello $ 250.00 126076 Total
MG House Cleaning 10-33-6270 $ 2,895.00 126009 3/20/2025 Cleaning of 1041 S St $ 2,895.00 126009 Total
MID VALLEY IT, INC 63-56-7105 $ 263.82 126077 4/2/2025 New Camera/ City Hall MID VALLEY IT, INC 10-07-7105 $ 263.83 126077 4/2/2025 New Camera/ City Hall MID VALLEY IT, INC 60-50-7105 $ 263.83 126077 4/2/2025 New Camera/ City Hall MID VALLEY IT, INC 10-03-6200 $ 2,120.00 126077 4/2/2025 Annual Maintenance MID VALLEY IT, INC 71-21-7010 $ 1,572.99 126077 4/2/2025 Docking Station $ 4,484.47 126077 Total
MID VALLEY IT, INC 10-21-6200 $ 3,134.00 126010 3/20/2025 IT CONTRACT/PD MID VALLEY IT, INC 63-56-6200 $ 1,567.00 126010 3/20/2025 IT CONTRACT/WATR MID VALLEY IT, INC 10-14-6200 $ 1,567.00 126010 3/20/2025 IT CONTRACT/FIN MID VALLEY IT, INC 60-50-6200 $ 1,567.00 126010 3/20/2025 IT CONTRACT/SEWR $ 7,835.00 126010 Total
MID VALLEY IT, INC 10-07-7105 $ 263.83 126130 4/11/2025 New Camera/ City Hall MID VALLEY IT, INC 60-50-7105 $ 263.83 126130 4/11/2025 New Camera/ City Hall MID VALLEY IT, INC 63-56-7105 $ 263.82 126130 4/11/2025 New Camera/ City Hall $ 791.48 126130 Total
MID VALLEY IT, INC 10-03-6310 $ 109.99 126077 4/2/2025 SSL Certificate Renewal $ 109.99 126077 Total
Modesto Junior College Ag Department 10-21-6208 $ 1,262.00 126078 4/2/2025 Animal Shelter/ March 2025 Modesto Junior College Ag Department 10-21-7105 $ 5,053.00 126078 4/2/2025 Catch & Release Program March 2025 $ 6,315.00 126078 Total
Muniquip, LLC 60-50-6225 $ 696.35 126131 4/11/2025 Lift Station Repair Parts $ 696.35 126131 Total
National Fleet Auto Group 71-21-7010 $ 57,056.92 126011 3/20/2025 2025 Police Ford Explorer/ PD $ 57,056.92 126011 Total
NBS 67-49-6200 $ 1,383.62 126080 4/2/2025 Quarterly Admin Fees 4-1-25 thru 6-30-25 /CFD NBS 69-47-6200 $ 3,338.00 126080 4/2/2025 Quarterly Admin Fees 4-1-25 thru 6-30-25/ LLD

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
9 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description $ 4,721.62 126080 Total
NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 12.93 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-22-6300 $ 119.97 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 60-50-6300 $ 38.16 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 60-50-6300 $ 21.91 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 166.26 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 60-50-6300 $ 32.35 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-46-6300 $ 32.30 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 8.61 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 60-50-6300 $ 1.07 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-07-6300 $ 4.30 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 60-50-6300 $ 194.79 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 63-56-6300 $ 107.86 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 2.15 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 16.17 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 69-47-6300 $ 10.78 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6700 $ 32.01 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 15.50 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 63-56-6300 $ 7.12 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 32.25 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 19.40 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-22-6300 $ 34.05 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-21-6300 $ 7.12 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 69-47-6300 $ 28.66 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 63-56-6300 $ 27.81 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 69-47-6300 $ (1.71) 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies NEWMAN ACE HARDWARE/JACT, 10-44-6300 $ 2.15 126082 4/2/2025 Batteries, Misc Tools, Light Bulbs, Cleaning, Supplies $ 973.97 126082 Total
Newman Auto Repair 10-22-6530 $ 521.43 126081 4/2/2025 Repair on 2014 GMC Sierra/ FD $ 521.43 126081 Total
Newman Auto Repair 10-22-6530 $ 126.18 126132 4/11/2025 Repair on C3/ FD $ 126.18 126132 Total
NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 80.35 126012 3/20/2025 Repair 2023 Chevy Silverado/ PD NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 75.83 126012 3/20/2025 Oil Change 2020 Ford Interceptor/ PD NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 100.00 126012 3/20/2025 Repair 2018 Ford Interceptor/ PD NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 696.56 126012 3/20/2025 Repair 2022 Dodge Durango/ PD NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 96.75 126012 3/20/2025 Oil Change 2017 Ford Interceptor/ PD $ 1,049.49 126012 Total
NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 71.04 126133 4/11/2025 Oil Change 2011 Nissan Altima/ PD NEWMAN SMOG AND LUBE 10-21-6530 $ 1,034.24 126133 4/11/2025 Repair 2011 Nissan Altima/ PD

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
10 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description $ 1,105.28 126133 Total
NORMAC, INC. 69-47-6300 $ 500.33 126083 4/2/2025 Simplot NORMAC, INC. 10-44-6300 $ 500.33 126083 4/2/2025 Simplot $ 1,000.66 126083 Total
Nutrien Ag Solutions Inc 60-50-6230 $ 1,803.06 126134 4/11/2025 4 Gallons Roundhouse, 15 Gallons Dimethoare, 5 Gallons Liberate Nutrien Ag Solutions Inc 60-50-6230 $ 1,860.80 126134 4/11/2025 4 Gallons Roundhouse, 15 Gallons Dimethoare, 6 Gallons Liberate $ 3,663.86 126134 Total
Occu-Med, Ltd 10-22-6235 $ 445.20 126013 3/20/2025 OSHA Respirator Questionnaire $ 445.20 126013 Total
ODP Business Solutions, LLC 60-50-6300 $ 189.62 126084 4/2/2025 Ink $ 189.62 126084 Total
One Step GPS LLC 60-50-6200 $ 153.45 126014 3/20/2025 GPS FleetTracking Software One Step GPS LLC 10-22-6200 $ 69.75 126014 3/20/2025 GPS FleetTracking Software One Step GPS LLC 63-56-6200 $ 153.45 126014 3/20/2025 GPS FleetTracking Software One Step GPS LLC 10-21-6200 $ 209.25 126014 3/20/2025 GPS FleetTracking Software $ 585.90 126014 Total
Operating Engineers Public & Misc Employees 10-00-2260 $ 1,164.00 126085 4/2/2025 Health Insurance Premium/ May 2025 /Caetano $ 1,164.00 126085 Total
Opportunity Stanislaus 63-56-6200 $ 1,300.00 126015 3/20/2025 Workkeys Testing February 2025 Opportunity Stanislaus 60-50-6200 $ 1,300.00 126015 3/20/2025 Workkeys Testing February 2025 Opportunity Stanislaus 10-44-6200 $ 1,300.00 126015 3/20/2025 Workkeys Testing February 2025 $ 3,900.00 126015 Total
Otis Elevator Company 10-07-6200 $ 808.89 126086 4/2/2025 Maintenance Contract Elevator 4-1-25 to 6-30-25 $ 808.89 126086 Total
OTTMAN FARMS, INC 60-50-6230 $ 2,052.00 126016 3/20/2025 Spraying of Alfalfa@ WWTP $ 2,052.00 126016 Total
OTTMAN FARMS, INC 60-50-6230 $ 4,427.00 126087 4/2/2025 Spraying of Alfalfa @ WWTP $ 4,427.00 126087 Total
P G & E 10-21-6510 $ 51.92 126017 3/20/2025 Natural Gas Pumped@ CNG Fueling Station 2-7-25 to 3-10-25 P G & E 10-44-6510 $ 207.68 126017 3/20/2025 Natural Gas Pumped@ CNG Fueling Station 2-7-25 to 3-10-25 P G & E 60-50-6510 $ 51.92 126017 3/20/2025 Natural Gas Pumped@ CNG Fueling Station 2-7-25 to 3-10-25 P G & E 10-33-6510 $ 415.37 126017 3/20/2025 Natural Gas Pumped@ CNG Fueling Station 2-7-25 to 3-10-25 P G & E 63-56-6510 $ 51.92 126017 3/20/2025 Natural Gas Pumped@ CNG Fueling Station 2-7-25 to 3-10-25 P G & E 69-47-6510 $ 259.61 126017 3/20/2025 Natural Gas Pumped@ CNG Fueling Station 2-7-25 to 3-10-25 P G & E 60-50-6410 $ 738.22 126017 3/20/2025 Gas & Electric @ City Hall 2-3-25 to 3-5-25 P G & E 63-56-6410 $ 738.21 126017 3/20/2025 Gas & Electric @ City Hall 2-3-25 to 3-5-25 P G & E 10-07-6410 $ 738.22 126017 3/20/2025 Gas & Electric @ City Hall 2-3-25 to 3-5-25 $ 3,253.07 126017 Total
P G & E 63-56-6410 $ 26,709.68 126135 4/11/2025 Gas & Electric Use P G & E 10-33-6410 $ 6,574.69 126135 4/11/2025 Gas & Electric Use

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
11 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description P G & E 10-46-6410 $ 506.71 126135 4/11/2025 Gas & Electric Use P G & E 69-47-6410 $ 4,248.49 126135 4/11/2025 Gas & Electric Use P G & E 10-45-6410 $ 157.63 126135 4/11/2025 Gas & Electric Use P G & E 10-22-6410 $ 1,736.87 126135 4/11/2025 Gas & Electric Use P G & E 10-07-6410 $ 2,978.83 126135 4/11/2025 Gas & Electric Use P G & E 10-44-6410 $ 1,649.45 126135 4/11/2025 Gas & Electric Use P G & E 60-50-6410 $ 30,273.81 126135 4/11/2025 Gas & Electric Use $ 74,836.16 126135 Total
P G & E 60-50-6410 $ 36.28 126017 3/20/2025 Natural Gas Pumped@ CNG Fueling Station 2-6-25 to 3-9-25 $ 36.28 126017 Total
P G & E 60-50-6410 $ 1,147.44 126046 3/24/2025 Gas & Electric Use $ 1,147.44 126046 Total
Pace Supply Corporation 63-56-6300 $ 380.97 126088 4/2/2025 Coupling Pace Supply Corporation 63-56-6300 $ 446.39 126088 4/2/2025 Packing $ 827.36 126088 Total
PIKUL KRISTINA 63-00-2010 $ 150.00 126029 3/20/2025 Refund Check 016474-000, 1145 Q STREET $ 150.00 126029 Total
PIONEER DRUG 10-46-6300 $ 5.38 126089 4/2/2025 Corp Yard Supplies $ 5.38 126089 Total
Public Agency Coalition Enterprise 10-00-2260 $ 27,455.90 126003 3/20/2025 Health Insurance Premium/ April 2025 $ 27,455.90 126003 Total
Public Agency Coalition Enterprise 10-00-2260 $ 19,718.90 126004 3/20/2025 Health Insurance Premium/ April 2025 $ 19,718.90 126004 Total
RALEY'S IN STORE CHARGE 10-22-6690 $ 75.57 126090 4/2/2025 Fire Department Supplies $ 75.57 126090 Total
Renewable Fuels Inc 10-33-6200 $ 716.29 126018 3/20/2025 Quarterly Service Renewable Fuels Inc 69-47-6200 $ 447.67 126018 3/20/2025 Quarterly Service Renewable Fuels Inc 63-56-6200 $ 89.54 126018 3/20/2025 Quarterly Service Renewable Fuels Inc 10-21-6200 $ 89.54 126018 3/20/2025 Quarterly Service Renewable Fuels Inc 60-50-6200 $ 89.54 126018 3/20/2025 Quarterly Service Renewable Fuels Inc 10-44-6200 $ 358.14 126018 3/20/2025 Quarterly Service $ 1,790.72 126018 Total
Rick Engineering Company 17-36-7780 $ 2,260.00 126091 4/2/2025 Project C 18529-C00 Newman Design Prop 1 $ 2,260.00 126091 Total
Robert Half Inc 63-56-6200 $ 586.78 126000 3/20/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Hurtado Robert Half Inc 60-50-6200 $ 586.79 126000 3/20/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Hurtado Robert Half Inc 10-14-6200 $ 586.79 126000 3/20/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Hurtado $ 1,760.36 126000 Total
Robert Half Inc 63-56-6200 $ 458.45 126067 4/2/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Real Robert Half Inc 10-14-6200 $ 458.46 126067 4/2/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Real

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
12 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description Robert Half Inc 60-50-6200 $ 458.45 126067 4/2/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Real Robert Half Inc 60-50-6200 $ 598.00 126067 4/2/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Hurtado Robert Half Inc 10-14-6200 $ 598.00 126067 4/2/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Hurtado Robert Half Inc 63-56-6200 $ 598.00 126067 4/2/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Hurtado $ 3,169.36 126067 Total
Robert Half Inc 63-56-6200 $ 598.00 126000 3/20/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Hurtado Robert Half Inc 60-50-6200 $ 598.00 126000 3/20/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Hurtado Robert Half Inc 60-50-6200 $ 573.07 126000 3/20/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Real Robert Half Inc 10-14-6200 $ 598.00 126000 3/20/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Hurtado Robert Half Inc 63-56-6200 $ 573.06 126000 3/20/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Real Robert Half Inc 10-14-6200 $ 573.07 126000 3/20/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Real $ 3,513.20 126000 Total
Robert Half Inc 60-50-6200 $ 478.40 126067 4/2/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Hurtado Robert Half Inc 60-50-6200 $ 248.42 126067 4/2/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Real Robert Half Inc 10-14-6200 $ 478.40 126067 4/2/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Hurtado Robert Half Inc 63-56-6200 $ 478.40 126067 4/2/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Hurtado Robert Half Inc 63-56-6200 $ 248.42 126067 4/2/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Real Robert Half Inc 10-14-6200 $ 248.43 126067 4/2/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Real $ 2,180.47 126067 Total
Robert Half Inc 63-56-6200 $ 573.06 126124 4/11/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Real Robert Half Inc 60-50-6200 $ 583.05 126124 4/11/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Hurtado Robert Half Inc 60-50-6200 $ 573.07 126124 4/11/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Real Robert Half Inc 63-56-6200 $ 583.05 126124 4/11/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Hurtado Robert Half Inc 10-14-6200 $ 583.05 126124 4/11/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Hurtado Robert Half Inc 10-14-6200 $ 573.07 126124 4/11/2025 Temporary Account Clerk/ Real $ 3,468.35 126124 Total
Rolfe Construction, Inc 17-36-7779 $ 54,171.95 126020 3/20/2025 NEWS Project $ 54,171.95 126020 Total
Rolfe Construction, Inc 18-56-7771 $ 287,811.05 126047 3/24/2025 Jensen Rd Improvements $ 287,811.05 126047 Total
Rolfe Construction, Inc 17-36-7780 $ 76,708.23 126020 3/20/2025 NEWS Project $ 76,708.23 126020 Total
RRM DESIGN GROUP, INC. 17-44-7780 $ 221.25 126021 3/20/2025 Newman Nature Park $ 221.25 126021 Total
SAFE-T-LITE 69-47-6300 $ 95.83 126092 4/2/2025 Safety Glass, Lens Cleaning Towelettes SAFE-T-LITE 63-56-6300 $ 95.83 126092 4/2/2025 Safety Glass, Lens Cleaning Towelettes SAFE-T-LITE 60-50-6300 $ 95.83 126092 4/2/2025 Safety Glass, Lens Cleaning Towelettes SAFE-T-LITE 10-33-6300 $ 95.83 126092 4/2/2025 Safety Glass, Lens Cleaning Towelettes SAFE-T-LITE 10-44-6300 $ 95.82 126092 4/2/2025 Safety Glass, Lens Cleaning Towelettes SAFE-T-LITE 10-33-6300 $ (55.42) 126092 4/2/2025 Return of Boots

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
13 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description SAFE-T-LITE 10-44-6300 $ (55.43) 126092 4/2/2025 Return of Boots SAFE-T-LITE 10-33-6300 $ (432.09) 126092 4/2/2025 Return of Roadmarker SAFE-T-LITE 69-47-6300 $ 27.82 126092 4/2/2025 Vests
SAFE-T-LITE 60-50-6300 $ 5.57 126092 4/2/2025 Vests
SAFE-T-LITE 10-33-6300 $ 22.27 126092 4/2/2025 Vests
SAFE-T-LITE 63-56-6300 $ 22.26 126092 4/2/2025 Vests
SAFE-T-LITE 10-07-6300 $ 11.14 126092 4/2/2025 Vests
$ 25.26 126092 Total
Saldivar Marisol 10-00-2841 $ 80.00 126136 4/11/2025 Sherman Park Rental Deposit Refund/ Saldivar $ 80.00 126136 Total
SHARPENING SHOP 10-22-6300 $ 48.33 126093 4/2/2025 Vents $ 48.33 126093 Total
SHARPENING SHOP 10-22-6300 $ 191.22 126022 3/20/2025 Module, Spring, Terminal $ 191.22 126022 Total
SiteOne Landscape Supply, LLC 69-47-6225 $ 2,409.93 126023 3/20/2025 Installation of Mechanical Seal $ 2,409.93 126023 Total
SJVAPCD 63-56-6675 $ 723.00 126137 4/11/2025 Permit to Operate/ Well #10 SJVAPCD 69-47-6675 $ 167.00 126137 4/11/2025 25-26 Annual Air Toxic Assessment $ 890.00 126137 Total
Solar Integrated Fund III 60-50-6410 $ 11,382.75 126138 4/11/2025 Solar Production Period 3-1-25 to 3-31-25 $ 11,382.75 126138 Total
Soundscapes Electric Security & Audio Video 10-07-6200 $ 270.00 126094 4/2/2025 3 Months Alarm Monthly Monitoring $ 270.00 126094 Total
Springbrook Holding Company, LLC 10-14-6310 $ 657.34 126095 4/2/2025 Civic Pay Transaction Fee Springbrook Holding Company, LLC 63-56-6310 $ 657.33 126095 4/2/2025 Civic Pay Transaction Fee Springbrook Holding Company, LLC 60-50-6310 $ 657.33 126095 4/2/2025 Civic Pay Transaction Fee $ 1,972.00 126095 Total
Stanislaus County Auditor-Controller 10-22-6615 $ 11,031.00 126139 4/11/2025 911 Fire Dispatch Services April-June 2025 $ 11,031.00 126139 Total
STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICE, Inc 17-50-7782 $ 6,938.50 126026 3/20/2025 Project# 184031755 Construction Management & Resident STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICE, Inc 61-55-7550 $ 120.50 126026 3/20/2025 Project# 184031755 Construction Management & Resident $ 7,059.00 126026 Total
STAPLES ADVANTAGE 10-14-6300 $ 20.67 126025 3/20/2025 Post Its STAPLES ADVANTAGE 63-56-6300 $ 20.66 126025 3/20/2025 Post Its STAPLES ADVANTAGE 60-50-6300 $ 20.67 126025 3/20/2025 Post Its $ 62.00 126025 Total
STAPLES ADVANTAGE 10-21-6300 $ 72.88 126096 4/2/2025 Coffee, Memo Books STAPLES ADVANTAGE 10-14-6300 $ 19.18 126096 4/2/2025 Paper, Correction Tape STAPLES ADVANTAGE 10-06-6300 $ 17.85 126096 4/2/2025 Paper, Correction Tape $ 109.91 126096 Total

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
14 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description State of Calif Dept of Justice 10-00-2014 $ 817.00 126024 3/20/2025 Fingerprint Apps/FBl/Child Abuse Index State of Calif Dept of Justice 10-00-2014 $ 96.00 126024 3/20/2025 Fingerprint Apps/FBl/Child Abuse Index $ 913.00 126024 Total
STEPHENS & BORRELLI INC. 63-00-2010 $ 10.53 126030 3/20/2025 Refund Check 007991-005, 1154 STRAWBRIDGE DR $ 10.53 126030 Total
STEVE'S QUALITY CLEANING 10-07-6200 $ 185.00 126048 3/24/2025 Cleaned & Buffed Floors@ City Hall $ 185.00 126048 Total
Sun Ridge Systems, Inc 10-21-6200 $ 12,881.00 126027 3/20/2025 RIMS Dispatch Software Annual Support $ 12,881.00 126027 Total
Sunrun Installation Services, Inc 10-00-5830 $ 314.46 126028 3/20/2025 Reimbursement for Payment on Permit #2024-278 $ 314.46 126028 Total
SWRCB Accounting Office 63-56-6675 $ 1,645.00 126141 4/11/2025 Annual Permit Fee Wetlands $ 1,645.00 126141 Total
True Blue Veterinary Group 10-21-6208 $ 1,285.98 126142 4/11/2025 Shelter Animals $ 1,285.98 126142 Total
UNIVAR USA, INC 63-56-6300 $ 1,243.00 126097 4/2/2025 225 Gallons of Sodium Hypoclorlte Delivered to Well #8 UNIVAR USA, INC 63-56-6300 $ 942.97 126097 4/2/2025 175 Gallons of Sodium Hypoclorlte Delivered to Well #10 $ 2,185.97 126097 Total
USA BLUEBOOK 63-56-6300 $ 47.41 126143 4/11/2025 Hammer USA BLUEBOOK 63-56-6300 $ 48.33 126143 4/11/2025 Wrench, Pliers USA BLUEBOOK 63-56-6300 $ 1,411.26 126143 4/11/2025 Pump, Wrenches $ 1,507.00 126143 Total
USA BLUEBOOK 63-56-6300 $ 304.32 126031 3/20/2025 Chart Paper $ 304.32 126031 Total
USA BLUEBOOK 60-50-6300 $ 246.24 126098 4/2/2025 Solution, Pouches $ 246.24 126098 Total
Valley 29 Electric, LLC 10-44-6200 $ 4,124.46 126099 4/2/2025 Repair on Street Lights Valley 29 Electric, LLC 10-44-6200 $ 269.69 126099 4/2/2025 Repair on Street Lights $ 4,394.15 126099 Total
Verizon Wireless 63-56-6420 $ 38.01 126100 4/2/2025 Mobile laptop access 2-19-25 to 3-18-25 Verizon Wireless 10-22-6615 $ 114.03 126100 4/2/2025 Mobile laptop access 2-19-25 to 3-18-25 Verizon Wireless 10-06-6420 $ 38.01 126100 4/2/2025 Mobile laptop access 2-19-25 to 3-18-25 Verizon Wireless 10-21-6420 $ 342.09 126100 4/2/2025 Mobile laptop access 2-19-25 to 3-18-25 $ 532.14 126100 Total
Vestis 60-50-6200 $ 117.54 126032 3/20/2025 Uniform Cleaning/Mat Rental/Shop Towels/ February 2025 Vestis 63-56-6200 $ 78.36 126032 3/20/2025 Uniform Cleaning/Mat Rental/Shop Towels/ February 2025 Vestis 10-07-6300 $ 9.65 126032 3/20/2025 Cooling Towels Vestis 10-33-6200 $ 117.55 126032 3/20/2025 Uniform Cleaning/Mat Rental/Shop Towels/ February 2025 Vestis 60-50-6600 $ 9.65 126032 3/20/2025 Cooling Towels Vestis 69-47-6300 $ 9.65 126032 3/20/2025 Cooling Towels

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
15 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description Vestis 10-44-6300 $ 9.65 126032 3/20/2025 Cooling Towels Vestis 10-21-6200 $ 186.56 126032 3/20/2025 Uniform Cleaning/Mat Rental/Shop Towels/ February 2025 Vestis 10-44-6200 $ 78.36 126032 3/20/2025 Uniform Cleaning/Mat Rental/Shop Towels/ February 2025 Vestis 10-22-6200 $ 89.03 126032 3/20/2025 Uniform Cleaning/Mat Rental/Shop Towels/ February 2025 Vestis 10-07-6200 $ 123.04 126032 3/20/2025 Uniform Cleaning/Mat Rental/Shop Towels/ February 2025 Vestis 63-56-6300 $ 9.65 126032 3/20/2025 Cooling Towels Vestis 10-33-6300 $ 9.65 126032 3/20/2025 Cooling Towels $ 848.34 126032 Total
West Coast Pet Memorial Services 10-21-6208 $ 23.85 126034 3/20/2025 Disposal Clinic $ 23.85 126034 Total
Western States Electric, Inc 10-00-1050 $ 50.00 126101 4/2/2025 Refund for Overpayment on Business License $ 50.00 126101 Total
Westside Connect 60-50-6600 $ 40.00 126033 3/20/2025 Single Box Ad Westside Connect 63-56-6600 $ 40.00 126033 3/20/2025 Single Box Ad Westside Connect 10-01-6300 $ 91.69 126033 3/20/2025 Business Card/ Pimentel Westside Connect 10-01-6300 $ 91.69 126033 3/20/2025 Business Card/ Harden Westside Connect 10-01-6600 $ 40.00 126033 3/20/2025 Single Box Ad $ 303.38 126033 Total
Westside Water Conditioning 60-50-6300 $ 55.73 126144 4/11/2025 Bottle Water Delivery 3-11-25 & 3-25-25 City Hall Westside Water Conditioning 60-50-6300 $ 67.17 126144 4/11/2025 Bottle Water Delivery 3-11-25 & 3-25-25/ Corp Yard Westside Water Conditioning 10-22-6200 $ 57.70 126144 4/11/2025 Bottle Water Delivery 3-11-25 & 3-25-25/ FD Westside Water Conditioning 60-50-6300 $ 28.85 126144 4/11/2025 Bottle Water Delivery 3-25-25/ WWTP Westside Water Conditioning 63-56-6300 $ 67.18 126144 4/11/2025 Bottle Water Delivery 3-11-25 & 3-25-25/ Corp Yard Westside Water Conditioning 10-21-6200 $ 68.65 126144 4/11/2025 Bottle Water Delivery 3-11-25 & 3-25-25/ PD Westside Water Conditioning 63-56-6300 $ 55.73 126144 4/11/2025 Bottle Water Delivery 3-11-25 & 3-25-25 City Hall Westside Water Conditioning 10-14-6300 $ 55.74 126144 4/11/2025 Bottle Water Delivery 3-11-25 & 3-25-25 City Hall $ 456.75 126144 Total
Wex Bank 69-47-6500 $ 427.86 126035 3/20/2025 Gas and Diesel Purchases 2-16-25 to 3-15-25 Wex Bank 10-21-6500 $ 3,120.22 126035 3/20/2025 Gas and Diesel Purchases 2-16-25 to 3-15-25 Wex Bank 10-33-6500 $ 638.38 126035 3/20/2025 Gas and Diesel Purchases 2-16-25 to 3-15-25 Wex Bank 10-22-6500 $ 1,353.98 126035 3/20/2025 Gas and Diesel Purchases 2-16-25 to 3-15-25 Wex Bank 60-50-6500 $ 687.27 126035 3/20/2025 Gas and Diesel Purchases 2-16-25 to 3-15-25 Wex Bank 10-07-6500 $ 56.95 126035 3/20/2025 Gas and Diesel Purchases 2-16-25 to 3-15-25 Wex Bank 10-44-6500 $ 139.77 126035 3/20/2025 Gas and Diesel Purchases 2-16-25 to 3-15-25 Wex Bank 63-56-6500 $ 1,180.60 126035 3/20/2025 Gas and Diesel Purchases 2-16-25 to 3-15-25 $ 7,605.03 126035 Total
White Brenner, LLP 63-56-6200 $ 616.23 126036 3/20/2025 Professional Srvcs Rendered Through Feb 2025 Cal Sport v De White Brenner, LLP 10-15-6200 $ 370.84 126036 3/20/2025 Professional Srvcs Rendered Through Feb 2025 HR White Brenner, LLP 10-15-6200 $ 102.70 126036 3/20/2025 Professional Srvcs Rendered Through Feb 2025 Litigation White Brenner, LLP 10-15-6200 $ 576.87 126036 3/20/2025 Through Feb 2025 General Municipal

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
16 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description $ 1,666.64 126036 Total
Williams Ashley 10-21-6695 $ 115.00 126103 4/2/2025 Academy Instuctor Cert Course Per Diem/ Williams $ 115.00 126103 Total
WILLIE ELECTRIC 60-50-6225 $ 961.63 126102 4/2/2025 Control Relay $ 961.63 126102 Total
YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 53.88 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 6.11 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 23.27 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-46-6300 $ 5.06 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 60-50-6300 $ 11.55 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 30.17 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 30.17 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 10.74 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 16.88 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 46.55 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 51.99 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 7.08 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-22-6300 $ 26.12 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 69-47-6300 $ 28.20 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 60-50-6300 $ 12.62 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 15.09 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-22-6300 $ 22.31 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 8.73 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 20.66 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 69-47-6300 $ 13.58 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 38.95 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 36.88 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 20.36 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 7.55 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 2.42 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 32.51 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 11.64 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 15.52 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 13.48 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-46-6300 $ 26.80 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 45.10 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 16.15 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 20.34 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-46-6300 $ 4.56 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-07-6300 $ 15.53 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs

AP Check Register
March 18, 2025 through April 15, 2025
17 of 17
Vendor Fund-Dept-Acct Amount Check # Check date Description YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 128.11 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-46-6300 $ 18.99 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 55.78 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 60-50-6300 $ 4.45 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 24.75 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 29.12 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 24.75 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 31.54 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 40.37 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 18.41 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 60-50-6300 $ 13.49 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 69-47-6300 $ 1.06 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 126.88 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 80.58 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-46-6300 $ 21.84 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 60-50-6300 $ 17.26 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-44-6300 $ 34.93 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 60-50-6300 $ 20.75 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 18.44 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 60-50-6300 $ 4.92 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 11.54 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 60-50-6300 $ 10.26 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-21-6307 $ 41.74 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 10-33-6300 $ 15.09 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 15.04 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs YANCEY LUMBER COMPANY 63-56-6300 $ 5.82 126104 4/2/2025 Dog Food/Misc Tools/Locks/light Bulbs $ 1,564.46 126104 Total
Zapien Mechanical, Fabrication & Electrical 10-33-6200 $ 624.71 126105 4/2/2025 Repair on Lights Zapien Mechanical, Fabrication & Electrical 69-47-6200 $ 624.71 126105 4/2/2025 Repair on Lights Zapien Mechanical, Fabrication & Electrical 60-50-6225 $ 1,830.66 126105 4/2/2025 Repair on Lift Station Pump $ 3,080.08 126105 Total
Zepeda Salazar Imelda 10-00-2841 $ 20.00 126145 4/11/2025 Pioneer Park Rental Deposit Refund/ Zepeda Salazar $ 20.00 126145 Total
$ 1,138,246.79 Grand Total

MINUTES

NEWMAN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING MARCH 25, 2025
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7:00 P.M., 938 FRESNO STREET
NOTICE: THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT (CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54950, ET SEQ.) AND THE FEDERAL AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT

1. Call To Order - Mayor Graham 7:00 P.M.

2. Pledge Of Allegiance.

3. Invocation – Council Member Pimentel.

4. Roll Call - PRESENT: Pimentel, Mayor Pro Tem Ball, Tomlinson, Harden, And Mayor Graham.

ABSENT: None.

5. Declaration Of Conflicts Of Interest - None.

6. Ceremonial Matters - None.

7. Items from the Public - Non-Agenda Items.

Michael Campos, 435 Cinnamon Lane, Explained That He Had Been Encouraging Parents To Bring Their Children Out For Community Play Dates At Sherman Park. Campos Stated That He Was Looking Into Becoming A Non-Profit Organization. He Thanked Community Liaison/Recreation Director Mendoza And Other Community Members For Supporting His Efforts.

Council Member Tomlinson Commended Mr. Campos For All His Efforts.

Michael Campos Stated That The Safety Of The Children Was A Priority And It Was Important To Become A Non-Profit To Have Liability Insurance.

Mayor Graham And Council Member Ball Thanked Mr. Campos For All Of His Efforts.

Grace Shilshtut, 1029 “Q” Street, Requested That The City Revise The Current Noise Ordinance To Make It Less Subjective And Establish More Desirable Objective Standards. Shilshtut Asked That The Ordinance Guidelines Be Made More Clear, Similar To The Fresno County Noise Ordinance And Provided Copies Of The Fresno County Ordinance To The City Council And City Staff.

City Manager Holland Stated That He Would Work With The Police Department To Review The Submitted Materials.

Lane Rodriguez, 723 Hammer Hill Drive, Suggested That The City Hold Community Picnic Events.

City Manager Holland Pointed Out That Lane Rodriguez Should Get In Contact With Community Liaison/Recreation Director Mendoza To Possibly Coordinate Something At An Upcoming Movie Night Event.

Council Member Harden Stated That He Enjoys The Movie Night Events Because He Likes Seeing The Community Come Together In Such A Positive Manner.

8. Consent Calendar
a. Waive All Readings Of Ordinances And Resolutions Except By Title. b. Approval Of Warrants.
c. Approval Of Minutes Of The February 25, 2025 Meeting.

ACTION: On A Motion By Tomlinson Seconded By Harden, The Consent Calendar Was Approved By The Following Vote: AYES: Pimentel, Ball, Tomlinson, Harden, And Mayor Graham; NOES:

None; ABSENT: None; NOT PARTICIPATING: None.

9. Public Hearings.
a. Adopt Resolution No. 2025-08, Declaring The Existence Of A Public Nuisance Under Ordinance No. 281 Mistletoe Abatement.

Council Member Pimentel Asked Why The Costs Per Address Varied.

Public Works Director Spankowski Explained That There Were Various Factors Such As The Amount Of Mistletoe And The Anticipated Complexity Of The Removal.

Mayor Graham Opened The Public Hearing At 7:17 P.M.

There Being No Public Comment, Graham Closed The Public Hearing At 7:17 P.M.

ACTION: On A Motion By Ball Seconded By Pimentel, Resolution No. 2025-08, A Resolution Declaring The Existence Of A Public Nuisance Under Ordinance No. 281 Mistletoe Abatement, Was Adopted By The Following Vote: AYES: Pimentel, Ball, Tomlinson, Harden, And Mayor Graham; NOES: None; ABSENT: None; NOT PARTICIPATING: None.

10. Regular Business
a. Report On The Downtown Market Events At The Downtown Plaza.

Council Member Harden Asked If There Were Standard Event Fees For Vendors.

Community Liaison/Recreation Director Mendoza Stated That The Chamber Of Commerce Makes An Effort To Keep The Costs Low And That The Fees Charged Were Primarily Used To Cover Event Costs, Such As Health Department Fees.

Council Member Harden Inquired If The Insurance Requirements Were Similar To What Other Community’s Require For Events.

Community Liaison/Recreation Director Mendoza Explained That The Newman Chamber Of Commerce Insures All Of The Vendors For These Downtown Events.

ACTION: On A Motion By Ball Seconded By Tomlinson, The Council Approved The Downtown Market Events As Submitted In The Staff Report, By The Following Roll Call Vote: AYES: Pimentel, Ball, Tomlinson, Harden, And Mayor Graham; NOES: None; ABSENT: None; NOT PARTICIPATING: None.
b. Report On Tunnel To Towers 5k Run/Walk.

ACTION: On A Motion By Tomlinson Seconded By Harden, The Council Approved The Tunnel To Towers 5k Run/Walk Event As Submitted In The Staff Report, By The Following Roll Call Vote:

AYES: Pimentel, Ball, Tomlinson, Harden, And Mayor Graham; NOES: None; ABSENT: None; NOT PARTICIPATING: None.
c. Adopt Resolution No. 2025-09, A Resolution Accepting The Wastewater Treatment And Reclamation Facility (WWTRF) McPike 1 Reclamation Improvements Project As Complete, Authorizing The City Clerk To Record A Notice Of Completion With Stanislaus County, And Authorizing The City Manager To Make Final Payment Of Retention Funds To Steve P.

Rados, Inc.

ACTION: On A Motion By Ball Seconded By Tomlinson, Resolution No. 2025-09, A Resolution Accepting The Wastewater Treatment And Reclamation Facility (WWTRF) McPike 1 Reclamation Improvements Project As Complete, Authorizing The City Clerk To Record A Notice Of Completion With Stanislaus County, And Authorizing The City Manager To Make Final Payment Of Retention Funds To Steve P. Rados, Inc. Was Adopted, By The Following Roll Call Vote: AYES: Pimentel, Ball, Tomlinson, Harden, And Mayor Graham; NOES: None; ABSENT: None; NOT PARTICIPATING:

None.
d. Adopt Resolution No. 2025-10, A Resolution Accepting Newman Wetlands Project, Grant No. Q1996046 As Complete, Authorizing The City Clerk To Record A Notice Of Completion With Stanislaus County, And Authorizing The City Manager To Make Final Payment Of Retention Funds To Rolfe Construction, Inc. 35 Days After The Notice Of Completion Has Been Recorded.

Council Member Ball Asked If There Was A Project Opening Date Scheduled For The Public.

Public Works Director Spankowski Stated That There Was Not A Planned Opening Date Yet But There Would Need To Be Some Progress On The NEWS Project Before It Could Be Open To The Public. Spankowski Pointed Out That The Public’s Access To The Site Would Be Through The NEWS And The Nature Park Projects And Not Through The Wetlands Project.

Council Member Harden Asked If The Access Points To Said Project Would Create Any Safety Concerns.

Public Works Director Spankowski Explained That The City And Its Contractors Would Be Assessing The Access To The Aforementioned Projects And It Would Be South Of The Bridge.

City Manager Holland Stated That The Primary Public Access To The Site Would Be Off Of Brazo Road And Not The Busier Canal School Road.

ACTION: On A Motion By Tomlinson Seconded By Harden, Resolution No. 2025-10, A Resolution Accepting Newman Wetlands Project, Grant No. Q1996046 As Complete, Authorizing The City Clerk To Record A Notice Of Completion With Stanislaus County, And Authorizing The City Manager To Make Final Payment Of Retention Funds To Rolfe Construction, Inc. 35 Days After The Notice Of Completion Has Been Recorded Was Adopted, By The Following Roll Call Vote: AYES: Pimentel, Ball, Tomlinson, Harden, And Mayor Graham; NOES: None; ABSENT: None; NOT PARTICIPATING: None.

11. Items From District Five Stanislaus County Supervisor. – None.

12. Items From The City Manager And Staff.

City Manager Holland Explained That The NEWS, Wetlands, And Nature Park Projects Are All Contained In One Eighty Acre Project Site That Will Be Used To Purify Storm Water Before It Was Released Into The River. Holland Mentioned That The City Received Thirteen Million Dollars In Grants For The Said Projects. He Stated That The City’s Risk Management Association Is Now Requiring Downtown Event Organizers To Provide A Three Million Dollar Insurance Policy. Holland Pointed Out That The City Was Informed That Its Foster Farms Project Was Not Funded Through The Federal Budget But Noted That The City Continues To Actively Seek Grant Funding In Addition To Potential Federal Funding. He Noted That There Would Be A Planning Commission Meeting On Thursday, April 17th. Holland Concluded With Reminding Mayor Graham And Mayor Pro Tem Ball That There Would Be A Meeting With West Stan Fire District On Monday, April 7th.

Recreation Director/Community Liaison Mendoza Reported That There Would Be An Adult Volleyball Tournament On Saturday, April 26th. Mendoza Mentioned That She Was Looking For Student Volunteers Who Needed To Earn Community Service Hours To Help The Recreation Department With The Summer Programs.

Mayor Graham Asked If It Was Possible To Do A Shorter Kids Run In Conjunction With The Tunnel To Towers Run/Walk Event.

Recreation Director/Community Liaison Mendoza Stated That She Would Look Into That Suggestion.

Sergeant Williams Reported That The County Intergraded Traffic Enforcement Team Provided Extra Traffic Enforcement And Education In Newman Earlier In the Day.

Council Member Harden Noted That He Observed The Traffic Enforcement Team Having Conversations And Educating The Residents.

Finance Director Humphries Reported That The Online Web Payment Software Would Be Upgraded To Allow The City To Take Payments For Various Items And Would Be Available Later This Summer.

Humphries Noted That The New System Would Have Additional Features And Allow The Resident To View Their Bill In A More In-Depth Manner.

Council Member Harden Asked If The New Said System Would Allow Residents To Go Paperless.

Finance Director Humphries Stated That Yes, Paperless Was One Of The Options.

Council Member Pimentel Asked If A New Account Would Be Required.

Finance Director Humphries Explained That, Yes, Residents Would Need To Register A New Account Because Unfortunately, The New System Would Not Carry Over The Previous Account Credentials.

City Manager Holland Pointed Out That There Would Not Be A Surcharge For The New System.

Council Member Harden Asked When The Residents Can Expect To Be Notified About The Changes.

Finance Director Humphries Explained That The City Would Like To Notify The Residents As Soon As Possible And As Much As Possible.

Public Works Director Spankowski Reported That The Urban Forest Management Plan In Conjunction With The Tree Keepers Software Was Funded Through A Grant And Was Still In The Process But Should Be Completed This Summer.

Chief Bowen Reminded Everyone To Check Their Smoke Detectors. Bowen Reported That The Fire Department Had Recently Conducted A Recruitment Event For Its Explorer Program. He Mentioned That Some Of The Department’s Firefighters Were Recognized By The Stanislaus County Board Of Supervisors For Their Deployment To The Los Angeles Fires.

13. Items From City Council Members.

Council Member Pimentel Thanked Michael Campos For His Efforts Regarding The Community Play Days For The Children.

Council Member Ball Thanked The Students In the Audience For Attending The City Council Meeting.

Council Member Harden Thanked Michael Campos For What He Was Doing For Local Families And Thanked The Students For Attending The Council Meeting.

Mayor Graham Encouraged The Students To Be Smart During Senior Assassin Week.

14. Adjournment.

ACTION: On A Motion By Tomlinson Seconded By Harden And Unanimously Carried, The Meeting Was Adjourned At 7:50 P.M.

Honorable Mayor and Members
of the Newman City Council
Agenda Item: 8.d.

City Council Meeting
of April 22, 2025
ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2025-, CONCURRENCE AND SUPPORT OF THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN (CP) FOR FISCAL YEARS 2025-2029 AND ANNUAL ACTION PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026

PREPARED FOR THE STANISLAUS URBAN COUNTY AND STANISLAUS HOME CONSORTIUM RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution No. 2025-, in concurrence and support of the Consolidated Plan (CP) for Fiscal Years 2025-2029 and Annual Action Plan (AAP) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-2026 prepared for the Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus Home Consortium.

BACKGROUND:

The City in partnership with Stanislaus County and the cities of Ceres, Hughson, Oakdale, Patterson, Riverbank, and Waterford form the Stanislaus Urban County for purposes of receiving U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) and Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) Program funding. Stanislaus County is the lead entity with responsibility for implementing and administering CDBG and ESG funding.

Stanislaus County is also the lead entity for the Stanislaus HOME Consortium, established on July 1, 2023, that includes all the Stanislaus Urban County member cities and the City of Turlock. Participation in the Stanislaus Urban County and the Stanislaus HOME Consortium enables the County and participatingjurisdictions to access funds directly from the federal government for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnership (HOME) Programs, rather than compete for funds through the State. The Consolidated Plan outlines the goals and objectives for funding for the next five years of 2025-2029 to assist low-income households and persons in the areas of housing, public infrastructure, public services and homeless assistance and prevention.

The FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan covers CDBG, ESG and HOME projects and funded programs for the upcoming fiscal year. As of the date of this staff report the final HUD allocations for the CDBG, ESG and HOME programs had not been released, once released the funding allocations for all members of the Urban County and Consortium will be adjusted proportionally. The estimated funding allocations in the draft AAP are based on the Fiscal Year 2024-2025 HUD funding and are only used as projections per HUD guidance.

ANALYSIS:

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The Stanislaus County Planning and Community Development Department, as the Consortium administrator, has the lead role in the preparation of the Annual Action Plan, which includes the public participation requirement under HUD guidelines.

A series of public meetings were held in each of the Urban County and Consortium member's jurisdiction. For the City ofNewman, the community meeting on the Annual Action Plan (AAP) and Consolidated Plan was held on April 16t11 , at 3:00 PM on Zoom, and at 4:00 PM at City of Newman's City Hall.

In addition, the Draft FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan and Consolidated Plan for Fiscal Years 2025-2029 has been available for public review in the Stanislaus County Planning and Community Development Department, as well as various locations throughout the County, for over a month. To date, the city has not received any verbal or written comments regarding the Annual Action Plan and the Consolidated Plan for Fiscal Years 2025-2029.

CDBG
For Fiscal Year 2025-2026, it is anticipated that the City of Newman will be allocated approximately $149,702 under the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. The goals of the CDBG program as established under the Federal CDBG programs guidelines are as follows: 1) to provide decent housing; 2) to provide a suitable living environment; and 3) to expand economic opportunities.

The City of Newman CDBG allocation for FY 2025-2026 will be utilized for the Steffensen/Sunshine Park Area Improvements Project.

Agenda Item: 8.d.

HOME
For Fiscal Year 2024-2025, it is anticipated that the City of Newman will be allocated approximately $100,536, under the Home Investment Partnership (HOME) Program. The goals of the Consortium as established under the federal HOME program guidelines is to further affordable housing activities benefitting low-income households.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The City will receive approximately $149, 702 in CDBG funds and $100,536 in HOME funds from the Stanislaus Urban County Consortium funds, which will be included in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-2026 City Budget.

CONCLUSION:

This action is required by HUD, as the City of Newman is a member of the Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium, for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funds.

Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2025-, in concurrence and support of the Consolidated Plan (CP) for Fiscal Years 2025-2029 and Annual Action Plan (AAP) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025- 2026 prepared for the Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus Home Consortium.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution No. 2025-, A Resolution of Concurrence and Support of the Consolidated Plan for Fiscal Years 2025-2029 and Annual Action Plan (AAP) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-2026 prepared for the Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus Home Consortium.

2. Fiscal Year 2025/2026 CDBG Funding Allocations Chart

3. Fiscal Year 2025/2026 HOME Funding Allocations Chart

4. An Excerpted Copy of the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan Draft

5. Copy of the 2025-2029 Annual Action Plan
2~ Director of Public Works
REVIEWED/CONCUR:

City Manager
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF CONCURRENCE AND SUPPORT OF THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN FO FISCAL YEARS 2025-2029 AND ANNUAL ACTION PLAN (AAP)
FOR FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2025-2026 PREPARED FOR THE STANISLAUS URBAN COUNTY

AND STANISLAUS HOME CONSORTIUM
WHEREAS, the Stanislaus Urban County is a recognized U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Entitlement jurisdiction that is comprised of the Cities of Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson, Riverbank, Waterford and the unincorporated areas of Stanislaus County that is eligible to receive Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds and Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) funds for FY 2025-2026; and
WHEREAS, the Stanislaus HOME Consortium which includes the Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock and the unincorporated areas of Stanislaus County have received Home Investment Partnership (HOME) funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for FY 2025-2026; and
WHEREAS, a Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan are HUD requirements to remain in compliance for federal funding; and
WHEREAS, the City as a member of the Stanislaus Urban County and the HOME Consortium is required to assist the County in the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan planning process to set community priorities, objectives and proposed projects; and WHEREAS, the Draft Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan were made available for public review period for the minimum 30 days requirement to allow the public the opportunity to review and provide comments prior to the public hearing by the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors on May 13, 2025.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Newman City Council hereby adopts a resolution of concurrence and support of the Stanislaus Urban County and the Stanislaus HOME Consortium to prepare the Consolidated Plan and the AAP for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 The foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newman held on the 22nd day of April, 2025 by Council Member , who moved its adoption, which motion was duly seconded and it was upon roll call carried and the resolution adopted by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST:

Mike Maier,
City Clerk of the City of Newman,
County of Stanislaus, State of California
APPROVED:

Casey Graham,
Mayor of the City of Newman,
County of Stanislaus, State of California

STANISLAUS URBAN COUNTY

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)

EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANTS (ESG)
FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN
Estimated FY 2025-2026 CDBG Allocation: $2,335,030
Estimated FY 2025-2026 ESG Allocation: $ 208,317
TOTAL: $2,543,347
The table below shows the estimated CDBG and ESG grant allocation breakdown among Urban County members and special programs based on FY 2024-2025 awarded funding.

ESTIMATED CDBG AND ESG ALLOCATIONS

URBAN COUNTY ACTIVITIES ADMINISTRATION TOTAL
MEMBER
City of Ceres $213,623 $5,000 $218,623
City of Hughson $158,003 $5,000 $163,003
City of Newman $144,702 $5,000 $149,702
City of Oakdale $163,815 $5,000 $168,815
City of Patterson $176,638 $5,000 $181,638
City of Riverbank $140,064 $5,000 $145,064
City of Waterford $217,545 $5,000 $222,545
Stanislaus County $328,634 $407,006 $735,640
Public Services @14% $325,000 $325,000
Fair Housing $25,000 $25,000
CDBG Total $1,868024 $467,006 $2,335,030
ESG Total $192,694 $15,623 $208,317
TOTAL ALLOCATION $2,060,718 $482,629 $2,543,347
All allocations will be proportionally increased or decreased from the estimated funding levels to match final allocation amounts.

STANISLAUS HOME CONSORTIUM

HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM (HOME)
FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN
Estimated FY 2025-2026 HOME Allocation: $1,262,718.33
The table below shows the estimated HOME grant allocation breakdown among Stanislaus HOME Consortium members. Estimate is based on FY 2024-2025 awarded funding.

HOME ALLOCATIONS*

HOME CONSORTIUM MEMBER ALLOCATION
City of Ceres $106,408.00
City of Hughson $94,221.00
City of Newman $100,536.00
City of Oakdale $102,904.00
City of Patterson $98,737.00
City of Riverbank $97,544.00
City of Turlock $116,257.00
City of Waterford $94,475.00
Stanislaus County $135,956.00
Community Housing Development $189,408.00
Organization (CHOO) Set-aside @ 15%
HOME Total $1,136,446.00
County Administration Total $126,272.33
TOTAL ALLOCATION $1,262, 718.33
*Please Note- All allocations will be proportionally increased or decreased from the estimated funding levels to match final allocation amounts. These funds shall be allocated to individual Consortium members and will be required to be committed to an approved project within six (6) months from July 1 of each year unless such deadline is extended by the County. An approved project shall be a project included within a HUD certified Annual Action Plan and approved by the County. If there are no approved projects within 6 months, the funding will be made available to the Consortium members for projects through a Request for Proposal (RFP) selection process by the County.

Prepared by the Stanislaus County
Department of Planning and Community Development
1010 10th Street, Suite #3400
Modesto, CA 95354
(209) 525-6330 – Fax (209) 525-5911
https://www.stancounty.com/planning/cdbg/plans-and-reports.shtm

STANISLAUS URBAN COUNTY &

STANISLAUS HOME CONSORTIUM

CONSOLIDATED PLAN
FISCAL YEARS 2025 - 2029
This Consolidated Plan includes contingency provision language to explain how project/program funding amounts will be adjusted once actual funding is made available by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
DRAFT
Excerpted 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan Draft 4/16/2025
Full Plan can be found at https://www.stancounty.com/planning/ cdbg/plans-and-reports.shtm#section2
Stanislaus Urban County and the Stanislaus HOME Consortium Stanislaus County
Chairman Buck Condit
Vice Chairman Vito Chiesa
Supervisor- Chance Condit
Supervisor- Mani Grewal
Supervisor- Terry Withrow
City of Newman
Mayor Casey Graham
Councilmember Shane Tomlinson
Councilmember Scott Ball
Councilmember Gisel Pimentel
Councilmember Matthew Harden
Councilmember Mary Moore
City of Riverbank
Mayor Rachel Hernandez
Vice Mayor Cindy Fosi
Councilmember John C. Pimentel
Councilmember Stacy Call
Councilmember Luis Uribe
City of Ceres
Mayor Javier Lopez
Vice Mayor Daniel A. Martinez
Councilmember James Casey
Councilmember Rosalinda L. Vierra
Councilmember Cerina Otero
City of Oakdale
Mayor Cherilyn Bairos
Mayor Pro Tem Christopher Smith
Councilmember Jorod Pitassi
Councilmember Jeff Kettering
Councilmember Kayleigh Gilbert
City of Turlock*
Mayor Amy Bublak
Vice Mayor Rebecka Monez
Councilmember Cassandra Abram
Councilmember Kevin Bixel
Councilmember Erika Philips
City of Hughson
Mayor George Carr
Mayor Pro Tem Randy Crooker
Councilmember Julie Ann Strain
Councilmember Susana Vasquez
Councilmember Alan McFadon
City of Patterson
Mayor Michael Clauzel
Councilmember Gabriela
Hernandez
Councilmember Jessica Romero
Councilmember Kendra Mora
Councilmember Carlos Roque
City of Waterford
Mayor Charlie Goeken
Vice Mayor Jamie Hilton
Councilmember Guadalupe
Gutierrez
Councilmember Christine Harris
Councilmember Elizabeth Talbott
*Note: The City of Turlock is not a member of the Stanislaus Urban County; however, it is a member of the Stanislaus HOME Consortium.

DRAFT
Contents
Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……. 1 ES-05 Executive Summary………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 1 Needs Assessment……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………… 19 NA-05 Overview……………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………… 19 Needs Assessment Overview…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 19 NA-10 Housing Needs Assessment……………………………………………………………………………………………. 20 Summary of Housing Needs………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 20 Housing Needs Assessment Tables……………………………………………………………………………………………… 21 Housing Needs Summary Tables…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 24 Housing Problems………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 25 Cost Burden > 30%........................................................................................................................... 27 Cost Burden > 50%........................................................................................................................... 28 Crowding (More than one person per room)………………………………………………………………………………. 29 Households with Children Present……………………………………………………………………………………………… 30 NA-15 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Problems…………………………………………………….. 33 NA-20 Disproportionately Greater Need: Severe Housing Problems…………………………………………. 38 NA-25 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Cost Burden………………………………………………… 43 NA-30 Disproportionately Greater Need: Discussion…………………………………………………………………. 46 NA-35 Public Housing………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 48 NA-45 Homeless Needs Assessment…………………………………………………………………………………………. 58 NA-50 Public Housing Non-Housing Community Development Needs……………………………………… 62 Housing Market Analysis…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 64 MA-05 Overview……………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………….. 64 MA-10 Housing Market Analysis: Number of Housing Units………………………………………………………. 67 MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing…………….…………………………………………….………. 73 MA-20 Housing Market Analysis: Condition of Housing……………………………………………….…….……. 82 MA-25 Public and Assisted Housing…………….………………………………………………………………………….. 91 MA-30 Homeless Facilities and Services…….……………………………………………………………………….……. 96 MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services……………………………………………………………………………. 96 MA-40 Barriers to Affordable Housing..…….……………………………………………….……………………………. 104 MA-45 Non-Housing Community Development Assets…………………………………………………………….. 106 MA-50 Needs and Market Analysis Discussion…………..……………………………………………………………. 123 MA-60 Broadband Needs of Housing Occupied by Low-and Moderate-Income Households……… 130 DRAFT
MA-65 Hazard Mitigation……………………………………………………………………………………………….………. 131 Strategic Plan……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………… 135 SP-05 Overview…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 135 SP-10 Geographic Priorities………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 136 SP-25 Priority Needs…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 137 SP-30 Influence of Market Conditions………………………………………………………………………………………… 148 SP-35 Anticipated Resources……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 148 SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure………………………………………………………………………………………… 154 SP-45 Goals-Goals Summary Information………………………………………………………………………………….. 159 SP-50 Public Housing Accessibility and Involvement………………………………………………………………….. 164 SP-55 Strategic Plan Barriers to Affordable Housing………………………………………………………………….. 165 SP-60 Homelessness Strategy……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 168 SP-65 Lead-based Paint Hazards……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 172 SP-70 Anti-Poverty Strategy………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 173 SP-80 Monitoring………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 174 Appendix A……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..………….…… 175 Community Engagement Meeting Summaries…………………………………………………………………………… 175 Summary of Survey Results………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 180 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 1 Executive Summary
ES-05 Execuve Summary – 24 CFR 91.200(c), 91.220(b)
Introduction
Stanislaus County, in partnership with the cities of Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson, Riverbank, and Waterford form the Stanislaus Urban County for purposes of receiving U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) and Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) Program funding. Stanislaus County is the lead entity with responsibility for implementing and administering CDBG and ESG funding.

The City of Turlock will be developing an AAP for their own separate CDBG funding independently.

Each year the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provides funding for housing and community development programs to the Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock, specifically Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) grant. In order to receive these funds, the Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock have prepared a joint Five-Year Consolidated Plan (Consolidated Plan) for Fiscal Years 2025-2029 which will serve as the blueprint for the expenditures of federal funds.

Throughout this document the following geographic terms will be used. • Stanislaus Planning Area: Includes the entirety of the planning area considered under the Consolidated Plan: the cities of Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson, Riverbank, Turlock and Waterford, and the unincorporated area of the County. • Stanislaus Urban County: A multi-jurisdictional CDBG entitlement, made up of the cities of Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson, Riverbank, and Waterford and the unincorporated area of the County. Stanislaus County is the “lead entity” for the Stanislaus Urban County.
• Unincorporated County: Includes the entire unincorporated area of the County (this area is not a part of any municipality).
• Entitlement Cities: The CDBG entitlement cities in the County are Modesto and Turlock. • Stanislaus Home Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) Consortium: The members of the Consortium are Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock. Stanislaus County is the “lead entity” for the Stanislaus HOME Consortium.

DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 2 The Consolidated Plan also includes the Annual Action Plan (AAP), which is the one-year plan that the Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock each prepare pursuant to the goals outlined in the Consolidated Plan. These AAPs detail the projects and activities that the Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock will undertake to address the housing and community development needs and local objectives using CDBG, ESG, and HOME funds received during Fiscal Year 2025.

Summary of the objectives and outcomes identified in the Plan Needs Assessment Overview The Stanislaus Urban County has identified the following five goals to address housing and community development needs during the span of the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan:
• Support affordable housing and promote accessible housing options • Work to address, prevent, and mitigate homelessness
• Improve public infrastructure and facilities
• Provide and ensure access to essential public services • Administration
The City of Turlock has identified the following five goals to address housing and community development needs during the span of the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan:
• Support affordable housing and promote accessible housing options • Work to address, prevent, and mitigate homelessness
• Improve public infrastructure and facilities
• Provide and ensure access to essential public services • Administration
During the five-year Consolidated Plan period, the Stanislaus Urban County expects to receive approximately:
• $2,305,008 annually in CDBG funding, for a five-year total of $11,525,040. • $205,225 annually in Emergency Soluons Grant (ESG) funding, for a five-year total of $1,026,125. • $1,262,718 annually in HOME funding, for a five-year total of $6,313,590.

During the five-year Consolidated Plan period, the City of Turlock expects to receive approximately:
• $621,000 annually in CDBG funding, for a five-year total of $3,105,000

CDBG funds can be used by the Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock for public services, public facilities and improvements, housing activities, and planning and administrative costs. ESG funds are used to assist people to quickly regain stability in housing after experiencing a housing crisis and/or homelessness. The HOME program funds support the development and rehabilitation of affordable rental and ownership housing for low- and moderate-income households. HOME funds can be used for activities that promote affordable rental housing and homeownership by low- and moderate-income households, including building acquisition, new construction and reconstruction, moderate or substantial rehabilitation, homebuyer assistance, and tenant
DRAFT
-based rental assistance.

Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 3 Evaluation of past performance
Stanislaus Urban County
In many older neighborhoods and communities of the Stanislaus Planning Area, public infrastructure is minimal or non-existent, causing this to be a high priority need. Infrastructure such as sewer, water, curb, gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage are typical development standards in newer neighborhoods but were not always requirements at the time older neighborhoods developed. The Stanislaus Urban County members have utilized CDBG funds for infrastructure improvement related projects.

Through the CDBG Public Services Program, the Stanislaus Urban County sets aside an average of 10% of its annual CDBG allocation for programs that provide services to low- to moderate-income households (families or individuals). In Fiscal Year 2024-2025, a total of eight public service programs were awarded $325,000 to carry-out a number of needed services and, as of March 1, 2025, approximately 1,060 individuals have received a form of service through the funded agencies. Funded services ranged from meals and shelter for low-income households to emergency food assistance programs.

The City of Turlock relinquished the role of lead entity for the Stanislaus HOME Consortium in Fiscal Year 2022. The City will report on program income and remaining HOME funding prior to Fiscal Year 2023 that they will continue to administer on behalf of the HOME Consortium until its fully expended in future Annual Action Plans (AAPs) and Consolidated Annual Performance Reports (CAPERs). Prior Stanislaus HOME Consortium funds are included in the Consolidated Plan for planning purposes and are labeled accordingly in this document. Since July 1, 2023, Stanislaus County has been the lead agency for the Stanislaus HOME Consortium, and has been working with the members of the Stanislaus HOME Consortium to identify housing projects and has contracted with a housing consultant to assist in the preparation of HOME policies and procedures and development of a Request for Proposals that will be utilized to identify, prioritize, and rank housing projects and to establish priorities for a consortium wide comprehensive housing rehabilitation program.

ESG program funding is used to provide emergency shelter and rental assistance for homeless households and households at-risk of becoming homeless. In Fiscal Year 2024-2025, a total of three programs were awarded $189,834 to carry-out services and, as of March 1, 2025, approximately 494 individuals have received services through the funded agencies. Funded services have included shelter and homeless prevention services.

Throughout Fiscal Year 2024-2025, the Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock, along with the Stanislaus Community System of Care (CSoC), the locally recognized Continuum of Care (CoC), continued to work together on strengthening efforts to address and collaborate on homeless issues including the implementation of the Stanislaus Regional Strategic Plan to Address Homelessness.

DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 4 City of Turlock
Through the CDBG Public Services Program, the City of Turlock has set aside up to 15% of its annual CDBG allocation for programs that provide services to low- to moderate-income households (families or individuals). In Fiscal Year 2024-2025, a total of seven public service programs were awarded $64,500 to assist in carrying out a number of needed services. Funded services include meals for low- and moderateincome households and seniors, as well as emergency shelter services, fair housing services, recreation scholarships for low-income youth, essential housing related services for low-income victims of domestic violence, and youth navigation services for homeless youth. The City continued to administer a First Time Home Buyers (FTHB) Program for low-income, first-time homebuyers which provides low interest loans to qualified clients to purchase a home. The City of Turlock utilized various resources including the HOME Program, CDBG, and CalHome to fund the program. The City continued offering a Housing Rehabilitation Program, for the repair of homes within the City and assists income eligible clients including the elderly, handicapped and other special needs, improving housing conditions. The City acquired multi-family units for rehabilitation and sale to eligible non-profit agencies. The City of Turlock served as the lead for the Stanislaus HOME Consortium prior to Fiscal Year 2023 and the remaining funding and program income continues to be administered by the City on behalf of the Consortium for eligible HOME activities.

Summary of citizen participation process and consultation process The community outreach process for the Consolidated Plan included a survey of the Stanislaus Planning Area, online community meetings, stakeholder interviews, in person community meetings, agency phone and email consultations, and consultation with the local Continuum of Care (CoC). Draft documents were made available to the public via the County’s website, at the offices of the Planning and Community Development departments of the respective Consortium members, and was emailed directly to know interested parties by Consortium staff. A summary of the citizen participation process and comments is included in Appendix A.

Summary of public comments
Any public comments received during the public review period or provided at the subsequent final public hearing to consider approval of the Consolidated Plan will be incorporated into the final Consolidated Plan submitted to HUD. A summary of the citizen participation process and comments is included in Appendix A.

Summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons for not accepting them No public comments were purposefully not included or not accepted during the development of the Consolidated Plan.

Summary
The Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock have engaged in a process of community outreach, consultations, and analysis of relevant community indicators to establish housing and community development goals for the five-year planning period. These goals will be used to plan for the use of CDBG, HOME, and ESG funds received by the Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock for the five-year period of 2025–2029.

DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 5 The Process
PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies - 91.200(b)

1. Describe agency/entity responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source The following are the agencies/entities responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan on behalf of the Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium, and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source.

Responsible Agencies
Stanislaus Urban County
Agency Role Name Department/Agency
CDBG Administrator Stanislaus County County Planning and Community Development
HOME Administrator Stanislaus County County Planning and Community Development
ESG Administrator Stanislaus County County Planning and Community Development
City of Turlock
Agency Role Name Department/Agency
CDBG Administrator City of Turlock City of Turlock – Housing Program Services
Narrative
Each year the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has provided funding for housing and community development programs to the Stanislaus Urban County and the Stanislaus HOME Consortium, specifically Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) grant.

In order to receive CDBG, ESG, and HOME funds, the City of Turlock and the Stanislaus Urban County have prepared a joint Five
DRAFT -Year Consolidated Plan for Fiscal Years 2025-2029 which will serve as the blueprint Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 6 for the expenditures of federal funds in the communities of Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson, Riverbank, Turlock, Waterford and the unincorporated area of Stanislaus County. Stanislaus County is the “lead entity” with responsibility for implementing and administering HUD Entitlement funding. However, the City of Turlock is the entitlement jurisdiction for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) for the City of Turlock. The City of Turlock will report HOME activities undertaken with the remaining funding received by the prior HOME Consortium under their own separate Annual AAP. The City is estimating to receive HOME program income of $110,000 per year for a total of $550,000 during the five-year Consolidated Plan period. In addition, the City has approximately $6,000,000 is carry-over funds related to HOME activities approved under the City’s prior 2024-2025 AAP; any changes to the City’s prior 2024- 2025 AAP for HOME funds will be done through the City’s 2024-2025 AAP through a substantial amendment, as appropriate.

Stanislaus County was formed from part of Tuolumne County in 1854. The county seat was first situated at Adamsville, then moved to Empire in November, La Grange in December, and Knights Ferry in 1862, and was fixed at the present location in Modesto in 1871. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the county has a total area of 1,515 square miles (3,920 km2), of which 1,495 square miles (3,870 km2) is land and 20 square miles (52 km2) (1.3%) is water.

The City of Turlock was founded on December 22, 1871 and was incorporated on February 15, 1908. The City of Turlock is the second largest city in Stanislaus County after Modesto. It is located between Modesto and Merced at the intersection of State Routes 99 and 165. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the City of Turlock has a total area of 16.9 square miles, all of which is land.

Consolidated Plan Public Contact Information
Stanislaus County
Angela Freitas, Director
Department of Planning and Community Development
1010 10th Street, Suite 3400
Modesto, CA 95354
Telephone: 209-525-6330
Fax: 209-525-5911
E-mail: [email protected]
City of Turlock
Jennifer Figueroa, Housing Program Manager
Housing Program Services Division
156 S Broadway, Suite 140
Turlock, CA 95380
Telephone: (209) 668-5542 Extension 2227
E-mail: JFigueroa
DRAFT
@turlock.ca.us
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 7 PR-10 Consultaon- 91.100, 91.110, 91.200(b), 91.300(b), 91.215(l) and 91.315(I)

1. Introduction
In preparing the Consolidated Plan, the Stanislaus HOME Consortium consulted with various organizations located in the Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock that provide services to residents.

Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction’s activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health and service agencies (91.215(I)).

The community outreach process for the Consolidated Plan included a survey of the Stanislaus Planning Area, online community meetings, stakeholder interviews, in person community meetings, agency phone and email consultations, and consultation with the local CoC. Draft documents were made available to the public via the County’s website, at the offices of the Planning and Community Development departments of the respective Consortium members, and was emailed directly to know interested parties by Consortium staff. A summary of the citizen participation process and comments is included in Appendix A. Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and persons at risk of homelessness
The Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock collaborate with the CoC in multiple ways. The CoC is made up of representatives from Stanislaus County (Planning & Community Development, Behavioral Health and Recovery Services, Child Support Services), City of Modesto, City of Turlock, City of Riverbank, the Stanislaus Regional Housing Authority (Housing Authority), housing service providers, social service providers, fair housing service providers, health service providers, and homeless service providers. Announcements for funding opportunities made available through the County and participating agencies are routinely advertised at the CoC meetings.

The Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock take part in regularly scheduled monthly CoC meetings and consult regularly with all attendees on housing needs, social service needs, and homelessness needs. This ongoing partnership increases shared understanding of service needs, gaps in services as well as roles and responsibilities throughout the continuum.

The Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock also routinely consult with a wide range of service providers and stakeholders. These involved both the public sector and private nonprofit sector. These personal contacts asked those who help to meet the housing and social services needs of Stanislaus County and City of Turlock residents to describe the level of needs in the community, the relative priority of needs, and what they believe can be done to better meet the needs of the county’s residents.

DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 8 Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction's area in determining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards and evaluate outcomes, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the administration of HMIS Meetings with the CoC and their executive committee are routinely conducted to help determine how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards and evaluate outcomes, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the administration of HMIS. A more detailed consultation on how ESG funds are implemented occurs at the CoC’s HMIS sub-committee, which takes place monthly. The sub-committee works to implement ESG and HMIS regulations, both in practice and in the HMIS system itself. Consultation with public sector and private nonprofits that provide permanent supportive housing, health services, and social services are also routinely conducted, in coordination with the CoC, to determine what resources are available to address the needs of any persons that are chronically homeless.

2. Describe agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the process and describe the jurisdictions consultations with housing, social service agencies and other entities
Agencies, Groups, Organizations Who Participated
DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 9 Citizen Participation Outreach
Mode of
Outreach
Target of
Outreach
Meeting Location Summary of Comments
Received
Summary of
Comments Not
Accepted
Public
Meetings
-Non-English
Speaking -
Specify other
language:

Spanish

-Nontargeted/broad
community
Ceres
• April 17, 2025, at 11:00am Community Meeng, via
Zoom.
• April 17, 2005, at 5:30pm Community Meeang, City
Hall, 2701 4th Street, Ceres.
• April 28, 2025, at 6:00pm Ceres City Council Meeang,
City Hall 2701 4th Street, Ceres.

Hughson
• April 14, 2025, at 5:15pm, Community Meeng, via
Zoom.
• April 14, 2025, at 5:15pm, Community Meeng, City
Hall, 7018 Pine Street, Hughson.
• April 28, 2025, at 6:00pm, Hughson City Council
Meeang, City Hall, 7018 Pine Street, Hughson.

Newman
• April 15, 2025, at 4:00pm, Community Meeng, City
Hall, 938 Fresno Street, Newman.
• April 16, 2025, at 4:00pm, Community Meeng, via
Zoom.
• April 22, 2025, at 7:00pm, Newman City Council
Meeang, City Hall, 938 Fresno Street, Newman.

Comments pending for April
Meetings
N/A
DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 10 Oakdale
• April 11, 2025, at 9:30am, Community Meeng/City
Hall, 455 South FihAve., Oakdale.
• April 11, 2025, at 9:30am, Community Meeng, via
Zoom.
• April 21, 2025, at 7:00pm, Oakdale City Council
Meeang/City Hall, 455 South Fioh Ave., Oakdale.

Patterson
• April 9, 2025, at 5:30pm, Community Meeang/City
Hall, 1 Plaza, Paperson.
• April 9, 2025, at 5:30pm, Community Meeang, via
Zoom.
• April 15, 2025, at 7:00pm, Paperson City Council
Meeang, City Hall, 1 Plaza, Paperson.

Riverbank
• April 9, 2025, at 4:30pm, Community Meeang, City
Hall, 6707 Third Street, Suite B, Riverbank.
• April 9, 2025, at 4:30pm, Community Meeang, via
Zoom.
• April 28, 2025, at 6:00pm, Riverbank City Council
Meeang, City Hall, 6707 Third Street, Suite B,
Riverbank.

Turlock
• April 15, 2025, at 1:30pm, Turlock Community
Collaborave Meeng, via Zoom.
• April 17, 2025, at 2:30pm, 3800 Cornucopia Way,
Modesto. (Stanislaus Continuum of Care Meeting)
• April 17, 2025, at 5:30pm, Community Meeng, City
DRAFT
Hall, 156 S. Broadway, Turlock.

Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 11 • April 17, 2025, at 5:30pm, Community Meeng, via
Zoom.
• May 13, 2025, at 6:00pm, Turlock City Council
Meeang, City Hall, 156 S. Broadway, Turlock.

Waterford
• April 9, 2025, at 5:30pm, Community Meeang, City
Hall, l 101 E. Street, Waterford.
• April 9, 2025, at 5:30pm, Community Meeng, via
Zoom.
• April 17, 2025, at 6:30pm, Waterford City Council
Meeang, City Hall, l 101 E. Street, Waterford.

Stanislaus County
• April 17, 2025, at 2:30pm, 3800 Cornucopia Way,
Modesto. (Stanislaus Continuum of Care Meeting)
• April 28, 2025, at 12:00pm, Community Meeting,
1010 10th Street, Basement Training Room, Modesto.
• April 30, 2025, at 5:30pm, Community Meeng, 1010
10th Street, Basement Training Room, Modesto.
• May 3, 2025, at 10:00am, Community Meeng, via
Zoom video conferencing.
• May 6, 2025, at 6:00pm, Community Meeang, via
Zoom video conferencing.
• May 13, 2025, at 9:00am, Public Hearing- Board of
Supervisors Meeting, 1010 10th Street, Stanislaus
Board of Supervisors Chambers, Modesto.

Newspaper
Ad
Nontargeted/broad
community
All public hearings/meetings and notice of the availability of the draft Consolidated Plan and AAP for public review, are to be published in newspapers covering the Stanislaus Planning Area (Ceres Courier, Hughson/Denair Dispatch, Modesto Bee (English and Spanish), Newman/Gustine Westside Index,
Oakdale Leader, Turlock Journal and Patterson Irrigator).

Comments pending for April
and May meetings
N/A
DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 12 1 Agency/Group/Organization Ceres Healthy Start Family Resource Center The Salvation Army Red Shield
Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA)
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Children
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Non-Homeless Special Needs
How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and
what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Agencies were consulted via email, one on one
meetings and via Microsoft TEAMS meetings.

Anticipated Outcomes/Areas of Improved
Coordination: Identification of needs for at risk
youth and their families. Results include
suggestions on how best serve at risk youth.
2 Agency/Group/Organization Area Agency on Aging
Healthy Aging Association
Stanislaus Advocacy Network
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Seniors
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Non-Homeless Special Needs
How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and
what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Agencies were consulted via email, one on one
meetings and via Microsoft TEAMS meetings
Anticipated Outcomes/Areas of Improved
Coordination: Identification of needed services
for seniors.
3 Agency/Group/Organization Center for Human Services
Central Valley Opportunity Center
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Education
Services-Employment
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and
what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Agencies were consulted via email, one on one
meetings and via Microsoft TEAMS meetings
Anticipated Outcomes/Areas of Improved
Coordination: Identification of needed basic
skills training such as budgeting, balancing a
DRAFT
check book to training for employment.

Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 13 4 Agency/Group/Organization Healthy Alternatives to Violent Environments (HAVEN)
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Victims of Domestic Violence What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Non-Homeless Special Needs How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and
what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Agencies were consulted via email, one on one
meetings and via Microsoft TEAMS meetings.

Anticipated Outcomes/Areas of Improved
Coordination: Identification of a need for legal
services for clients. There is a lack of funding
aimed towards assisting clients with legal
services and to help become stably housed.
5 Agency/Group/Organization Cambridge Academies
Stanislaus Workforce Development
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Education
Services-Employment
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Economic Development
How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and
what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Agencies were consulted via email, one on one
meetings and via Microsoft TEAMS meetings.

Anticipated Outcomes/Areas of Improved
Coordination: Identification of a need for legal
services for clients. There is a lack of funding
aimed towards assisting clients with legal
services and to help become stably housed.
6 Agency/Group/Organization United Samaritans Foundation Agency/Group/Organization Type Food Bank
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Non-Homeless Special Needs
How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and
what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Agency was consulted via email, one on one
meetings and via a Microsoft TEAMS meeting.

Anticipated Outcomes/Areas of Improved
Coordination: Identification of a need for
funding for improvements to the food pantry’s
DRAFT
facilities and vehicles.

Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 14 7 Agency/Group/Organization Cambridge Academies
Center for Human Services
Family Promise
Modesto Gospel Mission
We Care Program- Turlock
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-homeless
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and
what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Agencies were consulted via email, one on one
meetings and via Microsoft TEAMS meetings.

Anticipated Outcomes/Areas of Improved
Coordination: Identification of a need for
funding for shelter facility operations and legal
services for clients. There’s a need for funding to
support ongoing case management for clients to
help with longer term success.
8 Agency/Group/Organization Project Sentinel
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Non-Homeless Special Needs
How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and
what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Agencies were consulted via email, one on one
meetings and via Microsoft TEAMS meetings.

Anticipated Outcomes/Areas of Improved
Coordination: Identification of a need for
attorneys to assist clients with evictions both
landlord and tenants.
9 Agency/Group/Organization Stanislaus Regional Housing Authority Agency/Group/Organization Type Housing
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Non-Homeless Special Needs
How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and
what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Agencies were consulted via email, one on one
meetings and via Microsoft TEAMS meetings.

Anticipated Outcomes/Areas of Improved
Coordination: Identification of a need for
funding with less restrictions and more flexibility
in use with other funding sources.

DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 15 10 Agency/Group/Organization Turning Point Community Programs Agency/Group/Organization Type Housing
Services
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Non-Homeless Special Needs
How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and
what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Agencies were consulted via email, one on one
meetings and via Microsoft TEAMS meetings.

Anticipated Outcomes/Areas of Improved
Coordination: Identification of a need for more
rental housing and funding with less use
restrictions.
11 Agency/Group/Organization Valley Mountain Regional Center Agency/Group/Organization Type Housing
Services
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Non-Homeless Special Needs
How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and
what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Agencies were consulted via email, one on one
meetings and via Microsoft TEAMS meetings.

Anticipated Outcomes/Areas of Improved
Coordination: Identification of a need for more
affordable housing and supportive services for
households with persons with developmental
needs.
12 Agency/Group/Organization West Modesto Community Collaborative Agency/Group/Organization Type Services
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Non-Homeless Special Needs
How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and
what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Agencies were consulted via email, one on one
meetings and via Microsoft TEAMS meetings.

Anticipated Outcomes/Areas of Improved
Coordination: Identification of a need for grants
to help seniors and low-income households
DRAFT
repair their homes.

Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 16 Identify any Agency Types not consulted and provide rationale for not consulting Not applicable.

Other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan Name of Plan Lead Organization How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of each plan?
Stanislaus County
Housing Element
Stanislaus County Goals of the Housing Element of the General Plan were considered when preparing the Annual Action Plan. The goals of the Annual Action Plan address some of the housing needs identified in the Housing Element.

Housing Stanislaus Stanislaus County A countywide initiative to develop a common vision for housing in Stanislaus County.

City of Turlock
Housing Element
City of Turlock Goals of the Housing Element of the General Plan were considered when preparing the Annual Action Plan. The goals of the Annual Action Plan address some of the housing needs identified in the Housing Element.

City of Ceres
Housing Element
City of Ceres Goals of the Housing Element of the General Plan were considered when preparing the Annual Action Plan. The goals of the Annual Action Plan address some of the housing needs identified in the Housing Element.

City of Hughson
Housing Element
City of Hughson Goals of the Housing Element of the General Plan were considered when preparing the Annual Action Plan. The goals of the Annual Action Plan address some of the housing needs identified in the Housing Element.

City of Newman
Housing Element
City of Newman Goals of the Housing Element of the General Plan were considered when preparing the Annual Action Plan. The goals of the Annual Action Plan address some of the housing needs identified in the Housing Element.

City of Oakdale
Housing Element
City of Oakdale Goals of the Housing Element of the General Plan were considered when preparing the Annual Action Plan. The goals of the Annual Action Plan address some of the housing needs identified in the Housing Element.

City of Patterson
Housing Element
City of Patterson Goals of the Housing Element of the General Plan were considered when preparing the Annual Action Plan. The goals of the Annual Action Plan address some of the housing needs identified in the Housing Element.

City of Riverdale
Housing Element
City of Riverdale Goals of the Housing Element of the General Plan were considered when preparing the Annual Action Plan. The goals of the Annual Action Plan address some of the housing needs identified in the Housing Element.

City of Waterford
Housing Element
City of Waterford Goals of the Housing Element of the General Plan were considered when preparing the Annual Action Plan. The goals of the Annual Action Plan address some of the housing needs DRAFT
identified in the Housing Element.

Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 17 Continuum of Care
Consolidated
Application
Stanislaus
Community System
of Care (CoC)
The goals of the CoC’s annual submissions to HUD are similar in that they address the coordination, needs and goals of housing service providers and participating jurisdictions.

Stanislaus 2021
Regional Strategic
Plan to Address
Homelessness
Stanislaus
Community System
of Care (CoC)
The Strategic Plan addresses homelessness via various funded projects/activities including ESG -funds.

Public Housing
Agency (PHA) Plan
Stanislaus Regional
Housing Authority
Plan includes the need to increase affordable housing stock and integrate quality services
Action Plan for
Preventing and
Ending
Homelessness in
California
State of California
– Homeless
Coordinating and
Finance Council
This Action Plan orients the State’s efforts to drive purposeful, meaningful, and measurable progress toward preventing and ending homelessness in California, motivated by a vision of a future in which homelessness in California
Broadband
Infrastructure
Deployment
Public Utilities
Commission
Order Instituting Rulemaking Regarding Broadband Infrastructure Deployment and to Support Service Providers in the State of California.
2022-2027 Local
Hazard Mitigation
Plan
Stanislaus County –
Office of
Emergency
Services
The County of Stanislaus Office of Emergency Services developed the 2022-2027 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan update to make the County, its 10 participating jurisdictions, and its residents less vulnerable and more resilient to future hazard events Describe cooperation and coordination with other public entities, including the State and any adjacent units of general local government, in the implementation of the Consolidated Plan (91.215(l))
Narrative
In addition to the stakeholders, community groups and organizations that participated in the survey, interviews and meetings on the Consolidated Plan, significant aspects of the Consolidated plan development process included consultations with the Turlock Community Collaborative and the CoC and its membership which comprises both public and private nonprofit and for-profit entities, as well as private citizens.

DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 18 PR-15 Cizen Parcipaon- 91.105, 91.115, 91.200(c) and 91.300(c)

1. Summary of citizen participation process/Efforts made to broaden citizen participation Summarize citizen participation process and how it impacted goal-setting In order to ensure maximum participation in the Consolidated Plan process among all populations and special needs groups and to ensure that their issues and concerns are adequately addressed, the Stanislaus HOME Consortium/Stanislaus Urban County has a Citizen Participation Plan in place. The Citizen Participation Plan describes the actions to be taken to encourage citizen participation in the development of the Consolidated Plan. The community outreach process for the Consolidated Plan included online community meetings, in person community meetings, agency phone and email consultations.

The public review period for the Consolidated Plan was from April 4, 2025 to May 5, 2025. A public meeting notice was published in The Modesto Bee on April 4, 2025, in both English and Spanish, a newspaper covering the entire Stanislaus Planning Area. In addition, each Stanislaus HOME Consortium/Stanislaus Urban County member city advertised their city council meeting for the consideration of the Consolidated Plan in one of the following newspapers: Ceres Courier, Hughson/Denair Dispatch, The Modesto Bee, Newman/Gustine Westside Index, Oakdale Leader, Turlock Journal, and Patterson Irrigator. The Stanislaus HOME Consortium/Stanislaus Urban County also utilizes existing listservs to notify interested parties of the Consolidated Plan’s availability for review.

DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 19 Needs Assessment
NA-05 Overview
Needs Assessment Overview
The Needs Assessment examines needs related to affordable housing, special needs housing, community development and homelessness for the cities of Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson, Turlock, Riverbank, and Waterford and the unincorporated area of Stanislaus County. The Needs Assessment includes the following sections:
• Housing Needs Assessment
• Disproportionately Greater Need
• Public Housing
• Homeless Needs Assessment
• Non-Homeless Special Needs Assessment
• Non-Housing Community Development Needs
The Needs Assessment identifies those needs with the highest priorities which form the basis for the Strategic Plan section and the programs and projects to be administered. Most of the data tables in this section are populated with default data from HUD’s IDIS system, which includes all members of the Stanislaus HOME Consorum) which includes the Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock unless marked otherwise.

Other data tables were created and populated directly from the 2016-2020 American Community Survey (ACS) and the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) datasets. CHAS datasets are developed for HUD by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the ACS. AddiOonal tables created outside of IDIS, using these datasets, are described in-text or in the table for their geographic scope.

DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 21 HUD entitlement programs, CDBG, ESG, and HOME, operate under federally established income limits. Of the programs the Stanislaus Urban County and Turlock receive HUD funds, each program targets household income as a percentage of the area AMI at slightly different ranges. The tables throughout this section utilize the 30%, 50%, 80%, and 100% AMI categories. • CDBG -> 0%-80% AMI
• HOME -> 0%-80% AMI
• ESG -> 0%-30% AMI
As depicted on the table below, as of 2020, the County had a population of just over 330,000. This is a modest increase of 4% from 2009. The “Housing Needs Assessment Demographics” table and the three others showing changes from 2010 to 2020 below include countywide data, including each city and the unincorporated areas.

Housing Needs Assessment Demographics
Demographics Base Year: 2009 Most Recent Year: 2020 % Change Population 319,885 331,755 4%
Households 98,715 103,610 5%
Median Income $48,550 $62,873 30%
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS
Change in PopulaGon
Base Year: 2010 Most Recent Year: 2020 % Change
Stanislaus Planning Area 509,682 546,235 7%
Ceres 44,153 48,355 10%
Hughson 6,267 7,545 20%
Newman 9,806 11,498 17%
Oakdale 20,076 22,932 14%
Patterson 19,110 22,309 17%
Riverbank 21,778 24,623 13%
Turlock 67,376 72,715 8%
Waterford 8,315 8,884 7%
DRAFT
Data Source: 2006-2010 ACS, 2016-2020 ACS
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 22 Change in Number of Households
Base Year: 2010 Most Recent Year: 2020 % Change
Stanislaus Planning Area 163,841 174,826 7%
Ceres 12,922 13,302 3%
Hughson 1,891 2,639 40%
Newman 2,912 3,515 21%
Oakdale 6,802 8,178 20%
Patterson 5,496 6,214 13%
Riverbank 6,296 7,337 17%
Turlock 22,932 25,444 11%
Waterford 2,277 2,427 7%
Data Source: 2006-2010 ACS, 2016-2020 ACS
Change in Median Household Income
Base Year: 2010 2010 Adjusted for
Inflation to 2020 $
Most Recent Year:
2020
% Change
(inflation
adjusted)
Stanislaus Planning Area 51,094 60,802 62,873 3%
Turlock 50,124 59,648 59,247 -1%
Ceres 49,977 59,473 83,231 40%
Hughson 47,416 56,425 65,156 15%
Newman 59,842 71,212 67,459 -5%
Oakdale 54,187 64,483 69,947 8%
Patterson 58,308 69,387 70,163 1%
Riverbank 50,573 60,182 60,799 1%
Waterford 53,413 63,561 59,938 -6%
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS
While there are households in each AMI bracket, the low income - 50%-80% of AMI (population: 43,083) - and moderate income - 80%-100% of AMI (population: 10,763) - households collectively comprise more than half of all households in the Stanislaus Planning Area The table below refers to the Stanislaus HOME Consorum.

DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 28 cost burdened. Small families and elderly households represent the largest number of renter household subtypes that pay more than half of their household income on housing costs. Within owner occupied households, the elderly represent more than half of the homeowners that are housing cost burdened. The table below refers to data for the jurisdiconswithin the Stanislaus HOME Consorum.

Frequency of >50% Cost Burden: Stanislaus HOME ConsorGum Renter Owner
0-30% AMI >30-50%
AMI
>50-80%
AMI
Total 0-30% AMI >30-50%
AMI
>50-80%
AMI
Total

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS
Small Family 0 0 1,247 1,247 581 867 0 1,448
Large Family 0 0 344 344 72 500 194 766
Elderly 1,493 764 179 2,436 1,190 947 644 2,781
Other 0 1,336 540 1,876 300 0 0 300
Total need by income 1,493 2,100 2,310 5,903 2,143 2,314 838 5,295 Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS
The table below shows that for most members of the consortium, renters experience higher rates of both cost burden, indicating that across the consortium renters are in greater need of housing assistance than owners. The table below refers to individual Stanislaus HOME Consorum members; data for Stanislaus County is countywide data, including each city and the unincorporated areas.

Frequency of >30% Cost Burden: Stanislaus HOME Consortium Members Stanislaus
County Turlock Ceres Hughson Newman Oakdale Patterson Riverbank Waterford Owners 16% 18% 14% 15% 12% 16% 17% 22% 21%
Renter 22% 22% 17% 21% 24% 24% 27% 21% 13%
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS
The table below shows that for every member of the consortium, renters experience higher rates of both cost burden, indicating again that across the consortium renters are in greater need of housing assistance than owners.

DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 29 The table below shows that for every member of the consortium, renters experience higher rates of severe cost burden than owners, indicating again that across the consortium renters are in greater need of housing assistance than owners. The table below refers to individual Stanislaus HOME Consorummembers; data for Stanislaus County is countywide data, including each city and the unincorporated areas.

Frequency of >50% Cost Burden: Stanislaus HOME ConsorGum Members Stanislaus
County Turlock Ceres Hughson Newman Oakdale Patterson Riverbank Waterford Owners 11% 9% 13% 5% 4% 15% 16% 6% 11%
Renter 25% 26% 33% 37% 14% 18% 21% 18% 15%
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS
The tables below highlight overcrowding among both renter and owner households. Although not a problem as common as housing cost burdens, this issue is still indicative of a housing supply that does not offer affordable units large enough for those households that may need more bedrooms. Single-family households make up the highest number of households that are overcrowded. Please note that the subsequent table from IDIS/HUD referring to crowding/households with children is blank and no local information was available to provide additional context. The table below refers to data for the jurisdiconswithin the Stanislaus HOME Consorum.

Crowding Information: Household Structure
Renter Owner
0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total 0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS
Single family households 641 958 856 237 2,692 100 293 592 418 1,403 Multiple, unrelated family
households 58 135 325 82 600 0 100 183 288 571
Other, non-family households 0 0 20 10 30 0 0 20 0 20
Total need by income 699 1,093 1,201 329 3,322 100 393 795 706 1,994 DRAFT
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 36 Housing Problems: 80%-100% of Area Median Income
Housing Problems Has one or more of
four housing problems
Has none of
the four
housing
problems
Household has
no/negative income,
but none of the other
housing problems
Share
Jurisdiction as a whole 4,186 6,573 0 39%
White 1,900 3,029 0 39%
Black / African American 164 14 0 92%
Asian 408 149 0 73%
American Indian, Alaska Native 25 80 0 24%
Pacific Islander 15 0 0 100%
Hispanic 1,565 3,220 0 33%
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS
In all members of the Consortium, renters experience housing problems at a higher rate than owners, indicating that renters are in greater need of housing assistance. The table below demonstrates this. The data reported are from each city within the Stanislaus HOME Consorumas well as Countywide data, which includes all incorporated and unincorporated areas.

Frequency of 1 of 4 Housing Problems: Stanislaus HOME Consortium Members Stanislaus
County Turlock Ceres Hughson Newman Oakdale Patterson Riverbank Waterford Owners 11% 9% 13% 5% 4% 15% 16% 6% 11%
Renter 25% 26% 33% 37% 14% 18% 21% 18% 15%
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS
Discussion
DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 42 Frequency of 1 of 4 Housing Problems: Consortium Members Stanislaus
County Turlock Ceres Hughson Newman Oakdale Patterson Riverbank Waterford Owners 11% 9% 13% 5% 4% 15% 16% 6% 11%
Renter 25% 26% 33% 37% 14% 18% 21% 18% 15%
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS
Discussion
Those race or ethnicity groups that experience disproportionate rates of severe housing problems are as follows:
0-30% AMI Range
• Pacific Islander
• Hispanic
30%-50% AMI Range
• Black/African-American
• American Indian, Alaska Native
• Pacific Islander
50%-80% AMI Range
• Black/African-American
• Pacific Islander
80%-100% AMI Range
• Pacific Islander
The American Indian/Alaska Native, Black/African American, and Pacific Islander households of the Stanislaus Planning Area have both a smaller overall population and smaller sample size. The disproportionate rates of severe housing problems experienced by households in these populations are of note. However, it should also be observed that a large numerical majority of those households experiencing need are either White or Hispanic.

DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 44 The table below shows that for most members of the consortium, renters experience higher rates of both cost burden, indicating that across the consortium renters are in greater need of housing assistance than owners. The data reported are from each city within the Stanislaus HOME Consorumas well as Countywide data, which includes all incorporated and unincorporated areas.

Frequency of 30% Cost Burden: Stanislaus HOME Consortium Members Stanislaus
County Turlock Ceres Hughson Newman Oakdale Patterson Riverbank Waterford Owners 16% 18% 14% 15% 12% 16% 17% 22% 21%
Renter 22% 22% 17% 21% 24% 24% 27% 21% 13%
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS
The table below shows that for every member of the consortium, renters experience higher rates of both cost burden, indicating again that across the consortium renters are in greater need of housing assistance than owners. The data reported are from each city within the Stanislaus HOME Consorumas well as Countywide data, which includes all incorporated and unincorporated areas.

Frequency of 50% Cost Burden: Stanislaus HOME Consortium Members Stanislaus
County Turlock Ceres Hughson Newman Oakdale Patterson Riverbank Waterford Owners 11% 9% 13% 5% 4% 15% 16% 6% 11%
Renter 25% 26% 33% 37% 14% 18% 21% 18% 15%
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS
Discussion
There are 103,659 households in the Stanislaus Planning Area. There are approximately 67,534 households (65%) that are not housing costburdened, 18,279 housing cost-burdened households (18%), 16,843 severely housing cost- burdened households (16%), and 1,003 households (1%) with zero or negative income.

Of the 18,279 cost burdened households, approximately 45% are White households, 46% are Hispanic households, 2% are Black/African American households, 5% are Asian households, less than 1% of American Indian/Alaskan Native households, and there are no Pacific Islander households DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 64 Housing Market Analysis
MA-05 Overview
Housing Market Analysis Overview:

The Housing Market Analysis evaluates the past and present conditions of the local housing market and forecasts future housing needs in Stanislaus County, including the cities of Turlock, Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson, Riverbank, Waterford and the unincorporated areas over the course of the Consolidated Plan period – 2025- 2029.

Most of the data tables in this secKon are populated with default data from HUD’s IDIS system, which includes all members of the Stanislaus Home Investment Partnerships (HOME Program ConsorKum) which includes the Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock unless marked otherwise.

The other data tables were created and populated directly from the 2016-2020 American Community Survey (ACS) and the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) datasets. CHAS datasets are developed for HUD by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the ACS. AddiKonal tables created outside of IDIS, using these datasets, are described in-text or in the table for their geographic scope.

A brief overview of the report follows.

MA-10 Number of Housing Units – 91.210(a)&(b)(2)
• As of 2020, the Stanislaus Planning Area has 108,221 housing units, 79% of which are single-family homes
• Rental homes range in size; 17% are studios or one-bedrooms, 35% are 2-bedroom homes, and 48% have 3 or more bedrooms
• Owner occupied housing is larger; 86% of these units have 3 or more bedrooms MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing - 91.210(a) • Home values and rental prices have increased since 2010 • From 2010-2020, home values across the County increased 10% • From 2010-2020, the median rent in the County increased 27% MA-20 Housing Market Analysis: Condition of Housing – 91.210(a) • 45% of all renter-occupied housing units have at least one housing condition (i.e., lack of adequate plumbing, kitchen or heating facilities)
• 32% of owner-occupied housing units have one or two housing conditions • The housing stock for both owner-occupied and rental units is older. 72% of owner-occupied housing was built before 1980, and 82% of renter-occupied housing was built before 1980 MA-25 Public and Assisted Housing – 91.210(b)
• The Stanislaus Regional Housing Authority (SRHA), which serves seven area counties, has 647 public housing units
DRAFT
throughout Stanislaus County.

Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 67 MA-10 Housing Market Analysis: Number of Housing Units - 91.410,

91.210(a)&(b)(2)
Introduction
The Housing Market Analysis section utilizes the 2016 to 2020 American Community Survey data. Of the current units, single-unit detached properties make up the large majority of Stanislaus County’s housing stock. Multi-family units of five or more units make up about 8% of the housing market in the County, which is typical in moderately dense jurisdictions. Single-unit attached homes include homes that may share an outside wall, commonly referred to as a “townhouse” or “rowhouse.” Meanwhile, manufactured housing, such as mobile homes and RVs, make up about 6% of total stock; such housing is often found in more economically and environmentally vulnerable areas.

As of 2020, there were an esKmated 182,239 housing units in Stanislaus County, which means 1,853 units were added to the housing stock between the American Community Survey’s esmĀaon Āperiods of 2012- 2016 and 2016-2020. There were marginal increases in the number of units in the County and eight cieĀs that are in the consorĀum. The chart below includes data from each city within the ConsorumĀ as well as countywide data.

Data Source: 2012-2016 ACS, 2016-2020 ACS
All residential properties by number of units
The table below shows the number of housing units in each building type in Stanislaus County. For example, there are 4,628 housing units located in buildings where there are between 2-4 units in a building.
- 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000
Stanislaus County
Turlock
Ceres
Riverbank
Patterson
Oakdale
Newman
Hughson
Waterford
Housing Units Change from 2016-2020
DRAFT
# of Housing Units in 2016 # of Housing Units in 2020
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 68 Planning Area Residential Properties by Unit Number
Property Type Number Percentage
1-unit detached structure 85,555 79%
1-unit, attached structure 3,090 3%
2-4 units 4,628 4%
5-19 units 3,937 4%
20 or more units 4,490 4%
Mobile Home, boat, RV, van, etc. 6,521 6%
Total 108,221 100%
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS
The types of residential properties across the County and jurisdictions reveal that the majority of all owner-occupied housing is single family units. Newman has the highest percentage of owner-occupied single-family homes.

Because there is an insufficient supply of rental housing of different shapes and sizes, the County and consortium should focus on increasing density and rental housing. The size and tenure type of units across the County and consortium cities are shown below.

The column for Stanislaus County in the table below reflects data for the entire county, including each city and the unincorporated areas.

Stanislaus County Residential Properties by Type of Units Stanislaus
County Ceres Hughson Newman Oakdale Patterson Riverbank Turlock Waterford Owneroccupied 59% 60% 64% 73% 64% 68% 66% 54% 68%
1 unit,
detached 54% 55% 60% 72% 59% 65% 63% 50% 66%
1-unit,
attached 1% 0% 1% 1% 2% 0% 1% 1% 0%
2-4 units 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
5-19 units 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
20 or more
units 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Mobile home,
boat, RV, van,
etc.
3% 4% 3% 0% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2%
Renteroccupied 41% 40% 36% 27% 36% 32% 34% 46% 32%
1-unit,
detached 22% 23% 20% 13% 17% 26% 22% 18% 14%
1-unit,
attached 2% 2% 0% 1% 2% 1% 3% 2% 1%
2-4 units 5% 4% 3% 3% 3% 1% 3% 10% 11%
5-19 units 4% 4% 2% 5% 3% 2% 1% 8% 4%
DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 69 20 or more
units 5% 6% 10% 5% 9% 1% 4% 7% 3%
Mobile home,
boat, RV, van,
etc.
1% 1% 2% 0% 2% 0% 1% 1% 0%
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS
Unit Size by Tenure
The majority of owner-occupied housing units across the Stanislaus HOME Consortium have three or more bedrooms while rental units have a wider spread of unit sizes. This indicates that there may not be enough smaller ‘starter’ homes for first-time homebuyers. The column for Stanislaus County in the table below reflects data for the enKre county, including each city and the unincorporated areas.

Unit Size by Tenure Type
Stanislaus
County Ceres Hughson Newman Oakdale Patterson Riverbank Turlock Waterford Owneroccupied 59% 54% 60% 64% 73% 64% 68% 66% 68%
No
bedroom 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0%
1 bedroom 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1%
2 bedrooms 7% 6% 5% 5% 6% 8% 4% 5% 7%
3 or more
bedrooms 50% 46% 54% 59% 66% 56% 64% 61% 59%
Renteroccupied 41% 46% 40% 36% 27% 36% 32% 34% 32%
No
bedroom 2% 3% 1% 3% 0% 0% 1% 2% 2%
1 bedroom 6% 8% 5% 7% 4% 9% 7% 4% 0%
2 bedrooms 15% 20% 11% 11% 10% 14% 3% 7% 14%
3 or more
bedrooms 19% 15% 23% 14% 13% 12% 22% 21% 16%
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS
Describe the number and targeting (income level/type of family served) of units assisted with federal, state, and local programs.

The Stanislaus HOME ConsoruĀm
DRAFT
uses the following funding streams for affordable housing projects.

Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 70 HOME Funds: Stanislaus HOME ConsoruĀm is an entĀlement community for HOME Funds, which are used for low -income housing projects.

CDBG Funds: Both the Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock will ulĀize CDBG funds to assist with any potenKal housing projects, especially needed infrastructure. The City of Turlock will also ulĀize their CDBG funds to assist with their housing programs.

Emergency SoluĀons Grants (ESG): Stanislaus Urban County is an enKtlement community for ESG Funds, which are used to provide homeless services, including emergency shelter and homeless prevenon Āand rapid re-housing acvĀieĀs.

The Stanislaus Regional Housing Authority (SRHA) is the largest landlord of multifamily and senior housing for low- and moderate-income populations across the County. The SRHA owns and manages over 1,700 rental units, including public housing, year-round farm labor housing and migrant housing, in Stanislaus County.

Other Funding Sources: The Stanislaus Urban County will pursue addioĀnal funding to address housing needs and will collaborate with the City of Turlock, as HOME funding partners, in funding applicaKons.

PotenKal funding sources include bonds, the State Energy Upgrade California Program, and the exisKng PG&E Rebate Program, which serve low-income households.

Provide an assessment of units expected to be lost from the affordable housing inventory for any reason, such as expiration of Section 8 contracts.

Based on the respective 6th Cycle Housing Elements, the following jurisdictions do not have any affordable housing units at risk of converting to market rate during the planning period:
• Stanislaus County
• Riverbank
• Patterson
• Newman
• Hughson
The following jurisdictions noted that they had deed-restricted affordable housing units at risk of converting to market rate during the 2023-2031 planning period:
• Waterford: 10 units
• Ceres: 67 units
Oakdale and Turlock’s housing elements did not indicate if there were any affordable units in their jurisdiction’s that are at risk of conversion. All of the jurisdiction’s housing elements showed that they will continue to monitor the status of publicly assisted projects that may become at risk of losing affordable housing price restrictions
DRAFT
in the coming years.

Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 71 Does the availability of housing units meet the needs of the population? The 2022 1-year American Community Survey (ACS) Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) data reveals that 16,239 low-income renter households (defined as those households earning less than 50% of area median income) do not have access to an affordable home. Affordability is defined as housing costs being 30% of a household’s monthly gross income. The California Housing Partnership’s Stanislaus County 2024 Affordable Housing Needs Report demonstrates that a household would need to earn a gross pay of $5,063/ month ($60,756 annual income) to afford the average asking rent for a two-bedroom unit. A family of four persons with an annual income of $60,756, which is in an income bracket considered lowincome (earning less than 80% of AMI), is needed to afford that rent.

The Regional Housing Needs Allocaon Āprocess guides local Housing Element planning. Each locality in the Stanislaus HOME ConsorumĀ plans a housing element that applies to their jurisdicon.Ā In the case of the County, the jurisdicon Āincludes only unincorporated County land. The 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocations (2023-2031) for the County and each of the consortium cities shows that, to meet the coming housing needs for the jurisdiction, they must produce the following number of units for each tranche of incomes:

Number of Units needed for each income bracket in jurisdicWons (RHNA) Very Low
Income (<
50% AMI)
Low Income
(50-80% AMI)
Moderate
Income (80-
120% AMI)
Above
Moderate
Income (>
120% AMI)
Total
Stanislaus
County
(unincorporated
areas)
574 398 458 1,045 2,475
Turlock 1,305 903 1,960 2,498 5,802
Ceres 706 489 661 1,505 3,361
Hughson 284 196 122 279 881
Newman 197 136 218 497 1,048
Oakdale 414 286 294 671 1,665
Patterson 1,046 724 593 1,353 3,716
Riverbank 181 672 594 1,355 3,591
Waterford
DRAFT
107 74 115 261 557
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 72 Data Source: Stanislaus County, Turlock, Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson, Waterford and Riverbank’s 6th Housing Elements 2023-2031
Turlock and Patterson have a large share of units for extremely low-income populations that must be built over the 8-year period.

Describe the need for specific types of housing:

The type of housing currently available in the County is incongruent with the need, which indicates a demand for more affordable housing serving households earning 80% AMI or less. Based on each jurisdicKon’s 2023-31 Housing Element, there are a wide array of housing needs that cut across various household compositions and demographics. The following highlights several of the primary housing needs:
• The 2023-31 Regional Housing Needs Assessment for all nine jurisdictions that are part of the Stanislaus HOME ConsorĀum indicates a total of 23,096 housing units are needed to meet projected population growth, 9,481 of which are needed for households earning less than or equal to 80% AMI.
• Over half of the County’s households have an income less than 100% of HUD Area Median Family Income (HAMFI), which suggests a greater need for housing that serves lower-income households. • The County’s population age distribution between 2010-20 shows an increased senior population (48% increase among ages 65-74), indicating a need for more senior housing. • Similarly, an increase in younger family households (37% increase in ages 25-34), indicates a need for more single-family and homeownership units.

Discussion
Data in this section indicates that the market for homeownership opportunities is generally inaccessible to lower-income households due to the disparity between the County’s median home value and the projected home price affordable to low- and moderate-income workers. Those residents that cannot afford to purchase a home, the majority of which are lower-income households, rent. Relative to median household income, the median monthly rent is relatively affordable. However, the current availability of rental units affordable to households earning less than median income cannot meet the commensurate demand, which results in the majority of lower-income households experiencing a disproportionate share of severe housing problems, including housing cost burden DRAFT
.

Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 73 MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing - 91.410, 91.210(a) Introduction
The cost of purchasing and renting homes in Stanislaus County has continued to rise since 2010. According to 2016-2020 ACS data, the median home values across the County increased by 10% and the median rent increased by 27% during that period. Hughson and Newman both saw the largest climbs – 29% increases - from 2010-2020 home values. The row for Stanislaus County in the table below reflects data for the enrĀe county, including each city and the unincorporated areas.

Cost of Housing
Median Home Values Base Year: 2010 Most Recent Year: 2020 % Change Stanislaus County $285,200 $314,100 10%
Turlock $294,100 $329,900 12%
Ceres $256,200 $284,300 11%
Hughson $264,100 $340,200 29%
Newman $217,900 $280,500 29%
Oakdale $287,300 $333,100 16%
Paoerson $287,300 $327,600 14%
Riverbank $253,700 $318,800 26%
Waterford $239,100 $271,700 14%
Data Source: 2006-2010 ACS (Base Year), 2016-2020 ACS (Most Recent Year) This continued upward trend is supported by the Zillow Home Value Index which shows that between 2020 and 2024, Stanislaus County home values rose from just under $315,000 to more than $450,000.

Median home values have climbed anywhere from 45%-64% in all jurisdictions over the past four years.

Turlock, Oakdale, Hughson, Patterson and Riverbank’s 2024 median homes values all exceed the average median value Countywide. The row for Stanislaus County in the table below reflects data for the enrĀe county, including each city and the unincorporated areas.

DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 74 2020 Versus 2025 Home Values Change
Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016-2020 American Community Survey, B25077. Zillow Home Values Index, December 2024.

This continued upward trend is supported by the Zillow Home Value Index which shows that between 2020 and 2024, Stanislaus County home values rose from just under $315,000 to more than $450,000.

Median home values have climbed anywhere from 45%-64% in all jurisdictions over the past four years.

Home Values 2020 Home
Values
% of
Stanislaus
Median Value
Dec 2024
Zillow Home
Values
% of
Stanislaus
Median Value
% Change in
Median
Value: 2020-
2024
Stanislaus
County $314,100 100% $461,550 100% 47%
Turlock $329,900 105% $477,630 103% 45%
Ceres $284,300 91% $449,051 97% 58%
Home Values 2020 Home
Values
% of
Stanislaus
Median Value
Dec 2024
Zillow Home
Values
% of
Stanislaus
Median Value
% Change in
Median
Value: 2020-
2024
Stanislaus
County $314,100 100% $461,550 100% 47%
Turlock $329,900 105% $477,630 103% 45%
Ceres $284,300 91% $449,051 97% 58%
Hughson $340,200 108% $540,857 117% 59%
Newman $280,500 89% $436,464 95% 56%
Oakdale $333,100 106% $547,832 119% 64%
Patterson $327,600 104% $512,955 111% 57%
Riverbank $318,800 101% $480,582 104% 51%
Waterford $271,700 87% $418,348 91% 54%
DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 75 Hughson $340,200 108% $540,857 117% 59%
Newman $280,500 89% $436,464 95% 56%
Oakdale $333,100 106% $547,832 119% 64%
Patterson $327,600 104% $512,955 111% 57%
Riverbank $318,800 101% $480,582 104% 51%
Waterford $271,700 87% $418,348 91% 54%
Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016-2020 American Community Survey, B25077. Zillow Home Values Index, December 2024.

Rents between 2010-2020 also rose across the County. Hughson saw a 107% jump in rents during that time frame. The row for Stanislaus County in the table below reflects data for the enrĀe county, including each city and the unincorporated areas.
2010-2020 Median Rents
Median Rent Base Year: 2010 Most Recent Year: 2020 % Change Stanislaus
County $796 $1,010 27%
Turlock $785 $981 25%
Ceres $771 $1,078 40%
Hughson $ 792 $1,640 107%
Newman $712 $762 7%
Oakdale $863 $973 13%
Paoerson $913 $1,184 30%
Riverbank $838 $988 18%
Waterford $625 $904 45%
Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006-2010 American Community Survey, B25058. 2016-2020 American Community Survey, B25058.

Housing affordability among renters has increased even more since 2020. Median rents from 2020-2024 in the County have grown by 106%. With homeownership increasingly out of reach for many households coupled with rising rents, the combination is particularly problematic for many low- and moderate-income households. The row for Stanislaus County in the table below reflects data for the enrĀe county, including each city and the unincorporated areas.

DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 76 2020 vs. 2024 Median Rents
Median Rent 2020 Rent % of Stanislaus
Median Rent
2024 Rent % of Stanislaus
Median Rent
% Change in
Median Value:
2020-2024
Stanislaus
County $1,010 100% $2,084 100% 106%
Turlock $981 97% $1,860 89% 90%
Ceres $1,078 107% $2,411 116% 124%
Hughson $1,640 162%
Data not
available N/A N/A
Newman $762 75%
Data not
available N/A N/A
Oakdale $973 96% $2,091 100% 115%
Patterson $1,184 117% $2,649 127% 124%
Riverbank $988 98%
Data not
available N/A N/A
Waterford $904 90%
Data not
available N/A N/A
Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016-2020 American Community Survey, Table B25058., 2024 Zillow Observed Rent Index
Average Rents
The table below represents the average rents paid across the County as of 2020. Most renters are paying between $500-$1,500 per month, however, given annual inflation, we can assume that rents have increased since 2020. After adjusting for the US Consumer Price Index 2.9%/year inflation estimates, from 2020 and 2024, most rent across the County is more than $1,000/month. And as shown below, the 2025 fair market rent in the County is currently $1,566/month for a two-bedroom unit. The table below includes the full populaKon of the County
DRAFT
, including each city and the unincorporated areas.

Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 77 Stanislaus County Rent Paid
Rent Paid Number %
Less than $500 6,414 16%
$500-999 16,186 40%
$1,000-1,499 12,444 31%
$1,500-1,999 4,124 10%
$2,000 or more 1,174 3%
Total 40,342 100%
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS
Zillow data shows that, as of December 2024, the median rents in the enKrety of Stanislaus County, including each city and the unincorporated areas, as well as the specific ciKes within the Stanislaus HOME ConsorumĀ are:

Zillow Average Rents December 2024
Studio 1-bedroom 2-bedroom 3-bedroom 4-bedroom +
Stanislaus
County
$1,100 $1,475 $1,780 $2,395 $2,167
Ceres $1,500 $1,728 $2,500 $2,550
Turlock $900 $1,500 $1,775 $2,400 $3,715
Hughson - - - - -
Newman - $1,100 $1,750 $1,700 $2,500
Oakdale - $1,195 $1,649 $2,300 $2,950
Patterson - $1,200 $1,725 $2,450 $2,825
Riverbank $1,395 $1,600 $2,100 $3,000
Waterford - - $1,375 $2,800 -
Data Source: Zillow Rental Market Values December 2024
On average, Turlock is the most expensive City to rent larger family sized units (3+ bedrooms), while Newman is the most affordable City to rent in. Some communities did not have any reported rents on efficiencies or 4+ bedroom units. The data for Stanislaus County is countywide data, covering all citie and unincorporated areas
DRAFT .

Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 78 Data Source: Zillow Rental Market Values (December 2024) Housing Affordability
The table below shows the number of units that are affordable for each income bracket based on HUD’s annual calculation for area median incomes (AMI or HAMFI). Affordability means that a household is not paying more than 30% of their monthly gross income towards housing costs, including utilities.

Most rental units in Stanislaus County are available to those who make at least 80% of AMI. Most homes for sale are affordable to moderate income households earning at least 100% of AMI. Those with the lowest incomes have the fewest affordable housing options. 2022 US Census data demonstrates that 16,239 low-income renter households – those earning less than 50% of AMI - in Stanislaus County do not have access to an affordable home (PUMS 2022). The California Housing Partnership’s Stanislaus County 2024 Affordable Housing Needs Report shows that 76% of extremely low-income households earning less than 30% of AMI are paying more than half their income on housing costs compared to 4% of moderateincome households earning 80-120% of AMI paying proportional housing costs (PUMS 2022). The economic mismatch between area wages to housing costs is widening. $0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
$4,000
Stanislaus
County
Newman Ceres Patterson Oakdale Riverbank Turlock Waterford Stanislaus County Average Rents
(December 2024)
Efficiency 1-bedroom 2-bedroom 3-bedroom 4-bedroom +
DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 80 supply and increasing rent and home sales prices, these figures have likely widened during the last five years.

Additionally, each locality’s 6th Cycle Housing Element includes the forecasted housing needs for all income levels within their jurisdiction from 2023 to 2031. This is known as the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA).

The RHNA projects that an additional 23,096 housing units are needed from all nine jurisdictions in the Stanislaus HOME ConsorumĀ by 2031. The need for new housing units by income bracket in each jurisdicKon in the Stanislaus HOME ConsorumĀ follows below:
• Extremely Low – 275 units
• Very Low – 299 units
• Low – 398 units
• Moderate – 458 units
• Above Moderate – 1,045 units Total-All Consortium Jurisdictions Stanislaus County (unincorporated) Ceres HughsonNewmanOakdalePattersonRiverbankTurlockWaterford
Very Low 5,603 574 706 284 197 414 1,046 970 1,305 107
Low 3,878 398 489 196 136 286 724 672 903 74
Moderate 4,151 458 661 122 218 294 593 594 1,096 115
Above
Moderate
9,464 1,045 1,505 279 497 671 1,353 1,355 2,498 261
Total 23,096 2,475 3,361 881 1,048 1,665 3,716 3,591 5,802 557 How is affordability of housing likely to change considering changes to home values and/or rents? Given year over year increases in housing costsin the County during the last five years, real estate experts predict that rents and home values will continue to rise in the coming years. If the local wages to area housing costs disparities continue to widen, the affordability gaps will be exacerbated, creating a greater need for more income restricted housing.

How do HOME rents / Fair Market Rent compare to Area Median Rent? How might this impact your strategy to produce or preserve affordable housing?
The HUD Fair Market Rent for one, two, and three bedrooms are lower than area median market-rate rents. Average rents reported by Zillow in all jurisdictions are typically higher than FMRs. Average rents for all unit sizes across the County are higher than the “High HOME Rents.” DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 84 Condition of Units: Stanislaus Consorum Members
Stanislaus
County Turlock Ceres Hughson Newman Oakdale Paj erson Riverbank Owner-occupied
housing units
With one selected
condiKon 31% 29% 32% 20% 19% 19% 37% 29%
With two selected
condiKons 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 4% 2%
With three
selected
condiKons 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
With four selected
condiKons 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
No selected
condiKons 68% 70% 67% 80% 81% 81% 59% 68%
Renter-occupied
housing units
With one selected
condiKon 45% 48% 34% 58% 53% 53% 45% 43%
With two selected
condiKons 5% 5% 3% 5% 0% 0% 6% 2%
With three
selected
condiKons 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
With four selected
condiKons 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
No selected
condiKons 50% 47% 29% 37% 47% 47% 49% 55%
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS
Older housing stock is more likely to have structural or mechanical issues due to wear and tear. The age of residential properties can be used to predict how many hazardous conditions may exist across the County’s housing stock, with older units more likely to have unsafe conditions that require rehabilitation or replacement. Renter-occupied homes have more hazardous conditions reported and are more likely to be built before 1979: 51% of rental units were built prior to 1979 whereas 39% of owner-occupied units were built before 1979. Table below reflects data for the enrĀe county, including each city and the unincorporated
DRAFT
areas.

Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 85 Stanislaus County’s Housing Stock Year Unit Built by Tenure Type Year Unit Built Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied
Number % Number %
2000 or later 17,795 28% 7,657 19%
1980-1999 20,823 33% 12,095 30%
1950-1979 18,193 29% 14,916 37%
Before 1950 6,239 10% 5,913 15%
Total 63,050 100% 40,581 100%
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS
Across the consortium, Hughson and Patterson have the youngest owner-occupied housing units (built after 2000). This suggests that housing development has been stronger in these communities. Newman has the largest share of owner-occupied housing stock built before 1950. The column for Stanislaus County in the table below reflects data for the enrĀ e county, including each city and the unincorporated areas.

Space below intentionally left blank.

DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 86 Year Units Built: Owner-Occupied
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS
Newman and Hughson have the largest shares of newer rental housing stock built after 2000. 50% of Turlock’s and 53% of Oakdale’s rental housing was built before 1980. The column for Stanislaus County in the table below reflects data for the enKre county, including each city and the unincorporated areas.

DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 109 unemployment rate. Unemployment was higher in Ceres, Newman, Oakdale and Patterson.

Labor Force and Unemployment All Consortium Jurisdictions (2020) Labor
Force
Employment Unemployment
Number
Unemployment Rate
Stanislaus County 414,340 231,202 36,461 8.8%
Ceres 35,638 19,173 4,134 11.6%
Hughson 5,540 3,402 349 6.3%
Newman 8,522 4,926 989 11.6%
Oakdale 17,202 10,029 1,961 11.4%
Patterson 15,863 9,851 1,428 9%
Riverbank 18,065 10,351 1,156 6.4%
Turlock 56,313 31,478 4,295 7.6%
Waterford 6,667 3,554 500 7.5%
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS
DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 116 Educational Attainment Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months Some college or associate's degree 40,448
Bachelor's degree 62,220
Graduate or professional degree 86,920
Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS
By 2023, Waterford had the highest average income, $74,873, and Ceres had the lowest average income, $53,535, across all levels of educational attainment. The data shown in the MA-15 Cost of Housing section shows that the Zillow 2024 home values were highest in Oakdale, $547,832, and lowest in Waterford, $418,348. But Countywide median wage data is the most important to take into account because residents may work in jurisdictions outside of where they live. The column for Stanislaus County in the table below reflects data for the enKre county, including each city and the unincorporated areas.

Median Income (Last 12 Months) All Jurisdictions – 2023 2023 Median Income (Last 12 months)
Level of
Educational
Attainment
Stanislaus
County Ceres Hughson Newman Oakdale Patterson Riverbank Waterford < High
school
graduate $33,938 $40,887 $38,279 - $30,799 $38,316 $31,350 $43,796 High
school
graduate $41,201 $37,409 $53,728 $45,301 $48,645 $44,978 $45,905 $30,135 Some
college /
associate's
degree $50,445 $49,072 $71,230 $62,193 $55,456 $53,725 $57,092 $56,741 Bachelor's
degree $71,050 $58,077 $74,813 $94,350 $86,685 $77,807 $93,359 $100,197 Graduate
or
professional
degree $101,039 $81,516 $86,464 $86,515 $103,477 $114,118 $104,856 $143,494 AVERAGE $59,535 $53,392 $64,903 $72,090 $65,012 $65,789 $66,512 $74,873 Data Source: 2018-2023 ACS
Based on the Business Activity table above, what are the major employment sectors within your jurisdiction?
Within the Stanislaus Urban County, the three largest business sectors in Stanislaus County are (1) Agriculture, Mining, Oil & Gas Extraction; (2) Manufacturing; and (3) Retail Trade.

DRAFT

Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 137 SP-25 Priority Needs - 91.415, 91.215(a)(2)
Priority Needs
Stanislaus Urban County
Priority Needs Summary
1 Priority Need Name Public Infrastructure and Facility Improvement Priority Level High
PopulaAon Extremely Low Income
Low Income
Moderate Income
Middle Income
Large Families
Families with Children
Elderly
Frail Elderly
Public Housing Residents
Chronic Homelessness
Individuals
People with Mental Illness
People with Chronic Substance Use Disorders
Veterans
Persons with HIV/AIDS
Survivors of Domes( c Violence
People with Mental Disabili( es
People with Physical Disabili( es
People with Developmental Disabili( es
People with Alcohol or Other Addic( ons
Non-Housing Community Development
Geographic Areas
Affected
Stanislaus Urban County: Ceres, Hughson, Oakdale, PaY erson, Newman, Riverbank, Waterford and the County’s Unincorporated
Associated Goals Improve Public Infrastructure and facilies Administra( on
DescripAon The Stanislaus Urban County will connueaddressing infrastructure improvement needs in low-income neighborhoods to create improved suitable living environments.

Basis for RelaAve
Priority
Throughout the Stanislaus Urban County, there are neighborhoods and communi( es with minimal or non-existent public infrastructure. This round of Consolidated Planning has reaffirmed the community’s desire for public infrastructure improvements especially in the low-income communi( es. Projects will include but are not limited to public sewer and DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 138 water system installa( ons as well as public sewer and water system repairs, curb, guY er and sidewalk installa( on and repairs, storm drain improvements, and improvements that provide greater accessibility.

Projects under this goal may include other CDBG eligible non-housing community development infrastructure improvements.
2 Priority Need Name Affordable Housing
Priority Level High
PopulaAon Extremely Low Income
Low Income
Moderate Income
Middle Income
Large Families
Families with Children
Elderly
Frail Elderly
Public Housing Residents
Chronic Homelessness
Individuals
People with Mental Illness
People with Chronic Substance Use Disorders
Veterans
Persons with HIV/AIDS
Survivors of Domes( c Violence
People with Mental Disabili( es
People with Physical Disabili( es
People with Developmental Disabili( es
People with Alcohol or Other Addic( ons
Non-Housing Community Development
Geographic Areas
Affected
Stanislaus Urban County: Ceres, Hughson, Oakdale, PaY erson, Newman, Riverbank, Waterford and the County’s Unincorporated
Associated Goals Provide and Ensure Access to Essen( al Public Services Administra( on
DescripAon The Stanislaus Urban County intends to use all of their HOME allocaon to fund affordable housing ac( vi( es. These affordable housing ac( vi( es are varied and may include property acquisi( on to ensure affordable housing development, homeownership and rental rehabilitaon, and down payment assistance, among other opportuni( es that may present that will contribute to affordable housing in Stanislaus County.

Basis for RelaAve
Priority
According to data provided in the Needs Assessment and the Market Analysis completed as part of this Consolidated Plan, high housing cost burden, overcrowding, and low vacancy rates create a high need for affordable housing. Those households most impacted by these issues are low- and moderate-income households. Based on this data and the housing market analysis completed as part of this Consolidated Plan, the Stanislaus Urban County will pursue the crea( on of affordable housing DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 139 (new unit produc( on and conversion or preserva( on) as resources are available, which will benefit low-income households, homeless persons, households at-risk of homelessness and those with special needs. Home ownership will be encouraged through the First-me Homebuyer program and housing rehabilitaon will be provided to income qualified homeowners as a means of maintaining exisngaffordable housing. 3 Priority Need Name Community and Economic Development Priority Level High
PopulaAon Extremely Low Income
Low Income
Moderate Income
Middle Income
Large Families
Families with Children
Elderly
Frail Elderly
Public Housing Residents
Chronic Homelessness
Individuals
People with Mental Illness
People with Chronic Substance Use Disorders
Veterans
Persons with HIV/AIDS
Survivors of Domes( c Violence
People with Mental Disabili( es
People with Physical Disabili( es
People with Developmental Disabili( es
People with Alcohol or Other Addic( ons
Non-Housing Community Development
Geographic Areas
Affected
Stanislaus Urban County: Ceres, Hughson, Oakdale, PaY erson, Newman, DRAFT
Riverbank, Waterford and the County’s Unincorporated
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 140 Associated Goals Provide And Ensure Access to Essen( al Public Services Administra( on
DescripAon Stanislaus Urban County will include small business technical assistance as an acvity in the CDBG public services NOFA process to search for a service provider to provide technical assistance to small businesses and assist with capacity building, including strategic planning, opera( ons, and marke( ng.

Basis for RelaAve
Priority
Small businesses in Stanislaus Urban County have iden( fied a need locally for technical assistance with capacity building. Small start-up businesses who desire to expand but lack the capacity to do so may receive technical assistance through a selected service provider, with financial repor( ng systems, developing a business strategy, designing a company website, and/or enhance markeng efforts.
4 Priority Need Name Public Services
Priority Level High
PopulaAon Extremely Low Income
Low Income
Moderate Income
Middle Income
Large Families
Families with Children
Elderly
Frail Elderly
Public Housing Residents
Chronic Homelessness
Individuals
People with Mental Illness
People with Chronic Substance Use Disorders
Veterans
Persons with HIV/AIDS
Survivors of Domes( c Violence
People with Mental Disabili( es
People with Physical Disabili( es
People with Developmental Disabili( es
People with Alcohol or Other Addic( ons
Non-Housing Community Development
Geographic Areas
Affected
Stanislaus Urban County: Ceres, Hughson, Oakdale, PaY erson, Newman, Riverbank, Waterford and the County’s Unincorporated
Associated Goals Provide and Ensure Access to Essenal Public Services Work to Address, Prevent and Mi( gate Homelessness
Administra( on
DescripAon The Stanislaus Urban County will ulize up to a maximum of 15% of its annual award for the provision of public services. Public services include services targeted to extremely low, low, and moderate-income families and DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 141 individuals, as well as services targeted to special popula( ons such as atrisk youth, persons over 62 years of age, or persons with disabilie s.

Basis for RelaAve
Priority
The needs assessment and Market Analysis indicate a great need for public services for extremely low- and low-income households, the elderly, persons with disabilies, and at-risk youth. Public service programs help these vulnerable popula( ons meet their basic needs, such as food and shelter, and provide them with the resources and referrals for any addionalneeded services. Through supporng the meeng of basic needs, these individuals and families may focus their resources on other things that may increase their overall economic and financial stability. 5 Priority Need Name Homeless Services
Priority Level High
PopulaAon Extremely Low Income
Large Families
Elderly
Rural
Chronic Homelessness
Individuals
Families with Children
Mentally Ill
Chronic Substance Abuse
Veterans
Persons with HIV/AIDS
Vicms of Domesc Violence
Unaccompanied Youth
Geographic Areas
Affected
Stanislaus Urban County: Ceres, Hughson, Oakdale, PaY erson, Newman, Riverbank, Waterford and the County’s Unincorporated
Associated Goals Provide and Ensure Access to Essenal Public Services Work to Address, Prevent and Mi( gate Homelessness
Administra( on
DescripAon The Stanislaus Urban County allocates up to 15% of each annual award for public services grants some of which include programs that provide homeless services. Stanislaus Urban County ulizes 7.5% of its annual ESG award for Admin, a maximum of 10% for HMIS Ac( vi( es, maximum of 60% for emergency shelter ac( vi( es, and a minimum of 40% for Homeless Prevenon and Rapid Re-Housing Acvies. HMIS Acvity funds will be ulized to work with the Stanislaus CoC on coordinated assessment, outreach, and data collecon.Affordable housing acvies, as described in Priority Need 2 – Affordable Housing, will also be a part of the regional approach to solving homelessness.

Basis for RelaAve
Priority
As discussed in greater detail in the Needs Assessment, homeless individuals were counted as part of Stanislaus County’s 2024 Point-In-Time (PIT) count, including those who were unsheltered. The data indicates a need to support programs that serve individuals and families experiencing DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 153 • Stanislaus County has identified two publicly owned parcels – one in Keyes and one in Empire - that are vacant and considered developable for housing.
• Ceres has not identified any publicly owned surplus lands available for housing development in its jurisdiction. • Newman has identified one publicly owned parcel that is vacant and considered developable. It is estimated that it could yield 24 units. • Oakdale has not identified any publicly owned surplus lands available for housing development in its jurisdiction. • Patterson has not identified any publicly owned surplus lands available for housing development in its jurisdiction. • Riverbank has not identified any publicly owned surplus lands available for housing development in its jurisdiction. • Turlock Redevelopment Agency owns a parcel with a small office building. The building is currently leased for $1.00 per year to Haven Women’s Center. The intent of the five-year lease has been to bring needed an( -domesc violence services to City of Turlock and overcome the transporta( on barrier of clients and families traveling the fipeen miles to Modesto to get to needed services The City owns 5 sites with single-family dwellings that are intended to be rehabilitated and sold to income eligible first-me homebuyers or sold to a nonprofit agency to provide affordable rental housing.
• Waterford has not identified any publicly owned surplus lands available for housing development in its jurisdiction.

Discussion
The Annual Action Plans associated with this Consolidated Plan include contingency provision language to explain how project/program funding amounts will be adjusted once actual funding is made available by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 155 City of Newman Government -Economic
Development
-Non-homeless special
needs
-Neighborhood
improvements
Jurisdiction
City of Oakdale Government -Economic
Development
-Non-homeless special
needs
-Neighborhood
improvements
Jurisdiction
City of Patterson Government -Economic
Development
-Non-homeless special
needs
-Neighborhood
improvements
Jurisdiction
City of Riverbank Government -Economic
Development
-Non-homeless special
needs
-Neighborhood
improvements
Jurisdiction
City of Waterford Government -Economic
Development
-Non-homeless special
needs
-Neighborhood
improvements
Jurisdiction
City of Turlock Government --Non-homeless
special needs
-Neighborhood
improvements
-Affordable Housing
Homeownership/Rent
al
DRAFT
Jurisdiction
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 175 APPENDIX A:

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT MEETING SUMMARIES & SURVEY RESULTS

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT MEETING SUMMARIES
City of Ceres Community
Meeting
Date:
4/17/2025
at 11:00 a.m.

Meeting Location:

Via Zoom
Stakeholder meeting focused on review
of the draft Consolidated Plan and
Annual Action Plan.

Meeting Notes:
• Comments pending for April meeti gs.

City of Ceres Community
Meeti g
Date:
4/17/2025
at 5:30 p.m.

Meeti g Locatio :

City of Ceres-Community
Center Classroom
2 nd
oor, City Hall
2701 4th Street, Ceres
Stakeholder meeti g focused on review
of the draConsolidated Plan and
Annual Acti n Plan.

Meeting Notes:
• Comments pending for April meeti gs.

City of Ceres City Council
Meeti g
Date:
4/28/2025
at 6:00 p.m.

Meeti g Locatio :

City of Ceres-City Hall 2701
4th Street, Ceres
Consideration or approval of the dra
Consolidated Plan and Annual Acti n
Plan
Meeting Notes:
• Comments pending for April meeti gs.

City of
Hughson
Community
Meeti g
Date:
4/14/2025
at 5:15 p.m.

Meeti g Locatio :

City of Hughson- City Hall
7018 Pine Street, Hughson
(and Via Zoom)
Stakeholder meeti g focused on review
of the draConsolidated Plan and
Annual Acti n Plan
Meeting Notes:
• Comments pending for April meeti gs.

City of
Hughson
City Council
Meeti g
Date:
4/28/2025
at 6:00 p.m.

Meeti g Locatio :

City of Hughson- City Hall
7018 Pine Street, Hughson
Consideration or approval of the dra
Consolidated Plan and Annual Acti n
Plan
Meeting Notes:
• Comments pending for April meeti gs.

City of
Newman
Community
Meeti g
Date:
4/15/2025
at 3:00 p.m.

Meeti g Locatio :

Via Zoom
Stakeholder meeti g focused on review
of the draConsolidated Plan and
Annual Acti n Plan
Meeting Notes:
• Comments pending for April meeti gs.

DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 176 City of
Newman
Community
Meeti g
Date:
4/15/2025
at 4:00 p.m.

Meeti g Locatio :

City of Newman- City Hall
938 Fresno Street, Newman
Stakeholder meeti g focused on review
of the draConsolidated Plan and
Annual Acti n Plan
Meeting Notes:
• Comments pending for April meeti gs.

City of
Newman
City Council
Meeti g
Date:
4/22/2025
at 7:00 p.m.

Meeti g Locatio :

City of Newman- City Hall
938 Fresno Street, Newman
Consideration or approval of the dra
Consolidated Plan and Annual Acti n
Plan
Meeting Notes:
• Comments pending for April meeti gs.

City of Oakdale Community
Meeti g
Date:
4/11/2025
at 9:30 a.m.

Meeti g Locatio :

City of Oakdale- Public
Services Conference Room
455 S. 5th Avenue, Oakdale
(and via Zoom)
Stakeholder meeti g focused on review
of the draConsolidated Plan and
Annual Acti n Plan
Meeting Notes:
• Comments pending for April meeti gs.

City of Oakdale City Council
Meeti g
Date:
4/21/2025
at 7:00 p.m.

Meeti g Locatio :

City of Oakdale- City Hall,
277 North Second Avenue,
Oakdale
Consideration or approval of the dra
Consolidated Plan and Annual Acti n
Plan
Meeting Notes:
• Comments pending for April meeti gs.

City of
Paerson
Community
Meeti g
Date:
4/9/2025
at 5:30 p.m.

Meeti g Locatio :

City of Paerson- City Hall
1 Plaza, Patterson
(and via Zoom)
Stakeholder meeti g focused on review
of the draConsolidated Plan and
Annual Acti n Plan
Meeti g Notes:
• Comments pending for April meeti gs.

City of
Paerson
City Council
Meeti g
Date:
4/15/2025
at 7:00 p.m.

Meeti g Locatio :

City of Paerson- City Hall
1 Plaza, Patterson
Stakeholder meeti g focused on review
of the draConsolidated Plan and
Annual Acti n Plan
Meeti g Notes:
• Comments pending for April meeti gs.

City of
Riverbank
Community
Meeti g
Date:
4/9/2025
at 5:30 p.m.

Meeti g Locatio :

City of Riverbank- City Hall,
6707 Third Street
Suite B, Riverbank
(and via Zoom)
Stakeholder meeti g focused on review
of the draConsolidated Plan and
Annual Acti n Plan
Meeti g Notes:
• Comments pending for April
DRAFT
meeti gs.

Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock Joint 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan 179 Newspaper Ad - All public hearings/meetings and notice of the availability of the AAP for public review, are to be published in newspapers covering the Stanislaus Planning Area (Ceres Courier, Hughson/Denair Dispatch, Modesto Bee (English and Spanish), Newman/Gustine Westside Index, Oakdale Leader, Turlock Journal and Patterson Irrigator).

Comments: Comments pending circulation of newspaper ads Intentionally Left Blank
DRAFT
Prepared by the Stanislaus County
Department of Planning and Community Development
1010 10th Street, Suite #3400
Modesto, CA 95354
(209) 525-6330 – Fax (209) 525-5911
https://www.stancounty.com/planning/cdbg/plans-and-reports.shtm FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026

ANNUAL ACTION PLAN

STANISLAUS URBAN COUNTY

STANISLAUS HOME CONSORTIUM

FOR HUD ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS

ANNUAL ACTION PLAN
This Annual Action Plan includes contingency provision language to explain how project/program funding amounts will be adjusted once actual funding is made available by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and the Stanislaus HOME Consortium Stanislaus County
Chairman Buck Condit
Vice Chairman Vito Chiesa
Supervisor Chance Condit
Supervisor Mani Grewal
Supervisor Terry Withrow
City of Newman
Mayor Casey Graham
Councilmember Shane Tomlinson
Councilmember Scott Ball
Councilmember Gisel Pimentel
Councilmember Matthew Harden
Councilmember Mary Moore
City of Riverbank
Mayor Rachel Hernandez
Vice Mayor Cindy Fosi
Councilmember John C. Pimentel
Councilmember Stacy Call
Councilmember Luis Uribe
City of Ceres
Mayor Javier Lopez
Vice Mayor Daniel A. Martinez
Councilmember James Casey
Councilmember Rosalinda L. Vierra
Councilmember Cerina Otero
City of Oakdale
Mayor Cherilyn Bairos
Mayor Pro Tem Christopher Smith
Councilmember Jorod Pitassi
Councilmember Jeff Kettering
Councilmember Kayleigh Gilbert
City of Turlock*
Mayor Amy Bublak
Vice Mayor Rebecka Monez
Councilmember Cassandra Abram
Councilmember Kevin Bixel
Councilmember Erika Phillips
City of Hughson
Mayor George Carr
Mayor Pro Tem Randy Crooker
Councilmember Julie Ann Strain
Councilmember Susana Vasquez
Councilmember Alan McFadon
City of Patterson
Mayor Michael Clauzel
Councilmember Gabriela
Hernandez
Councilmember Jessica Romero
Councilmember Kendra Mora
Councilmember Carlos Roque
City of Waterford
Mayor Charlie Goeken
Vice Mayor Jamie Hilton
Councilmember Guadalupe
Gutierrez
Councilmember Christine Harris
Councilmember Elizabeth Talbott
*Note: The City of Turlock is not a member of the Stanislaus Urban County; however, it is a member of the Stanislaus HOME Consortium.

DRAFT
Annual Action Plan Fiscal Year 2025-2026

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ES-05 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...............................................................................................................................................................................1 PR-05 LEAD& RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES ....................................................................................................................................................................4 PR-10 CONSULTATION....................................................................................................................................................................................................5 PR-15 CITIZENPARTICIPATION...................................................................................................................................................................................9 AP-15 EXPECTED RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................................................................ 13 AP-20 ANNUAL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES...................................................................................................................................................... 16 AP-35 PROJECTS .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 18 AP-38 PROJECT SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................................................... 20 AP-50 GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION ............................................................................................................................................................... 40 AP-55 AFFORDABLE HOUSING.......................................................................................................................................................................... 43 AP-60 PUBLIC HOUSING...................................................................................................................................................................................... 45 AP-65 HOMELESS AND OTHER SPECIAL NEEDS ACTIVITIES ................................................................................................................. 47 AP-75 BARRIERS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING ............................................................................................................................................. 51 AP-85 OTHER ACTIONS........................................................................................................................................................................................ 54 AP-90 PROGRAM SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS................................................................................................................................................. 58 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan ES-05 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
Each year the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provides funding for housing and community development programs to the Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock, specifically Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) grant. The Stanislaus Urban County consist of the cities of Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson, Riverbank, Waterford and the unincorporated areas of Stanislaus County. Together, the Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock have prepared a joint Five-Year Consolidated Plan (Consolidated Plan) for Fiscal Years 2025-2029 which will serve as the blueprint for the expenditures of federal funds.

Beginning in 2000, with the City of Turlock serving as the lead entity, the Stanislaus Urban County was part of the City of Turlock/Stanislaus Urban County Home Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) Consortium for purposes of receiving federal HOME grant funding. On July 1, 2023, Stanislaus County became the lead entity for a new HOME Consortium, the Stanislaus HOME Consortium, consisting of the Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock. CDBG, ESG and HOME activities will be reported in this Annual Action Plan (AAP) for the Stanislaus HOME Consortium and the City of Turlock will report their CDBG activities in their own separate AAP.

For Fiscal Year 2025-2026 the HUD funding allocations are as follow:

Stanislaus Urban County:

CDBG: $2,305,008
ESG $205,225
Stanislaus HOME Consortium:

HOME: $1,262,718
This Annual Action Plan (AAP) includes contingency provision language to explain how project/program funding amounts will be adjusted once actual funding is made available by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Throughout this document the following geographic terms will be used. • Stanislaus Planning Area: Includes the entirety of the planning area considered under the Fiscal Year 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan: the cities of Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson, Riverbank, Turlock, Waterford, and the unincorporated area of the County.
• Stanislaus Urban County: A multi-jurisdictional CDBG entitlement, made up of the cities of Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson, Riverbank, Waterford, and the unincorporated area of the County. Stanislaus County is the “lead entity” for the Stanislaus Urban County. • Unincorporated County: Includes the entire unincorporated area of the County (this area is not a part of any municipality).
• Entitlement Cities: The CDBG entitlement cities in the County are Modesto and Turlock. • Stanislaus Home Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) Consortium: The members of the Consortium are Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock. Stanislaus County is the “lead entity” for the Stanislaus HOME Consortium.

This AAP details the projects and activities that the Stanislaus Urban County and the Stanislaus HOME Consortium will undertake to address the housing and community development needs and local objectives using CDBG, ESG, and HOME funds. This document is the AAP for Year 1 of the Consolidated Plan and covers the funds received during Fiscal Year 1 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan 2025-2026. The majority of this document is generated through HUD’s Integrated Disbursement and Information System (IDIS) System.

Summary of the Objectives and OutcomesIdentified in the Plan Needs Assessment Overview Stanislaus Urban County and City of Turlock:

The Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock have identified five goals to address housing and community development needs during the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan:

1. Improve public infrastructure and facilities

2. Provide and ensure access to essential public services;

3. Support affordable housing and promote accessible housing options;

4. Work to address, prevent and mitigate homelessness; and

5. Administration.

CDBG funds are used by the Stanislaus Urban County for public services, public facilities and infrastructure improvements, and planning and administrative costs. ESG funds are utilized for Homeless Prevention, Rapid Re-Housing, Shelter, and Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) activities and administrative costs. HOME funds will be used to increase and improve the supply of affordable housing by supporting the development of new affordable housing projects and rehabilitation of existing housing.

Evaluation of Past Performance
Stanislaus Urban County:

In many older neighborhoods and communities, public infrastructure is minimal or non-existent, causing this to be a high priority need. Infrastructure such as sewer, water, curb, gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage are typical development standards in newer neighborhoods but were not always requirements at the time older neighborhoods developed. The Stanislaus Urban County members have utilized CDBG funds for infrastructure improvement related projects.

Through the CDBG Public Services Program, the Stanislaus Urban County may set aside up to 15% of its annual CDBG allocation for programs that provide services to low- to moderate-income households (families or individuals). In Fiscal Year 2024-2025, a total of eight public service programs were awarded $325,000 to carry-out a number of needed services and, as of March 1, 2025, approximately 1,060 individuals have received a form of service through the funded agencies.

Funded services ranged from meals and shelter for low-income households to emergency food assistance programs.

As lead agency for the Stanislaus HOME Consortium, Stanislaus County has been working with its member citiesto identify housing projects and has contracted with a housing consultant to assist in the preparation of HOME policies and procedures and development of a Request for Proposals that will be utilized to identify, prioritize, and rank housing projects and to establish provides for a consortium wide comprehensive housing rehabilitation program.

ESG program funding is used to provide emergency shelter and rental assistance for homeless households and households at-risk of becoming homeless. In Fiscal Year 2024-2025, a total of three programs were awarded $189,834 to carry-out services and, as of March 1, 2025 approximately 494 individuals have received services through the funded agencies.

Funded services have included shelter and homeless prevention services.

Throughout Fiscal Year 2024-2025, the Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock along with the local Continuum of Care (CoC) continued to work together on strengthening efforts to address and collaborate on mitigating homeless issues 2 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan including providing funding to eligible shelters for operations and services through federal and state program funding such as Homeless Housing Assistant and Prevention (HHAP), ESG, and PLHA.

Summary of Citizen Participation Process and Consultation Process The community outreach process for the AAP included online community meetings, stakeholder interviews, in person community meetings, agency phone and email consultations, and consultation with the local CoC. Draft documents were made available to the public via the County’s website, at the offices of the Planning and Community Development departments of the respective Stanislaus HOME Consortium members, and were emailed directly to know interested parties by Consortium staff. A summary of the citizen participation process and comments is included in Appendix A.

Summary of Public Comments
Anypublic commentsreceivedduring thepublic reviewperiodorprovidedatthesubsequent final public hearing to consider approval of the AAP will be incorporated into the final AAP submitted to HUD. A summary of the citizen participation process and comments is included in Appendix A.

Summary of Comments or Views Not Accepted and the Reasons for Not Accepting Them No public comments were purposefully not included or not accepted during the development of the Consolidated Plan.

Space below left intentionally blank.
3 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan The Process
PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies
Agency/entity responsible for preparing/administering the Consolidated Plan

1. Describe agency/entity responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source.

The following are the agencies/entities responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan on behalf of the Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium, and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source.

Agency Role Name Department/Agency
CDBG Administrator Stanislaus County Stanislaus County Planning and Community Development ESG Administrator Stanislaus County Stanislaus County Planning and Community Development HOME Administrator Stanislaus County Stanislaus County Planning and Community Development Narrative
Each year the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provides funding for housing and community development programs to the Stanislaus Urban County and the Stanislaus HOME Consortium, specifically CDBG, ESG, and HOME grants.

In order to receive CDBG, ESG, and HOME funds, the Stanislaus Urban County, along with the City of Turlock, has prepared a joint Five-Year Consolidated Plan for Fiscal Years 2025-2029 which will serve as the blueprint for the expenditures of federal funds.

Consolidated Plan Public Contact Information
Stanislaus County
Angela Freitas, Director
Department of Planning and Community Development
1010 10th Street, Suite 3400, Modesto, CA 95354
Telephone: 209-525-6330
E-mail: [email protected]
4 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan PR-10 Consultation
Introduction
In preparing the AAP, the Stanislaus HOME Consortium consulted with various organizations that provide services to residents of the Stanislaus Planning Area. In many instances, these consultations are part of ongoing interactions between member jurisdictions and the agency or group described. The community outreach process for the AAP included online community meetings, in person community meetings, stakeholder interviews, agency phone and email consultations, and consultation with the local CoC. Draft documents were made available to the public via the County’s website as well as emailed directly by County staff to interested parties. A summary of the citizen participation process and comments is included in Appendix A.

The community outreach process included a survey of the Stanislaus Planning Area, stakeholder meetings and agency phone and email consultations on the AAP. Draft documents were made available to the public online as well as emailed directly by County staff and City of Turlock staff. A summary of the citizen participation process and activities to date is included in Appendix A; it also includes anticipated events and meetings in the near future prior to submission to HUD.

Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and persons at risk of homelessness.

Stanislaus County staff collaborate with the CoC in multiple ways. The CoC is made up of representatives from the City of Modesto, the City of Turlock, Stanislaus County, the Stanislaus Regional Housing Authority (SRHA), law enforcement agencies, housing service providers, social service providers, health service providers, and homeless service providers.

Announcements for all funding opportunities through the Stanislaus Urban County and the Stanislaus HOME Consortium are routinely advertised at the CoC meetings.

Stanislaus County takespartin regularly scheduledmonthly CoCmeetings and consultsregularly with attendees on housing needs, social service needs, and homelessness needs. This ongoing partnership increases shared understanding of roles and responsibilities throughout the continuum.

In preparation of this AAP, Stanislaus County consulted with a wide range of service providers and stakeholders. These involved both the public sector and private nonprofit sector. These personal contacts asked those who help to meet the housing and social services needs of residents to describe the level of needs in the community, the relative priority of needs, and what they believe can be done to better meet the needs of the county’s residents.

DescribeconsultationwiththeContinuum(s) ofCare thatservesthe jurisdiction's areaindetermining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards and evaluate outcomes, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the administration of HMIS.

Meetings with the CoC and their executive committee are routinely conducted to help determine how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards and evaluate outcomes, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the administration of HMIS.

A representative from the CoC participates on the County’s Grant Review Panel reviews and scores applications for CDBG Public Services and ESG funds. Nonprofit organizations and service providers apply through a competitive process. The process typically begins approximately six months prior to the start of the upcoming fiscal year, except in the year that the Consolidated Plan is being developed. In the year that the Consolidated Plan is being developed, the process is 5 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan conducted after the new Consolidated Plan, that includes new goals and funding priorities, is approved by the Board of Supervisors. In addition to the CoC representative, the Grant Review Panel also includes a representative from each Stanislaus Urban County member jurisdiction. The draft ESG and CDBG Public Services funding recommendations are presented to the CoC during its monthly meeting in April or prior to being taken to the Board of Supervisors for approval for comment.

A more detailed consultation on how ESG funds are implemented occurs at the CoC’s HMIS sub-committee, which takes place monthly. The sub-committee works to implement ESG and HMIS regulations, both in practice and in the HMIS system itself.

Consultation with public sector and private nonprofits that provide permanent supportive housing, health services, and social services are also routinely conducted, in coordination with the CoC, to determine what resources are available to address the needs of any persons that are chronically homeless.

Describe agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the process and describe the jurisdictions consultations with housing, social service agencies and other entities. 1 Agency/Group/Organization(s) Ceres Healthy Start Family Resource Center The Salvation Army Red Shield
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Children
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment NonHomeless Special Needs How wasthe Agency/Group/Organization consulted and what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Outreach and stakeholder meetings
2 Agency/Group/Organization Area Agency on Aging
Healthy Aging Association
Stanislaus Advocacy Network
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Seniors
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment NonHomeless Special Needs How wasthe Agency/Group/Organization consulted and what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Outreach and stakeholder meetings
3 Agency/Group/Organization Center for Human Services
Central Valley Opportunity Center
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Education
Services Employment
Food Bank
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment How wasthe Agency/Group/Organization consulted and what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Outreach and stakeholder meetings
6 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan 4 Agency/Group/Organization Healthy Alternatives to Violent Environments (HAVEN)
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Victims of Domestic Violence What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Non-Homeless Special Needs How wasthe Agency/Group/Organization consulted and what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Outreach and stakeholder meetings
5 Agency/Group/Organization Cambridge Academies
Stanislaus Workforce Development
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Education
Services-Employment
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? HousingNeed Assessment Economic Development
How wasthe Agency/Group/Organization consulted and what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Outreach and stakeholder meetings
6 Agency/Group/Organization United Samaritans Foundation Agency/Group/Organization Type Food Bank
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment NonHomeless Special Needs How wasthe Agency/Group/Organization consulted and what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Outreach and stakeholder meetings
7 Agency/Group/Organization (s) Cambridge Academies
Center for Human Services
Children’s Crisis Center
Family Promise
We Care Program
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-homeless
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Homelessness Strategy Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless
Homeless Needs - Families with children
How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted
and what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areasfor improved coordination?
Outreach and stakeholder meetings
8 Agency/Group/Organization Project Sentinel
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Non-Homeless Special Needs
How wasthe Agency/Group/Organization consulted and what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Outreach and stakeholder meetings
7 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Identify any agency types not consulted and provide rationale for not consulting.

N/A
Describe other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan.

Name of Plan Lead Organization How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of each plan?
Continuum of Care Consolidated
Application
Stanislaus County Homeless Strategy
General Plan Housing Elements Stanislaus Urban County
and Stanislaus HOME
Consortium members
Goals of the Housing Element of the General Plan
were considered when preparing the Annual
Action Plan. The goals of the Annual Action Plan
address some of the housing needs identified in
the Housing Element.

City of Turlock Housing Element City of Turlock Goals of the Housing Element of the General Plan were considered when preparing the Annual
Action Plan. The goals of the Annual Action Plan
address some of the housing needs identified in
the Housing Element.

Stanislaus 2021 Regional Strategic Plan
to Address Homelessness
Stanislaus Community
System of Care (CoC)
The Strategic Plan addresses homelessness via
various funded projects/activities including ESG,
CDBG, or HOME funds.

Public Housing Agency (PHA) Plan Stanislaus Regional
Housing Authority
Both include the need to increase affordable
housing stock and integrate quality services.

Action Plan for Preventing and Ending
Homelessness in California
State of California –
Homeless Coordinating
and Finance Council
This Action Plan orients the State’s efforts to drive
purposeful, meaningful, and measurable progress
toward preventing and ending homelessness in
California, motivated by a vision of a future in
which homelessness in California
Broadband Infrastructure Deployment Public Utilities
Commission
Order Instituting Rulemaking Regarding
Broadband Infrastructure Deployment and to
Support Service Providers in the State of
California.
2022-2027 Local Hazard Mitigation
Plan
Stanislaus County – Office
of Emergency Services
The Stanislaus County Office of Emergency
Services in collaboration with the cities of Ceres,
Hughson, Modesto, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson,
Riverbank, Turlock, Waterford, and the County
Office of Education is updating their 2017 Local
Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP). The LHPM 2017
recognized earthquakes, floods, dam inundation,
landslides and wildfire as the local natural
hazards.

Housing Stanislaus Stanislaus County A countywide initiative to develop a common vision for housing in Stanislaus County.
8 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan PR-15 Citizen Participation

1. Summary of citizen participation process/efforts made to broaden citizen participation. Summary of citizen participation process and how it impacted goal-setting.

In order to ensure maximum participation in the AAP process among all populations and special needs groups and to ensure that their issues and concerns are adequately addressed, the Stanislaus HOME Consortium/Stanislaus Urban County has a Citizen Participation Plan in place. The Citizen Participation Plan describes the actions to be taken to encourage citizen participation in the development of the AAP. The community outreach process for the AAP included online community meetings, in person community meetings, agency phone and email consultations.

The public review period for the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan was from April 4, 2025 to May 5, 2025. A public meeting notice was published in The Modesto Bee on April 4, 2025, in both English and Spanish, a newspaper covering the entire Stanislaus Planning Area. In addition, each Stanislaus HOME Consortium/Stanislaus Urban County member city advertised their city council meeting for the consideration of the AAP in one of the following newspapers: Ceres Courier, Hughson/Denair Dispatch, The Modesto Bee, Newman/Gustine Westside Index, Oakdale Leader, Turlock Journal, and Patterson Irrigator. The Stanislaus HOME Consortium/Stanislaus Urban County also utilizes existing listservs to notify interested parties of the AAP’s availability for review.

Summary of Citizen Participation
Information pending the end ofthe Public Review Period
Space below left intentionally blank.
9 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Citizen Participation Outreach
Mode of
Outreach
Target of Outreach Summary of Response Summary of
Comments
Received
Summary of
Comments
Not
Accepted
URL
(If applicable)
Public
Meetings
-Non-English Speaking - Specify
other language: Spanish
-Non-targeted/broad community
Ceres
• April 17, 2025, at 11:00am Community Meeting, Via Zoom. • April 17, 2005, at 5:30pm Community Meeting/City Hall, 2701 4th Street, Ceres. • April 28, 2025, at 6:00pm City of Ceres Community Meeting/City Hall 2701 4th Street, Ceres.

Hughson
• April 14, 2025, at 5:15pm, Community Meeting, Via Zoom. • April 14, 2025, at 5:15pm, Community Meeting/City Hall, 7018 Pine Street, Hughson.
• April 28, 2025, at 6:00pm, Hughson City Council Meeting/City Hall, 7018 Pine Street, Hughson.
•
Newman
• April 15, 2025, at 4:00pm, Newman City Council Meeting/City Hall, 938 Fresno Street, Newman.
• April 16, 2025, at 4:00pm, Community Meeting, Via Zoom. • April 22, 2025, at 7:00pm, Newman City Council Meeting/City Hall, 938 Fresno Street, Newman.

Oakdale
• April 11, 2025, at 9:30am, Community Meeting/City Hall, 455 South Fifth Ave., Oakdale.
• April 11, 2025, at 9:30am, Community Meeting, Via Zoom. • April 21, 2025, at 7:00pm, Oakdale City Council Meeting/City Hall, 455 South Fifth Ave., Oakdale.

Comments pending for
April Meetings
Comments pending for
April Meetings
Comments pending for
April Meetings
Comments pending for
April Meetings

N/A N/A
10 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Patterson
• April 9, 2025, at 5:30pm, Community Meeting/City Hall, 1 Plaza, Patterson. • April 9, 2025, at 5:30pm, Community Meeting, Via Zoom. • April 15, 2025, at 7:00pm, Patterson City Council Meeting/City Hall, 1 Plaza, Patterson.

Riverbank
• April 9, 2025, at 4:30pm, Community Meeting/City Hall, 6707 Third Street, Suite B, Riverbank.
• April 9, 2025, at 4:30pm, Community Meeting, Via Zoom. • April 28, 2025, at 6:00pm, Riverbank City Council Meeting/City Hall, 6707 Third Street, Suite B, Riverbank.

Comments pending for
April Meetings
Comments pending for
April Meetings
Turlock
• April 17, 2025, at 5:30pm, Community Meeting/City Hall, 156 S. Broadway, Turlock.
• April 17, 2025, at 5:30pm, Community Meeting, Via Zoom. • April 15, 2025, at 1:30pm, Turlock Community Collaborative Meeting, Via Zoom. • May 13, 2025, at 6:00pm, Turlock City Council/City Hall, 156 S. Broadway, Turlock.

Waterford
• April 9, 2025, at 5:30pm, Community Meeting/City Hall, l 101 E. Street, Waterford. • April 9, 2025, at 5:30pm, Community Meeting, Via Zoom. • April 17, 2025, at 6:30pm, Waterford City Council Meeting/ City Hall, l 101 E.

Street, Waterford.

Stanislaus County
• April 17, 2025, at 2:30pm, 3800 Cornucopia Way, Modesto. • April 28, 2025, at 12:00pm, 1010 10th Street, Basement Training Room, Modesto. • April 30, 2025, at 5:30pm, 1010 10th Street, Basement Training Room, Modesto. • May 3, 2025, at 10:00am, via Zoom video conferencing
• May 13, 2025, at 9:00am, 1010 10th Street, Board Chambers, Modesto.

Comments pending for
April Meetings
Comments pending for
April Meetings
Comments pending for
April Meetings
11 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Newspaper Ad Non-targeted/broad community All public hearings/meetings and notice of the availability of the draft AAP for public review, were published in newspapers covering the Stanislaus Planning Area (Ceres Courier, Hughson/Denair Dispatch, Modesto Bee (English and Spanish), Newman/Gustine Westside Index, Oakdale Leader, Turlock Journal and Patterson Irrigator).

Comments pending for
April and May meetings

N/A N/A
Space below intentionally left blank.
12 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan AP-15 EXPECTED RESOURCES
Introduction
During Fiscal Year 2025-2026, the Stanislaus Urban County expects to receive approximately $2,305,008 in CDBG program funding and $205,225 in ESG funding; and the Stanislaus HOME Consortium expects to receive $1,262,718 in HOME funding.

As of February 28, 2025, the amount of prior years’ unspent funds was approximately $5,291,782 in federal CDBG and $331,622 in federal ESG funds. The Stanislaus Urban County also has a balance of approximately $459,200.98 in NSP 1 and $722,798.26 in NSP 3 program income funding. The NSP funding is anticipated to be utilized during Fiscal Year 2025-2026 for housing development and/or infrastructure activities. The projects and programs’ allocated funding listed in the AAP will be adjusted proportionally according to the final HUD allocations awarded to Stanislaus County.

During Fiscal Year 2025-2026, the Stanislaus HOME Consortium expects to receive approximately $1,262,718 in HOME funding. As this is the first year of the Stanislaus HOME Consortium, no HOME income is anticipated. As of February 28, 2025, the amount of prior years’ unspent HOME funds was approximately $2,968,080.71 Anticipated Resources
Stanislaus Urban County
Program Source of Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount Available Narrative Description Funds Annual
Allocation: $
Program
Income: $
Prior Year
Resources: $
Total:
$
Remainder of Consolidated
Plan
$
CDBG public -
federal
Administration and Planning,
Economic Development,
Housing, Public
Infrastructure, and Public
Services
$2,305,008 $0 $5,291,782 $7,596,790.14 $9,220,032 Majority of funds will be utilized for infrastructure projects. 15% will be set aside for public services. 20% for Administration. Prior year resources are projected
to be approximately $5.2 million that will be carried
forward to HUD approved infrastructure projects.

ESG public -
federal
Overnight shelter operations
and services, Rapid rehousing (rental assistance),
and homeless prevention,
HMIS data support services
$205,225 $0 $331,622 $536,847.12 $820,900 Funds will be utilized for ESG program administration, emergency shelters, homeless
management information system (HMIS) data entry,
and homeless prevention and rapid re-housing
services. The $331,622 in ESG prior years resources
are awarded to service providers and will be spent in
FY 2025-2026.
13 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Stanislaus HOME Consortium
Program Source of Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount Available Narrative Description Funds Annual
Allocation: $
Program
Income: $
Prior Year
Resources: $
Total:
$
Remainder of Consolidated Plan
$
HOME public -
federal
Acquisition, Homeowner
rehab, Multifamily rental
new construction,
Multifamily rentalrehab,
new construction for
ownership and TBRA.
$1,262,718 $0 $71,705,362 $2,968,080 $5,050,872 Funds will be utilized for affordable housing development, rehabilitation, and administration.

Space below intentionally left blank.
14 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Annual Action Plan Fiscal Year 2025-2026
Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied.

CDBG Program - Infrastructure: Stanislaus Urban County members will continue the use ofstate and other non HUD-federal funds (as they become available) as leverage for infrastructure projects. The County has set aside approximately $55.8 million in American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) funding to Community Infrastructure. The County’s West Modesto Project Area is one of the areas that will be receiving ARPA funds to assist with the installation of sewer lines and sewer connections. The County was awarded $5.6 million from the State Water Board for the West Modesto Project to be utilized in Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

CDBG Program - Public Services Grants: Leverage funding identified by applicant agencies awarded funding amounts to $5,089,650.

HOME Program - 25% Match Requirement: The Stanislaus HOME Consortium uses local funds, state funds, and program income from various funding sources as contributions to housing pursuant to HOME matching requirements.

ESG Program - 100% Match Requirement: Leverage funding identified by applicant agencies awarded funding identified utilizing CDBG, CoC funding, private donation, foundation funding, and in-kind as sources to meet the program match requirement. Fiscal Year 2025-2026 ESG (federal and state) allocations are expected to leverage approximately $1,254,986 in funding.

If appropriate, describe publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan.

Stanislaus County and the City of Ceres are the only Stanislaus HOME Consortium members with identified surplus lands within the Stanislaus Planning Area. County staff is currently researching the possibilities of developing affordable housing units at 18 South Abbie Street, located in the unincorporated community of Empire. The property is the former Empire Library site and is near the Empire Migrant Facility. The City of Ceres is exploring options for a vacant 0.17-acre lot at the northwest corner of Arthur Way and Hollister Street. The vacant property is the former site of a city well which was removed and could be used for residential development.

Space below intentionally left blank.
15 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan AP-20 ANNUAL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Goals and Summary Information
Sort
Order
Goal Name Start
Year
End
Year
Category Needs Addressed Funding GoalOutcome
Indicator
1 Improve Public
Infrastructure and
Facilities
2025 2029 Non-Housing
Community
Development
Public Infrastructure
Improvement
CDBG: $1,519,006 Households: 500
2 Provide and Ensure Access to
Essential Public Services
2025 2026 Non-Homeless Special
Needs
Public Services CDBG: $325,000 Persons: 1,200
3 Work to Address, Prevent and
Mitigate Homelessness
2025 2027 Homeless Homeless Services
Public Services
ESG: $189,834 Persons:350
4 Support Affordable Housing
and Promote Accessible
Housing Options
2025 2029 Affordable Housing Affordable Housing HOME: $1,136,446 Households: 10 5 Administration 2025 2026 Administration Public Infrastructure Improvement
Homeless Services
Public Services
Affordable Housing
CDBG: $461,002
ESG: $15,391
HOME: $126,272
Other: 1
Space below intentionally left blank.
16 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Goal Description
1 Goal Name Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilities Goal Description Provide infrastructure improvements and facility projects in income-qualified residential neighborhoods lacking sewer, water, orstormwatersystems, or where infrastructure exists but is in need of repair. 2 Goal Name Provide and Ensure Access to Essential Public Services Goal Description Projects and activities under this goal may support organizations that offer services such as educational programs, food boxes, health care services, and economic development. 3 Goal Name Work to Address, Prevent, and Mitigate Homelessness Goal Description Projects under this goal will support organizations providing homeless prevention services and shelter services for those individuals or families experiencing homelessness, including emergency shelters, and rapid re-housing. 4 Goal Name Support Affordable Housing and Promote Accessible Housing Options Goal Description Housing improvements for those persons with disabilities and projects that may consist of rehabilitation or development of affordable housing units for either renters or homeowners. 5 Goal Name Administration
Goal Description Administration for CDBG, ESG, and HOME programs.

Space below intentionally left blank.
17 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan AP-35 PROJECTS
Introduction
As shown in the previous secti n, AP-20 Annual Goals and Objecti es, the Stanislaus HOME Consorum have identifie goals to address housing and community development needs that both enti es will work towards achieving in Fiscal Year 2025-2026. Below are the proposed projects to be funded with FY 2025-2026 federal funding from the CDBG, ESG, and HOME programs.

The project listi g below includes the proposed CDBG projects and administration for the Stanislaus Urban County members according to their respecve allocaon.

The proposed HOME programs include the County’s administration of the program and housing programs that will be made available to Stanislaus HOME Consorum members. Annually, HOME allocaons are distributed amount the Consorum members and Consorum members are given six months from the beginning of each scal year to propose projects using their HOME allocation. If no feasible project is proposed and approved by the County, the HOME funds will return to the County for reallocatio to an approved project in the AAP.

Stanislaus Urban County
# Project Name

1. Stanislaus County - CDBG Program Administraon FY 25-26 (CDBG)

2. Stanislaus County - West Modesto Sewer Infrastructure Project FY 25-26 (CDBG)

3. Stanislaus County - Tenant/Landlord Services FY 25-26 (CDBG)

4. City of Ceres - CDBG Project Acvity Delivery FY 25-26 (CDBG)

5. City of Ceres - Morrow Village ADA Improvements Phase 3 (4 Phases) FY 25-26 (CDBG)

6. City of Hughson - CDBG Project Acvity Delivery FY 25-26 (CDBG)

7. City of Hughson – Second Street (Phase 2) Infrastructure Project FY 25-26 (CDBG)

8. City of Newman - CDBG Project Acvity Delivery FY 25-26 (CDBG)

9. City of Newman - Steff nsen/Sunshine Park Area Improvement Project FY 25-26 (CDBG)

10. City of Oakdale - CDBG Project Acvity Delivery FY 25-26 (CDBG)

11. City of Oakdale – Southwest Downtown Safe Routes to School Project FY 25-26 (CDBG)

12. City of Paerson - CDBG Project Acvity Delivery FY 25-26 (CDBG)

13. City of Paerson – Apricot Estates Improvements Project FY 25-26 (CDBG)

14. City of Paerson – E Street & 9th Street Water Improvements Project FY 25-26 (CDBG)

15. City of Riverbank - CDBG Project Acvity Delivery FY 25-26 (CDBG)

16. City of Riverbank – Texas Avenue Sewer Improvements Project FY 25-26 (CDBG)

17. City of Riverbank – 7
th Street Water Line Installa
on Project FY 25-26 (CDBG)

18. City of Waterford - CDBG Project Acvity Delivery FY 25-26 (CDBG)

19. City of Waterford – G Street Pedestrian Improvements Project FY 25-26 (CDBG)

20. Stanislaus County – CDBG Public Services Program FY 25-26 (CDBG-PSG)

21. Stanislaus County – Emergency Soluons Grants (ESG) Program FY 25-26 18 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Stanislaus HOME Consortium
# Project Name

1. Stanislaus County - HOME Program Administraon FY 25-26 (HOME)

2. Stanislaus County – Community Housing Development Organizaon (CHDO) FY 25-26 (HOME)

3. Stanislaus County – Consorti m Aff rdable Housing Program FY 25-26 (HOME)

4. Stanislaus County – Housing Rehabilitati n Program FY 25-26 (HOME) Describe the reasons for allocation priorities and any obstacles to addressing underserved needs:

The following are three specifi HUD goals for the CDBG program:
• Provide decent housing;
• Provide a suitable living environment; and
• Expand economic opportunities.

HOME funds may be used for a variety of aordable housing acvies that generally fall into the four categories:
• Rehabilitation of owner-occupied housing;
• Assistance to homebuyers;
• Acquisition, rehabilitation, or construction of rental housing; and • Tenant-based rental assistance.

The 2025-2026 Consolidated Plan identifies the following Priority Needs for the Stanislaus HOME Consortium:
• Public infrastructure and facility improvements;
• Affordable housing;
• Community and economic development;
• Public services;
• Homeless services; and
• Community emergency responses.

These priority needs take into account the Consolidated Plan Needs Assessment and MarketAnalysis data and are reflected in the projects identified above.

Obstacles in addressing underserved needs are:
• A lack of available funds and resources; and
• The constraints and restrictions of the funding programs requirements.

Space below intentionally left blank.
19 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan AP-38 PROJECT SUMMARY
Stanislaus Urban County

1. Stanislaus County-CDBG Program Administration FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Paerson, Riverbank, Waterford, and Unincorporated Stanislaus County
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilitie Provide and Ensure Access to Essenti l Public Services
Work to Address, Prevent and Migate Homelessness
Support Aordable Housing and Promote Accessible Housing Opons Administratio
Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure and Facility Improvement Aordable Housing
Community and Economic Development
Public Services
Homeless Services
Funding: CDBG - $401,002
Description: Stanislaus County will provide management and administration services to the Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium member Cities. The funds will cover the costs of staff, publications, public notices, and other eligible costs directly related to the CDBG program.

These funds will also cover administration costs incurred from managing the ESG and HOME program (costs incurred in excess of ESG and HOME administration funds).

National Objective: N/A
Matrix Code: 21A
Target Date: 6/30/2026
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• N/A
Location Description: 1010 10th Street, Suite 3400, Modesto, CA 95354 Planned Activities: Administration of CDBG, ESG and HOME programs, and projects for FY 25-26 20 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

2. Stanislaus County-West Modesto Sewer Infrastructure Project FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Unincorporated Stanislaus County
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilitie Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Funding: CDBG - $325,632
Description: This project will install sanitary sewer mains and laterals in three separate unincorporated neighborhoods within West Modesto in Stanislaus County. It is estimated that the project will include the installation of up to 80,000 linear feet of gravity mains and approximately 1,004 new house laterals in the Spencer/Marshall (144 services), Beverly/Waverly (527 services), and Rouse/Colorado (333 services) neighborhoods. The Spencer/Marshall neighborhood is located approximately 0.3 miles west of Highway 99 and is accessible from State Route 132 and Spencer Avenue. The Beverly/Waverly neighborhood is located approximately

0.9 miles west of Highway 99 and is accessible from Paradise Road. The Rouse/Colorado neighborhood is located approximately 0.6 miles west of Highway 99 and is accessible from Tuolumne Boulevard and Roselawn Avenue. The project may include target areas for sidewalks pending available funding and environmental review.

The targeted neighborhoods are disadvantaged communities located in West Modesto with predominantly residential parcels that currently rely on septic tanks for the treatment of sewage. The project is proposed in response to health and safety concerns associated with failing septic systems which could lead to the degradation of groundwater quality. The complete project will allow property owners to abandon their existing septic tanks and connect to the public sewer system. The new sewer infrastructure will connect into the City of Modesto’s existing public sewer system. Upon completion of the project, infrastructure ownership will be transferred to the City of Modesto for operation and maintenance.

National Objective: LMA
Matrix Code: 03J
Presumed Benefit: No
Objective: Address the need for infrastructure improvements in the low-income residential area of unincorporated West Modesto.
21 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Performance Outcomes:
• Number of households with access to infrastructure: 1,004 • Number of residents impacted by infrastructure: 3,000 Target Date: 6/30/2030
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• 1,004 Households
• 3,000 Individuals
Location Description: 1010 10th Street, Suite 3400, Modesto, CA 95354 Planned Activities: FY 25-26 Acvies include design, engineering, and construcon of sewer infrastructure and related infrastructure improvements to the West Modesto Neighborhoods of:
• Spencer/Marshall - Proposed boundary area includes Maze Boulevard, Spencer Avenue, California Avenue, Briggs Ditch, and Spruce Street (3 Activities/Phases).
• Beverly/Waverly - Proposed boundary area includes Chicago Avenue, Ellen Avenue, Paradise Road, Ritsch Lane, Wade Avenue, and Ohio Avenue (2 Activities/Phases).
• Rouse/Colorado - Proposed boundary area includes between Sutter and Sunset Avenues, south of South Avenue, and north of Garden Avenue (2 Activities/Phases).

3. Stanislaus County-Tenant/Landlord Services FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Paerson, Riverbank, Waterford, and Unincorporated Stanislaus County
Goals Supported: Provide and Ensure Access to Essenti l Public Services Needs Addressed: Aordable Housing
Funding: CDBG - $25,000
Description: Stanislaus County will release a NOFA for CDBG Public Services to search for an eligible service provider and will contract with a housing service provider that is a HUD certified housing agency, to carry out tenant – landlord services. Funds will be used to provide housing counseling and tenant/landlord mediation services to residents of the Stanislaus Urban County.

National Objective: N/A
22 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Matrix Code: 21D
Presumed Benefit: To Be Determined-Pending NOFA
Objective: Address the need to assist residents with housing issues and to provide housing counseling.

Performance Outcomes: Pending release of a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) Target Date: 6/30/2026
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• To Be Determined-Pending NOFA
Location Description: Pending release of a Noti e of Funding Availability (NOFA) Planned Activities: Stanislaus County will contract with HUD certi ed housing agency to carry out housing counseling and/or tenant landlord services. Funds will be used to provide housing informaon, housing counseling and tenant/landlord mediatio services to residents of the Stanislaus Urban County.

4. City of Ceres-CDBG Project Acvity Delivery FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Ceres
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilities Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Affordable Housing
Economic Development
Public Services
Homeless Services
Funding: CDBG - $5,000
Description: This expenditure includes costs directly associated with implementing and managing CDBG projects.

National Objective: N/A
Matrix Code: 21A
Target Date: 6/30/2026
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• N/A
23 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Location Description: 2720 2nd Street, Ceres, CA 95307
Planned Activities: Project activi y delivery costs related to CDBG projects for the City of Ceres in FY 25-26.

5. City of Ceres-Morrow Village ADA Improvements Phase 3 (4 Phases) FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Ceres
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilies Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Funding: CDBG - $210,620
Description: The project has four phases and will provide sidewalk, installation of curb and gutter on Morrow Avenue. The project is located in the City of Ceres, on Eloise Avenue from Garrison Street to Joy Avenue, in the Morrow Village Subdivision. Project will be phased out and costs include design, engineering, and construction.

National Objective: LMA
Matrix Code: 03L
Presumed Benefit: No
Objective: Address the need for infrastructure improvements in the low-income residential area of Ceres.

Performance Outcomes:
• Number of households with access to infrastructure improvements: 70 • Number of residents impacted by infrastructure improvement: 250 Target Date: 6/30/2030
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• 70
Location Description: 2720 2nd Street, Ceres, CA 95307
Planned Activities: Infrastructure Improvements
24 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

6. City of Hughson-CDBG Project Acvity Delivery FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Hughson
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilities Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Affordable Housing
Economic Development
Homeless Services
Funding: CDBG - $5,000
Description: This expenditure includes costs directly associated with implementing and managing CDBG projects.

National Objective: N/A
Matrix Code: 21A
Target Date: 6/30/2026
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• N/A
Location Description: 7018 Pine Street, Hughson, CA 95326 Planned Activities: Project activi y delivery costs related to CDBG projects for the City of Hughson in FY 25-26.

7. City of Hughson-Second Street (Phase 2) Infrastructure Project FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Hughson
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilitie Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Funding: CDBG - $155,000
Description: The project includes the installation of curb, gutter, sidewalk infill, and ADA improvements. The project is part of a multi-year effort to complete sidewalk projects to improve connectivity, mobility, and access for pedestrians. The project area is located along 2nd Street from Santa Fe Avenue to Locust Street. The project will be phased out and costs include design, engineering, and construction.

National Objective: LMA
25 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Matrix Code: 03K
Presumed Benefit: No
Objective: Address the need for infrastructure improvements in the low-income residential area of Hughson.

Performance Outcomes:
• Number of households with access to infrastructure improvements: 50 • Number of residents impacted by infrastructure improvement: 100 Target Date: 6/30/2030
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• 100 individuals
• 50 households
Location Description: 7018 Pine Street, Hughson, CA 95326 Planned Activities: Infrastructure Improvements

8. City of Newman-CDBG Project Acvity Delivery FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Newman
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilities Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Affordable Housing
Economic Development
Public Services
Homeless Services
Funding: CDBG - $5,000
Description: This expenditure includes costs directly associated with implementing and managing CDBG projects.

National Objective: N/A
Matrix Code: 21A
Target Date: 6/30/2025
26 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• N/A
Location Description: 1162 Main Street, Newman, CA 95360 Planned Activities: Project activi y delivery costs related to CDBG projects for the City of Newman in FY 25-26.

9. City of Newman – Steensen-Sunshine Park Area Improvements FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Newman
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilitie Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Funding: CDBG - $141,700
Description: This project is to improve sidewalks, curbs, lights and make ADA improvements within the residenti l area surrounding the community park. The project will be phased out and costs include design, engineering, and construcon.

National Objective: LMA
Matrix Code: 03F
Presumed Benefit: No
Objective: Address the need for infrastructure improvements in the low-income residential area of Newman.

Performance Outcomes:
• Number of households with access to infrastructure improvements: 200 • Number of residents impacted by infrastructure improvement: 510 Target Date: 6/30/2030
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• 510 Individuals
• 200 Households
Location Description: 1162 Main Street, Newman, CA 95360 Planned Activities: Infrastructure Improvements
27 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

10. City of Oakdale – CDBG Project Acvity Delivery FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Oakdale
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilitie Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Aordable Housing
Economic Development
Public Services
Homeless Services
Funding: CDBG - $5,000
Description: This expenditure includes costs directly associated with implementi g and managing CDBG projects.

National Objective: N/A
Matrix Code: 21A
Target Date: 6/30/2026
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• N/A
Location Description: 280 N. 3rd Avenue, Oakdale, CA 95361 Planned Activities: Project activi y delivery costs related to CDBG projects for the City of Oakdale in FY 25-26.

11. City of Oakdale – Southwest Downtown Safe Routes to School Project FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Oakdale
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilies Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Funding: CDBG - $160,813
Description: The project (formerly named the South First, Second and Third Street Improvements Project) will provide bike, pedestrian and ADA improvements for the area of South First, South Second, South Third Avenues from West G to West J Street (including East H and East I Streets from south First Avenue to South Yosemite Avenue. The project will be phased out and costs include design, engineering and construcon. 28 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan National Objective: LMA
Matrix Code: 03L
Presumed Benefit: No
National Objective: Address the need for infrastructure improvements in the low-income residenti l area of Oakdale.

Performance Outcomes:
• Number of households with access to infrastructure improvements: 150 • Number of residents impacted by infrastructure improvement: 525 Target Date: 6/30/2030
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• 525 Individuals
• 150 Households
Location Description: 280 N. 3rd Street, Oakdale, CA 95361 Planned Activities: Infrastructure Improvements

12. City of Paerson – CDBG Project Activi y Delivery FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Paerson
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilies Provide and Ensure Access to Essenti l Public Services
Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Aordable Housing
Economic Development
Public Services
Homeless Services
Funding: CDBG - $5,000
Description: This expenditure includes costs directly associated with implementi g and managing CDBG projects.

National Objective: N/A
Matrix Code: 21A
Target Date: 6/30/2026
29 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• N/A
Location Description: 1 Plaza, Paerson, CA 95363
Planned Activities: Project activi y delivery costs related to CDBG projects for the City of Paerson in FY 25-26.

13. City of Paerson – Apricot Estates Improvements Project FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Paerson
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilitie Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Funding: CDBG - $100,000
Description: This project includes the installation of curb, guer, sidewalk, the installation of streetlights and installation of 33 ADA compliant curb ramps. The project will be mul-phased, and costs include design, engineering, and construcon.

National Objective: LMA
Matrix Code: 03K
Presumed Benefit: No
Objective: Address the need for infrastructure improvements in the low-income residenti l area of Paerson.

Performance Outcomes:
• Number of households with access to infrastructure improvements: 140 • Number of residents impacted by infrastructure improvements: 420 Target Date: 6/30/2030
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• 420 Individuals
• 140 Households
Location Description: 1 Plaza, Paerson, CA 95363
Planned Activities: Infrastructure Improvements
30 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

14. City of Paerson – E Street and 9th Street Project FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Paerson
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilitie Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Funding: CDBG - $73,636
Description: The project consists of the design and replacement of waterlines and water service lines to numerous properties in the E Street neighborhood.

The project includes the replacement of an estimated 17,750 linear feet of existing water pipes of various sizes, and the installation of an estimated 1,000 feet of new water pipes in various sizes. The 9th Street portion of the project includes the reconstruction of 9th Street between Las Palmas and Sperry Avenues. Four existing ADA ramps and two driveways will be removed and replaced to meet ADA standards. The project will be mul-phased and costs include design, engineering, and construcon.

National Objective: LMA
Matrix Code: 03K
Presumed Benefit: No
Objective: Address the need for infrastructure improvements in the low-income residenti l area of Paerson.

Performance Outcomes:
• Number of households with access to infrastructure improvements: 80 • Number of residents impacted by infrastructure improvements: 280 Target Date: 6/30/2030
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• 280 Individuals
• 80 Households
Location Description: 1 Plaza, Paerson, CA 95363
Planned Activities: Infrastructure Improvements
31 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

15. City of Riverbank – CDBG Project Activi y Delivery FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Riverbank
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilitie Provide and Ensure Access to Essenti l Public Services
Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Aordable Housing
Economic Development
Public Services
Homeless Services
Funding: CDBG - $5,000
Description: This expenditure includes costs directly associated with implementi g and managing CDBG projects.

National Objective: N/A
Matrix Code: 21A
Target Date: 6/30/2026
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• N/A
Location Description: 6707 3rd Street, Riverbank, CA 95367 Planned Activities: Project activi y delivery costs related to CDBG projects for the City of Riverbank in FY 25-26.

16. City of Riverbank – Texas Avenue Sewer Improvements Project FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Riverbank
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilitie Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Funding: CDBG – $100,000
Description: The project consists of the replacement of sewer infrastructure within 20 feet alleys and a 50 feet street at the following locations on Texas Ave., between Kansas Ave alley from 8th Street to Chief Tucker Avenue; and on Texas Ave between Terminal Avenue to 8th Street. The project consists of approximately 1,925 linear feet of sewer line replacement, all six inch sewer lines will be removed and replaced with eight inch sewer line, 32 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan including reconnecon of approximately 53 sewer laterals. This is a mul- year project that will be phased based on funding availability and will include design, engineering, and constructi n costs.

National Objective: LMA
Matrix Code: 03J
Presumed Benefit: No
Objective: Improve health and safety issues for residents in conformance with the City of Riverbank adopted General Plan.

Performance Outcomes:
• Number of households with access to infrastructure improvements: 35 • Number of residents impacted by infrastructure improvement: 105 Target Date: 9/30/2028
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• 1,838 Individuals
• 525 Households
Location Description: 6707 3rd Street, Riverbank, CA 95367 Planned Activities: Infrastructure Improvements

17. City of Riverbank – 7
th Street Waterline Installation F 25-26 (CDBG)
Target Area(s): Riverbank
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilitie Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Funding: CDBG – $37,062
Description: The project will include the installaon of approximately 350 linear feet of an eight inch water line and the connecon of water services/sewer laterals. The project is located from Nevada Street to Arizona Street. This is a mul-year project that will be phased based on funding availability and will include design, engineering, and constructi n costs.

National Objective: LMA
Matrix Code: 03JI
33 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Presumed Benefit: No
Objective: Improve health and safety issues for residents in conformance with the City of Riverbank adopted General Plan.

Performance Outcomes:
• Number of households with access to infrastructure improvements: 20 • Number of residents impacted by infrastructure improvement: 75 Target Date: 6/30/2030
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• 75 Individuals
• 20 Households
Location Description: 6707 3rd Street, Riverbank, CA 95367 Planned Activities: Infrastructure Improvements

18. City of Waterford – CDBG Project Activi y Delivery FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Waterford
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilitie Provide and Ensure Access to Essenti l Public Services
Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Aordable Housing
Economic Development
Public Services
Homeless Services
Funding: CDBG - $5,000
Description: This expenditure includes costs directly associated with implementi g and managing CDBG projects.

National Objective: N/A
Matrix Code: 21A
Target Date: 6/30/2026
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• N/A
34 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Location Description: 101 E Street, Waterford, CA 95386 Planned Activities: Project activi y delivery costs related to CDBG projects for the City of Waterford in FY 25-26.

19. City of Waterford – G Street Pedestrian Improvements Project FY 25-26 (CDBG) Target Area(s): Waterford
Goals Supported: Improve Public Infrastructure and Facilitie Needs Addressed: Public Infrastructure Improvement
Funding: CDBG - $214,543
Description: The project includes frontage improvements, curb, guer, and ADA ramps along the east side of G Street, from Bentley to Dorsey. The project costs include design, engineering and construcon.

National Objective: LMA
Matrix Code: 03I
Presumed Benefit: No
Objective: Address the need for infrastructure improvements in the low-income residenti l area of Waterford.

Performance Outcomes:
• Number of households with access to infrastructure improvements: 30 • Number of residents impacted by infrastructure improvement: 90 Target Date: 6/30/2026
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• 90 Individuals
• 30 Households
Location Description: 101 E Street, Waterford, CA 95386 Planned Activities: Infrastructure Improvements

20. Stanislaus County – CDBG Public Services FY 25-26 (CDBG-PSG) Target Area(s): Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Paerson, Riverbank, Waterford, and Unincorporated Stanislaus County
35 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Goals Supported: Provide and Ensure Access to Essenti l Public Services Work to Address, Prevent and Migate Homelessness
Needs Addressed: Public Services
Funding: CDBG - $325,000
Description: Stanislaus County will release a Noti e of Funding Availability (NOFA) for Public Services based on the adopted Consolidated Plan’s prioritie in May 2025. Eligible service providers will be ranked by a Grant Review Panel consisti g of representati es of the Stanislaus Urban County.

Maximum grant amount will be $35,000 and the highest-ranking service providers will be funded.

National Objective: N/A
Matrix Code: N/A
Presumed Benefit: N/A
Objective: To Be Determined-Pending NOFA
Performance Outcomes: To Be Determined – Pending NOFA
Target Date: 6/30/2026
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• To Be Determined – Pending NOFA
Location Description: 1010 10th Street, Suite #3400, Modesto, CA 95354 Planned Activities: To Be Determined – Pending NOFA

21. Stanislaus County – Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) Program FY 25-26 Target Area(s): Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Paerson, Riverbank, Waterford, and surrounding Unincorporated Stanislaus County
Goals Supported: Work to Address, Prevent and Mitigate Homelessness Needs Addressed: Homeless Services
Funding: ESG - $205,225
Description: Stanislaus County will release a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for ESG funds based on the adopted Consolidated Plan’s priorities in May 2025. Eligible service providers will be ranked by a Grant Review Panel consisting of representatives of the
36 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Target Date: 6/30/2027
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities:
• To Be Determined-Pending NOFA
Location Description: 1010 10th Street, Suite #3400, Modesto, CA 95354 Planned Activities: Shelter, Homeless Services, Rental Assistance and Case Management Stanislaus HOME Consortium

1. Stanislaus County – HOME Program Administration F 25-26 (HOME) Target Area(s): Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Paerson, Riverbank, Turlock, Waterford, and surrounding Unincorporated Stanislaus County Goals Supported: Administratio
Needs Addressed: Aordable Housing
Funding: HOME: $126,272
Description: Stanislaus County will provide management and administration services to the Stanislaus HOME Consorum member jurisdicons. The funds will cover the costs of salary, publications, public notices, and other eligible costs directly related to the program.

Target Date: 6/30/2027
Performance Outcomes: N/A
Location Description: Stanislaus Planning Area
Planned Activities: Program Administratio

2. Stanislaus County – Community Housing Development Organizatio (CHDO) FY 25-26 (HOME) Target Area(s): Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Paerson, Riverbank, Turlock, Waterford, and surrounding Unincorporated Stanislaus County Goals Supported: Support Aordable Housing and Promote Accessible Housing Opons Needs Addressed: Aordable Housing
Funding: HOME: $189,408
37 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Description: Funding will be made available to eligible CHDOs to acquire and or develop aordable housing (Housing development activiti Regulatory Citation 92.205).

Target Date: 6/30/2027
Performance Outcomes:
• Number of households: 1 to 5
Location Description: Stanislaus Planning Area
Planned Activities: CHDO project.

3. Stanislaus County – Consorti m Aordable Housing Program FY 25-26 (HOME) Target Area(s): Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Paerson, Riverbank, Turlock, Waterford, and surrounding Unincorporated Stanislaus County Goals Supported: Support Aordable Housing and Promote Accessible Housing Opons Needs Addressed: Aordable Housing
Funding: HOME: $473,519
Description: Acquisition, development, and/or rehabilitaon of property for the development of aordable rental housing to income eligible clients.

Properti s may be transferred to non-prot agencies to provide property management services. Project activi y may include the purchase of affordability covenants on existi g residenti l units (Regulatory Citaon:

92.205).

Target Date: 6/30/2027
Performance Outcomes:
• Number of households: 5
Location Description: Stanislaus Planning Area
Planned Activities: Acquisition, development and/or rehabilitation of property for the development of aordable housing.

4. Stanislaus County – Housing Rehabilitation Program FY 25-26 (HOME) Target Area(s): Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Paerson, Riverbank, Turlock, Waterford, and surrounding Unincorporated Stanislaus County 38 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Goals Supported: Support Aordable Housing and Promote Accessible Housing Opons Needs Addressed: Aordable Housing
Funding: HOME: $473,519
Description: Rehabilitation of owner-occupied units. The Stanislaus HOME Consorum will oer loans and grants to maintain single-family aordable housing stock for low to moderate income
households/individuals. The program serves as a way to preserve and maintain aordable through the rehabilitaon of existi g housing (Regulatory Citation 92.205). The project costs will include rehabilitaon (materials and labor) and project delivery costs.

Target Date: 6/30/2027
Performance Outcomes:
• Number of households: 5
Location Description: Stanislaus Planning Area
Planned Activities: Consorum wide housing rehabilitation for both owner and renter occupied units.

Space below intentionally left blank.
39 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan AP-50 GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION
Description of the geographic areas of the entitlement (including areas of low-income and minority concentration) where assistance will be directed:

The Stanislaus Urban County is comprised of the geographical boundaries of the cities of Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson, Riverbank, Waterford, and unincorporated Stanislaus County. The Stanislaus Urban County with the geographical boundaries of the City of Turlock form the Stanislaus Home Consortium. Together, the Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium comprise the Stanislaus Planning Area. Assistance will be targeted throughout the Stanislaus Planning Area.

A requirement ofthe CDBGprogramisto benefitthosemembers ofthe population thatmeetthe definition of a Targeted Income. An example of a Targeted Income person is one who earns 80% or less of the Area Medium Income (AMI) for CDBG funds, and 30% or less than the AMI for ESG funds. Additionally, if a project benefits a specific neighborhood or community, at least 51% of the population within that geography boundary must be within the Targeted Income Group (TIG).

Approximately 15% of the Stanislaus Urban County’s CDBG entitlement allocation is designated underthe CDBG “Public Services” program. The CDBG Public Services program provides funds to nonprofit organizations, through a competitive application process, to provide essential public service programs throughout the participating Stanislaus Urban County member jurisdictions.

The remaining funds are distributed among the Stanislaus Urban County members, via a formula that represents poverty and population census data, to address community infrastructure needs. These needs may include, but are not limited to, sewer infrastructure, storm drainage, and sidewalk infill projects. Use of CDBG funds to address infrastructure improvements needs assists in efforts to improve the quality of life by promoting safe and healthy communities.

The eligibility of households for HOME assistance varies with the nature of the funded activity. For rental housing and rental assistance, at least 90 percent of benefiting families must have incomes that are no more than 60 percent of the HUD-adjusted median household income forthe area. In rental projects with five or more assisted units, at least 20% of the units must be occupied by families with incomes that do not exceed 50% of the HUD-adjusted median. The incomes of households receiving HUD assistance must not exceed 80 percent of the area median.

Approximately 15% of the Stanislaus HOME Consortium’s HOME entitlement allocation is required to be set-aside for eligible CHDOs to fund the acquisitionand/ordevelopment of affordable housing to be owned orrentedby income qualified families. The remaining funds will be allocated among Consortiummembers, based on a formula that takes into account the amount of HOME funds that a potential single consortium member jurisdiction might contribute to the overall HOME program based on HUDs HOME Consortium Builder Tool.

While funds will be annually allocated to each of the Stanislaus HOME Consortium member jurisdictions, the funds will be programed by Stanislaus County based on project prioritization and funding availability, with a goal of distributing the funding equitably throughout the Stanislaus Planning Area throughout the life of the Consortium and not simply on an annual basis. All member jurisdictions will be given the opportunity to propose projects using their HOME allocation, with a requirement that funding for the project(s) must be encumbered for use within six months of the beginning of each fiscal year.

Unencumbered funds will be utilized by Stanislaus County, as lead entity, in delivery of eligible housing 40 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan programs and projects. Programs and projects will be developed through the release of Requests for Proposals (RFP) for housing rehabilitation services, and general affordable housing projects for the entire Stanislaus HOME Consortium. Stanislaus County will retain an ongoing list of projects, developed from member jurisdiction proposed projects and an annual RFP (to be released to developers, realtors, and with others interested in participating in affordable housing development) seeking projects ready to be developed. The project list will be prioritized based on community need, project feasibility (i.e., funding, entitlements, design stage, etc.), time frame for full implementation, and geographical distribution of funding. All member jurisdictions will be involved in the review and prioritization of projects.

Rationale for the prioritiesfor allocation investments geographically.

Geographic Distribution – Percentage of Funds
CDBG funds allocated to the Stanislaus Urban County will be utilized for various programs including infrastructure improvements, public services, and fair housing. Some programs are funded collectively for the benefit of the entire Stanislaus Urban County, such as homeless and public services. Other programs are specific to individual member jurisdictions of the Stanislaus Urban County. Each member jurisdiction of the Stanislaus Urban County identifies the specific needs within its respective communities as a means to determine use of its specific allocation.

In selecting the infrastructure projects to be funded by CDBG, an assessment of the project areas below moderate-income requirements must be conducted. Project areas with a census tract not showing 51% of the population as being within the below moderate-income requirements are required to undergo a HUD approved Income Survey. For the current infrastructure projects currently proposed to be funded, only the County’s West Modesto Sewer Infrastructure Project meets the census threshold not requiring an Income Survey.

Target Area CDBG
West Modesto 14%
Ceres 9.4%
Hughson 6.9%
Newman 6.4%
Oakdale 7.2%
Patterson 7.7%
Riverbank 6.2%
Waterford 9.5%
Unincorporated
Stanislaus County

32.6%
Turlock N/A
41 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan The first neighborhood that the County will invest CDBG funds is the Rouse/Colorado Neighborhood is located approximately 0.6 mile west of Highway 99 and is accessible from Tuolumne Boulevard and Roselawn Avenue. The Rouse/Colorado Neighborhood is located in Census Tract 22, Block Groups 2, 3 and 4. The 2020 Census identified a median household income of $44,010 for Census Tract 22. Census Tract 22 is designated as a low- income area according to the HUD.

The second neighborhood that the County will invest CDBG funds in is the Beverly/Waverly Neighborhood is located approximately 0.9 miles west of Highway 99 and is accessible from Paradise Road. The Beverly/Waverly Neighborhood is located in Census Tract 16.03, Block Groups 1 and 2. The 2020 Census identified a median household income of $44,010 for Census Tract 22. Census Tract 22 is designated as a low- income area according to the HUD. The 2020 Census identified a county-wide median household income of $63,368 for Stanislaus County.

Due to the census tracts not showing that 51% of the population as being within the below moderateincome requirements, each of the Stanislaus Urban County member cities has conducted an Income Survey and analysis oftheirrespective project areas. Surveys have verified that aminimum of the residents living within each of the cities project areas are moderate and below the 80% HUD Area Medium Income (AMI) limit and, as such, are eligible for HUD funding:

Target Area Census Tracts
Ceres 25.01, block group 1; 25.02, block group 1 and 26.02, block group 1; 26.05, block group 2 Hughson 29.02, block group 3
Newman 34, block group 1
Oakdale 2.02, block group 1
Patterson 32.01, block group 1; 32.03, block group 2; 32.04, block group 1 and 32.05, block group 2
Riverbank 30.02, block group 1; 3.01, block group 2; 3.03, block group 1; 3.04, block group 1; and 4.06, block group 2
Waterford 28.02, block group 2
HOME funds are being proposed for the use of property acquisition, development, and rehabilitation.

Owner occupied housing rehabilitation will be funded collectively for the benefit of the entire Stanislaus HOME Consortium.

Space below intentionally left blank.
42 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan AP-55 AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Introduction
The tables in this section provide estimates, based on the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan planning process, on the number of homeless, non-homeless, and special needs households to be provided affordable housing during the programyear and the number of affordable unitsthatwill be providedby programtype, including rentalassistance,productionofnewunits,rehabilitationofexistingunits,oracquisitionofexisting units.

One Year Goals for the Number of Householdsto be Supported Homeless 0
Non-Homeless 10
Special-Needs 0
Total 10
One Year Goals for the Number of Households Supported Through Rental Assistance 0
The Production of New Units 0
Rehab of Existing Units 10
Acquisition of Existing Units 6
Total 16
Space below intentionally left blank.
43 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Discussion
The 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocations (2023-2031) for Stanislaus County shows that, to meet the coming housing needs, the following number of units for each tranche of incomes is needed:

Number of Units needed for each income bracket in jurisdictions (RHNA) Very Low
Income
(< 50% AMI)
Low Income
(50-80% AMI)
Moderate
Income (80-
120% AMI)
Above
Moderate
Income
(> 120% AMI)
Total
Stanislaus County
(unincorporated areas)
574 398 458 1,045 2,475
Turlock 1,305 903 1,960 2,498 5,802
Ceres 706 489 661 1,505 3,361
Hughson 284 196 122 279 881
Newman 197 136 218 497 1,048
Oakdale 414 286 294 671 1,665
Patterson 1,046 724 593 1,353 3,716
Riverbank 181 672 594 1,355 3,591
Waterford 107 74 115 261 557
Data Source: Stanislaus County, Turlock, Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson and Riverbank’s 6th Housing Elements 2023-2031
The type of housing currently available throughout the County is incongruent with the need, which indicates a demand for more affordable housing serving households earning 80% AMI or less.

The 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan identifies affordable housing as a Priority Need. In Fiscal Year 2025- 2026, the Stanislaus HOME Consortium will use funds available to address a variety of housing needs within the Stanislaus Planning Area.

Space below intentionally left blank.
44 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan AP-60 PUBLIC HOUSING
Introduction – Stanislaus Urban County
The Stanislaus HOME Consortium and the SRHA continue to have a close working relationship and meet on an as-needed basis to discuss concerns relevant to public housing and other housing matters. The Stanislaus HOME Consortiumwill continue toworkwiththe SRHAand other public and private housing and social service agencies to foster public housing improvements and resident initiatives.

Actions planned during the next year to address the needs to public housing:

The SRHA’s mission is committed to addressing the unmet housing needs of residents and communities in the county, consistent with Federal, State, and local law. The SRHA owns and operates public housing units in addition to operating the Housing Choice Voucher Program.

The SRHA operates conventional public housing units and operates several affordable housing programs in addition to Public Housing, including year-round Farm Labor Housing, Seasonal Migrant Farm Worker Housing, and several smaller affordable housing properties including units funded under the Neighborhood Stabilization Program and the Housing Choice Voucher Program. These affordable housing programs will continue to operate in the 2025-2026 program year.

The SRHA continues to work on increasing the stock of affordable housing in Stanislaus County through other available resources, programs, and partnerships as opportunities arise.

Actions to encourage public housing residents to become more involved in management and participate in homeownership:

The SRHA previously implemented a services and communication “quality control” system that provides the SRHA with immediate customer feedback and identifies areas that may need improvement. The SRHA has also implemented a resident education program with regularly scheduled meetings and written communications on agency policy, rules, and leases.

Efforts to improve communications with residents and program participants include: on site resident training/informational meetings, regular newsletters and flyers. The SRHA has implemented a “curbside” appearance program. The focus of the program is the exterior of buildings, parking areas, playgrounds and other areas of the complexes. Rodent and insect problems are addressed when residents report a problem and/or on Annual Inspections. In an effort to better educate residents concerning these problems, information is regularly provided through the SRHA newsletter. These actions have assisted the SRHA in creating an atmosphere which emphasizes customer satisfaction and communication.

Further, the SRHA has a Resident Advisory Board (RAB) which representsthe residents assisted by the agency.

The RAB assists in the development of the SRHA’s five-year Plan. Resident involvement will continue to be supported in an effort to enhance the service delivery by taking into account input from those with lived experience.

These actions have assisted the SRHA in creating an atmosphere which emphasizes customer satisfaction and communication.
45 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan If the PHA is designated astroubled, describe the manner in which financial assistance will be provided or other assistance:

The SRHA is not designated as a troubled Housing Authority.

Space below intentionally left blank.
46 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan AP-65 HOMELESS AND OTHER SPECIAL NEEDS ACTIVITIES
The Stanislaus Community System of Care (CSoC), the locally recognized CoC, is comprised of an elected Board and various sub-committees. The CoC Board is comprised of representatives from homeless advocates, community members, and service providers, as well as public and private sector agencies in the County. The CoC meets on a monthly basis to identify gaps and needs in homeless services and to pursue an overall systematic approach to address homelessness. Through regular attendance and participation in the CoC meetings, Stanislaus HOME Consortium members consult with the CoC to develop cooperative plans and strategiesto leverage resources to provide emergency shelter and rapid re-housing services, and is informed of changes in local goals, objectives and performance measures.

The recognition of homelessness as a social and economic issue is uniting service providers, businesses, the public, and private sectorsin achieving compliance with the HEARTH Act, adopting best practices to end chronic homelessness, and improving the system to rapidly re-house individuals and families.

The following are a few County-wide efforts that are not directly funded by HUD entitlements funds but contribute to the overall CoC:

Access Center Emergency Shelter (ACES)
The Access Center Emergency Shelter(ACES), a 182 bed, low-barriershelterfocused on providing shelter to the most vulnerable unsheltered population by decreasing common barriers to individuals accepting shelter service, such as, pets, partners, and possessions. ACES opened November 26, 2019 and is being operatedby the SalvationArmy throughanagreement approved by the Board of Supervisors on October 1, 2019. The Community Assessment Response and Engagement (CARE) Multidisciplinary Team is also able to use the location to provide case management and shelter to the most vulnerable unsheltered individuals. The opening of ACES also afforded an opportunity for the most vulnerable unsheltered population to be sheltered and connected with case management services, with a strong emphasis on assisting shelter guests to become document ready for entry into the community’s coordinated entry housing continuum. Additionally, Stanislaus County Animal Services Agency partnered with ACES to create a healthy pets program. This program provides pet food, crates, and animal health services to petsresiding at ACES.

Empire Cold Weather Family Shelter
The Empire Cold Weather Family Shelter was initiated in November 2018 as a partnership with the Stanislaus Regional Housing Authority. The target population served are families who are currently being case managed in the Community Service Agency’s (CSA) Housing Support Program (HSP) unit, have used all available temporary shelter nights, are still engaged in the search for permanent housing and have been unsheltered the longest based on date of referral to the HSP program.

CSA worksin partnership with Community Housing and Shelter Services(CHSS) for placement of families at the Empire Cold Weather Family Shelter and has an existing contract with CHSS to administer, arrange and facilitate temporary housing services to CalWORKs and Welfare-to-Work eligible families.

CHSS also provides case management services, which include assisting and educating participants on their income, household budgets, and housing options; aiding participants in completion of housing applications and landlord outreach; and providing housing search workshops. 47 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan CSA has staff on-site during standard business hours to work with the families and CHSS staff also is available to assistfamilies on a regularbasis. StanislausCountyAffordableHousingCorporation (STANCO) provides on-site property management services including security and routine maintenance of the facility and units.

Family Housing Facility
In coordination with the countywide strategy to address the critical issue of homelessness especially as it impacts families with school aged children, Stanislaus County leases a motel located at 1128 South 9th Street in Modesto. The property has 21 units and a three-room office space. In November 2019, CSA began using this site to operate a year-round family shelter using the model implemented at the Empire Cold Weather Family Shelter. The Family Housing Facility operates 24-hours a day; CSA has contracted with STANCO for property management and security services.

Access Center
On February 3, 2020, the Access Center, a “hub location” for multiple homeless programs and the entry way into the sheltersystem, opened at 912 D Street, Modesto, California. The Access Center serves as a one-stop hub and physical entry point for individuals at-risk of or currently experiencing homelessness to access a wide range of co-located homelessness servicesincluding centralized homeless outreach and engagement; housing assessments and navigation; and homelessness support services and referrals.

The Access Center also employs a “meet you where you are” strategy that has specialized homeless outreach workers meet individuals on the street and in homeless encampment areas and encourages individuals to connect to services.

The following partners are co-located at the Access Center - Center for Human Services; Community Housing and Shelter Services; Community Impact Central Valley; Disability Resource Agency for Independent Living; Downtown Streets Team Modesto; Golden Valley Health Centers; Salvation Army - Modesto; Stanislaus County (Behavioral Health and Recovery Services and Community Services Agency); Telecare Corporation and Turning Point Community Programs.

Homeless Strategic Plan
In 2021, the Stanislaus Homeless Alliance (SHA) and the CSoC collaborated to update the Regional Plan to address homelessness in Stanislaus County, originally prepared in January 2019. The updated plan, now referred to as the Homeless Strategic Plan (HSP), adopts a data-informed approach to addressing the needs of people experiencing homelessness by enhancing community decision-making, supporting organizational and provider capacity and improving systems coordination.

A work group formed for the update to the HSP continues to meet quarterly to discuss the goals in the HSP and provide the SHA and CSoC with updates on the progress made towards meeting plan goals.

Space below intentionally left blank.
48 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Describe the jurisdictions one-year goals and actionsforreducing and ending homelessness including:

Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs.

The Stanislaus Urban County and the City of Turlock a partner and stakeholder in the CoC, regularly attending CoC meetings and actively contributing to creating efficient processes. The CoC has become increasingly efficient in use of funds and allocation of non-financial resources with the implementation of a Coordinated Entry System (CES). A CES Task Force was formed and meets regularly to continually improve the system and ensure it is an effective tool. There are several service providers within the CoC that conduct street outreach throughout the County. Through Behavioral Health and Recovery Services (BHRS) and a collaboration of several other County departments, an Outreach and Engagement Center (OEC) was established in 2018. The OEC coordinates the provision of multiple services throughout the County for those experiencing homelessness. Teams of outreach workers go out five days a week to connect homeless individuals directly with benefits and services to engage those who may otherwise not seek assistance. The OEC also serves as a physical entry point for support through assessments and referrals and is open for walk-in access Monday through Friday.

Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons.

SheltersinStanislausCounty receive a combinationoffederal,state, local, private, andfoundation funding from a diversified stream of sources including: federal CoC, ESG (state and federal) and CDBG programs, community foundations, and others. In total, there are 12 shelters represented on the 2023 HUD Housing Inventory Count (HIC), including several for specific populations like youth, families, or adults.

There is a continued dedication to low-barrier, housing-focused shelters, to move those without a place to live into permanent housing, and clients from the We Care Program, Children’s Crisis Center, Community Housing and Shelter Services (CHSS), and Family Promise are able to receive rapid re-housing assistance to become stably housed.

Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again.

The CoC continues to hone-in on system processes and address gaps in the service delivery system to ensure that specific vulnerable sub-populations do not fall through the cracks. As the CoC partnerships grow and each entity becomes more understanding of their role as well as the roles of other agencies, the system will yield more effective results for those individuals and families that are experiencing homelessness. The Coordinated Entry System (CES) is an effective tool in minimizing the number of days someone experiences homelessness.

The delivery of wrap-around services is critical to the long-term success of those individuals and families that have experienced homelessness but are now housed. Through the CoC, there are housing supportive services made available, offering financial assistance, security deposits, legal services, credit repair, utility payments, counseling, among others. It is understood by the CoC and its partners that the end goal is not to simply find housing, but to maintain stable housing. 49 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Agencies that are funded through the Stanislaus Urban County’s ESG program are required to participate in the planning and ongoing development of the CES. ESG sub-grantees must participate in the client referralsystem aslong as it does not place any additional housing barriers on the client, cause a financial burden on the agency and compromises their other funding sources. Some of the larger agencies within the County that provide resources for homeless individuals and families include: We Care ProgramTurlock, Family Promise of Greater Modesto, The Salvation Army, Children’s Crisis Center, Naomi’s House, and the Modesto Gospel Mission. Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living is an overall goal of the CoC.

The Stanislaus Urban County works with the CoC towards this goal by funding programs with ESG funds that aim to shorten the period of time that individuals and families experiences homelessness, facilitate access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and prevent individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again. The Stanislaus Urban County’s homeless strategy also places a high priority on providing rental assistance, housing relocation and stabilization services to persons and households experiencing homelessness.

Helping low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely lowincome individuals and families and those who are: being discharged from publicly funded institutions and systems of care (such as health care facilities, mental health facilities, foster care and other youth facilities, and corrections programs and institutions); or, receiving assistance from public or private agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education, or youth needs.

The Plan to address homelessness in Stanislaus County identifies discharge planning as a key part of the strategy in addressing homelessness throughout the County moving forward. Acknowledging that further collaboration among public institutions and other community system of care providers needs to occur so that no individual or family is discharged into homelessness, the CoC continues to work on these issues through awareness campaigns and coordinated efforts to align services and resources among CoC partners.

Local health care facilities have specific protocol in place requiring a safe discharge for all patients. The County’s Public Health Agency established a task force to review the current protocol in place and address any gaps in services necessary to ensure successful discharge planning services. Currently in place there are discharge planning social workers on staff at the hospitals who work with service providers to locate appropriate housing that could include HUD McKinney-Vento funded emergency shelters, transitional or permanent housing units and prevent the release of patients to the streets. For adults recently released from custody, the County addresses housing issues through the Day Reporting Center (DRC). The Sheriff’s Department conducts Probation Orientation meetings at the DRC in which several programs have participated in the pastincluding Solidarity, Teen Life Challenge, and Modesto Gospel Mission.

As a result of the CoC’s coordination with the Probation Department and the Sheriff’s Office, a diversion program has been established. The diversion program helps homeless who would otherwise be jailed for minor crimes stay at the Salvation Army shelter facility, where they receive overnight shelter and case management services. The County has transitional living procedures in place for juveniles exiting foster care to address youth in placement where the long-term plan is emancipation. These procedures are required by both the State and Federal governments. The County develops a 90-day transition plan that includes a housing component. A lead officer received a list of those eligible minors from the case officers and works with the case officer, minor, family, and any services providers to develop the plan prior to the minor’s last status review (usually at 18 years old). A status review is a court hearing to review the minor’s status in placement. The plans are submitted to the court and all involved parties, including the minor. 50 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan AP-75 BARRIERS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Introduction – Stanislaus Urban County
The Stanislaus HOME Consortium will work to provide affordable housing opportunities with a focus on maintaining existing affordable housing opportunities (housing rehabilitation) and the development of new affordable housing units. One of the main barriers to affordable housing, both rental and homeownership, has been the lack of affordable housing units. In its efforts to expanding the inventory of housing units, the Stanislaus HOME Consortium will utilize its funding in support of the strategies identifies in the county-wide initiative, Housing Stanislaus, undertaken by Stanislaus County with an aim at building a shared vision and policy framework for housing in Stanislaus County: https://housingstanislaus.org/.

While many of the barriers to housing development are outside of the Stanislaus HOME Consortium’s direct control, the individual member jurisdictions can work together to collectively address the barriers through the development and implementation of their respective Housing Elements, the 6th cycle update is currently underway for all member jurisdictions, which requires all governments to adequately plan to meet the housing needs of everyone in the community. Housing Elements include an assessment of housing needs, identify constraints, provide for a sites inventory, and include a housing plan with goals, objectives, and policies to maintain, preserve, improve, and develop housing.

HOME funds provide a much-needed contribution to the gap in the funding stream needed to undertake meaningful action to address affordable housing.

Collectively the members of the Stanislaus HOME Consortium will leverage available funding for the development of affordable housing projects throughout Stanislaus County and will support efforts to create access to capital needed to increase housing development and improve housing affordability in Stanislaus County.

Actions it planned to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to affordable housing such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land,zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges, growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential investment.

Potential constraints to housing development vary by area throughout the Stanislaus Planning Area, but generally include cost of infrastructure, residential development fees, development standards, land use entitlement processing times, and limited funding for affordable housing development. Barriers to housing also include personal barriers such as poor credit history, involvement with the law, limited knowledge about tenants’ rights and the complaints process.

Development Process
To expedite project facilitation and provide internal support to project applicants, the Stanislaus HOME Consortium will continue to undertake efforts to build relationships with the development community to identify the barriers and constraints to the development of affordable housing to identify public/private partnership opportunities for the development of affordable housing. a variety of housing including but not limited to affordable housing.
51 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Fee Structure
Members of the Stanislaus HOME Consortium will continue to review its fee systems as a means of reducing the cost of housing development. The members recognize that fees can affect the cost of construction of affordable housing in the community.

Development Standards and Processing Times
Members of the Stanislaus HOME Consortium will continue to review and were reasonable and appropriate, amend theirrespective developmentstandards and processesin an effort to provide cost and timing savings in the development of residential units while continuing to ensure the public health, safety, and welfare of residents. The Stanislaus HOME Consortium will continue to monitor constraints and where possible, undertake efforts that can address these constraints and their effect on the provision of affordable housing.

Discussion
For jurisdictions that charge an impact fee, the California Mitigation Fee Act requires that the jurisdiction demonstrate the “nexus” between the type of development in question and the impact being mitigated by the proposed fee, and that fee amount be proportional to the impact caused by the development.

Fees not covered by the California Mitigation Fee Act include inclusionary housing ordinance in-lieu fees, permit processing fees, utility connection fees, and fees included within specific development agreements between a jurisdiction and a developer. Despite state law limiting direct impact fees, the fees can be a large part of a jurisdiction’s total fee requirements for housing development. Because developers tend to pass these fees onto the final housing owner, the effects of reducing these fees on housing affordability depend on the amount of the fee reduction and current home prices. Because the eventual owner bears the brunt of fees, high fees limit development of lower-cost housing more than higher-cost housing. (Terner Center for Housing Innovation- UC Berkeley, Current Practices and Policy Considerations to Improve Implementation of Fees Governed by the Mitigation Fee Act, August 2019). A reduction in development fees for low-income housing may help these projects become financially feasible. A jurisdiction deferring development fees until a certain time after project completion can also help add flexibility the project’s upfront costs and assist in the development of low-income housing.

Municipal Processing Time: The processing time required to obtain full approval of a development project is often cited as a contributing factor to the high cost of housing in the State of California Review and legislative approval, while often necessary steps in the development process, add to the cost of construction by increasing land holding costs and interest payments. Governments are not always able to control delays when multiple levels of government must communicate, review, and approve plans, delays due to the schedule or timing of legislative boards of approval, or delays based on the amount of municipal staff capacity to review plans when demand for services is high.

Prevailing Wages: Davis-Bacon prevailing wage must be paid to laborers when federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) dollars are used to pay for any construction project over $2,000 or on any multifamily housing project over eight units. Prevailing wage must also be paid on any HOME-funded multifamily housing project that directly funds twelve or more units. While competitive wages are currently high, Davis-Bacon wages may be higher and add additional cost to housing construction and rehabilitation activities. California’s Prevailing Wage Law requires contractors to pay minimum wage rates on public works projects that support housing construction such as roads, water and sewer projects, and other public utilities. The rates are set by the California Department of Industrial Relations. These additional costs could add to local costs for housing development. 52 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Expiration of Affordability Contracts: Affordability contracts with private property owners have a time limit that runs out after a contractually- set number of years. Unless the affordability contracts are renewed with the property owner, the affordable rental housing units will expire and become market-rate housing.

Space below intentionally left blank.
53 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan AP-85 OTHER ACTIONS
Introduction
The Stanislaus HOME Consortium targets federal funds to residents who have traditionally not been served or are underserved by programs. Project activities funded through the Consolidated Plan are carefully designed to provide appropriate and needed services, particularly to those who may not be eligible for assistance from other sources, or are geographically isolated by lack of transportation, or lack basic amenities, particularly medical care, in their neighborhoods.

Actions planned to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs:

One of the ongoing challenges in meeting the needs of the underserved is the lack of sufficient funding forservices provided by local governments, non-profit organizations, and other agencies. Service providers faced with this challenge are expected to provide more and more services with the same, if not smaller, budgets every year. The Stanislaus HOME Consortium will continue to seek funding opportunities through different sources, encourage projects or programs that leverage funds, and ensure that projects and programs are operated as effectively and efficiently as possible.

The Stanislaus HOME Consortium members will continue being an involved stakeholder in the CoC and the Stanislaus Homeless Alliance (SHA). These organizations both function to bring stakeholders and residents together to identify needs, service gaps, and potential solutions and partnerships to address housing and homelessness needs within the region.

The SRHA supports low- and moderate-income families throughout the region, and also plays a key role in overcoming obstacles in meeting needs. Through working closely with the SRHA, the Stanislaus HOME Consortium will continue to support the SRHA in their efforts to first identify needs and further meet those needs.

Actions planned to foster and maintain affordable housing:

As stated throughout the Consolidated Plan and AAP, affordable housing is considered a high priority.

Accordingly, the use of the HOME funding is prioritized for the development and rehabilitation of affordable housing that serves low-income households. Affordable housing strategies include both development of new affordable housing units as well as the conservation of existing affordable housing units. CDBG funding will be used to develop infrastructure critical to the development of new affordable housing units andmaintenance of existing affordable housing units.

The Stanislaus HOME Consortium rely on private non-profit organizations and for-profit developers to acquire, develop, or rehabilitate affordable units. The Stanislaus HOME Consortium will continue to work closely with these entities to ensure that each year as many new affordable units are produced, or rehabilitated, as possible.

Actions planned to reduce lead-based paint hazards:

The SRHA serves as the lead agency in Stanislaus County for the identification, documentation, and prevention of lead poisoning. The Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program of Stanislaus County, administered through the SRHA, becomes involved with childhood lead-based poisoning when notification of an elevated screening blood level is received either from the laboratory or physician. If the blood level is 10ug/dL (micrograms per deciliter), notification is made to the family. Once a child meets the case definition, an environmental investigation is performed by a Registered Environmental Health 54 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Specialist to determine, if possible, the source of lead exposure. The SRHA, in partnership with the Department of Environmental Resources, conducts the investigation of residences where children with elevated levels of lead reside.

The Stanislaus HOME Consortium partners with the Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program to distribute information throughout the Stanislaus Planning area. If the source of lead exposure is related to the residential physical environment (e.g., peeling paint that indicates the presence of lead), then HOME funding available for housing rehabilitation programs may be used for eradication.

The SRHA actively addresses the issue of lead-based paint hazards by providing noticesto landlords and tenants who participate in the Housing Choice Voucher Program, warning them of the hazards of leadbased paint. Individuals participating in CDBG or HOME funded rehabilitation and first-time home buyer assistance programs are provided the notice addressing lead-based paint hazard. Additionally, all units that are rehabilitated with CDBG and HOME funds are subject to lead-based paint compliance requirements.

Actions planned to reduce the number of poverty-level families:

The Stanislaus HOME Consortium works to reduce poverty through ensuring an adequate, affordable, quality housing supply, improving low-income neighborhoods, strengthening the employment skills of the community and ensuring access to basic needs such as food and shelter. The Stanislaus HOME Consortium is particularly focused on ensuring quality housing options to low- income individuals through the production of new low-income units as well as the rehabilitation of existing low-income units and combating rental discrimination against minorities.

The CoC has developed into a more coordinated organization over the past five years, and the Stanislaus HOME Consortium will continue to leverage those partnerships and resources to address the issues of poverty.

The Stanislaus County Economic Development Action Committee (EDAC), with membership from all members of the Stanislaus HOME Consortium, collaboratively develops and updates the Stanislaus County Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) which presents the socio- economic overview of Stanislaus County, along with highlights of the economic development activities and projects that will be undertaken by private and public entities in a mission to create new jobs and provide critical services to the residents of Stanislaus County. The report can be found at: http://www.stancounty.com/ceo/econdev/pdf/ceds.pdf. The CEDS recognizes impacts housing affordability and availability have on local economic development efforts and the need for a strong local workforce dependent on housing and training.

Equipped with this information, five workgroups, comprised of technical experts, local community members and key stakeholders, came together to move key focus areas from analysis to prototypes and solutions for inclusion in a comprehensive investment document.

The workgroups focused on:
• Entrepreneurship and small business dynamism
• Talent development
• Addressing non-skill barriers to jobs and training
55 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan • Bioproducts and the circular economy growth strategy
• Technology and skill adoption in the Ag sector
The comprehensive investment document, the Stanislaus 2030 Investment Blueprint (Investment Blueprint), is based on the understanding of larger market forces and future trends; current and future state of Stanislaus County economy; knowledge of demographic shifts; and authentic community input.

Four strategic focus areas were identified: (1) Bioindustrial Manufacturing; (2) Talent Development; (3) Removal of NonSkill Barriersto Jobs& Training; and (4) Entrepreneurship and Small Business Dynamism.

A copy of the Investment Blueprint is available in English and Spanish through the following link:
www.stanislaus2030.com/resources.

The Investment Blueprint, accepted by the Board of Supervisors on November 1, 2022, identifies strategic focus areas with initial investment strategies and tactics; funding and policy aligned with each of the strategies and performance that is reported regularly to partners and the public.

Actions planned to develop institutional structure:

The Stanislaus Urban County publishes an annual Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) funds. The NOFA includes an announcement of a Grant Technical Workshop and timeline for the upcoming grant cycle. The NOFA is published in the local newspaper, The Modesto Bee, in English and Spanish. An e-mail is sent out to all past and current grantees and applicants that have applied in the last five (5) years. The Stanislaus Urban County also announces the NOFA at the CoC meeting, distributes a reminder, and e-mails the CoC agencies a NOFA announcement.

The Stanislaus Urban County holds a Grant Technical Workshop to release the upcoming grant application and explain the grantrequirements. County staff is available via phone, in person, and by e-mail to answer questions and provide technical assistance throughout the application process.

The Stanislaus Urban County also requires those receiving grants (sub-grantees) to attend a Grantee Technical Workshop prior to receiving their agreements. Attendance of this workshop and a fully executed agreement is required prior to any reimbursements. At the technical workshop, the policies, procedures, program regulations, requirements and obligations of the grant are explained. All sub-grantees receive the electronic copies ofthe documents covered in theGrantee Technical Workshop.

Actions planned to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies:

Stanislaus County, as administrator of the Stanislaus Urban County and the Stanislaus HOME Consortium, coordinates and consults with services and housing providers, local,state and federal government entities, non-profit and for-profit organizations and business, professional organizations, interest groups, and other parties interested in the implementation of federal programs.

Specifically, they are: Stanislaus Regional Housing Authority, Stanislaus County Health Services Agency, Stanislaus County Community Services Agency, Stanislaus County Behavioral Health and Recovery Services; California Department of Housing and Community Development; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); Stanislaus County Affordable Housing Corporation (STANCO), California Rural Legal Assistance (CRLA), Great Valley Housing Corporation, and Self-Help Enterprises. This will ensure thatthe activities outlined in the AAP are given the fullest attention for design and implementation or construction.
56 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Stanislaus County will continue to participate in regularly scheduled meetings with the cities of Modesto and Turlock to coordinate any CDBG, HOME and ESG funded activity that may be of benefit to each of the separate entitlement communities within Stanislaus County. Further, monthly meetings are held between the participating members of the Stanislaus HOME Consortium. This ensures that the activities outlined in the AAP are given the fullest attention for design and implementation or construction.

The Stanislaus HOME Consortium member jurisdictions will maintain active involvement in the CoC, a multiagency collaborative which focuses on the community’s housing and social service needs, to continue outreach and information sharing with other Stanislaus County agencies serving similar clientele.

Space below intentionally left blank.
57 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan AP-90 PROGRAM SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
Introduction
There are three specific goals of the CDBG program:

1. Provide decent housing.

2. Provide a suitable living environment.

3. Expand economic opportunities.

This AAP has been developed to assist in achieving these three goals. The overriding consideration required of the CDBG program is to benefit those members of the population that meet the definition of Targeted Income. A Targeted Income person is one who earns 80% or less of the AMI for CDBG funds.

Additionally, if a project benefits a specific neighborhood or community, at least 51% of the population within that geographic boundary must be within the Targeted Income Group (TIG).

As identified in the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan, priority will be given to projects in the following areas:
public infrastructure and facility improvement, affordable housing, community and economic development, Public Services, homeless services, and community emergency responses.

Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG)
Reference 24 CFR 91.220(l)(1)
Projects planned with all CDBG funds expected to be available during the year are identified in the Projects Table. The following identifies program income that is available for use that is included in projects to be carried out.

1. The total amount of program income that will have been received before the start of the next program year and that has not yet been reprogrammed

2. The amount of proceedsfrom section 108 loan guaranteesthat will be used during the year to address the priority needs and specific objectives identified in the grantee's strategic plan.
$ 0

3. The amount of surplus funds from urban renewal settlements $ 0

4. The amount of any grant funds returned to the line of credit for which the planned use has not been included in a prior statement or plan $ 0

5. The amount of income from float-funded activities $ 0 Total Program Income: $0
Other CDBG Requirements

1. The amount of urgent need activities 0

2. The estimated percentage of CDBG funds that will be used for activities that benefit persons of low and moderate income. Overall Benefit - A consecutive period of one, two or three years may be used to determine that a minimum overall benefit of 70% of CDBG funds is used to benefit persons of low and
moderate income. Specify the years covered that include this Annual Action Plan. 90%
Emergency Solutions Grant(ESG)
58 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Reference 91.220(l)(4)

1. Include written standards for providing ESG assistance (may include as attachment) The Stanislaus Urban County adopted performance standards in line with HUD and HCD guidelines and in coordination with the CoC. These standards include: rapid re-housing clients into permanent housing within 30 days after determination of eligibility; retaining this housing for at least six months; attaining or maintaining income while in permanent housing. Agencies are required to do housing stability planning with their clients and are strongly encouraged to use a progressive engagement with clients to determine their financial need and receive just enough assistance to maintain housing. The annual NOFA included a new requirement that all ESG awarded agencies must have their policies and procedures approved prior to being awarded funding to help ensure the programs operate within the HUD standards for the ESG program. If an awarded agency is found to be out of compliance or can not adhere to HUD standards, the County will take steps to recapture funds and redistribute funding to the next agency according to their ranking score resulting from the annual NOFA.

2. If the Continuum of Care has established centralized or coordinated assessment system that meets HUD requirements, describe that centralized or coordinated assessment system.

The Stanislaus Urban County continues to work with the local CoC to further develop the Coordinated Entry System and include a larger scale of community participation. The CoC has established a working committee to implement this system to ensure compliance with the HEARTH Act. The recently updated (January 2020) Coordinated Entry System Policies and Procedures Manual can be found at:
https://csocstan.com/coordinated-entry-system-ces-policies-and-procedures-manual/

3. Identify the process for making sub-awards and describe how the ESG allocation was made available to private nonprofit organizations (including community and faith-based organizations).

For Fiscal Year 2025-2026, ESG funds will be allocated based on a competitive grant cycle to which public service providers can apply for ESG funds. Applicants will be restricted to submitting one (1) application per agency for ESG funds. All applicants will be required to attend a Grant Technical Workshop prior to submission of an application. A Grant Review Panel made up of representatives from the Stanislaus Urban County, the County’s Chief Executive Office, and the local CoC will review each written application submission and oral presentation and will score them individually.

The following is the scoring criteria that is utilized by the Grant Review Panel for CDBG Public Services Grant and Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) Program grant applications:

Capacity & Experience
• Agency & Staff Experience with Grant Administration
• Program Sustainability Outlook
• Funding prioritization will be provided to agencies with successful experience in administering HUD funding.

Addressing the Need/Extent of the Problem
• Prevention Focus
• Consistent with Adopted Consolidated Plan Consistent/Priority Need • Identifying and Addressing a Community Need
59 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan • Funding prioritization will factor in equitable distribution throughout the Stanislaus Urban County
• Use of health index tool or similar tool
Collaboration
• Does the Proposed Program Include Cross Sector Engagements? • Are there Partnerships and Collaborations?
• Outreach and Referrals
Accomplishments & Program Evaluation
• Are Accomplishments Measurable?
• Standardized Methods and Tools to Evaluate Progress
• Are Goals Verifiable and Attainable?
• Will the Program be Impactful and Effective?
• Use of Racial Equity Assessment
Financials
• Clear and Efficient Budget
• Leveraging Sources
Performance & Risk Assessment
• Implementation- Soundness of Approach
• Monitoring Results and Timeliness
Program Innovation
Grant Submittal
• Is the Application Clear?
• Presentation Value

4. If the jurisdiction is unable to meet the homeless participation requirement in 24 CFR 576.405(a), the jurisdiction must specify its plan for reaching out to and consulting with homeless or formerly homeless individuals in considering policies and funding decisions regarding facilities and services funded under ESG.

The Stanislaus Urban County consults with the local Continuum of Care which has formerly homeless individuals as members. Sub-grantees who administer the shelters and the rapid re-housing programs have formerly homeless individuals in their organizations who help shape policies and make decisions about services and programs that receive ESG funding.

5. Describe performance standards for evaluating ESG.

Under the Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) Program, Stanislaus County staff reviews quarterly ESG statistical tables, HMIS client reports, narratives, Request for Funds forms and budget printouts, which identify the total funds uses/requested by each grantee during that reporting period. Stanislaus County staff verifies match funding (i.e. - local unrestricted donations). In this manner, the subrecipient in turn ensures that dollar to dollar matching requirements are satisfied by paying the remainder of the expenses from non-ESG sources.
60 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME)
Reference 24 CFR 91.220(l)(2)

1. A description of other forms of investment being used beyond those identified in Section

92.205 is as follows:

The Stanislaus HOME Consortium will permit HOME funds to be invested as loans, grants, deferred payment loans, and other types of investment as permitted by the regulations described in

92.205(b). Other forms of investment will not be permitted without the prior approval of HUD.

2. A description of the guidelines that will be used for resale or recapture of HOME funds when used for homebuyer activities as required in 92.254, is as follows:

The HOME statute states that resale provisions must limit subsequent purchase of the property to income-eligible families, provide the owner with a fair return on investment, including any improvements, and ensure that the housing will remain affordable to a reasonable range of lowincome homebuyers. The HOME statue also specifies that recapture provisions must recapture the HOME investment from available net proceeds in order to assist other HOME-eligible families. Under the recapture provision, the property may be sold without income-edibility restrictions. The Stanislaus HOME Consortium has elected to establish a recapture provision as part of its program.

In cases where the net proceeds available at the time of sale are insufficient to recapture the entire direct HOME subsidy provided to the homebuyer, the Stanislaus HOME Consortium is not required to repay the difference between the total direct HOME subsidy and the amount recaptured from available net proceeds. The net proceeds are the sales price minus loan repayment (other than HOME funds) and closing costs. In applying the option of the recapture provision, the following formulas will be used:

HOME investment / (HOME investment + Homeowner investment) X Net proceeds = HOME amount to be repaid
Homeowner investment / (HOME investment + Homeowner investment) X Net proceeds = Amount to Homeowner
Affordable Homeownership Limits
HUD provides that the HOME affordable homeownership limits (initial purchase price or afterrehabilitation value) of homeownership units assisted with HOME funds not to exceed 95 percent of the area median purchase price for single family housing. Under the Code of Federal Regulations at title 24, part 92, section 254, paragraph (a)(2)(iii), HUD allows jurisdictions to prepare a market analysis to determine this limit following HUD guidance. The 95 percent of median area purchase price must be established in accordance with a market analysis that ensures that a sufficient number of recent housing sales are included in the survey. Sales must cover the requisite number of months based on volume. The address of the listed properties must include the location within the consortia's jurisdiction. The housing sales data must reflect all, or nearly all, of the one-family house sales in the entire consortia jurisdiction.

After identifying the median sales price per HUD's guidance, the amount should be multiplied by 0.95 to determine the 95 percent of the median area purchase price. Final limits are rounded to the nearest thousand. The Stanislaus HOME Consortium will use the highest limit as determined by HUD or the HUD approved market analysis.
61 DRAFT
Stanislaus Urban County and Stanislaus HOME Consortium 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

3. A description of the guidelines for resale or recapture that ensures the affordability of units acquired with HOME funds. See 24 CFR 92.254(a)(4) are as follows:

In the case of affordability, the Stanislaus HOME Consortium will recapture the entire amount of the direct HOME subsidy provided to the homebuyer before the homebuyer receives a return. The Stanislaus HOME Consortium’s recapture amount will be limited to the net proceeds available from the sale. While the home may be sold without restriction on the new buyers’ income, the recaptured funds will be used to assist other income eligible homebuyers.

Recapture provision will be ensured through the use of real estate lien notes and/or restrictive covenants outlining the Stanislaus HOME Consortium’s recapture provisions. Homeownership projects undertaken using the resale provision shall use deed restrictions, covenants running with the land, or other similar mechanisms per 92.254(a)(5)(i)(A) to ensure the resale requirements are met. The period of affordability specified in the mortgage will be the minimum period for the recapture scenario asspecified above. The period of affordability will be based on the total amount of direct HOME funds invested in the housing project.

4. Plans for using HOME funds to refinance existing debt secured by multifamily housing that is rehabilitated with HOME funds along with a description of the refinancing guidelines required that will be used under 24 CFR 92.206(b), are as follows:

The Stanislaus HOME Consortium does not intend to refinance any kind of existing debt with HOME funds.
62 DRAFT
Honorable Mayor and Members
of the Newman City Council
APPROVE THE 2025 CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES

DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE
RECOMMENDATION:

Agenda Item: 9. a.

City Council Meeting
of April 22, 2025
Adopt Resolution No. 2025 - , approving the 2025 Citywide Capital Facilities Development Impact Fees Nexus Study Update.

BACKGROUND:

The purpose of a nexus study is to establish the legally required nexus (or reasonable relationship) between projected new residential and nonresidential development and the capital facilities that will be required to serve that new development.

The nexus requirements for imposing development impact fees were established under AB 1600 legislation, as codified by the Mitigation Fee Act (the Act; California Government Code section 66000 and following). The Act sets forth the procedural requirements for establishing and collecting development impact fees. The procedures require that a "reasonable relationship or nexus must exist between a governmental exaction and the purpose of the condition." Specifically, each local agency imposing a fee must:
• Identify the purpose of the fee.
• Identify how the fee is to be used.
•Determine how a reasonable relationship exists between the fee's use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed.
• Determine how a reasonable relationship exists between the need for the public facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed.
• Determine how a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility is attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.

ANALYSIS:

The purpose of the Nexus Study Update is to update the City Capital Facility Fee (CFF) Program and establish the legally required nexus (or reasonable relationship) between projected new residential and nonresidential development in the City through buildout of the City's General Plan Primary Sphere of Influence (PSOI) and the improvements that will be required to serve that new development.

The fees included in the CFF Program are being updated to serve projected development in the current City limits and a portion of the City's surrounding Sphere oflnfluence (SOI). The City 2030 General Plan (General Plan) Land Use Element defines the SOI as "the area outside the city limits that the City considers as reasonable for annexation." The General Plan divides the SOI into a Primary SOI (PSOI) and a Secondary SOI (SSOI), with the PSOI being the area most likely to annex into the City and develop first. As it is anticipated that the SSOI will not develop for many years, this Nexus Study Update includes public improvements needed to serve new development in the current City limits and the PSOI only.

The CFF Program is a City-implemented development impact fee program applicable to land uses in the City's Sphere of Influence. It is used as a mechanism to fund baokbone infrastructure and public facilities (public improvements) needed to serve the projected new residents and employees that are not funded by other sources.

This Nexus Study Update will update the following fee components:
•Fire
•Police
• General Government
•Transportation
•Sewer
• Storm Drainage
•Water
•Administration
The current CFF Program also includes Park fees, but these fees are not being updated at this time. A Parks Master Plan is being prepared, and the City plans to update the Park fees after the Parks Master Plan has been adopted.

Agenda Item: 9.a.

ENVffiONMENTAL:

The Nexus Study Update is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However, individual projects within the Study Update may be subject to CEQA.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Positive. Approval of the Nexus Study Update will ensure the City is collecting the correct fees from new development to offset the cost associated with the capital facilities required to serve the development.

CONCLUSION:

A Capital Facility Fee program allows City's to collect fees from new development to ensure that development is paying its fair share for capital infrastructure projects and are not being subsidize by existing residents and businesses. To ensure the correct fee amount is being collected and that fees are consistent with current State law, the City hired an outside firm to prepare a CFF Nexus Study Update. A copy of the draft report was emailed to the local Building Industry Association (BIA), local builders, and a couple of landowners who requested a copy on March 14th. After some dialogue with the BIA, a few modifications to the report have been made. With no additional comments to address, staff recommends the Council adopt Resolution No. 2025 - , approving the 2025 Citywide Capital Facilities Development Impact Fees Nexus Study Update.

ATTACHMENT:

1. Resolution No. 2025 - , approving the 2025 Citywide Capital Facilities Development Impact Fees Nexus Study Update.

2. 2025 Citywide Capital Facilities Development Impact Fees Nexus Study Update.

Respectfully submitted,
Michael E. Holland
City Manager
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWMAN TO APPROVE THE 2025 CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE.

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Newman adopted Newman Municipal Code Section 1-15- 3 in October 1993 creating and establishing the authority for imposing and charging Municipal Facilities Fees (MFF), and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Municipal Code Section' 1-18-3 in April 1994 and adopted by resolution 94-22 (the Citywide Services Master Plan) which established development impact fees for traffic, sewer, water and storm drainage; and
WHEREAS, the above-referenced ordinances previously adopted the current fees for City facilities based on capital programs associated with each category of facilities, including police, fire, parks, streets and governmental facilities, storm drain, water and sewer and; in addition, included fees necessary to pay for the administration of the Municipal Facilities Fees program, and WHEREAS, in June 2022, the Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with Economic & Planning Services, Inc. (EPS) to conduct a Citywide Capital Facilities Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update, and
WHEREAS, EPS reviewed the City's General Plan, infrastructure master plans, equipment inventories and discussed development plans with City staff to develop the capital programs and fees levied on future development necessary to serve development that occurs within the City Limits and the General Plan's Primary Sphere of Influence; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Citywide Capital Facilities Development Impact Fees Nexus Study Update was emailed to interested parties on March 14th indicating that a Public Hearing on the matter would be held at the April 22nd City Council meeting and a virtual meeting designed to present an overview of the Nexus Study Update and answer questions would be held on March 24th, and WHEREAS, in compliance with State law requiring at minimum of 30-day notice, a Notice of Public Hearing was published in the West Side Index on March 19th, and WHEREAS, the Nexus Study Update was set for a public hearing of the Newman City Council to be held at 7:00p.m., or as soon thereafter as may be heard, on April 22, 2025 in the City Council Chambers and such hearing was duly held, and
WHEREAS, after considering the Nexus Study Update, and testimony received at the public hearing held on April 22nd, the City Council hereby approves and adopts the recommendations in the Nexus Study Update, and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that fees collected pursuant to this resolution shall be used to finance the municipal facilities identified in the above-referenced reports, which are incorporated herein by this reference, and further finds that future development in the City of Newman as set forth in the reports will generate additional demands on municipal services, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Newman conducted a hearing at City Hall, 938 Fresno Street, Newman, California, on April 22, 2025, regarding the Citywide Capital Facilities Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update:

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council heard the evidence offered by persons interested in this proceeding;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that the various reports and the testimony received at the public hearings of April 22, 2025 have established:

1. That there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facilities designated in the reports and in the City's General Plan and the impacts of the types of development for which the corresponding fees are charged,

2. That there is a reasonable relationship between the fees, uses, and the type of development for which the fee is charged,

3. That there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the various fees and the cost of the public facilities or portions of the public facilities attributable to the development and types of development upon which the various fees are imposed,

4. That the cost estimates set forth in the reports and analyses are reasonable cost estimates for constructing these facilities, and that the fees expected to be generated by future development will not exceed the total costs of constructing the public facilities just referenced,

5. The analysis in the reports establishes a linkage or nexus between development in the City's General Plan Area and the need for additional public facilities or improvements to existing public facilities within the City of Newman. The City Council further finds that the methods of allocation of the fee components proposed in analysis of the reports and enacted herein, do bear a fair and reasonable relationship to each development's burden on, and benefit from, the facilities to be funded by the respective fees.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that should any fee provision, clause, paragraph or subparagraph of this resolution or application thereof to any person or circumstances be held invalid or unconstitutional, that invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect other provisions or applications thereof which can be given effect without the invalid fee, provision, clause, paragraph or subparagraph, and to this end, the provisions of this resolution are declared severable. By adopting this resolution, the City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this resolution without that fee, provision, clause, paragraph or, subparagraph.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that the provisions of this resolution enacted by the City Council on April 22, 2025 shall take effect in accordance with law.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that to the extent any portion of any previously adopted ordinance or resolution conflicts with any of the provisions of this resolution, the language of this resolution shall prevail, and the language in the previous ordinance or resolution to the contrary is hereby superseded and revoked.

The foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newman held on the 22nd day of April, 2025 by Council Member , who moved its adoption, which motion was duly seconded and it was upon roll call carried and the resolution adopted by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST:

Mike Maier,
City Clerk of the City of Newman,
County of Stanislaus, State of California
APPROVED:

Casey Graham,
Mayor of the City of Newman,
County of Stanislaus, State of California

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES

DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES

NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
Prepared for: Prepared by:

City of Newman Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.

April 2025
EPS #222059
Table of Contents

1. Introduction and Executive Summary 1
Overview....................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose.......................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Nexus Study Requirements ...................................................................................................................................... 9 CFF Program Implementation and Administration.......................................................................................... 11 Key Supporting Documents .................................................................................................................................. 12 Organization of Report........................................................................................................................................... 13

2. City Land Uses and Demographics 14
Introduction............................................................................................................................................................... 14 Summary of Development, Population, and Employee Projections............................................................ 14 Residential Estimates and Projections ................................................................................................................ 17 Nonresidential Estimates and Projections ......................................................................................................... 18 Residential Demographic Information by Dwelling Unit Size ....................................................................... 20

3. Infrastructure and Public Facilities 24
CFF Program Costs.................................................................................................................................................. 25

4. Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation 35
Cost Allocation by Component............................................................................................................................. 38

5. Nexus Findings 58
California Government Code Section 66001.................................................................................................... 58 California Government Code Section 66016.5 (AB 602)............................................................................... 66

6. CFF Program Implementation and Administration 72
Introduction............................................................................................................................................................... 72 Implementing Resolutions...................................................................................................................................... 72 CFF Program Administration................................................................................................................................. 72 Inflation Adjustment................................................................................................................................................ 73 Fee Exemptions, Reductions, and Waivers........................................................................................................ 73 Fee Credit and Reimbursement to Developers ................................................................................................ 74 CFF Program Update Adoption Process ............................................................................................................ 75 Programming Revenues and Projects with the Capital Improvement Plan............................................... 75 Compliance Requirements..................................................................................................................................... 76 Appendices
Appendix A: Development Projections
Appendix B: Capital Improvement Program
List of Maps
Map 1-1. Regional Map.................................................................................................................................................... 2 Map 2-1. City of Newman Planning Boundaries ....................................................................................................15 List of Tables
Table 1-1. Proposed CFF Program Fee Summary....................................................................................................... 4 Table 1-2. Water Improvement Fees ............................................................................................................................. 5 Table 1-3. Development Impact Fee Comparison (2 pages) .................................................................................... 7 Table 2-1. Land Use Summary through Buildout of Primary SOI ........................................................................16 Table 2-2. Estimated Persons per Household by Residential Fee Category .....................................................22 Table 2-3. Estimated Trips per Household by Residential Fee Category...........................................................23 Table 3-1. Summary of Fee-Funded Improvement Costs......................................................................................24 Table 3-2. Summary of Fee-Funded Fire Improvement Costs .............................................................................26 Table 3-3. Summary of Fee-Funded Police Improvement Costs .........................................................................27 Table 3-4. Summary of Fee-Funded General Government Improvement Costs .............................................28 Table 3-5. Summary of Fee-Funded Street Improvement Costs .........................................................................30 Table 3-6. Summary of Fee-Funded Sewer Improvement Costs.........................................................................31 Table 3-7. Summary of Fee-Funded Drainage Improvement Costs....................................................................33 Table 3-8. Summary of Fee-Funded Water Improvement Costs.........................................................................34 Table 4-1. Proposed CFF Program Fee Summary....................................................................................................36 Table 4-2. Water Improvement Fees ..........................................................................................................................37 Table 4-3. Fire, Police, and General Government DUEs ........................................................................................39 Table 4-4. Fire Facilities Cost Allocation....................................................................................................................40 Table 4-5. Police Facilities Cost Allocation................................................................................................................41 Table 4-6. General Government Facilities Cost Allocation....................................................................................42 Table 4-7. Transportation Improvements DUEs ......................................................................................................44 Table 4-8. Transportation Improvement Cost Allocation ......................................................................................45 Table 4-9. Sewer DUE Factors......................................................................................................................................47 Table 4-10. Sewer DUEs...................................................................................................................................................48 Table 4-11. Sewer Improvements Cost Allocation.....................................................................................................49 Table 4-12. Storm Drainage DUEs ................................................................................................................................. 51 Table 4-13. Storm Drainage Improvements Cost Allocation...................................................................................52 Table 4-14. Water DUE Factors .....................................................................................................................................54 Table 4-15. Water DUEs...................................................................................................................................................55 Table 4-16. Water Improvements Cost Allocation ....................................................................................................56 Table 4-17. Water Improvements Cost by Water Meter Size ................................................................................57 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1 Introduction and Executive Summary

1. Introduction and Executive Summary
Overview
The City of Newman (City) is located in Stanislaus County approximately 25 miles south of the City of Modesto. Map 1-1 shows the location of the City within the greater region. The City retained Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) to prepare this 2025 Capital Facilities Development Impact Fee Program Nexus Study Update (Nexus Study Update). The City last adopted a comprehensive update of its Capital Facilities Development Impact Fee (CFF) Program in 2002 (Resolution No. 2002-22). Since then, the City has adopted annual fee updates to account for cost inflation. This Nexus Study Update provides a comprehensive update to the CFF Program and establishes the legally required findings necessary to implement the updated CFF Program fees (fees).

The City’s CFF Program currently includes the following nine components: Parks, Fire, Police, General Government, Transportation, Storm Drainage, Water, Sewer, and Administration. The purpose of the CFF Program is to condition new development to fund the necessary capital improvements required to maintain City facility standards. This Nexus Study Update proposes updates to all development impact fees except the Parks component. The proposed fee updates are based on the most up-to-date information on development status and capital facilities costs.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 2 Introduction and Executive Summary Map 1-1. Regional Map
Source: City of Newman 2030 General Plan (April 10, 2007)

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 3 Introduction and Executive Summary Purpose
The purpose of the Nexus Study Update is to update the City CFF Program and establish the legally required nexus (or reasonable relationship) between projected new residential and nonresidential development in the City through buildout of the City’s General Plan Primary Sphere of Influence (PSOI) and the improvements that will be required to serve that new development.

The CFF Program is a City-implemented development impact fee program applicable to land uses in the City’s Sphere of Influence. It is used as a mechanism to fund backbone infrastructure and public facilities (public improvements) needed to serve the projected new residents and employees that are not funded by other sources. This Nexus Study Update will update the following fee components:
• Fire • Sewer
• Police • Storm Drainage
• General Government • Water
• Transportation • Administration
The current CFF Program also includes Park fees, but these fees are not being updated at this time. A Parks Master Plan is being prepared, and the City plans to update the Park fees after the Parks Master Plan has been adopted.

Table 1-1 summarizes the proposed updated fees by residential and commercial land use for each of the fee components except Water. For each land use, the administration fee component is calculated as 3 percent of the sum of all other fees and will fund administration of the CFF Program. All CFF Program components in Table 1-1 will be charged and collected per residential dwelling unit or 1,000 commercial building square feet. Table 1-2 summarizes the Water fees, which are proposed to be charged per meter and also include an associated 3-percent administration fee component. All CFF Program components are consistent with the requirements of California Assembly Bill (AB) 1600 legislation, as codified by the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code sections 66000 et. seq.).

In Table 1-1, different fee components have different residential fee categories, whereas all nonresidential fees will be charged per 1,000 building square feet and have the same fee categories. For the residential fees, different fee categories are proposed for different fee components to address provisions of California Assembly Bill 602 (AB 602), enacted in 2021. AB 602 modified the Mitigation Fee Act and stipulates that a jurisdiction must calculate residential fees proportionately to the square footage of the dwelling units, with the exception of water and sewer fees and any other fees for which specific findings can be made as to why the fees should not be enacted on a square foot basis.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4 Introduction and Executive Summary Table 1-1. Proposed CFF Program Fee Summary
Land Use Category Parks [2] Fire Police
General
Government Transportation Sewer [3]
Storm
Drainage [3] Subtotal
CFF Program
Admin. [4] Total
Source Table 4-4 Table 4-5 Table 4-6 Table 4-8 Table 4-11 Table 4-13

RESIDENTIAL
Residential by Square Foot Range
Single-Family
<750 TBD $1,811 $1,456 $3,900 $4,375 - $11,542 $346 $11,888 750 to 999 sq. ft. TBD $2,228 $1,790 $4,798 $5,238 - $14,054 $422 $14,475 1,000 to 1,999 sq. ft. TBD $2,519 $2,025 $5,426 $5,792 - $15,762 $473 $16,235 ≥ 2,000 sq. ft TBD $2,882 $2,316 $6,206 $6,470 - $17,874 $536 $18,410 Multifamily
<750 TBD $1,424 $1,145 $3,068 $2,625 - $8,262 $248 $8,509 750 to 999 sq. ft. TBD $1,752 $1,408 $3,774 $3,143 - $10,077 $302 $10,379 1,000 to 1,999 sq. ft. TBD $1,981 $1,593 $4,268 $3,475 - $11,317 $340 $11,656 ≥ 2,000 sq. ft TBD $2,266 $1,822 $4,881 $3,882 - $12,851 $386 $13,237 Residential by Land Use [2]
Single-Family TBD - - - - $10,150 $1,294 $11,444 $343 $11,788 Multifamily TBD - - - - $7,105 $552 $7,657 $230 $7,887
Residential by Average Unit Size
Single-Family (1,700 sq. ft.) TBD $2,519 $2,025 $5,426 $5,792 $10,150 $1,294 $27,206 $816 $28,023 Multifamily (750 sq. ft.) TBD $1,752 $1,408 $3,774 $3,143 $7,105 $552 $17,734 $532 $18,266

NONRESIDENTIAL
Office N/A $690 $554 $1,486 $8,873 $6,801 $1,052 $19,456 $584 $20,039 Commercial N/A $345 $277 $743 $14,875 $6,801 $1,052 $24,092 $723 $24,815 Light Industrial N/A $230 $185 $495 $4,005 $4,162 $751 $9,828 $295 $10,123 Heavy Industrial N/A $172 $139 $371 $4,560 $4,162 $845 $10,249 $307 $10,556 Business Park N/A $690 $554 $1,486 $7,517 $4,872 $751 $15,871 $476 $16,347 Source: City of Newman; EPS.
[1] Excludes water fees, which are charged per water meter and vary by water meter size. See Table 1-2 for water fees. [2] Parks fees shown as TBD because the City does not plan to update them until after completion of the Parks Master Plan. [3] Sewer and storm drainage fee components are calculated by residential land use only rather than by square foot range within each residential land use. [4] CFF Program Administration fees calculated as 3% of all other fees. per unit
per unit
per unit
per 1,000 bldg. sq. ft.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 5 Introduction and Executive Summary Table 1-2.Water Improvement Fees
In response to the provisions of AB 602, some of the CFF components must have residential fees that differ by dwelling unit size while other components do not need to have different fees for different unit sizes. The proposed residential and nonresidential fee categories for all fee components except Water (which will be charged by meter size) are summarized below.

Fire, Police, General Government, and Transportation Fee Components—Residential Categories
Single-family and multifamily development will each have the following fee categories by dwelling unit square foot ranges. The square foot ranges are aligned between single-family and multifamily units based on available data and to simplify fee administration.

Single-Family and Multifamily Fee Categories
• <750 sq. ft.
• 750 to 999 sq. ft.
• 1,000 to 1,999 sq. ft.
• ≥2,000 sq. ft.

Sewer and Storm Drainage—Residential Categories
• Single-family
• Multifamily
Item Water
Administration
(3%)
Total Fee
per Meter
Source Table 4-17
Meter
1-inch and under $10,183 $305 $10,488

1.5-inch $20,366 $611 $20,977
2-inch $32,586 $978 $33,563
3-inch $71,281 $2,138 $73,419
4-inch $128,306 $3,849 $132,155
6-inch $264,758 $7,943 $272,700
8-inch $570,247 $17,107 $587,355
10-inch $855,371 $25,661 $881,032
Source: City of Newman; EPS.

Fee per Water Meter

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 6 Introduction and Executive Summary All Fee Components Except Water—Nonresidential Categories • Office
• Commercial
• Light Industrial
• Heavy Industrial
• Business Park
The proposed fees are based on the best land use information, backbone infrastructure and public facilities cost estimates, funding source information, and administrative cost estimates available at this time. The cost estimates presented in this report are in constant 2025 dollars. The following chapters of this report detail the land uses, facilities requirements, cost estimates, and cost allocation methodology used to estimate the fees. The City periodically will conduct a review of improvement costs and make necessary adjustments to the CFF Program, including applying an appropriate inflation adjustment factor to the fees to reflect changes in project costs. Chapter 6 details the implementation of CFF Program updates.

Table 1-3 shows a comparison of the current CFF Program fees and the proposed fees. This table compares proposed fees for the average-sized single-family and multifamily units with the current single-family and multifamily fees. It also compares proposed and current nonresidential fees per 1,000 building square feet.

Most of the proposed fees are higher than the current fees. However, all of the proposed storm drainage fees and the proposed police, general government, and transportation fees for some of the land use categories are lower than the current fees.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 7 Introduction and Executive Summary Table 1-3. Development Impact Fee Comparison (2 pages)

RESIDENTIAL
Item
Existing
(Low Den) Proposed Difference
Pct.

Difference Existing Proposed Difference
Pct.

Difference
Parks [2] TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Fire $723 $2,519 $1,796 248.5% $649 $1,752 $1,103 169.9% Police $1,376 $2,025 $649 47.1% $1,236 $1,408 $172 13.9% General Government $1,850 $5,426 $3,576 193.3% $1,661 $3,774 $2,112 127.2% Transportation $6,242 $5,792 ($450) (7.2%) $4,390 $3,143 ($1,248) (28.4%) Sewer $1,169 $10,150 $8,981 768.0% $357 $7,105 $6,748 1,891.4% Storm Drainage $2,862 $1,294 ($1,568) (54.8%) $873 $552 ($321) (36.8%) Water [3] $1,721 $10,183 $8,462 491.6% $525 $4,391 $3,866 736.0% Total $15,943 $37,389 $21,446 134.5% $9,692 $22,125 $12,433 128.3%

OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL
Item
Existing
(Bus Park) Proposed Difference
Pct.

Difference
Existing
(Gen Com) Proposed Difference
Pct.

Difference
Fire $234 $690 $456 195.2% $234 $345 $111 47.6%
Police $445 $554 $110 24.6% $445 $277 ($168) (37.7%)
General Government $598 $1,486 $888 148.4% $598 $743 $145 24.2% Transportation $2,504 $8,873 $6,369 254.3% $4,943 $14,875 $9,931 200.9% Sewer $360 $6,801 $6,441 1,791.5% $360 $6,801 $6,441 1,791.5% Storm Drainage $1,123 $1,052 ($71) (6.3%) $1,123 $1,052 ($71) (6.3%) Water [3] $940 $6,893 $5,954 633.7% $940 $6,893 $5,954 633.7% Total $6,203 $26,349 $20,146 324.8% $8,642 $30,985 $22,344 258.6% Commercial
Existing and Proposed Fees per Unit (2025$) [1]
Single-Family Multifamily
Office
Existing and Proposed Fees per 1,000 Bldg. Sq. Ft. (2025$)

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 8 Introduction and Executive Summary Table 1-3 (page 2) Development Impact Fee Comparison

LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, AND BUSINESS PARK
Item Existing Proposed Difference
Pct.

Difference Existing Proposed Difference
Pct.

Difference
Fire $156 $230 $74 47.6% $156 $172 $17 10.7% $234 $690 $456 195.2% Police $297 $185 ($112) (37.7%) $297 $139 ($158) (53.3%) $445 $554 $110 24.6% General Government $399 $495 $97 24.2% $399 $371 ($27) (6.8%) $598 $1,486 $888 148.4% Transportation $2,504 $4,005 $1,501 59.9% $1,041 $4,560 $3,519 338.2% $2,504 $7,517 $5,013 200.2% Sewer $360 $4,162 $3,802 1,057.5% $360 $4,162 $3,802 1,057.5% $360 $4,872 $4,513 1,255.1% Storm Drainage $1,123 $751 ($371) (33.1%) $1,123 $845 ($278) (24.7%) $1,123 $751 ($371) (33.1%) Water [3] $940 $8,353 $7,413 789.0% $940 $8,353 $7,413 789.0% $940 $6,893 $5,954 633.7% Total $5,777 $18,181 $12,404 214.7% $4,313 $18,602 $14,288 331.2% $6,203 $22,764 $16,562 267.0% Source: City of Newman; EPS.
[1] Proposed fees are for the average-sized single-family (1,700 square feet) and multifamily (750 sq. ft.) units. [2] Parks fees shown as TBD because the City does not plan to update them until after completion of the Parks Master Plan. [3] Estimated water fees are shown per unit (residential) and 1,000 bldg. sq. ft. (nonresidential) for comparison purposes. However, these fees will be charged per meter with fee that vary by meter size. See Table 1-2.

Light Industrial Heavy Industrial Business Park
Existing and Proposed Fee per 1,000 Bldg. Sq. Ft. (2025$)

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 9 Introduction and Executive Summary Nexus Study Requirements
California Government Code 66000
The purpose of a nexus study is to establish the legally required nexus (or reasonable relationship) between projected new residential and nonresidential development and the capital facilities that will be required to serve that new development.

As briefly described in the previous section, the nexus requirements for imposing development impact fees were established under AB 1600 legislation, as codified by the Mitigation Fee Act (the Act; California Government Code section 66000 and following). The Act sets forth the procedural requirements for establishing and collecting development impact fees. The procedures require that a “reasonable relationship or nexus must exist between a governmental exaction and the purpose of the condition.” Specifically, each local agency imposing a fee must:
• Identify the purpose of the fee.
• Identify how the fee is to be used.
• Determine how a reasonable relationship exists between the fee’s use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed. • Determine how a reasonable relationship exists between the need for the public facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed.
• Determine how a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility is attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.

Assembly Bill 602
In addition, in 2021, AB 602 amended the requirements that would apply to new or updated impact fees by creating a “standards and practices” section to the Act, codified as Government Code Section 66016.5. This section is both declaratory of previously existing law and adds certain new requirements. A new provision that pertains to this report requires that a nexus study “shall calculate a fee imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of proposed units of the development” [66016.5(a)(5)(A)], and “large jurisdictions shall adopt a capital improvement plan as a part of the nexus study” [66016.5(a)(6)].

Water and sewer systems are specifically exempt from the requirements of Section 66016.5. An exemption to the square footage allocation method may be made for other backbone infrastructure if the nexus study makes the following three findings:

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 10 Introduction and Executive Summary • An explanation as to why square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on a housing development project. • An explanation that an alternative basis of calculating the fee bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.
• That other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments or otherwise ensure that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees.

Section 66016.5 [66016.5(a)(5)(C)] also states that the square footage allocation method “does not prohibit an agency from establishing different fees for different types of developments.”
In response to these provisions of AB 602, this Nexus Study Update makes findings justifying the use of the residential fee land uses summarized above for the various fee components. Chapter 5 details all required nexus findings.

Senate Bill 13 and Accessory Dwelling Units
In addition to the considerations discussed above pursuant to AB 602, a separate piece of legislation, California Senate Bill 13 (SB 13), passed in 2019, establishes a new system for assessing fees on accessory dwelling units (ADUs). It amended California Government Code Section 65852.2(3)(A)(f)(3) to read:
“A local agency, special district, or water corporation shall not impose any impact fee upon the development of an accessory dwelling unit less than 750 square feet. Any impact fees charged for an accessory dwelling unit of 750 square feet or more shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit.”
Based on this section of the California Government Code, any ADU smaller than 750 square feet is exempt from the CFF Program. Fees on ADUs larger than 750 square feet require the City to perform the following calculations:

1. Determine the total habitable building square footage of both the proposed ADU and the primary residential unit on the lot on which the ADU is proposed.

As an example, assume that a primary single-family dwelling unit has 2,200 habitable building square feet and the proposed ADU has 1,100 habitable building square feet.

2. Calculate the ADU’s habitable building square feet as a percentage of the primary unit’s habitable building square feet.

In the example from step 1), the size of the ADU is 50 percent of the primary residential unit.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 11 Introduction and Executive Summary

3. Identify the CFF category and fee that would have applied to the primary residential unit. In the CFF Program, the fee category would differ for the different fee components.

In the example from step 1), the CFF category is “Single-family >2,000 sq. ft.” for Fire, Police, General Government, and Transportation fees and either Single-family or Multifamily for Storm Drainage.

4. For each fee component, calculate the ADU fees as the percentage from step 2) multiplied by the fee for the fee category identified in step 3).

In the example from step 1), the ADU fee for each fee component is 50 percent of the primary unit fee.

CFF Program Implementation and Administration
Implementation
Chapter 6 details the process and requirements for adopting the updated CFF Program fees. The fees must be adopted by the City Council and will be effective 60 days following final action on the adoption of this Nexus Study Update. The CFF Program is independent and separate from all other City, County, other agency, or regional development impact fees that will be applicable to development in the City of Newman.

Adoption of this CFF Program Update requires the City Council to follow certain procedures, including holding a public hearing with at least 30 days’ notice for the hearing. The City is required to post a public notice at least 30 days before the public hearing considering the fee. The City shall notify any member of the public who requests notice of intent to begin an impact fee nexus study of the date of the hearing. Mailed notice 14 days before the public hearing is required for those individuals who request such notification. Data, such as this Nexus Study and referenced material, must be made available at least 10 days before the public hearing.

Administration
The City will administer the CFF Program. The CFF Program will include a 3 percent planning and administration component to fund CFF Program administration. The administration component of the CFF must be paid in cash to provide the City with funding to administer the CFF Program, while CFF Program credits may be available for the other fee components (as detailed in Chapter 6).

Administration of the CFF Program will include the following major tasks:
• Tracking all CFF Program payments and assignment of fee credits and reimbursements for improvements constructed privately by developers. • Tracking the progress of construction contracts for CFF Program improvements.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 12 Introduction and Executive Summary • Performing annual fee adjustments to account for inflation of infrastructure and public facilities costs.
• Conducting periodic reviews of development projections, facilities requirements, improvement costs, funding sources, and cost allocation methodologies and making necessary adjustments to the CFF Program. • Preparing the required annual and five-year reports on the status of the CFF Program.

Key Supporting Documents
The following key documents produced by or for the City were referenced in this analysis and used in developing the fees. Other documents that were used in the analysis are referenced in footnotes throughout this report:
• City of Newman 2030 General Plan
• City of Newman 2030 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Public Review Draft (October 4, 2006)
• Northwest Newman Master Plan
• Draft Capital Facilities Fees Update Study, prepared by PMC (October 2010) • City of Newman Traffic Improvements, prepared by Dowling and Associates (2000)
• Water Master Plan, prepared by Stantec (2022)
• Wastewater Collection System Master Plan, prepared by Eco:Logic (2008) • Wastewater Collection System Sewer System Management Plan (2023) • Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation Facility Update Report, prepared by Stantec (2018)
• Storm Drain Master Plan, prepared by Boyle Engineering Corporation (2007)

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 13 Introduction and Executive Summary Organization of Report
This Nexus Study Update is organized into the following chapters:
• Chapter 1 summarizes the proposed CFF Program Update. • Chapter 2 identifies the land uses that will be subject to the CFF Program. • Chapter 3 details the CFF Program improvements and costs. • Chapter 4 details the cost allocation and fee estimate methodology. • Chapter 5 summarizes the nexus findings for each CFF Program component. • Chapter 6 describes CFF Program implementation and administration.

In addition, the Nexus Study Update contains the following appendices:
• Appendix A: Development Projections
• Appendix B: Capital Improvement Program
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 14 City Land Uses and Demographics

2. City Land Uses and Demographics
Introduction
The fees included in the CFF Program are being updated to serve projected development in the current City limits and a portion of the City’s surrounding Sphere of Influence (SOI). The City 2030 General Plan (General Plan) Land Use Element defines the SOI as “the area outside the city limits that the City considers as reasonable for annexation.” The General Plan divides the SOI into a Primary SOI (PSOI) and a Secondary SOI (SSOI), with the PSOI being the area most likely to annex into the City and develop first. As it is anticipated that the SSOI will not develop for many years, this Nexus Study Update includes public improvements needed to serve new development in the current City limits and the PSOI only.

Map 2-1 shows the City limits, the boundaries of the PSOI and the SSOI, and the General Plan annexation areas in the PSOI and SSOI. This chapter discusses the development, population, and employment projections in the City limits and the PSOI. The projections are used to allocate fee-funded costs to the projected land uses.

Summary of Development, Population, and Employee
Projections
Table 2-1 summarizes the estimated existing, projected new, and total development, population, and employees by residential and nonresidential land use through buildout of the current City limits and the PSOI annexation areas shown on Map 2-1. The PSOI annexation areas are General Plan Areas 1, 2, and 3, a small portion of General Plan Area 9, and several other areas adjacent to the City on the west, south, and east but not included in one of the major General Plan areas. Note that, in this report, reference to “PSOI buildout” or “buildout of the PSOI” includes buildout of both the current City limits and the PSOI annexations areas.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 15 City Land Uses and Demographics Map 2-1. City of Newman Planning Boundaries

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 16 City Land Uses and Demographics Table 2-1. Land Use Summary through Buildout of Primary SOI Existing Net New
Buildout of
Primary SOI Existing Net New
Buildout of
Primary SOI
Formula A B C D=B+C A*B A*C A*D
Residential pph [2]
Single-Family 514.1 3.51 3,271 3,250 6,521 N/A 11,408 N/A Multifamily 32.7 2.44 494 629 1,123 N/A 1,535 N/A
Total 546.8 3,765 3,879 7,644 12,051 12,943 24,994
Formula A B C D=B+C C/A
bldg. sq. ft.
per employee [4]
Nonresidential
Office 8.3 250 0 90,387 90,387 N/A 362 N/A
Commercial 63.3 500 518,045 689,337 1,207,382 N/A 1,379 N/A Light Industrial 36.0 750 273,735 627,264 900,999 N/A 836 N/A Heavy Industrial 8.5 1,000 65,786 148,104 213,890 N/A 148 N/A Business Park 126.2 250 0 1,924,045 1,924,045 N/A 7,696 N/A Total 242.3 857,566 3,479,137 4,336,703 1,796 10,421 12,217 Source: City of Newman; California Department of Finance; Northwest Newman Master Plan; U.S. Census Bureau; EPS. [1] See Table A-1 for dwelling units and Table A-6 for building square feet. Both tables detail the asuumptions and method for estimating remaining dwelling units and building square feet. Existing dwelling units from California Department of Finance. Existing building square feet provided by City of Newman. [2] Persons per household (pph) factors estimated in Table A-5 and rounded to nearest hundredth. [3] Existing population equals January 1, 2024 household population from CA DOF. Existing pph assumptions applied to net new dwelling units to derive net new population. A breakdown of existing population by unit type is not available from CA DOF. Total buildout population is calculated as total existing population plus total net new population. Development impact fees are based on net new population. [4] Bldg. sq. ft. per employee from City of Newman General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis (2006). This analysis applies bldg. sq. ft. per employee factors to remaining building square feet to derive employee estimates. [5] See Table A-7 for method used to estimate existing employees. This analysis applies bldg. sq. ft. per employee factors to remaining building square feet to derive remaining employees. A breakdown of existing employees by nonresidential category is not available. Total buildout employees are calculated as total existing employees plus total remaining employees. Development impact fees are based on net new employees.

Net New
Acres
Building Square Feet Employees [5]
Dwelling Units/Building Square Feet [1] Population/Employees Pop/Emp
Factor
Dwelling Units Population [3]

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 17 City Land Uses and Demographics The projected new development, population, and employees through PSOI buildout are used in the calculation of the City fees by land use. Projections have been developed for the following land uses:

Residential
• Single-family
• Multifamily
Nonresidential
• Office
• Commercial
• Light Industrial
• Heavy Industrial
• Business Park
Appendix A provides detailed backup for the existing and new development, population, and employee estimates and projections summarized in Table 2-1.

The remainder of this chapter details the methodology for estimating these estimates and projections.

Note that Appendix A also includes development projections for the SSOI. Although public improvements needed to serve the SSOI are not included in this Nexus Study Update, it is necessary to project development in the SSOI for the purposes of excluding the portion of the police and roads costs that apply to new development in the SSOI. This process is summarized in Chapter 3.

Residential Estimates and Projections
This section details the methodology for estimating existing and projecting new residential development and population by residential land use through buildout of the PSOI.

Existing Estimates
The estimated existing single-family and multifamily dwelling units and total population in the City reflect the California Department of Finance (DOF) estimates for Newman as of January 1, 2024, the most recent DOF data available.

The DOF reports population in total only, so a breakdown by single-family and multifamily units was not available and is not shown in Table 2-1.

Projections Through Buildout of PSOI
The remaining single-family and multifamily development and population projections through buildout of the PSOI are shown in Table 2-1 in the “Net New”

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 18 City Land Uses and Demographics columns. Note that these projections for new development in the City are used in the fee calculations.

Development
The projected new single-family and multifamily dwelling units through buildout of the PSOI are a combination of the estimated remaining dwelling units in the current City limits and in the PSOI annexation areas. The projections were derived from a variety of sources, including City staff, the General Plan, the General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis, the 2015 Newman Housing Element, and the Northwest Newman Master Plan (NWNMP). Table A-1 in Appendix A summarizes the projected dwelling units in the existing City and the PSOI annexation areas by unit type. Tables A-2 and A-3 provide the backup detail for the remaining City and PSOI development, respectively. Table A-4 provides additional detail on the NWNMP (or annexation area 3) projected development.

Population
For each land use (single-family and multifamily), the population is estimated as the projected number of new dwelling units through City and PSOI buildout multiplied by the estimated persons per household (PPH). The PPH factors vary for singlefamily and multifamily units and were derived from the US Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) data for the City as detailed in Table A-5.

Total Projections
The total projected dwelling units and population in the City after buildout of the PSOI are calculated as the sum of the estimated existing and new units and population, respectively. In total, it is projected that the City will have approximately 7,600 dwelling units and a population of 25,000 after buildout of the PSOI. The existing dwelling units and population estimates account for just under half of these totals.

Nonresidential Estimates and Projections
This section details the methodology for estimating existing and projecting new nonresidential development and employees by nonresidential land use through buildout of the PSOI. The development estimates and projections shown in Table 2-1 are further detailed in Table A-6.

Existing Estimates
City staff provided existing nonresidential building square feet by nonresidential land use. Total existing employees were derived from US Census Bureau data. As shown in Table A-7, annual US Census Bureau estimates of the number of employees in the City were available through 2022. These estimates were used to estimate the total number of employees through 2024 by applying the average annual percentage increase in employees from 2012 through 2022 to the

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 19 City Land Uses and Demographics following two years. A breakdown of employees by nonresidential land use multifamily units was not available and is not shown in Table 2-1.

Projections Through Buildout of PSOI
The nonresidential development and employee projections through buildout of the PSOI are shown in Table 2-1 in the “Net New” columns. Note that these projections for new development in the City are used in the fee calculations.

Development
The projected new nonresidential building square feet by land use through buildout of the PSOI are a combination of the estimated remaining building square feet in the current City limits and in the PSOI annexation areas. The projections were derived from a variety of sources, including City staff, the General Plan, the General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis, and the NWNMP. The projections are based on the remaining nonresidential acres by land use in the current City limits and the PSOI annexation areas. For each nonresidential development type, a floor area ratio (FAR) is applied to the remaining acres to estimate remaining building square feet.

Table A-6 summarizes the projected nonresidential square feet in the existing City and the PSOI annexation areas by land use. Tables A-8 and A-3 provide the backup detail for the remaining City and PSOI development, respectively. Table A-4 provides additional detail on the NWNMP (or annexation area 3) projected development.

Employees
For each nonresidential land use, the employees are estimated as the projected number of new building square feet through City and PSOI buildout divided by an estimate of building square feet per employee. The building square feet per employee factors vary by nonresidential land use and are obtained from the General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis.

Total Projections
The total projected nonresidential building square feet and employees in the City after buildout of the PSOI are calculated as the sum of the estimated existing and new building square feet and employees, respectively. In total, it is projected that the City will have approximately 4.3 million nonresidential building square feet and 12,200 employees after buildout of the PSOI. The existing nonresidential development and employee estimates account for only 15 percent of this total.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 20 City Land Uses and Demographics Residential Demographic Information by Dwelling
Unit Size
Persons per Household and Trips per Household Factors by Residential Unit Size Ranges
As discussed in Chapter 1, in response to the provisions of AB 602, the singlefamily and multifamily fees for some of the fee components will be charged by dwelling unit square foot range. These fee components and fee categories by square foot range are summarized below. Note that single-family and multifamily development will each have the same fee categories. The square foot ranges were aligned between single-family and multifamily units based on available data and to simplify fee administration.

Fire, Police, General Government, and Transportation Single-Family and Multifamily Categories
• <750 sq. ft.
• 750 to 999 sq. ft.
• 1,000 to 1,999 sq. ft.
• ≥2,000 sq. ft.

Persons per household are used in cost allocations needed to establish the Fire, Police, and General Government fees, and trips per household are used in the cost allocation needed to establish the Transportation fees. Because each of these fee components will have fees that are charged by dwelling unit square foot range, persons per household and trips per household must be established for the singlefamily and multifamily square foot ranges summarized above. The methods for estimating the persons per household and trips per household by square foot range are detailed below.

Persons per Household by Square Foot Range
Table 2-2 summarizes the calculation of the single-family and multifamily PPH by residential square foot range. The methodology for estimating the single-family and multifamily PPH by square foot range is outlined in the steps below:

1. Compile 2023 AHS national data on PPH by square foot range for detached and attached single-family homes. Table A-9 summarizes the following data needed to calculate the PPH by square foot range:
- Number of households surveyed by number of persons per household (1 to 7 PPH) for each fee category square foot range.
- Resulting total number of units and persons per square foot range. - Average national PPH for each square foot range, calculated as total persons divided by total units surveyed.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 21 City Land Uses and Demographics - Average PPH adjustment factor for each square foot range, calculated as average PPH for the square foot range divided by PPH for the 1,000 to 1,999 square foot range.

2. Using the PPH adjustment factors from step 1, estimate PPH by fee category square foot range, as shown in Table 2-2. This table includes the following pertinent information:
- PPH adjustment factor for each square foot range from step 1. - Average single-family and multifamily unit sizes and corresponding average single-family PPH (3.51) and multifamily PPH (2.44). Table A-5 and Table A10 provide the backup for these values. - PPH factor for each single-family square foot range, calculated as the average single-family PPH (3.51) multiplied by the PPH adjustment factor for the range.
- PPH factor for each multifamily square foot range, calculated in a two-step process. First, the average multifamily PPH for the range containing the average sized multifamily home (750 to 999 square feet) is calculated as a percentage of the single-family PPH for the same range. Next, for each multifamily range, this percentage is multiplied by the single-family PPH for the same range to obtain the multifamily PPH. See footnote 2 in Table 2-2 for a detailed example calculation.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 22 City Land Uses and Demographics Table 2-2. Estimated Persons per Household by Residential Fee Category Trips per Household Factors by Square Foot Range
Table 2-3 summarizes the calculation of the single-family and multifamily trips per household (TPH) by residential square foot range. The methodology for estimating the single-family and multifamily TPH by square foot range is similar to the methodology for estimating the PPH by square foot range and is outlined in the steps below:

1. Compile the 2023 AHS data discussed above for the PPH calculations and 2017 National Household Travel Survey data on average daily TPH for standard household sizes (1 to 7 persons). Table A-9 summarizes the following data needed to calculate TPH by residential square foot range:
- Average number of TPH by number of persons per household (1 to 7 PPH). - Number of households surveyed by number of persons per household (1 to 7 PPH) for each fee category square foot range.
- Resulting total number of units and trips per square foot range. - Average national daily TPH for each square foot range, calculated as total trips divided by total units surveyed.
- Average TPH adjustment factor for each square foot range, calculated as average TPH for the square foot range divided by TPH for the 1,000 to 1,999 square foot range.

2. Using the TPH adjustment factors from step 1, estimate TPH by fee category square foot range, as shown in Table 2-3. This table includes the following pertinent information:

Average Unit
Size (sq. ft.)
Persons per
Household [2]
Average Unit
Size (sq. ft.)
Persons per
Household [2]
< 750 0.72 2.52 1.98
750 to 999 0.88 3.10 750 2.44
1,000 to 1,999 1.00 1,700 3.51 2.76
≥ 2,000 1.14 4.01 3.15
Source: US Census Bureau; City of Newman; EPS.
[1] See Table A-9 for persons per household (PPH) factors. [2] See Table A-5 for PPH for the average size single-family and multifamily units.

Single-family PPH for the other square foot ranges = PPH for average size unit * PPH factor.

Multifamily PPH for the other square foot ranges = multifamily PPH pct. of single-family PPH for average multifamily unit size multiplied by single-family PPH for square foot range.

For example, MF PPH for "<750 sq. ft." range = 2.44 / 3.10 *2.44.

Land Use Category
(Sq. Ft. Range)
PPH Single-Family Multifamily
Adjustment
Factor [1]

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 23 City Land Uses and Demographics - TPH adjustment factor for each square foot range from step 1. - Average single-family and multifamily unit sizes and corresponding average single-family PM Peak Trips (0.94) and multifamily PM Peak Trips (0.51).

Table A-10 provides the backup for the average single-family unit’s square feet. The PM Peak Trip values are from the ITE Manual 11th edition. - TPH factor for each single-family square foot range, calculated as the average single-family PM Peak Trip rate (0.94) multiplied by the TPH adjustment factor for the range.
- TPH factor for each multifamily square foot range, calculated in a two-step process. First, the average multifamily TPH for the range containing the average sized multifamily home (750 to 999 square feet) is calculated as a percentage of the single-family TPH for the same range. Next, for each multifamily range, this percentage is multiplied by the single-family TPH for the same range to obtain the multifamily TPH. See footnote 2 in Table 2-3 for a detailed example calculation.

Table 2-3. Estimated Trips per Household by Residential Fee Category Average Unit
Size (sq. ft.)
PM Peak
Hour Trips per
Household [2]
Average Unit
Size (sq. ft.)
PM Peak
Hour Trips per
Household [2]
< 750 0.76 0.71 0.43
750 to 999 0.90 0.85 750 0.51
1,000 to 1,999 1.00 1,700 0.94 0.56
≥ 2,000 1.12 1.05 0.63
Source: US Census Bureau; National Household Travel Survey; ITE Manual 11th Edition; City of Newman; EPS. [1] See Table A-9 for trips per household (PPH) factors. [2] See Table B-14 for TPH for the average size single-family and multifamily units.

Single-family TPH for the other square foot ranges = TPH for average size unit * TPH factor.

Multifamily TPH for the other square foot ranges = multifamily TPH pct. of single-family TPH for average multifamily unit size multiplied by single-family TPH for square foot range.

For example, MF TPH for "<750 sq. ft." range = 0.51 / 0.85 * 0.71.

Single-Family Multifamily
Land Use Category
(Sq. Ft. Range)
TPH
Adjustment
Factor [1]
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 24 Infrastructure and Public Facilities

3. Infrastructure and Public Facilities
This chapter summarizes the backbone infrastructure and public facilities (public improvements) that are required to serve future development through buildout of the PSOI and that will be funded by the CFF Program. All costs are expressed in constant 2025 dollars. Table 3-1 summarizes the estimated costs of the required public improvements by fee component. The public improvement costs across all fee components total approximately $217.3 million. In addition, the CFF Program includes an administration cost component that is calculated as 3 percent of all other CFF Program costs, bringing the total costs to be funded through the CFF Program to $223.9 million. Appendix B contains a Project Capital Improvement Program (CIP) that details the requirements and costs for the public improvements.

Table 3-1. Summary of Fee-Funded Improvement Costs

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 25 Infrastructure and Public Facilities CFF Program Costs
As shown in Table 3-1, fee-funded cost estimates are provided for the following CFF Program components: Fire, Police, General Government, Transportation, Sewer, Storm Drainage, Water, and CFF Program Administration. The City also has a Parks fee, which is not being updated in this study because the City plans to complete the currently ongoing Parks Master Plan update before updating the Parks fee. The CFF Program improvements and costs for each component are discussed in the remainder of this chapter.

Fire, Police, and General Government Service Population As detailed in Appendix B (see Table B-26), the future new service population used to inform fire, police, and general government facility requirements through buildout of the PSOI is estimated as the number of residents plus approximately 24 percent of the number of employees through PSOI buildout. The number of employees is weighted, or discounted, to reflect the fewer number of hours that employees spend working in the City as compared to the maximum amount of time a resident could spend in the City, and thus employees lower demand for new improvements. The estimated 24 percent weighting factor is calculated as 40 hours per week for an employee (the standard work week) as compared to 168 total hours per week for a resident (24 hours per day).

The existing and new service population for development through buildout of the PSOI are summarized below:
• Existing Service Population: 12,482
• New Service Population through PSOI buildout: 15,444
These service populations are used to estimate the new fire, police, and general government facilities requirements through PSOI buildout, as described in the following sections of this chapter. Note that Table B-26 also includes the estimated service population for the General Plan SSOI areas. This service population is needed to determine the portion of the police station required to serve development in the SSOI and, thus, to be excluded from the CFF Program. Only the portion needed for development through PSOI buildout is included in the CFF Program.

Fire Improvements
The City will need to construct and acquire new fire facilities, vehicles, and equipment to serve future new residents and employees in the City. As summarized in Table 3-2 and discussed further in the remainder of this section, the cost of these improvements needed to serve new development through PSOI buildout totals approximately $11.1 million. The fire improvements and costs are further detailed in Tables B-1, B-2, and B-5 of Appendix B.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 26 Infrastructure and Public Facilities Table 3-2. Summary of Fee-Funded Fire Improvement Costs Fire Station
The City currently has one fire station and estimates that a second station will be needed by the time the City population reaches 18,000 to 20,000 residents. The fire station is estimated to cost $8.3 million, which includes both construction and land acquisition costs.

Fire Vehicles
The Fire CIP includes an inventory of the current vehicles owned by the City Fire department. As the new service population through PSOI buildout is only slightly higher than the existing service population, the City estimates that the Fire Department will need to acquire an equal number of each type of vehicle as it currently owns. The City Fire Department provided the cost estimates for each type of vehicle. The required new vehicles are projected to cost $2.7 million in total.

Firefighting Gear
It is estimated that the new fire station will be operated by 9 full-time (FTE) firefighters. This number of firefighters is estimated as 3 FTEs for each of 3 8 hour shifts in a 24-hour period. Thus, the CIP includes required firefighting gear for 9 firefighters, which is estimated to cost $155,000 in total. The City Fire Department provided the firefighting gear requirements and cost estimates.

Police Improvements
The City will need to construct and acquire new police facilities, vehicles, and equipment to serve future new residents and employees in the City. As summarized in Table 3-3 and discussed further in the remainder of this section, the cost of these improvements needed to serve new development through PSOI buildout totals approximately $8.9 million. The police improvements and costs are further detailed in Tables B-3 through B-5 of Appendix B.

Item Quantity
Improvement Cost -
Primary SOI (2025$)
Source Table B-2
Fire Station 1 $8,262,500
Vehicles 12 $2,670,000
Equipment 9 $154,800
Total (Rounded) $11,087,000
Source: City of Newman, EPS.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 27 Infrastructure and Public Facilities Table 3-3. Summary of Fee-Funded Police Improvement Costs Police Station
The City has one police station and estimates that a second station will be needed to serve projected new residents and employees through buildout of both the City’s PSOI and SSOI. The police station is estimated to cost $16.8 million, which includes both construction and land acquisition costs. Approximately 42 percent of this cost, or $7.0 million, is allocated to development through PSOI buildout and included in the CFF Program. The remaining 58 percent of the station is needed to serve development in the City’s SSOI annexation areas.

Police Vehicles
The General Plan indicates a target ratio of two police officers for each 1,000 new residents. Based on this standard, a total of 26 new officers will be needed to serve the projected new residents and employees through PSOI buildout. As the new population is slightly higher than the existing population, and the Police Department currently has 16 police cars, it is estimated that another 17 new police cars will be required for the new officers. In addition, the Police Department currently owns one DUI Trailer and estimates that an additional DUI trailer will be needed to serve the new residents and employees through PSOI buildout. The Police Department provided the cost estimates for each type of vehicle. The required new vehicles are projected to cost $1.6 million in total.

Police Officer Equipment
The Police Department must acquire equipment for the 26 new police officers needed to serve the new residents and employees of the City through PSOI buildout (see above discussion). The estimated cost for the required equipment for each officer is based on costs used in the City of Fresno’s 2022 Police Item Quantity
Improvement Cost -
Primary SOI (2025$)
Source Table B-4
Police Station [1] 0.42 $7,005,657
Vehicles 18 $1,605,000
Equipment 26 $300,820
Total (Rounded) $8,911,000
Source: City of Newman, EPS.
[1] Quantity is portion of police station needed to serve development through buildout of primary SOI.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 28 Infrastructure and Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Update escalated to current dollars. In total, the CIP includes approximately $301,000 in equipment costs for the new police officers.

General Government Improvements
The City will need to construct and acquire new government facilities, vehicles, and equipment to serve future new residents and employees in the City. As summarized in Table 3-4 and discussed further in the remainder of this section, the cost of these improvements needed to serve new development through PSOI buildout totals approximately $23.9 million. The general government improvements and costs are further detailed in Tables B-6 through B-8 of Appendix B.

Table 3-4. Summary of Fee-Funded General Government Improvement Costs Government Facilities
The City provided a list of its current inventory of general government facilities (see Table B-6). Examples are City Hall, a museum, a teen center, a corporation yard, and several water department facilities. Based on the existing inventory, a list of general government new facilities space needed to serve the new service population through PSOI buildout was developed. In general, the amount of projected new facility space for each government facility was based on the amount of existing space multiplied by the ratio of the new service population to the existing service population (approximately 1.2). In other words, the amount of new facility space was generally based on the existing standard of facility space per service population. However, in some cases, it was assumed that only the same amount of space as for the existing facility would be needed.

The costs for most facilities were based on the 2023 appraisal of City buildings, prepared by AssetWorks, with the appraisal values escalated to 2025 dollars. It was also generally assumed that the new facilities would be constructed as an expansion of the existing facilities so that there would be no land acquisition costs. An exception to these cost estimates was the estimate for a new Item Source
Improvement Cost -
Primary SOI (2025$)
Facilities Table B-6 $22,160,000
Vehicles and Equipment Table B-8 $1,718,500
Total (Rounded) $23,879,000
Source: City of Newman; EPS.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 29 Infrastructure and Public Facilities corporation yard, where the City has already purchased land for a new site and provided the estimated land acquisition and construction costs. The total estimated cost of new government facilities required for new development through PSOI buildout is $22.2 million.

Government Vehicles and Equipment
The General Government CIP includes an inventory of the current vehicles owned by the City. For each vehicle, the City provided replacement costs in 2023 dollars, which were escalated to 2025 dollars for the purposes of this report. As the new service population through PSOI buildout is only slightly higher than the existing service population, the City estimates that it will need to acquire an equal number of each type of vehicle as it currently owns, with the exception of general purpose trucks, where it is assumed that two additional trucks will be purchased to serve the slightly higher new service population. The total estimated cost of the new vehicles and equipment required for new development through PSOI buildout is $1.7 million.

Note that the cost of new vehicles needed for the wastewater treatment plan (WWTP) and attributable to new development are accounted for in the sewer cost estimates and, therefore, excluded from this section.

Transportation
New transportation improvements will be needed to serve future new residents and employees in the City. As summarized in Table 3-5, the cost of these improvements needed to serve new development through PSOI buildout totals approximately $49.7 million. The improvements include the completion of remaining 1992 General Plan road segments, 2030 General Plan road segments, intersection improvements, and traffic signals. The transportation improvements and costs are further detailed in Tables B-9 through B-14 of Appendix B.

It is assumed that all transportation improvements and associated costs are needed to serve all existing and new development in the City. EPS estimated the distribution of the costs attributable to existing development, new development through PSOI buildout, and SSOI development based on the estimated percentage distribution of trips attributable to existing development, new development through PSOI buildout, and SSOI development, respectively (see Table B-14). The fee-funded costs summarized in Table 3-5 are equal to the costs attributable to new development through PSOI buildout only, or an estimated 39 percent of the total costs. Each of the components of the transportation costs are summarized in the remainder of this section.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 30 Infrastructure and Public Facilities Table 3-5. Summary of Fee-Funded Street Improvement Costs 1992 General Plan Street Segments
The 1992 General Plan remaining street segments and the estimated costs of these segments are based on the 2000 Traffic Mitigation Fee Study prepared by Dowling and Associates, with the estimated costs updated to current dollars. The original costs were in 2000 dollars, updated to 2009 dollars in the 2010 Draft Capital Facilities Fees Update Study prepared by PMC (2010 Draft CFF Update Study), and updated to current dollars in this report. As described previously, an estimated 39 percent of the total costs are attributable to development through PSOI buildout and included in the fee-funded costs in this report. 2030 General Plan Street Segments
The street segment improvements include those identified in the 2030 General Plan and 2030 General Plan EIR Traffic Report. The original cost estimates (in 2009 dollars) were from the 2010 Draft CFF Update Study and have been updated to current dollars. As described previously, an estimated 39 percent of the total costs are attributable to development through PSOI buildout and included in the fee-funded costs in this report.

Intersections
The intersection improvements include those identified in the 2030 General Plan and 2030 General Plan EIR Traffic Report. The original cost estimates (in 2009 dollars) were from the 2010 Draft CFF Update Study and have been updated to current dollars. As described previously, an estimated 39 percent of the total costs are attributable to development through PSOI buildout and included in the fee-funded costs in this report.

Item
Improvement Cost -
Primary SOI (2025$)
Source Table B-9
Completion of 1992 GP Segments $20,703,430
2030 General Plan Circulation Element and Impacted Segments $16,555,789 Intersection Improvements $3,982,261
Traffic Signals $8,475,346
Total (Rounded) $49,717,000
Source: City of Newman, EPS.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 31 Infrastructure and Public Facilities Traffic Signals
The traffic signal improvements include those identified in the 2030 General Plan EIR Traffic Report, excluding those outside of the City’s PSOI and SSOI. The original cost estimates (in 2009 dollars) were from the 2010 Draft CFF Update Study and have been updated to current dollars. As described previously, an estimated 39 percent of the total costs are attributable to development through PSOI buildout and included in the fee-funded costs in this report.

Sewer
New sewer improvements will be needed to serve future new residents and employees in the City. As summarized in Table 3-6, the cost of these improvements needed to serve new development through PSOI buildout totals approximately $55.4 million. The improvements include wastewater collection system improvements, wastewater treatment and reclamation facility improvements, and vehicles and equipment. The sewer improvements and costs are further detailed in Tables B-15 through B-18 of Appendix B.

Table 3-6. Summary of Fee-Funded Sewer Improvement Costs Wastewater Collection System
The wastewater collection system improvements and estimated costs were obtained from the 2008 Wastewater Collection System Master Plan prepared by Eco:Logic and escalated to current dollars. The Wastewater Collection System Master Plan includes North Route and South Route improvements. The South Route improvements have been excluded from the cost estimates in this report because they are designed to serve only SSOI areas only. In addition, a percentage of the North Route improvements will serve SSOI areas, so the estimated cost of these improvements has also been excluded.

Item
Improvement Cost -
Primary SOI (2025$)
Source Table B-15
Wastewater Collection System $7,660,000
Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation $45,929,000
Vehicles and Equipment $1,773,000
Total (Rounded) $55,362,000
Source: City of Newman, EPS.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 32 Infrastructure and Public Facilities Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation Facility Upgrade
The wastewater treatment and reclamation facility upgrade improvements and estimated costs were obtained from the 2018 Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation Facility Upgrade report prepared by Stantec and escalated to current dollars. The improvements were designed to serve existing and new development through PSOI buildout. The costs attributable to new development have been estimated separately from the total costs because they are the only costs that will be included in the CFF Program.

Wastewater Vehicles and Equipment
The planned wastewater vehicles and estimated costs were provided by Stantec in 2023 dollars and escalated to current dollars. The improvements and equipment are needed to serve existing and new development through PSOI buildout. The costs attributable to new development have been estimated separately from the total costs because they are the only costs that will be included in the CFF Program.

DUEs
A DUE factor is established for each land used to measure its impact on the sewer system as compared to a single-family unit. The number of DUEs for each land use are estimated as the DUE factor multiplied by the total amount of new development through PSOI buildout. The DUEs are summed across land uses to obtain total DUEs to which to apply the cost per DUE.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 33 Infrastructure and Public Facilities Storm Drainage
New storm drainage improvements will be needed to provide flood protection for future new residents and employees in the City. As summarized in Table 3-7, the cost of these improvements needed to serve new development through PSOI buildout totals approximately $7.4 million. The improvements include pipelines, detention basins, channels, greenbelts, and culverts. The improvements and costs were obtained from the 2007 City Storm Drainage Master Plan prepared by Boyle Engineering, and the costs were updated to current dollars.

Table 3-7. Summary of Fee-Funded Drainage Improvement Costs The storm drainage improvements and costs are further detailed in Tables B-19 and B-20 of Appendix B. Improvements for the Northside Drainage System are shown because this drainage system will serve the PSOI. Portions of this system also serve areas in the SSOI, so the improvements and costs associated with those areas have been excluded from the total costs.

Water Improvements
New water improvements will be needed to serve future new residents and employees in the City. As summarized in Table 3-8, the cost of these improvements needed to serve new development through PSOI buildout totals approximately $61.0 million. The water improvements and costs are further detailed in Tables B-21 through B-23 of Appendix B.

Item
Improvement Cost -
Primary SOI (2025$)
Source Table B-19
Northside Drain $7,414,000
Total (Rounded) $7,414,000
Source: City of Newman, EPS.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 34 Infrastructure and Public Facilities Table 3-8. Summary of Fee-Funded Water Improvement Costs Water System Improvements
The water system improvements and estimated costs were obtained from the 2022 Water Master Plan prepared by Stantec, which includes water well and water main improvements needed to serve specific planned developments in the City and PSOI areas. The average gallons per day provided by the Water Master Plan improvements was compared to the average gallons per day attributable to all development in the PSOI to estimate the percentage of the improvement costs attributable to development through PSOI buildout. This percentage (97.4%) was applied to the total Water System Master Plan costs to estimate the cost of water system improvements needed for new development through PSOI buildout.

Item
Improvement Cost -
Primary SOI (2025$)
Source Table B-21
Water System Improvements from Water Master Plan $60,971,000 Total (Rounded) $60,971,000
Source: City of Newman, EPS.

Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 35 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation

4. Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee
Calculation
The fee for each improvement type is estimated by allocating the CFF Program costs (detailed in the previous chapter) to the various land uses based on each land use’s relative demand for and benefit received from the improvement type.

Recall from Chapter 1 that to comply with the requirements in AB 602, the residential land use categories for Fire, Police, General Government, and Transportation fees are based on ranges of unit square feet, while the residential land use categories for Storm Drainage and Sewer fees are based on the type of unit, and Water fees are based on meter size.

Table 4-1 provides an estimate of all fees except Water fees. Table 4-2 provides a separate summary of the Water fees since it is proposed that Water fees be charged per meter size rather than per dwelling unit or 1,000 building square feet.

In total, the CFF Program Update consists of seven backbone infrastructure and public facilities components and an Administration component.

For each residential and commercial land use, the backbone infrastructure and public facilities component fees are established by a cost allocation methodology, while the Administration fee is established as three percent of the total of the other fees. Although the residential land use categories vary for the different fee components, the cost allocation methodology for all fee components allocates costs per residential unit and 1,000 commercial building square feet. This allocation is then used to estimate the fees.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 36 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-1. Proposed CFF Program Fee Summary
Land Use Category Parks [2] Fire Police
General
Government Transportation Sewer [3]
Storm
Drainage [3] Subtotal
CFF Program
Admin. [4] Total
Source Table 4-4 Table 4-5 Table 4-6 Table 4-8 Table 4-11 Table 4-13

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 37 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-2. Water Improvement Fees
The general steps to allocate the costs and estimate the fees shown in Table 4-1 and Table 4-2 for each backbone infrastructure and public facilities fee component are outlined below:

1. Determine the CFF Program costs. These costs were detailed in the previous chapter.

2. Determine the Dwelling Unit Equivalent (DUE) factor for each land use that serves as a measure of demand placed on the improvement relative to the demand of either a Single-Family dwelling unit (for Storm Drainage, Water, and Sewer fees) or a “Single-family 1,000 to 1,999 Sq. Ft.” dwelling unit (for Fire, Police, General Government, and Transportation fees).

3. For each land use, multiply the DUE factor by the number of units (dwelling units or 1,000 commercial bldg. sq. ft.) and sum across land uses to derive the total DUEs.

4. Calculate the cost per DUE as the total cost divided by the total DUEs.

5. For each land use, calculate the cost per unit or building square foot as the DUE factor multiplied by the cost per DUE:
o For all fee components except Water, the costs per unit and building square foot serve as the fees.
o For Water fees, an additional step is required to convert the fees to a meter fee.

The fee for 1-inch and under meters equals the cost per single-family unit. Flow factors that measure the flow capacity for larger meters as compared to a 1-inch meter are used to establish the fees for meters ranging from 1.5 to 10 inches.

Item Water
Administration
(3%)
Total Fee
per Meter
Source Table 4-17
Meter
1-inch and under $10,183 $305 $10,488

Fee per Water Meter

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 38 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Cost Allocation by Component
As outlined above, DUE factors are used to allocate improvement costs to each land use based on the land use’s demand placed on an improvement type relative to the demand from a single-family unit. The remainder of this chapter summarizes the DUE factors and details the cost allocation for each backbone infrastructure and public facilities fee component.

Fire, Police, and General Government
DUE Factors
Table 4-3 details the DUE factors for fire, police, and general government facilities and calculates the total DUEs across all land use categories. The DUE factors are established using population and employees to estimate relative demand for fire and police protection and general government services by land use. The DUE factors by land use are calculated as the number of residents or employees per unit (residential dwelling unit or 1,000 nonresidential building square foot) relative to the number of residents for a “Single-family 1,000 to 1,999 Sq. Ft.” unit. For nonresidential land uses, DUE factors are then multiplied by 0.24, which reflects the estimated time an employee spends in the City (40 hours per week divided by 168 total hours per week) as compared to a resident.

Cost Allocation
Tables 4-4, 4-5, and 4-6 summarize the fire facilities, police facilities, and general government facilities cost allocations, respectively, using the improvement costs established in the previous chapter, the DUE factors and total DUEs from Table 4-3, and the methodology outlined at the beginning of this chapter.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 39 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-3. Fire, Police, and General Government DUEs

Land Use
Remaining
Dwelling Units/
Bldg. Sq. Ft. [1]
Bldg. Sq. Ft.
per Employee [1]
Pop/Emp
Factor [2]
DUE
Factor [3]
Total
Remaining
DUEs [4]
Residential pph per unit
Single-Family
< 750 2.52 0.72
750 to 999 3.10 0.88
1,000 to 1,999 3,250 3.51 1.00 3,250
≥ 2,000 4.01 1.14
Multifamily
< 750 1.98 0.57
750 to 999 629 2.44 0.70 437
1,000 to 1,999 2.76 0.79
≥ 2,000 3.15 0.90
Subtotal Residential 3,879 3,687
Commercial
emp per 1K
bldg. sq. ft.
per 1K
bldg. sq. ft.

Weighting Factor [5] 0.24
Office 90,387 250 0.96 0.27 25
Commercial 689,337 500 0.48 0.14 94
Light Industrial 627,264 750 0.32 0.09 57
Heavy Industrial 148,104 1,000 0.24 0.07 10
Business Park 1,924,045 250 0.96 0.27 527
Subtotal Commercial 3,479,137 713
Total 4,401
Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Housing Survey; City of Newman; EPS. [1] See Table 2-1.
[2] See Table 2-2 for PPH factors.

Employees per 1,000 bldg. sq. ft. = (1/sq. ft. per employee*1,000) * weighting factor. [3] DUE factor = population/employee factor / single-family (1,000 to 2,000) population/employee factor. [4] Residential remaining DUEs = remaining units * DUE factor.

Nonresidential remaining DUEs = remaining bldg. sq. ft./1,000 * DUE factor. [5] See Table B-26.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 40 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-4. Fire Facilities Cost Allocation
DUE Factor [1] Amount
Cost per DUE
Total Cost [2] $11,087,000
Total New DUEs [1] 4,401
Cost per DUE $2,519
Cost per Unit/Bldg. Sq. Ft.

Single-Family (sq. ft. ranges)
< 750 0.72 $1,811
750 to 999 0.88 $2,228
1,000 to 1,999 1.00 $2,519
≥ 2,000 1.14 $2,882
Multifamily
< 750 0.57 $1,424
750 to 999 0.70 $1,752
1,000 to 1,999 0.79 $1,981
≥ 2,000 0.90 $2,266
Nonresidential
Office 0.27 $690
Commercial 0.14 $345
Light Industrial 0.09 $230
Heavy Industrial 0.07 $172
Business Park 0.27 $690
Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Housing Survey; City of Newman; EPS. [1] See Table 4-3.
[2] See Table 3-1.

Item
per unit
per unit
per 1,000 bldg. sq. ft.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 41 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-5. Police Facilities Cost Allocation
DUE Factor [1] Amount
Cost per DUE
Total Cost [1] $8,911,000
Total New DUEs [2] 4,401
Cost per DUE $2,025
Cost per Unit/Bldg. Sq. Ft.

Single-Family (sq. ft. ranges)
< 750 0.72 $1,456
750 to 999 0.88 $1,790
1,000 to 1,999 1.00 $2,025
≥ 2,000 1.14 $2,316
Multifamily
< 750 0.57 $1,145
750 to 999 0.70 $1,408
1,000 to 1,999 0.79 $1,593
≥ 2,000 0.90 $1,822
Nonresidential
Office 0.27 $554
Commercial 0.14 $277
Light Industrial 0.09 $185
Heavy Industrial 0.07 $139
Business Park 0.27 $554
Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Housing Survey; City of Newman; EPS. [1] See Table 3-3.
[2] See Table 4-3.

Item
per unit
per unit
per 1,000 bldg. sq. ft.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 42 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-6. General Government Facilities Cost Allocation

DUE Factor [1] Amount
Cost per DUE
Total Cost [1] $23,879,000
Total New DUEs [2] 4,401
Cost per DUE $5,426
Cost per Unit/Bldg. Sq. Ft.

Single-Family (sq. ft. ranges)
< 750 0.72 $3,900
750 to 999 0.88 $4,798
1,000 to 1,999 1.00 $5,426
≥ 2,000 1.14 $6,206
Multifamily
< 750 0.57 $3,068
750 to 999 0.70 $3,774
1,000 to 1,999 0.79 $4,268
≥ 2,000 0.90 $4,881
Nonresidential
Office 0.27 $1,486
Commercial 0.14 $743
Light Industrial 0.09 $495
Heavy Industrial 0.07 $371
Business Park 0.27 $1,486
Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Housing Survey; City of Newman; EPS. [1] See Table 3-1.
[2] See Table 4-3.

Item
per unit
per unit
per 1,000 bldg. sq. ft.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 43 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Transportation
DUE Factors
The transportation DUE factors are established using PM peak hour trip rates to measure relative demand for roadway infrastructure by land use. The DUE factors by land use are calculated as the estimated PM peak hour trip rate per dwelling unit or 1,000 commercial building square feet relative to the PM peak hour trip rate per dwelling unit for a “Single-family 1,000 to 1,9999 Sq. Ft.” house.

The base PM peak hour trip rates by land use are obtained from the Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition.

Residential Factors
Residential DUE factors are established using the PM peak hour trip rate per unit adjusted by a trip adjustment factor that scales the trips up or down depending on number of persons per household for the different unit size categories. The DUE factor for each land use category equals the adjusted PM peak hour trip rate relative to the PM peak hour trip rate for a “Single-family 1,000 to 1,9999 Sq. Ft.” unit. The calculation of the trip adjustment factor for each residential fee category was detailed in Chapter 2.

Nonresidential Factors
Nonresidential DUE factors for each land use are established using the PM peak hour trip rate per 1,000 building square foot multiplied by the percentage of new trips considered to be newly originated trips as a measure of demand (see Table B-14).

DUE Factor Summary
Table 4-7 summarizes the residential and nonresidential PM peak hour trip rates and DUE factors described above and calculates the total DUEs across all land use categories.

Cost Allocation
Table 4-8 summarizes the transportation cost allocation using the transportation costs established in the previous chapter, the DUE factors and total DUEs from Table 4-7, and the methodology outlined at the beginning of this chapter.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 44 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-7. Transportation Improvements DUEs
Land Use
Category
Adjusted PM
Peak Hour
Trip Rate DUE Factor
Remaining
Dwelling Units/
Bldg. Sq. Ft. Total DUEs
Source Table 2-3
Formula A C Res: B*C
Nonres: B*C/1,000
Residential
Single-Family Residential
< 750 0.71 0.76 - -
750 to 999 0.85 0.90 - -
1,000 to 1,999 0.94 1.00 3,250 3,250
≥ 2,000 1.05 1.12 - -
Subtotal 3,250 3,250
Multifamily
< 750 0.43 0.45 - -
750 to 999 0.51 0.54 - -
1,000 to 1,999 0.56 0.60 629 377
≥ 2,000 0.63 0.67 - -
Subtotal 629 377
Nonresidential
Office 1.44 1.53 90,387 138
Commercial 2.41 2.57 689,337 1,770
Light Industrial 0.65 0.69 627,264 434
Heavy Industrial 0.74 0.79 148,104 117
Business Park 1.22 1.30 1,924,045 2,497
Subtotal 3,479,137 4,956
Total 8,584
Source: City of Newman; ITE Manual (11th Edition); EPS.

Transportation DUEs through Primary SOI Buildout
B=A/A for Single Fam
1,000-2,000 sq. ft.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 45 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-8. Transportation Improvement Cost Allocation
DUE Factor [1] Amount
Cost per DUE
Total Cost through Primary SOI Buildout [1] $49,717,000 Total New DUEs [2] 8,584
Cost per DUE $5,792
Cost per Unit/Bldg. Sq. Ft.

Single-Family (sq. ft. ranges)
< 750 0.76 $4,375
750 to 999 0.90 $5,238
1,000 to 1,999 1.00 $5,792
≥ 2,000 1.12 $6,470
Multifamily
< 750 0.45 $2,625
750 to 999 0.54 $3,143
1,000 to 1,999 0.60 $3,475
≥ 2,000 0.67 $3,882
Nonresidential
Office 1.53 $8,873
Commercial 2.57 $14,875
Light Industrial 0.69 $4,005
Heavy Industrial 0.79 $4,560
Business Park 1.30 $7,517
Source: City of Newman; EPS.
[1] See Table 3-1.
[2] See Table 4-7.

Item
per 1,000 bldg. sq. ft.
per unit
per unit

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 46 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Sewer
DUE Factors
Table 4-9 details the sewer facilities DUE factors by land use category, and Table 4-10 calculates the total DUEs across all land use categories. The DUE factors are established using daily sewage generation to estimate relative demand for sewer facilities by land use. The DUE factors by land use are calculated as the sewage gallons per day per unit (residential dwelling unit or 1,000 nonresidential building square foot) relative to the sewage gallons per day for a single-family unit.

Sewage generation rates were obtained from the 2018 City of Newman Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation Facility Upgrade report prepared by Stantec.

Cost Allocation
Table 4-11 details the sewer facilities cost allocation using the sewer costs established in the previous chapter, the DUE factors from Table 4-9, the total DUEs from Table 4-10, and the methodology outlined at the beginning of this chapter.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 47 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-9. Sewer DUE Factors

Land Use Formula
Single
Family Multifamily
Commercial
and Office
Business
Park Industrial
Residential
Existing Population [1] A 10,140 10,140
MGD [1] B 0.64 0.64
GPD per Person C=B*1,000,000/A 63.12 63.12
Persons per Household [2] D 3.51 2.44
GPD per Unit C*D 221.27 153.89
Nonresidential
Acres [1] A 37.00 37.00 57.00
MGD [1] B 0.06 0.06 0.09
GPD per Acre [1] C=B*1,000,000/A 1,621.62 1,621.62 1,578.95 FAR [2] D 0.25 0.35 0.40
GPD per 1,000 Bldg. Sq. Ft. C*D 148.91 106.36 90.62
DUE Factor (per unit / 1,000 bldg. sq. ft.) 1.00 0.70 0.67 0.48 0.41 Source: City of Newman Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation Facility Upgrade (September 20, 2018); City of Newman; EPS.

MGD: Million gallons per day; GPD: Gallons per day.
[1] From Table 3 of Newman Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation Facility Upgrade prepared by Stantec (September 20, 2018) Amounts for existing development.
[2] See Table A-8.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 48 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-10. Sewer DUEs
Land Use
DUE
Factor DUEs
Source Table 2-1 Table 4-9
Residential
Single-Family 3,250 1.00 3,250
Multifamily 629 0.70 440
Subtotal Residential 3,879 3,690
Nonresidential
Office 90,387 0.67 61
Commercial 689,337 0.67 462
Light Industrial 627,264 0.41 257
Heavy Industrial 148,104 0.41 61
Business Park 1,924,045 0.48 924
Subtotal Commercial 3,479,137 1,764
Total 5,454
Source: City of Newman; EPS.

Remaining Dwelling
Units/Bldg. Sq. Ft.
through PSOI Buildout

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 49 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-11. Sewer Improvements Cost Allocation
Item
DUE
Factors [1] Amount
Cost per DUE
Total Cost through Primary SOI Buildout [1] $55,362,000 Total New DUEs [2] 5,454
Cost per DUE $10,150
Cost per Unit/Bldg. Sq. Ft.

Residential
Single-Family 1.00 $10,150
Multifamily 0.70 $7,105
Nonresidential
Office 0.67 $6,801
Commercial 0.67 $6,801
Light Industrial 0.41 $4,162
Heavy Industrial 0.41 $4,162
Business Park 0.48 $4,872
Source: City of Newman; EPS.
[1] See Table B-15.
[2] See Table 4-10.
per unit
per 1,000 bldg. sq. ft.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 50 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Storm Drainage
DUE Factors
Table 4-12 details the storm drainage facilities DUE factors by land use category and calculates the total DUEs across all land use categories. The DUE factors are established using impervious acres percentages to estimate relative demand for storm drainage improvements by land use. The DUE factors by land use are calculated as the impervious acres per unit (residential dwelling unit or 1,000 commercial building square foot) relative to the impervious acres for a singlefamily unit.

Cost Allocation
Table 4-13 details the storm drainage facilities cost allocation using the storm drainage costs established in the previous chapter, the DUE factors and total DUEs from Table 4-12, and the methodology outlined at the beginning of this chapter.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 51 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-12. Storm Drainage DUEs
Land Use Acres
Dwelling Units/
Bldg. Sq. Ft.

Impervious
Percentage
Impervious
Acres
Impervious Acres per
Unit/1,000 Bldg. Sq. Ft.

DUE
Factor
Source Table 2-1 Table 2-1
Formula A B C D=B*C Res: E=D/B F=E/Single Fam E Res: B*F Nonres: E=D/B*1,000 Nonres: B*F/1,000
Residential per unit
Single-Family 514.1 3,250 0.50 257.1 0.08 1.00 3,250
Multifamily 32.7 629 0.65 21.2 0.03 0.43 268
Subtotal Residential 546.8 3,879 3,518
Nonresidential
per 1K
bldg. sq. ft.

Office 8.3 90,387 0.70 5.8 0.06 0.81 73
Commercial 63.3 689,337 0.70 44.3 0.06 0.81 560
Light Industrial 36.0 627,264 0.80 28.8 0.05 0.58 364
Heavy Industrial 8.5 148,104 0.90 7.7 0.05 0.65 97
Business Park 126.2 1,924,045 0.70 88.3 0.05 0.58 1,117 Subtotal Commercial 242.3 3,479,137 174.9 2,211
Total 789.1 5,730
Source: City of Newman; EPS.

Impervious Acres
Remaining Development
through Buildout of Primary SOI Total
Remaining
DUEs

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 52 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-13. Storm Drainage Improvements Cost Allocation Item DUE Factor [1] Amount
Cost per DUE
Total Cost through Primary SOI Buildout [1] $7,414,000
Total New DUEs [2] 5,730
Cost per DUE $1,294
Cost per Unit/Bldg. Sq. Ft. [3]
Residential
Single-Family 1.00 $1,294
Multifamily 0.43 $552
Nonresidential
Office 0.81 $1,052
Commercial 0.81 $1,052
Light Industrial 0.58 $751
Heavy Industrial 0.65 $845
Business Park 0.58 $751
Source: City of Newman; EPS.
[1] See Table 3-1.
[2] See Table 4-12.
[3] Residential fees are by land use only rather than by square foot range within each land use.
per unit
per 1,000 bldg. sq. ft.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 53 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Water
DUE Factors
Table 4-14 details the water facilities DUE factors by land use category, and Table 4-15 calculates the total DUEs across all land use categories. The DUE factors are established using daily water usage to estimate relative demand for water facilities by land use. The DUE factors by land use are calculated as the water gallons per day per unit (residential dwelling unit or 1,000 nonresidential building square foot) relative to the water gallons per day for a single-family unit.

Water usage rates were derived from values in the 2015 City of Newman Urban Water Management Plan and the 2022 City of Newman Water Master Plan reports.

Cost Allocation
Table 4-16 details the water facilities cost allocation using the water costs established in the previous chapter, the DUE factors from Table 4-14, the total DUEs from Table 4-15, and the methodology outlined at the beginning of this chapter. Table 4-17 establishes fees by meter size using the cost per DUE from Table 4-16 as the fee for a 1-inch or smaller meter and basing the fees for the other meter sizes on their relative flow capacities as compared to the flow capacity for a 1-inch meter (as described at the beginning of the chapter).

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 54 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-14. Water DUE Factors
Land Use FAR Units [1]
MG
per Year [2]
GPD
per Unit [3]
GPD per
Acre [4]
Adjusted GPD
per Unit/1,000
Bldg. Sq. Ft. [5]
DUE
Factor [6]
Residential
Single-Family 3,089 364 323 - 665 1.00
Multifamily 492 25 139 - 287 0.43
Subtotal Residential 3,581 317 243 - 500
Nonresidential
Commercial 0.25 - - - 4,900 450 0.68
Industrial 0.40 - - - 9,500 545 0.82
Source: City of Newman; EPS.
[1] Single-family from Table 3-1 of 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. Multifamily from CA DOF Table E-8. [2] Average demand from Table 4-1 of 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. [3] GPD per unit = (MG per year*1,000,000/365 days) / units. [4] Commercial values from Table 4-6 of 2022 Water Master Plan. [5] Average GPD for residential units adjusted to average 500 GPD across all residential units, as reported in the 2022 Water Master Plan.

Average GPD per 1,000 nonresidential bldg. sq. ft. calculated as: GPD per Acre / (43560*FAR) * 1,000. [6] DUE factor = adjusted GPD per unit or bldg. sq. ft. / single-family adjusted GPD per unit. 2015 Estimates 2025 Estimates

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 55 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-15. Water DUEs
Land Use
DUE
Factor DUEs
Source Table 2-1 Table 4-14
Residential
Single-Family 3,250 1.00 3,250
Multifamily 629 0.43 271
Subtotal Residential 3,879 3,521
Nonresidential
Office 90,387 0.68 61
Commercial 689,337 0.68 467
Light Industrial 627,264 0.82 515
Heavy Industrial 148,104 0.82 121
Business Park 1,924,045 0.68 1,302
Subtotal Commercial 3,479,137 2,466
Total 5,988
Source: City of Newman; EPS.

Remaining Dwelling
Units/Bldg. Sq. Ft.
through PSOI Buildout

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 56 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-16. Water Improvements Cost Allocation
Item
DUE
Factor Amount
Cost per DUE
Total Cost through Primary SOI Buildout [1] $60,971,000 Total New DUEs [2] 5,988
Cost per DUE $10,183
Cost per Unit/Bldg. Sq. Ft.

Residential
Single-Family 1.00 $10,183
Multifamily 0.43 $4,391
Nonresidential
Office 0.68 $6,893
Commercial 0.68 $6,893
Light Industrial 0.82 $8,353
Heavy Industrial 0.82 $8,353
Business Park 0.68 $6,893
Source: City of Newman; EPS.
[1] See Table B-21.
[2] See Table 4-15.
per 1,000 bldg. sq. ft.
per unit

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 57 Cost Allocation Methodology and Fee Calculation Table 4-17. Water Improvements Cost by Water Meter Size Item Type
Flow
Factor [1]
Cost per
Meter
Cost per DUE
Total Cost [2] $60,971,000
Total New DUEs [3] 5,988
Cost per DUE $10,183
Water Meter
1-inch and under Displacement 1.0 $10,183

1.5-inch Displacement 2.0 $20,366
2-inch Displacement 3.2 $32,586
3-inch Turbine Class I 7.0 $71,281
4-inch Turbine Class I 12.6 $128,306
6-inch Turbine Class I 26.0 $264,758
8-inch Turbine Class II 56.0 $570,247
10-inch Turbine Class II 84.0 $855,371
Source: City of Newman; Sacramento Department of Utilities; EPS. [1] Flow factors from Sacramento Department of Utilities based on the American Water Works Association M-6 Manual, Table 5-3, assuming the types of meters shown. 5/8-inch and 3/4-inch meters considered equivalent to 1-inch meters since they all generally serve single-family residential customers. The fee for a 1-inch meter is established in Table 4-16. [2] See Table B-21.
[3] See Table 4-15.

Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 58 Nexus Findings

5. Nexus Findings
This report has been prepared to update the CFF Program fees in accordance with the procedural guidelines established in the Mitigation Fee Act, which are codified in California Government Code (CGC) Section 66000 et. seq. The Mitigation Fee Act sets forth the procedural requirements for establishing and collecting development impact fees.

In particular, CGC Section 66001 includes specific requirements for establishing a reasonable relationship or nexus between the development impact fee, and CGC Section 66016.5 (added in 2021 to address the newly enacted AB 602) includes additional requirements for development impact fees. The remainder of this chapter addresses the requirements of CGC Section 66001 and CGC Section 66016.5.

California Government Code Section 66001
CGC Section 66001 requires that a “reasonable relationship or nexus must exist between a governmental exaction and the purpose of the condition.” Specifically, each local agency imposing a development impact fee must make the following findings:
• Identify the purpose of the fee.
• Identify how the fee is to be used.
• Determine how a reasonable relationship exists between the fee’s use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed. • Determine how a reasonable relationship exists between the need for the public facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed.
• Demonstrate how a reasonable relationship exists between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.

This section details these findings for each CFF Program component that is addressed in this report.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 59 Nexus Findings
Fire
Purpose of Fee
The purpose of the Fire Fee is to provide funding to construct a new fire station and provide equipment and vehicles to serve the residents and employees of the City.

Use of Fee
The Fire fees will be used to construct the fire station and provide the fire vehicles and equipment necessary to serve new development.

Relationship Between Use of Fee and Type of Development The Fire fees will be used to construct a new fire station that is needed to adequately serve the new development, as well as to acquire vehicles and equipment needed to provide emergency services from the new station. A reasonable relationship exists between the use of the Fire fee and the residential and commercial development on which the fees are imposed because the fees will be used to construct and acquire the fire facilities, equipment, and vehicles needed to serve the new residents and employees generated by the new development.

Relationship Between Need for Facility and Type of Development New residential and commercial development in the City will generate new residents and employees that will result in the need for a fire station and associated vehicles and equipment to provide fire protection and meet required response times for emergency services.

A reasonable relationship exists between the need for a new fire station, vehicles, and equipment and the type of new residential and nonresidential development projects because the fire station must be constructed to expand fire protection to accommodate the new development.

Relationship Between Amount of Fee and Cost of Facility or Portion of Facility Attributed to Development on Which Fee is Imposed The total cost of improvements funded by the Fire fee is allocated among the projected new residential and nonresidential land uses in the City at buildout based on the relative demand each land use is anticipated to place upon the improvements. Cost allocation factors based on persons per household and employees per 1,000 commercial building square feet are used to measure the relative demand generated by each land use and to allocate the fire station improvement costs across all benefiting land uses in the City. A reasonable relationship exists between the amount of the Fire fees and the costs of the facilities attributable to the new residential and nonresidential development on which the fees are imposed because the fees are derived using appropriate cost allocation factors as measures of the proportional demand generated by each development type.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 60 Nexus Findings
Police
Purpose of Fee
The purpose of the Police fee is to provide funding to construct a new police station and provide equipment and vehicles to serve the residents and employees of the City.

Use of Fee
The Police fees will be used to construct a police station and provide the police vehicles and equipment necessary to serve new development.

Relationship Between Use of Fee and Type of Development The Police fees will be used to construct a new police station that is needed to adequately serve the new development, as well as to acquire vehicles and equipment needed to provide law enforcement and police services from the new station. A reasonable relationship exists between the use of the Police fee and the residential and commercial development on which the fees are imposed because the fees will be used to construct the police station and expand police services that are needed to serve the new residents and employees generated by the new development.

Relationship Between Need for Facility and Type of Development New residential and commercial development in Newman will need a police station and associated vehicles and equipment to provide expanded law enforcement and services and meet required emergency response times.

A reasonable relationship exists between the need for a new police station, vehicles, and equipment and the type of new residential and nonresidential development projects because the police station must be constructed to accommodate the new development.

Relationship Between Amount of Fee and Cost of Facility or Portion of Facility Attributed to Development on Which Fee is Imposed The total cost of improvements funded by the Police Fee is allocated among the projected new residential and nonresidential land uses in the City at buildout based on the relative demand each land use is anticipated to place upon the improvements. Cost allocation factors based on persons per household and employees per 1,000 commercial building square feet are used to measure the relative demand generated by each land use and to allocate the police station, vehicles, and equipment costs across all benefiting land uses in the City. A reasonable relationship exists between the amount of the Police fees and the costs of the facilities attributable to the new residential and nonresidential development on which the fees are imposed because the fees are derived using appropriate cost allocation factors as measures of the proportional demand generated by each development type.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 61 Nexus Findings
General Government
Purpose of Fee
The purpose of the General Government fee is to provide funding to construct new general city and water department facilities and acquire new administrative and public works vehicles and equipment needed to serve the residents and employees of the City.

Use of Fee
The General Government fees will be used to construct new general city and water department facilities, expand existing facilities, and provide the administrative and public works vehicles and equipment necessary to serve new development.

Relationship Between Use of Fee and Type of Development The General Government fees will be used to construct new government facilities and acquire new vehicles and equipment that are needed to adequately serve the new development. A reasonable relationship exists between the use of the General Government fee and the residential and commercial development on which the fees are imposed because the fees will be used to construct the facilities and acquire the vehicles and equipment that are needed to serve the new residents and employees generated by the new development.

Relationship Between Need for Facility and Type of Development New residential and nonresidential development in Newman will need new government facilities and associated vehicles and equipment so that the City can continue to provide general City services at the current levels of service to the new residents and employees.

A reasonable relationship exists between the need for improved government facilities and equipment and the type of new residential and nonresidential development projects because the improvements are necessary to serve the new development.

Relationship Between Amount of Fee and Cost of Facility or Portion of Facility Attributed to Development on Which Fee is Imposed The total cost of improvements funded by the General Government Fee is allocated among the projected new residential and nonresidential land uses in the City at buildout based on the relative demand each land use is anticipated to place upon the improvements. Cost allocation factors based on persons per household and employees per 1,000 commercial building square feet are used to measure the relative demand generated by each land use and to allocate the fire station improvement costs across all benefiting land uses in the City. A reasonable relationship exists between the amount of the General Government fees and the costs of the facilities attributable to the new residential and nonresidential development on which the fees are imposed because the fees are derived using appropriate cost allocation factors as measures of the proportional demand generated by each development type.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 62 Nexus Findings
Transportation
Purpose of Fee
The purpose of the Transportation fee is to provide funding to construct new roadway infrastructure required to serve the anticipated new residents and employees in the City.

Use of Fee
The Transportation fees will be used to construct and expand roadway improvements needed to accommodate future new traffic volumes projected as a result of new development.

Relationship Between Use of Fee and Type of Development The Transportation fees will be used to construct and expand roadways needed to adequately serve an increased service population and area as the result of the new development. A reasonable relationship exists between the use of the Transportation Fee and the residential and nonresidential development on which the fees are imposed because the fees will be used to construct the roadway system needed to serve the new residents and employees generated by the new development.

Relationship Between Need for Facility and Type of Development New residential and commercial development in the City will generate new residents and employees that will result in new vehicular trips and the need for additional and expanded roads to maintain adequate levels of service.

A reasonable relationship exists between the need for new roads and the type of new residential and nonresidential development projects because the road improvements must be constructed to accommodate the new development types that will place an increased demand on the roadway system.

Relationship Between Amount of Fee and Cost of Facility or Portion of Facility Attributed to Development on Which Fee is Imposed The total cost of improvements funded by the Transportation fee is allocated among the projected new residential and nonresidential land uses in the City’s expansion areas at buildout based on the relative demand each land use is anticipated to place upon the improvements. Cost allocation factors based on PM peak hour trips are used to measure the relative demand generated by each land use and to allocate the road improvement costs across all benefiting land uses in the expansion areas. A reasonable relationship exists between the amount of the Transportation fees and the costs of the facilities attributable to the new residential and nonresidential development on which the fees are imposed because the fees are derived using appropriate cost allocation factors as measures of the proportional demand generated by each new development type.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 63 Nexus Findings
Sewer
Purpose of Fee
The purpose of the Sewer fee is to provide funding to construct new wastewater infrastructure required to serve Newman’s new residents and employees.

Use of Fee
The Sewer fees will be used to construct sewer facilities needed to accommodate the increased demand projected as a result of new development.. The Sewer fees will be used to fund the construction of collection system and reclamation and treatment improvements, as well as the acquisition of vehicles and equipment.

Relationship Between Use of Fee and Type of Development The Sewer fees will be used to construct the sewer system infrastructure needed to adequately serve the new City service population as the result of new development. A reasonable relationship exists between the use of the Sewer fees and the residential and nonresidential development on which the fees are imposed because the fees will be used to construct the sewer system infrastructure needed to serve the new residents and employees generated by the new development.

Relationship Between Need for Facility and Type of Development New residential and nonresidential development in the City will generate new residents and employees that will result in the need for new sewer system capacity to provide adequate service to the City’s expanded service population. A reasonable relationship exists between the need for sewer system improvements and the type of new residential and nonresidential development projects because the new sewer system improvements must be constructed to accommodate the new development types that will place an increased demand on the sewer system.

Relationship Between Amount of Fee and Cost of Facility or Portion of Facility Attributed to Development on Which Fee is Imposed The total cost of improvements funded by the Sewer fees is allocated among the projected new residential and nonresidential land uses in the City at buildout based on the relative demand each land use is anticipated to place upon the improvements. Cost allocation factors based on sewer generation, as measured in daily generation, are used to measure the relative demand generated by each land use and to allocate the sewer infrastructure improvement costs across all benefiting land uses in the City. A reasonable relationship exists between the amount of the Sewer fees and the costs of the facilities attributable to the new residential and nonresidential development on which the fees are imposed because the fees are derived using appropriate cost allocation factors as measures of the proportional demand generated by each development type.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 64 Nexus Findings
Storm Drainage
Purpose of Fee
The purpose of the Storm Drainage fee is to provide funding to construct new storm drainage infrastructure required to provide flood protection to new development in the City.

Use of Fee
The Storm Drainage fees will be used to construct and expand storm drainage infrastructure (including detention basins, pipelines, channels, greenbelts, and culverts) to accommodate increased demand for flood protection as a result of new development.

Relationship Between Use of Fee and Type of Development The Storm Drainage fees will be used to construct storm drainage improvements needed to adequately serve an increased service population as the result of the new development. A reasonable relationship exists between the use of the storm drainage fees and the residential and nonresidential development on which the fees are imposed because the fees will be used to construct the storm drainage infrastructure needed to serve the new residents and employees generated by the new development.

Relationship Between Need for Facility and Type of Development New residential and nonresidential development in the City will generate new residents and employees that will result in the need for additional storm drainage infrastructure to provide adequate flood protection to the expanded City service population. A reasonable relationship exists between the need for storm drainage improvements and the type of new residential and nonresidential development projects because the storm drainage infrastructure must be constructed to accommodate the new development types that will place an increased demand on the storm drainage system.

Relationship Between Amount of Fee and Cost of Facility or Portion of Facility Attributed to Development on Which Fee is Imposed The total cost of improvements funded by the Storm Drainage fee is allocated among the projected new residential and nonresidential land uses in the City at buildout based on the relative demand each land use is anticipated to place upon the improvements. Cost allocation factors based on the need for drainage improvements, as measured by impervious surface area generated by each land use type, are used to measure the relative demand generated by each land use and to allocate the storm drainage costs across all benefiting land uses in the City expansion areas. A reasonable relationship exists between the amount of the Storm Drainage fees and the costs of the facilities attributable to the new residential and commercial development on which the fees are imposed because the fees are derived using appropriate cost allocation factors as measures of the proportional demand generated by each development type.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 65 Nexus Findings
Water
Purpose of Fee
The purpose of the Water fee is to provide funding to construct new water infrastructure required to serve the City’s new residents and employees.

Use of Fee
The Water fees will be used to construct water facilities needed to accommodate the increased demand projected as a result of new development. The Water fees will be used to fund construction of the wells, booster pumps, storage tanks, and mains needed to distribute water throughout the new development areas.

Relationship Between Use of Fee and Type of Development The Water fees will be used to construct the water system infrastructure needed to adequately serve the new City service population as the result of new development. A reasonable relationship exists between the use of the Water fees and the residential and nonresidential development on which the fees are imposed because the fees will be used to construct the water system infrastructure needed to serve the new residents and employees generated by the new development.

Relationship Between Need for Facility and Type of Development New residential and nonresidential development in the City will generate new residents and employees that will result in the need for new water system capacity to provide adequate service to the City’s expanded service population. A reasonable relationship exists between the need for water system improvements and the type of new residential and nonresidential development projects because the new water system improvements must be constructed to accommodate the new development types that will place an increased demand on the water system.

Relationship Between Amount of Fee and Cost of Facility or Portion of Facility Attributed to Development on Which Fee is Imposed The total cost of improvements funded by the Water fees is allocated among the projected new residential and commercial land uses in the City at buildout based on the relative demand each land use is anticipated to place upon the improvements. Cost allocation factors based on water usage, as measured in daily water demand, are used to measure the relative demand generated by each land use and to allocate water infrastructure improvements across all benefiting land uses in the City. A reasonable relationship exists between the amount of the Water fees and the costs of the facilities attributable to the new residential and nonresidential development on which the fees are imposed because the fees are derived using appropriate cost allocation factors as measures of the proportional demand generated by each development type.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 66 Nexus Findings
Administration
The administration component of the CFF funds City costs associated with fee program administration and implementation, including credit and reimbursement agreement negotiations and implementation, credit and reimbursement tracking, annual reporting requirements, periodic updates to the Nexus Study, and other related costs. Collection and implementation of the CFF Program fees, inclusive of the constituent fee components described above, is reliant upon funding from the administration component.

For each land use, the administration component is calculated as three percent of the total of all other CFF Program components. Costs of the administration component are therefore based on each fee component and subcomponent, and associated nexus findings for the administration component are established by the nexus finding for each fee component documented above.

California Government Code Section 66016.5 (AB 602)
As noted earlier in this document, this nexus analysis must consider the newly created CGC Section 66016.5. This section stipulates that a jurisdiction must calculate residential development impact fees proportionately to the square footage of the dwelling units, with the exception of water and sewer fees and any other fees for which specific findings can be made as to why the fees should not be enacted on a square foot basis.

In this report, residential fees are calculated as shown below:
• Fire, Police, General Government, and Transportation
Fees by dwelling unit square foot ranges
• Sewer and Storm Drainage
Fees by unit type
• Water
Fees by meter size
The sewer and water fees need no further justification as they are exempted from the proportionality requirement of CGC Section 66016.5. However, the required findings detailed in CGC Section 66016.5 must be made for fire, police, general government, transportation, and storm drainage fees. The specific requirements and findings for fire, police, general government, transportation, and storm drainage fees are detailed in the remainder of this chapter.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 67 Nexus Findings
Requirements for Exceptions to Fee Proportional to Housing Square Footage
CGS Section 66016.5(a)(5)(A) states, among other things, that fees “imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of the proposed units of the development shall be deemed to have used a valid method to establish a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.” However, Section 66016.5(a)(5)(B) states that a nexus study “is not required to comply with this proportionality requirement if the local agency makes the following findings:
a) An explanation as to why square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on a housing development project. b) An explanation that an alternative basis of calculating the fee bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.
c) That other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments, or otherwise ensure that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees.” Fire
a) An explanation as to why square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on a housing development project.

Fire protection facilities provide benefit to physical building space; however, emergency medical services calls, which are driven by residents and employees, generally account for most fire service calls. Consequently, the fire protection improvement costs are allocated to dwelling units on a persons-served basis in the form of persons per household and employees per 1,000 building square feet rather than on a building square foot basis.

The persons per household data provided in this report supports identification of an increasing number of people per household as a dwelling unit size increases.

However, the data present limitations on both the lower/smaller unit size range and on the higher/larger unit size range. For example, regardless of how small a dwelling unit may be, the minimum assumed household size would be 1 person per unit. Similarly, as home size continues to increase, the data are not as conclusive that the number of persons per unit continues to increase in a linear or otherwise determinant fashion. For these reasons, deriving a fee directly calculated on residential building square footage alone is not an appropriate metric to calculate the Fire fees.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 68 Nexus Findings
b) An explanation that an alternative basis of calculating the fee bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.

As detailed in Chapter 2, the number of people per household shows a pattern of increasing as unit size increases. Thus, implementing the fee based on ranges of building square feet for residential development bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development because units that fall in the lower building unit size range pay a lower fee than units that fall in a higher building unit size range, which is proportional to the estimated number of people per household by unit size within each size range. c) That other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments, or otherwise ensure that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees.

Implementation of the Fire fees for residential development by building square foot range achieves the objective that smaller residential units would be charged a lower fee than larger units and ensures proportionality of fees based on relative demand for the facilities, as documented in this report.

Police
a) An explanation as to why square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on a housing development project.

The need for police facilities is driven by the safety needs of residents and employees. Consequently, the police protection improvement costs are allocated to dwelling units on a persons-served basis in the form of persons per household and employees per 1,000 building square feet rather than on a building square foot basis.

The persons per household data provided in this report supports identification of an increasing number of people per household as a dwelling unit size increases.

As detailed in Chapter 2, the number of people per household shows a pattern of increasing as unit size increases. Thus, implementing the fee based on ranges of

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 69 Nexus Findings
building square feet for residential development bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development because units that fall in the lower building unit size range pay a lower fee than units that fall in a higher building unit size range, which is proportional to the estimated number of people per household by unit size within each size range. c) That other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments, or otherwise ensure that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees.

Implementation of the Police fees for residential development by building square foot range achieves the objective that smaller residential units (which tend to have fewer occupants) would be charged a lower fee than larger units and ensures proportionality of fees based on relative demand for the facilities, as documented in this report.

General Government
a) An explanation as to why square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on a housing development project.

The need for general government facilities is driven by the daily needs of residents and employees. Consequently, the general government improvement costs are allocated to dwelling units on a persons-served basis in the form of persons per household and employees per 1,000 building square feet rather than on a building square foot basis.

The persons per household data provided in this report supports identification of an increasing number of people per household as a dwelling unit size increases.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 70 Nexus Findings
fall in a higher building unit size range, which is proportional to the estimated number of people per household by unit size within each size range. c) That other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments, or otherwise ensure that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees.

Implementation of the Police fees for residential development by building square foot range achieves the objective that smaller residential units (that tend to have fewer occupants) would be charged a lower fee than larger units and ensures proportionality of fees based on relative demand for the facilities, as documented in this report.

Transportation Fees
a) An explanation as to why square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on a housing development project.

The roadway improvement costs are allocated to dwelling units on a trip basis, in the form of PM peak hour trips per unit, which relies on transportation factors, as well as on persons per household, as persons per household has a direct relationship to the number of PM peak hour trips. The persons per household data provided in this report supports identification of an increasing number of people per household and trips per household as a dwelling unit size increases.

However, the data present limitations on both the lower/smaller unit size range and on the higher/larger unit size range. For example, regardless of how small a dwelling unit may be, the minimum assumed household size would be 1 person per unit. Similarly, as home size continues to increase, the data are not as conclusive that the number of persons per unit and daily trips per unit continue to increase in a linear or otherwise determinant fashion. For these reasons, deriving a fee directly calculated on residential building square footage alone is not an appropriate metric to calculate the Transportation fees. b) An explanation that an alternative basis of calculating the fee bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.

As detailed in Chapter 2, the number of people per household, trips per household, and PM peak hour trips per household show a pattern of increasing as unit size increases. Thus, implementing the fees based on ranges of building square feet for residential development bears a reasonable relationship between the fees charged and the burden posed by the development because units that fall in the lower building unit size range pay a lower fee than units that fall in a higher building unit size range. The fees are proportional to the estimated number of people per household by unit size within each size range.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 71 Nexus Findings
c) That other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments, or otherwise ensure that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees.

Implementation of the Transportation fees for residential development by building square foot range achieves the objective that smaller residential units would be charged a lower fee than larger units and ensures proportionality of fees based on relative demand for the facilities, as documented in this report.

Storm Drainage
a) An explanation as to why square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on a housing development project.

New imperious surfaces drive the demand for drainage facilities. In housing developments, new impervious surfaces incorporate the footprint on a parcel, capturing ground floor living spaces, as well as driveways, sidewalks, patios, and other such surfaces. A basis of square footage of proposed units would introduce inequities. For example, a two-story home with the same footprint as a singlestory home would pay twice the fee while causing an identical impact on the drainage system.
b) An explanation that an alternative basis of calculating the fee bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.

For storm water runoff, the standard, customary, and equitable method to establish a reasonable relationship between the fee charged, the facilities required, and the type of development on which the fee is imposed is with a direct measure of new, impermeable surfaces. New runoff as a result of development establishes the demand for new or improved capacity, the cost of which is the basis of the fee.
c) That other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments, or otherwise ensure that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees.

A fee basis of impermeable square footage ensures equity for the allocation of the cost of the impact from development. The fee is proportional to the impact caused by new impermeable surfaces. Smaller developments with identical unit footprints will have the same fees. Smaller footprints will have proportionately lower fees.

Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 72 CFF Program Implementation and Administration

6. CFF Program Implementation and
Administration
Introduction
The proposed CFF Program fees presented in this report are based on the best improvement cost estimates, funding source information, administrative cost estimates, and land use information available at this time. If costs change significantly, if the type or amount of new development changes, if other assumptions significantly change, or if other funding becomes available (as a result of legislative action on state and local government finance, for example), the CFF Program should be updated accordingly.

After the CFF updates presented in this report are established, the City will conduct periodic reviews of the public improvement costs and other assumptions used as the basis of this Nexus Study Update. Based on these reviews, the City may make necessary adjustments to the CFF Program. As required by AB 602, the City shall update the nexus study no later than every 8 years.

The cost estimates presented in this report are in constant 2025 dollars. When the City does not adjust the CFF Program fees by reviewing facility costs or other assumptions, the City may adjust the costs and fees for inflation each year as outlined in this chapter.

Implementing Resolutions
The proposed updated CFF Program fee schedule must be adopted by the City Council. The updated fees will be effective 60 days following final action on the adoption of this Nexus Study Update and any associated fee resolution(s) establishing the updated fees. The fee resolutions should reference the inflation adjustment factor discussed in this chapter.

CFF Program Administration
The CFF Program fees will be collected from new development as development occurs; however, use of these funds may need to wait until a sufficient fund balance can be accrued. Per Government Code Section 66000, the City of Newman is required to deposit, invest, account for, and expend the fees in a prescribed manner.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 73 CFF Program Implementation and Administration Inflation Adjustment
The costs in this report are shown in 2025 dollars. To ensure that the CFF Program stays current with the prevailing cost of construction, the proposed fees will be automatically adjusted by the City annually to account for the inflation (or deflation) of construction, right-of-way acquisition, environmental, and design costs. Consistent with other City-administered fee programs, annual fee adjustments shall occur automatically on March 1 of each calendar year, and the fees will be adjusted by the annual percentage change in the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI) for San Francisco from December of two prior years to December of the prior year. For example, the adjustment for the 2026 fees would be equal to the percentage change in the San Francisco CCI from December 2024 through December 2025.

Fee Exemptions, Reductions, and Waivers
Public Agencies
All federal and state agencies, public school districts, and the City may be exempt from paying the CFF Program fees. Other non-City public agencies shall be subject to payment of the fees; however, the City may choose to waive some or all of the fees in specific cases at the City’s discretion.

Replacement/Reconstruction
Any replacement or reconstruction (no change in use) of any residential unit or any nonresidential structure that is damaged or destroyed as a result of fire, flood, explosion, wind, earthquake, riot, or other calamity, or act of God shall be exempt from the CFF Program fees. However, if the replacement or reconstructed residential unit exceeds the documented total number of units or unit size of the damaged/destroyed residential structure, or the replacement or reconstructed nonresidential building exceeds the documented total floor area of the damaged/destroyed building, the excess units or building square footage is subject to the CFF Program fees.

Additions/Alterations/Modifications/Temporary Facilities The following rules shall apply to additions, alterations, modifications, and temporary facilities:

1. Consistent with current State law, ADUs and Junior ADUs that are fewer than 750 building square feet shall not be assessed the CFF Program fees.

2. Additions to residential structures where the total square footage of the dwelling remains within a fee category range, provided no change in use occurs and a second full kitchen is not added, shall not be charged a fee. If the square footage of the addition causes the unit to move into a higher fee

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 74 CFF Program Implementation and Administration category range, the difference in fees for the two fee category ranges shall be collected from the development.

3. Except as otherwise provided, when an existing residential dwelling is converted into two primary units, or a new primary dwelling is added to the property, that new unit shall be assessed a fee consistent with the provisions of this Nexus Study Update.

4. Non-habitable residential structures, including decks, pools and spas, pool cabanas, sheds, and detached garages, shall not be assessed a fee. An attached garage shall not count towards the square footage of the dwelling.

Accessory Dwelling Units
Fees on ADUs larger than 750 square feet require a two-part calculation. First the City will determine the total habitable building square footage of the proposed ADU and the primary residential unit on the lot on which the ADU is proposed.

The City will determine the ADU building square footage as a proportion of the primary residential unit. As an example, if the primary residential dwelling unit is 2,000 building square feet and the proposed ADU is 1,000 building square feet, then the ADU would be 50 percent of the primary residential unit. The City would then identify the CFF Program fees that will apply to the primary residential unit and apply 50 percent to that amount as the CFF Program fees applicable to the ADU. In this example, the categories would be the Single-family >2,000 sq. ft. category fire, police, general government, and transportation fees and either single-family or multifamily residential for the other fee categories.

Credit for Replacement of Existing Buildings
New development that replaces existing development is eligible for a fee credit to the extent the facilities to be funded by the new development are already provided to the existing development. For example, a 4-unit apartment complex that is replaced by an 8 unit apartment complex could receive up to a 50 percent credit in the fee (4/8 = 50 percent).

Fee Credit and Reimbursement to Developers
As is typical with development impact fee programs, many of the public infrastructure improvements are needed up front before adequate revenue from the fee collection would be available to fund such improvements. Consequently, some type of private funding may be necessary to pay for the public improvements when they are needed. This private financing may be in the form of land-secured bonds, developer equity, or other forms of private financing.

In cases where a private party (e.g., developer) has advance-funded an eligible CFF Program facility, the party will be owed fee credits or reimbursements from the CFF Program. Note that the CFF administration component must be paid in

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 75 CFF Program Implementation and Administration cash to provide the City with funding to administer the CFF Program. CFF credits or reimbursements will be provided under the following conditions:
• Developer-installed improvements shall be considered for reimbursement.

Only funds collected from the CFF Program shall be used to reimburse a developer who installed eligible CFF Program improvements identified in the General Plan CIP.
• The value of any developer-installed improvement for fee credit or reimbursement purposes shall be based on the lesser of the actual cost of eligible facilities (as determined at the sole discretion of the City via a review of the construction contract and payments made, plus an allowance determined by the City for soft costs directly associated with the facility design and construction) or the total eligible facility costs based on the cost schedule and estimate set forth in the CIP, subject to the automatic annual inflation adjustment described previously in this chapter. A fee credit and reimbursement agreement will govern how the CFF reimbursements will be provided.
• All construction contracts, construction work, and requests for reimbursement will be performed in conformance with the most current City policies governing such construction of eligible improvements and any other terms identified in the fee credit and reimbursement agreement.

CFF Program Update Adoption Process
Impact fee program adoption procedures are found in CGC Section 66016 through CGC Section 66019. Adoption of this CFF Program Update requires the City Council to follow certain procedures, including holding a public hearing with at least 30 days’ notice for the hearing (Gov. Code § 66016.5(a)(7)). The City is required to post a public notice at least 30 days before the public hearing considering the fee. The City shall notify any member of the public that requests notice of intent to begin an impact fee nexus study of the date of the hearing.

Mailed notice 14 days before the public hearing is required for those individuals who request such notification. Data, such as this Nexus Study and referenced material, must be made available at least 10 days before the public hearing. Any new or increased fees would be effective 60 days after adoption.

Programming Revenues and Projects with the
Capital Improvement Plan
The City will update the CIP to identify specific projects and program fee revenues to those projects. Use of the CIP in this manner documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the use of fee revenues.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 76 CFF Program Implementation and Administration The City shall plan its CIP expenditures at least 5 years in advance and show where all collected CFF Program revenues will be spent. The City can hold funds in a project account for longer than 5 years, if necessary, to collect sufficient funds to complete a given project. See Compliance Requirements below for the specific CIP update requirements stated in CGC Section 62000.

Compliance Requirements
The California Mitigation Fee Act (CGC Section 66000 et seq.) mandates procedures for administration of impact fee programs, including collection, accounting, refunds, updates, and reporting. The City must comply with the annual and 5 year reporting requirements. For facilities to be funded with a combination of impact fees and other revenues, the City must identify the source and amount of the other revenues. The City must also identify when the other revenues are anticipated to be available to fund the project. The City’s compliance obligations regarding the California Mitigation Fee Act include the specific requirements detailed below.

Earmarking of Fee Revenues
CGC Section 66006 mandates that the City deposit fees for the improvements in a separate capital facilities account or fund to avoid any commingling of the fees with other revenues and funds of the City, except for temporary investments.

Fees must be expended solely for the purpose for which they were collected.

Interest earned on the fee revenues must also be placed in the capital account and used for the same purpose. The California Mitigation Fee Act is not clear as to whether depositing fees “for the improvements” refers to a specific capital improvement or a class of improvements (e.g., fire or police facilities). The City maintains discretion as to how it will collect and account for impact fees, while maintaining compliance with CGC requirements.

Reporting
CGC Section 66006 requires that once each year, within 180 days of the close of the fiscal year, the City must make available to the public the following information for each account established to receive impact fee revenues:

1. The amount of the fee.

2. The beginning balance and the ending balance of the account or fund.

3. The amount of the fees collected and interest earned.

4. Identification of each public improvement on which fee revenues were expended and the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fee revenues.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 77 CFF Program Implementation and Administration

5. Identification of the approximate date by which the construction of a public improvement will commence, if the City determines sufficient funds have been collected for financing of an incomplete public improvement.

6. A description of each interfund transfer or loan made from the account or fund, including interest rates, repayment dates, and a description of the improvements on which the transfer or loan will be expended.

7. The amount of any refunds or allocations made pursuant to CGC Section 66001, paragraphs (e) and (f).

The above-listed information must be reviewed by the City Council at its next regularly scheduled public meeting, but not fewer than 15 days after the statements are made public.

Findings and Refunds
CGC Section 66001 requires that, for the fifth fiscal year following the first deposit of any impact fee revenue into an account or fund as required by CGC Section 66006, and every 5 years thereafter, the City must make all the following findings for any fee revenues that remain unexpended, whether committed or uncommitted:

1. Identify the purpose to which the fee will be put.

2. Demonstrate the reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged.

3. Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing of incomplete improvements for which the impact fees are to be used.

4. Designate the approximate dates on which the funding necessary to complete financing of those improvements will be deposited into the appropriate account or fund.

Updating the CFF Program Nexus Study
According to CGC Section 66016.5(a)(8), impact fee nexus studies shall be updated at least every 8 years from the date of adoption. This requirement became effective on January 1, 2023.

In future updates, the City may use the impact fee nexus study template developed by the California Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section 50466.5 of the Health and Safety Code to update the nexus study.

CITYWIDE CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES NEXUS STUDY UPDATE

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
APRIL 2025
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 78 CFF Program Implementation and Administration Annual Update of the Capital Improvement Plan
CGC Section 66002 provides that if the City adopts a CIP to identify the use of impact fees, that program must be adopted and annually updated by a resolution of the governing body at a noticed public hearing. Appendix B includes the CIP for the CFF Program.

Appendices:

Appendix A: Development Projections
Appendix B: Capital Improvement Program
Appendix A: Development Projections
Table A-1 Residential Development Summary through
Buildout of Primary SOI .................................................................... A-1 Table A-2 Remaining Residential Dwelling Units in City Limits................... A-2 Table A-3 Remaining Development in Primary SOI
Annexation Areas ............................................................................... A-3 Table A-4 Projected New Development—Northwest
Newman Master Plan ........................................................................ A-4 Table A-5 Estimated Persons per Occupied Household—
City of Newman.................................................................................. A-5 Table A-6 Nonresidential Development Summary through
Buildout of Primary SOI .................................................................... A-6 Table A-7 Employee History ............................................................................... A-7 Table A-8 Remaining Nonresidential Development in City .......................... A-8 Table A-9 National Single-Family Persons per Household and Trips per Household........................................................................... A-9 Table A-10 Average Single-Family Unit Size Estimate.................................. A-10 Table A-11 Projected Development, Population, and Employees in Secondary SOI.............................................................................. A-11 Table A-12 Remaining Development in Secondary SOI
Annexation Areas ............................................................................ A-12 DRAFT
Table A-1Newman Capital Facilities Fees UpdateResidential Development Summary through Buildout of Primary SOIItem Net
Acres [2]
Existing
City [3]
Annexation
Areas [4] Total
Formula A B C D E=C+D E+A
Single-Family
Low Density
Low Density - 424.3 221 2,185 2,406 - Low Density 2nd Unit - 30.9 - 179 179 - Subtotal Low Density - 455.2 221 2,364 2,585 - Medium Density - 58.9 158 507 665 - Subtotal Single-Family 3,271 514.1 379 2,871 3,250 6,521Multifamily 494 32.7 92 537 629 1,123 Total 3,765 546.8 471 3,408 3,879 7,644
Source: City of Newman; California Department of Finance; Northwest Newman Master Plan; EPS. [1] Single-family and multifamily units from California Department of Finance Table E-5 (1/1/2024).[2] See Table A-2 and Table A-3.[3] See Table A-2. Includes Caton Ranch, which has been reccommended for annexation but is not yet annexed.[4] See Table A-3.

Dwelling Units
Remaining through Primary SOI Buildout
Existing Units
(2025) [1]
Primary SOI
Buildout
Units
Prepared by EPS 2/7/2025
A-1
Z:\Shared\projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 2.7.25.xlsx DRAFT
Table A-2Newman Capital Facilities Fees UpdateRemaining Residential Dwelling Units in City Limits [1]Map No. APN Acres Zoning GP Land Use Density Units GP Land Use Density Acres Units1 128-060-010 1.58 R-3 HDR 20.00 25 MDR 12.00 1.58 192 026-041-004 2.50 R-3 HDR 20.00 40 HDR 20.00 2.50 403 026-041-058 2.53 R-3 HDR 20.00 40 HDR 20.00 2.53 405 128-022-016 0.80 R-3 HDR 20.00 12 HDR 20.00 0.80 126 049-040-008 10.00 R-3 HDR 20.00 1088 049-059-006 10.59 R-2 MDR 6.50 699 026-016-049 (Part) 13.87 R-2 MDR 12.00 106 MDR 12.0 9.16 7010 049-064-001-020 4.26 R-2 MDR 12.00 1411 026-041-070 9.00 PD MDR 12.00 4012 128-008-021 0.26 R-3 CR 12.00 3 MDR 12.00 0.26 313 128-009-024 0.13 C-1 D 12.00 1 MDR 12.00 0.13 114 128-009-073 0.09 C-1 D 12.00 1 MDR 12.00 0.09 115 128-022-010 1.68 I MDR 12.00 20 MDR 12.00 1.68 2016 128-050-016 0.19 R-1 MDR 12.00 2 MDR 12.00 0.19 217 128-060-011 0.88 R-1 MDR 12.00 10 MDR 12.00 0.88 1018 049-050-044 1.93 R-1 MDR 12.00 23 MDR 12.00 1.93 2319 049-050-045 0.75 R-1 MDR 12.00 9 MDR 12.00 0.75 920 026-015-014 4.00 -- MDR 12.00 4821 026-015-013 15.71 -- MDR 12.00 18820 & 21 026-015-013 and 026-015-014 [2] - - - - - LDR 5.68 19.71 112
22 049-040-010 106.00 R-1 PMR 2.00 23523 026-056-058 4.97 R-1 LDR 5.00 24 LDR 4.50 4.97 2224 026-059-070 2.02 R-2 LDR 5.00 10 LDR 2.02 1025 049-042-001 12.80 R-3 LDR 8.00 104 LDR 4.50 12.80 5826 128-003-031 0.26 R-1 CR 5.00 1 LDR 0.26 127 128-003-033 0.23 R-1 CR 5.00 1 LDR 0.23 128 128-006-047 0.17 R-1 CR 5.00 129 128-006-066 0.26 R-1 CR 5.00 1 LDR 0.26 130 128-013-017 0.19 R-1 CR 5.00 1 LDR 0.19 131 128-013-018 0.19 R-1 CR 5.00 1 LDR 0.19 132 128-013-019 0.17 R-1 CR 5.00 1 LDR 0.17 133 026-043-019 2.75 R-1 LDR 5.00 13 LDR 2.75 13Total 210.7 1,152 66.0 471 LDR 130.0 393 43.5 221
MDR 63.3 534 16.6 158
HDR 17.4 225 5.8 92
Source: City of Newman; City of Newman Housing Element 2015; EPS.[1] Excludes NWNMP parcels in City limits.[2] Caton Ranch; annexation in process. New APNs were created after 2015.

Status in 2015
developeddevelopeddeveloped
Development Remaining in 2025
developeddevelopeddeveloped
Caton Ranch - See Below
Prepared by EPS 3/5/2025
A2
Z:\Shared\Projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 3.4.25.xlsx DRAFT
Table A-3Newman Capital Facilities Fees UpdateRemaining Development in Primary SOI Annexation AreasGeneral Plan Area Low
Density
Low
Density
2nd Unit
Medium
Density
High
Density Total Commercial
Professional
Office
Business
Park
Light
Industrial
Heavy
Industrial Total
Net to Gross Acres [1] 75% 85%Density (units per net acre/FAR) 5.81 5.81 12.00 20.00 7.00 0.25 0.25 0.35 0.40 0.40Percentage of Units 65% 7% 15% 13% 100%Percentage of Acres 79% 8% 9% 5% 100%Area 1 86.3 8.6 9.6 5.0 109.5 - - - - - - Area 2 97.0 9.7 10.8 5.6 123.0 - - 34.0 - - 34.0
Area 3 NWNMP [2]
PMR 125.7 12.6 13.9 7.3 159.5 - - - - - -
Other 18.4 - - 9.0 27.4 27.3 8.3 59.2 - - 94.8
Area 9 - Residential Portion [3] 12.0 - - - 12.0 - Other Areas in Primary SOI East of Area 5 [3] 27.0 - 8.0 - 35.0 - - - - - -
East of Area 6 [3] 26.4 - - - 26.4 - - - - - - Southwest of Area 9 [4] - - - - - - - - 8.5 8.5 17.0 Subtotal Net Acres 380.7 30.9 42.3 26.8 480.8 27.3 8.3 93.2 8.5 8.5 145.8 Area 1 501 50 115 100 766 - - - - - -
Area 2 563 56 129 112 860 - - 518,364 - - 518,364
Area 3 NWNMP [2] -
PMR 733 73 167 145 1,118 - - - - - - Other 55 - - 180 235 297,297 90,387 902,563 - - 1,290,247 Area 9 - Residential Portion [3] 57 - - - 57 - - - - - - Other Areas in Primary SOI
East of Area 5 [3] 157 - 96 - 253 - - - - - -
East of Area 6 [3] 119 - - - 119 - - - - - -
Southwest of Area 9 [4] - - - - - 148,104 148,104 296,208 Subtotal Units 2,185 179 507 537 3,408 297,297 90,387 1,420,927 148,104 148,104 2,104,819Source: Newman General Plan; 2015 Newman Housing Element; Newman General Plan FIA; EPS.[1] Based on Northwest Newman Master Plan net to gross ratio.[2] From Northwest Newman Maser Plan. See Table A-4.[3] Residential net developable acres and units provided by City of Newman.[4] Based on General Plan Figure LU-3 and Table LU-2.

Residential
Net Acres
(estimated as net to gross acres factor multiplied by gross acres except where noted in footnotes) Dwelling Units Building Square Feet
Commercial
Assumptions
Prepared by EPS 3/5/2025
A3
Z:\Shared\Projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 3.4.25.xlsx DRAFT
Table A-4Newman Capital Facilities Fees UpdateProjected New Development - Northwest Newman Master Plan (General Plan Subarea 3)Item Dwelling Units
per Acre FAR Acres
Dwelling
Units
Building
Square Feet
Formula A B C A*C B*C*43,560Northwest Newman Master Plan - 2017 Very Low Density Residential 3 - 18.4 55 -
Medium Density Residential 10 - - - - Planned Mixed Residential 7 - 159.5 1,118 - High Density Residential 20 - 9.0 180 -
Business Park - 0.35 59.2 - 902,563
Community Commercial - 0.25 27.3 - 297,297
Professional Office - 0.25 8.3 - 90,387
Total 281.7 1,353 1,290,247
Source: Northwest Newman Master Plan; EPS.

Prepared by EPS 2/7/2025
A4
Z:\Shared\projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 2.7.25.xlsx DRAFT
Table A-5
Newman Capital Facilities Fees Update
Estimated Persons per Occupied Household - City of Newman Land Use
Occupied
Units [1] Population [2]
Persons per
Household [3]
Single-Family (Detached or Attached) 3,156 11,064 3.51
Multifamily 461 1,124 2.44
Total 3,617 12,188 3.37
Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) and American Housing Survey (AHS); California Department of Finance (DOF); EPS.
[1] Occupied units from ACS 2022 5-Year Table B25032
[2] Population in occupied units from ACS 2022 5-Year Table B25033. [3] PPH calculated as population / occupied units.

City of Newman - 2022
Prepared by EPS 2/7/2025
A-5 Z:\Shared\projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 2.7.25.xlsx DRAFT
Table A-6Newman Capital Facilities Fees UpdateNonresidential Development Summary through Buildout of Primary SOIItem Remaining
Net Acres
Existing
(2023) [1] Remaining Buildout
Existing City [2]
Office 0.00 0 0 0Commercial 36.00 518,045 392,040 910,085Light Industrial 27.50 273,735 479,160 752,895Heavy Industrial 0.00 65,786 0 65,786Business Park 33.00 0 503,118 503,118Total 96.50 857,566 1,374,318 2,231,884 Annexation Areas [3]
Office 8.30 0 90,387 90,387Commercial 27.30 0 297,297 297,297Light Industrial 8.50 0 148,104 148,104Heavy Industrial 8.50 0 148,104 148,104Business Park 93.20 0 1,420,927 1,420,927Total 145.80 0 2,104,819 2,104,819 Total
Office 8.30 0 90,387 90,387Commercial 63.30 518,045 689,337 1,207,382Light Industrial 36.00 273,735 627,264 900,999Heavy Industrial 8.50 65,786 148,104 213,890Business Park 126.20 0 1,924,045 1,924,045Total 242.30 857,566 3,479,137 4,336,703 Source: City of Newman; Northwest Newman Master Plan; EPS.[1] From City of Newman.[2] See Table A-8 for estimated remaining development in City.[3] See Table A-3 for calculation of estimated remaining development in annexation areas.

Building Square Feet
Prepared by EPS 2/7/2025
A6
Z:\Shared\projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 2.7.25.xlsx DRAFT
Table A-7
Newman Capital Facilities Fees Update
Employee History (All Jobs)
Year
Employees
(Total All Jobs)
Annual
Percentage
Increase
Citywide Employees [1]
2012 1,476
2013 1,559 5.62%
2014 1,555 (0.26%)
2015 1,639 5.40%
2016 1,583 (3.42%)
2017 1,571 (0.76%)
2018 1,663 5.86%
2019 1,698 2.10%
2020 1,686 (0.71%)
2021 1,696 0.59%
2022 1,738 2.48%
Average Annual Pct. Change 1.65%
Estimated Employees After 2022 [2]
2023 1,767 1.65%
2024 1,796 1.65%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau OnTheMap; EPS.
[1] From U.S. Census Bureau Work Area Profile Report (All Jobs) for City of Newman. [2] EPS estimated the current (2024) number of employees in the City by applying the average annual percentage increase in employees from 2012 to 2022 to each year from 2023 through 2024.

Prepared by EPS 2/7/2025
A-7 Z:\Shared\projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 2.7.25.xlsx DRAFT
Table A-8Newman Capital Facilities Fees UpdateRemaining Nonresidential Development in City Land Use Acres FAR
Building
Square Feet
Office - 0.25 - Commercial 36.0 0.25 392,040Light Industrial 27.5 0.40 479,160Heavy Industrial - 0.40 - Business Park 33.0 0.35 503,118Total 96.5 1,374,318 Source: City of Newman; EPS.

Prepared by EPS 3/5/2025 Z:\Shared\Projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 3.4.25.xlsx A-8
DRAFT
Table A-9Newman Capital Facilities Fees UpdateNational Single-Family Persons per Household and Trips per Household Trips per
Household [1]
<750
Sq. Ft.
750-999
Sq. Ft.
1,000-1,999
Sq. Ft.
≥2,000
Sq.Ft. Total
Units (in thousands)
1 person 3.82 934 1,884 11,167 5,634 19,619
2 persons 6.88 558 1,704 15,666 14,159 32,0873 persons 9.44 212 764 6,951 5,637 13,5644 persons 12.61 145 484 5,432 6,741 12,8025 persons 14.72 0 196 2,456 3,115 5,767 6 persons 15.28 0 57 762 1,100 1,919
7 persons or more 21.03 0 48 537 555 1,140
Total Units 1,849 5,137 42,971 36,941 86,898
Persons (in thousands) [3] 3,266 11,178 105,691 103,887 224,022Average PPH 1.77 2.18 2.46 2.81 2.58PPH Adjustment Factor [4] 0.72 0.88 1.00 1.14Trips (in Thousands) 11,237 37,001 343,644 331,486 712,131Average Daily Trips per household (TPH) 6.08 7.20 8.00 8.97 8.20Trip Adjustment Factor [5] 0.76 0.90 1.00 1.12Source: US Census Bureau American Housing Survey (AHS) 2023 - National; 2017 National Household Travel Survey; EPS.[1] From 2017 National Household Travel Survey.[2] Detached and attached single-family units from AHS 2023 National data.[3] Assumes 7 persons in a "7 persons or more household."[4] PPH divided by PPH for 1,000-2,000 sq. ft. unit.[5] TPH divided by TPH for 1,000-2,000 sq. ft. unit.

Single-Family Unit Size [2]
Prepared by EPS 3/5/2025 Z:\Shared\Projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 3.4.25.xlsx A-9
DRAFT
Table A-10
Newman Capital Facilities Fees Update
Average Single-Family Unit Size Estimate
Floor Plan
Unit
Square Feet
Mattos Ranch Square Feet
Avila 1,113
Blazer 1,252
Gypsy 1,365
Morgan 1,734
Palomino 2,359
Stallion 2,496
Average (rounded) 1,700
Source: City of Newman; EPS.

Prepared by EPS 2/7/2025 Z:\Shared\projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 2.7.25.xlsx A-10
DRAFT
Table A-11Newman Capital Facilities Fees UpdateProjected Development, Population, and Employees in Secondary SOILand Use PPH / Sq. Ft.
per Employee
Net New Units/
Bldg. Sq. Ft.

Net New Population/
Employees [1]
(Rounded)
Source Table 2-1 Table A-12Residential
Single-Family 3.51 5,213 18,298
Multifamily 2.44 780 1,903
Total 5,993 20,201
Nonresidential
Office 250 0 0
Commercial 500 0 0Light Industrial 750 4,087,670 5,450
Heavy Industrial 1,000 0 0Business Park 250 0 0Total 4,087,670 5,450 Source: City of Newman; EPS.
[1] Population = PPH*Net New Units;
Employees = Net New Bldg. Sq. Ft./Sq. Ft. per Employee.

Secondary SOI
Prepared by EPS 4/8/2025 Z:\Shared\projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 4.7.25 .xlsx A-11
DRAFT
Table A-12Newman Development Impact Fees UpdateRemaining Development in Secondary SOI Annexation AreasGeneral Plan Area Low
Density
Low
Density
2nd Unit
Medium
Density
High
Density Total Commercial
Professional
Office
Business
Park
Light
Industrial
Heavy
Industrial Total
Net to Gross Acres [1] 75% 85%Density (units per net acre/far) 5.81 5.81 12.00 20.00 7.00 0.25 0.25 0.35 0.40 0.40Percentage of Units 65% 7% 15% 13% 100%Percentage of Acres 79% 8% 9% 5% 100%Area 4 126.5 12.7 14.0 7.3 160.5 - - - - - - Area 5 124.7 12.5 13.8 7.2 158.3 - - - - - -
Area 6 141.9 14.2 15.7 8.2 180.0 - - - - - -
Area 7 188.6 18.9 20.9 10.9 239.3 - - - - - -
Area 8 93.4 9.3 10.4 5.4 118.5 - - - - - -
Area 9 [2] - - - - - - - - 91.8 - 91.8
Area 10 - - - - - - - - 142.8 - 142.8
Subtotal Net Acres 675.1 67.5 74.9 39.0 856.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 234.6 0.0 234.6 Area 4 735 74 168 146 1,123 - - - - - - Area 5 725 72 166 144 1,107 - - - - - - Area 6 824 82 189 164 1,259 - - - - - - Area 7 1,096 110 251 218 1,675 - - - - - - Area 8 543 54 124 108 829 - - - - - - Area 9 [2] - - - - - - - - 1,599,523 - 1,599,523Area 10 - - - - - - - - 2,488,147 - 2,488,147 Subtotal Units 3,923 392 898 780 5,993 0 0 0 4,087,670 0 4,087,670 Source: Newman General Plan; 2015 Newman Housing Element; Newman General Plan FIA; EPS.[1] Based on Northwest Newman Master Plan net to gross ratio.[2] Nonresidential portion only.

Residential Commercial
Assumptions
Net Acres
(estimated as net to gross acres factor multiplied by gross acres except where noted in footnotes) Dwelling Units Building Square Feet
Prepared by EPS 3/5/2025 Z:\Shared\Projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 3.4.25.xlsx A-12
Appendix B: Capital Improvement Program
Table B-1 Existing Fire Facilities and Vehicles Cost.......................................... B-1 Table B-2 Estimated Fire Stations, Vehicles, and Equipment Cost to Serve New Development....................................................... B-2 Table B-3 Existing Police Facilities and Vehicles................................................ B-3 Table B-4 Estimated Police Facilities and Vehicles Cost to Serve New Development ..................................................................... B-4 Table B-5 Estimated Police and Fire Station Costs............................................ B-5 Table B-6 Estimated Cost of General Government Facilities .......................... B-6 Table B-7 Existing General Government Vehicles and Equipment Costs ..... B-7 Table B-8 Estimated Cost of New General Government
Vehicles and Equipment....................................................................... B-8 Table B-9 Summary of Transportation Improvement Costs ............................ B-9 Table B-10 Estimated Cost of Remaining Transportation Improvements from 2000 Traffic Mitigation Fee Study (2 pages) ....................... B-10 Table B-11 Estimated Cost of Street Segment Improvements from Newman 2030 General Plan................................................... B-12 Table B-12 Estimated Intersection Reconfiguration and
Signalization Costs .............................................................................. B-13 Table B-13 Estimated Signalization Costs of Existing Intersections.............. B-14 Table B-14 Transportation Improvements Allocation Between Existing and New Development....................................................... B-15 Table B-15 Summary of Sewer Costs for New Development ........................ B-16 Table B-16 Estimated Wastewater Collection System Costs ......................... B-17 Table B-17 Estimated Cost of Wastewater Treatment and
Reclamation Facility Upgrade........................................................... B-18 Table B-18 Estimated Cost of Wastewater Vehicles and Equipment........... B-19 Table B-19 Summary of Storm Drainage Improvement
Costs for New Development............................................................ B-20 Table B-20 Estimated Storm Drainage Costs (2 pages).................................... B-21 Table B-21 Summary of Water Costs for New Development........................ B-23 Table B-22 Estimated Water System Improvements in Water Master Plan Costs ............................................................................... B-24 Table B-23 Daily Water Demand in Water Master Plan and Primary SOI... B-25 Table B-24 Construction Cost Index Adjustments............................................ B-26 Table B-25 Consumer Price Index Adjustments ................................................ B-27 Table B-26 Service Population for Fire, Police, and General Government Facilities ........................................................................ B-28 DRAFT
Table B-1
Newman Capital Facilities Fees Update
Existing Fire Facilities and Vehicles Cost (2025$)
Item Amount
Replacement Cost
per Vehicle [1]
2024 Population [2] 12,051
2024 Service Population [2] 12,482
Fire Department Stations 1
Fire Personnel [3]
Sworn Firefighters (FTEs) 6
Prevention Officers (FTEs) 1
Professional Staff 2
Total 8
Sworn Firefighters per 1,000 Population 0.50
Stations [3]
Number of Stations 1
Existing Station Size (Sq. Ft.) 9,644
Vehicles [3]
2022 Bauer Breathing Air Support Trailer 1 $175,000
2020 Ford Inceptor SUV 1 $75,000
2010 Ford F150 1 $75,000
2023 Ford Inceptor SUV 1 $75,000
2014 GMC Sierra 1 $75,000
2009 Dodge Charger 1 $35,000
2010 Dodge Charger 1 $35,000
2019 Cargo Trailer 1 $15,000
2019 Generac Mobile Generator 1 $100,000
1991 Spartan Fire Truck 1 $830,000
2005 Ford Rescue Truck 1 $350,000
2007 Pierce Fire Truck 1 $830,000
Total 12 $2,670,000
Source: City of Newman, EPS.
[1] Replacement costs obtained from CSJVMA APD Program Listing report and City staff as of 2024.
[2] See Table B-26.
[3] Existing fire personnel, station size, and vehicles provided by City staff as of 2024.

Prepared by EPS 4/8/2025 Z:\Shared\projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 4.7.25 .xlsx B-1
DRAFT
Table B-2
Newman Capital Facilities Fees Update
Estimated Fire Stations, Vehicles, and Equipment Cost to Serve New Development (2025$) Item Existing [1] Number Unit Cost Total Cost Notes
New Population [2] 12,943
Existing Service Population [2] 12,482
New Service Population through Primary SOI Buildout [2] 15,444 Fire Department Stations and Personnel
Estimated Population Served by One Station [3] 10,000
Stations 1
Sworn Firefighters (FTEs) [4] 9
Station, Vehicles, and Equipment Cost
Stations [5] 1 $8,262,500 $8,262,500
Vehicles [6]
Breathing Air Support Trailer 1 1 $175,000 $175,000
Fire SUVs 4 4 $75,000 $300,000
Fire Cars 2 2 $35,000 $70,000
Cargo Trailer 1 1 $15,000 $15,000
Generac Mobile Generator 1 1 $100,000 $100,000
Type 1 Fire Engine 2 2 $830,000 $1,660,000
Rescue Truck 1 1 $350,000 $350,000
Total 12 12 $1,580,000 $2,670,000
NFPA/OSHA Required Firefighting Gear [6] firefighters
Structure 9 $3,000 $27,000 10-year life
Wildland 9 $1,500 $13,500 10-year life
Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus 9 $10,000 $90,000 15-year life Station Uniform 9 $2,000 $18,000 Annually
Personnel Pagers/Radios 9 $700 $6,300 10-year life
Total 9 $17,200 $154,800
Total Cost $11,087,300
Total Cost Rounded $11,087,000
Source: City of Newman, EPS.
[1] See Table B-1.
[2] See Table B-26.
[3] Per the City, a second station is needed by the time the population reaches 18,000 to 20,000. [4] 3 firefighters per station for 24 hours a day = 9 FTEs per station. Based on information in 2030 General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis.
[5] See Table B-5 for station cost.
[6] Vehicle and gear unit costs obtained from CSJVMA APD Program Listing report and City staff as of 2024.

New Stations, Vehicles, and Equipment
Prepared by EPS 4/8/2025 Z:\Shared\projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 4.7.25 .xlsx B-2
DRAFT
Table B-3
Newman Capital Facilities Fees Update
Existing Police Facilities and Vehicles
Item Number
2023 Population [1] 12,051
2023 Service Population [1] 12,482
Police Department Stations 1
Police Personnel [2]
Sworn Officers 13.0
Code Enforcement Officers 2.0
Professional Staff 2.0
Total 17.0
Sworn Officers per 1,000 Population 1.1
Existing Station (1200 Main Street) [2]
Square Feet 6,328
Vehicles [2]
2023 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 1
2023 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 1
2022 Dodge Durango Utility 1
2021 Ford Interceptor Utility 1
2020 Ford Interceptor Utility 1
2018 Ford Interceptor Utility 1
2017 Ford Interceptor Utility 1
2016 Ford Interceptor Utility 1
2015 Ford Interceptor Utility 1
2013 Dodge Charger 1
2007 Buick Lacrosse 1
2011 Chevrolet Tahoe 1
2012 Nissan Altima 1
2011 Nissan Altima 1
2002 Ford F150 1
2009 Honda Civic 1
Total Patrol Vehicles 16
1996 Mighty DUI Trailer 1
Total Patrol Units and Trailer 17
Source: City of Newman; EPS.
[1] See Table B-26.
[2] Existing police personnel, station size, and vehicles provided by City staff as of 2024.

Prepared by EPS 4/8/2025 Z:\Shared\projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 4.7.25 .xlsx B-3
DRAFT
Table B-4
Newman Capital Facilities Fees Update
Estimated Police Facilities and Vehicles Cost to Serve New Development (2025$) Item Existing [1] Number Unit Cost Total Cost
Existing Population [2] 12,051
New Population through Primary SOI Buildout [2] 12,943
New Population through Primary and Secondary SOI Buildout [2] 33,144 Existing Service Population [2] 12,482
New Service Population through Primary SOI Buildout [2] 15,444 New Service Population through Primary and Secondary SOI Buildout [2] 36,953 Primary SOI Percentage 42%
Police Department Stations and Personnel
Stations Required [3] 1
Sworn Officers (FTEs) [4] 26
Station, Vehicles, and Equipment Cost
Stations [5] 1 42% $16,762,500 $7,005,657
Vehicles
Police Cars [6] 16 17 $90,000 $1,530,000
DUI Trailer [6] 1 1 $75,000 $75,000
Total 17 18 $1,605,000
Police Officer Equipment [7] 26 $11,570 $300,820
Total Cost $8,911,477
Total Cost Rounded $8,911,000
Source: City of Newman, EPS.
[1] See Table B-3.
[2] See Table B-26.
[3] 1 new station per City. Station sized to serve new service population through buildout of Primary and Secondary SOI.

Only portion of station needed to serve buildout through Primary SOI. [4] 2 officers per 1,000 residents * number of future residents / 1,000. [5] See Table B-5 for station cost. New station estiamted at 15,000 sq. ft. and sized to serve new residents and employees through buildout of primary and secondary SOI. Portion allocated to Primary SOI based on Primary SOI new service population as percentage of total new service population through buildout of Primary and Secondary SOI. [6] Vehicle costs provided by City.
[7] Unit cost from City of Fresno escalated to 2025$ using CPI adjustment from 2022. See Table B-25.

New Stations, Vehicles, and Equipment
Prepared by EPS 4/8/2025 Z:\Shared\projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 4.7.25 .xlsx B-4
DRAFT
Table B-5Newman Capital Facilities Fees UpdateEstimated Police and Fire Station Costs (2025$)Item Acres per
Station
Building Sq. Ft.
per Station
Cost per
Acre/Sq. Ft.

Total
Cost (2025$)
Fire Station Cost [1]
Land Acquisition 1.5 $175,000 $262,500Construction 10,000 $800 $8,000,000Total $8,262,500 Police Station Cost [2]
Land Acquisition 1.5 $175,000 $262,500Construction Cost 15,000 $1,100 $16,500,000Total $16,762,500 Source: City of Newman, EPS. [1] Acres and building square feet based on values from Fresno Police Development Impact Fee Program Nexus Study Update - 2022 prepared by EPS. Land acquisition cost per acre provided by City of Newman. Total station construction costs provided by Newman Fire Chief.[2] Acres and building square feet provided by City of Newman. Land acquisition cost per acre provided by City of Newman. Cost per building square foot based on 2019 construction costs to build new police station in Lathrop. Costs escalated to 2025$ using the change in the ENR CCI from 2019 to 2025 (approximately 28%). Police station sized to serve all future new residents and employees through buildout of all primary and secondary sphere of influence areas of Newman.

Prepared by EPS 4/8/2025 Z:\Shared\projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 4.7.25 .xlsx B-5
DRAFT
Table B-6Newman Capital Facilities Fees UpdateEstimated Cost of General Government FacilitiesItem [1] Address Acres Cost per
Acre (2025$)
Total
(2025$)
Floor Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Appraised
Value (2023$)
Estimated
Cost (2025$) [2]
Improvement
Ratio
Percentage Increase in CCI (2023-2025) [3] 2.9%Existing Service Population [4] 12,482Net New Service Population through Primary SOI Buildout [4] 15,444Ratio of Net New to Existing Service Population (rounded) 1.2General City City Hall and Commercial Space 938 Fresno Street 0.172 $871,200 $150,000 14,800 $5,494,000 $5,653,597 $5,803,597 1.2 17,760 $6,784,317Museum 1209 Main Street 0.344 $871,200 $300,000 2,700 $1,051,000 $1,081,531 $1,381,531 1.0 2,700 $1,081,531Recreation Teen Center 831 Hardin Road 0.287 $653,400 $187,500 3,724 $1,031,000 $1,060,950 $1,248,450 1.2 4,469 $1,273,140 Memorial Center 649 Orestimba Road 0.459 $871,200 $400,000 4,256 $1,407,000 $1,447,872 $1,847,872 1.2 5,107 $1,737,447West Side Theatre 1331 Main Street 0.172 $871,200 $150,000 11,523 $4,389,300 $4,516,806 $4,666,806 1.0 11,523 $4,516,806Corporation Yard [5] 712 Fresno Street 0.689 $740,520 $510,000 5,780 $569,000 $585,529 $1,095,529 NA NA $5,150,000Downtown Plaza Restroom and Storage 1328 Main Street 0.057 $871,200 $50,000 448 $198,600 $204,369 $254,369 1.2 538 $245,243 Subtotal 43,231 $14,139,900 $14,550,655 $16,298,155 $20,788,484 Water Department
Maintenance Office/Water Well 1R 1139 Fresno Street - - - 792 $651,100 $670,014 $670,014 1.2 950 $804,017 Maintenance Warehouse 1125 Fresno Street 0.175 $350,000 $61,000 1,802 $236,700 $243,576 $304,576 1.2 2,162 $292,291Water Department Storage 1139 Fresno Street 0.175 $350,000 $61,000 854 $77,100 $79,340 $140,340 1.2 1,025 $95,208 Emergency Generator 1139 Fresno Street - - - 0 $175,400 $180,495 $180,495 1.0 - $180,495 Subtotal Water Department 3,448 $1,140,300 $1,173,425 $1,295,425 $1,372,011 Total 46,679 $15,280,200 $15,724,080 $22,160,495
Total (Rounded) $22,160,000Source: City of Newman; EPS. [1] All existing facilities information except acres and land cost from AssetWorks Summary Appraisal Report (2023) Acres and land cost per acre provided by City staff in 2024. Excludes leased buildings and vacant building (Leased: Old Schoolhouse, 2 single family homes,1 office; Vacant: retail building). Also excludes sewer department facilities because sewer costs include required new facilities and equipment. See Table B-15.[2] Calculated as 2023 cost * (1+ percentage increase in CCI).[3] See Table B-24.[4] See Table B-26,[5] Existing corporation yard includes: storage, shop, office, carports, animal shelter. New corporation yard costs provided by City; includes $150,000 for land purchased in 2023 and $5 million for construction of a new corporation yard.

New Improvements
Land Cost Building Cost Total
Cost
(2025$)
Floor
Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Estimated
Cost
(2025$)
Existing Improvements
Prepared by EPS 4/8/2025 Z:\Shared\projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 4.7.25 .xlsx B-6
DRAFT
Table B-7
Newman Capital Facilities Fees Update
Existing General Government Vehicles and Equipment Costs [1] Item Number
Replacement
Cost (2023$)
Replacement
Cost (2025$) [2]
rounded
Percentage Increase in CCI (2023-2025) [3] 2.9%
Administration Vehicles
2019 Chevrolet Bolt - CSO 1 $20,000 $20,600
2019 Toyota Prius - Administration 1 $20,000 $20,600
Subtotal 2 $40,000 $41,200
Public Works Vehicles
Dump Trucks
2009 GMC Flatbed Dump Truck 1 $74,502 $76,700
2011 Ford F550 Dump Truck 1 $74,502 $76,700
Subtotal 2 $149,004 $153,400
2009 GMC Aerial Lift Truck 1 $162,000 $166,700
2018 Elgin Crosswind Sweeper 1 $400,000 $411,600
General Purpose Trucks
2002 Chevrolet 1/2 Ton 1 $51,000 $52,500
2005 Chevrolet C2500 2 $108,000 $111,100
2005 Chevrolet F250 1 $54,000 $55,600
2007 Chevrolet K2500 1 $54,000 $55,600
2012 Ford F-250 1 $54,000 $55,600
2012 Ford F-150 1 $51,000 $52,500
2013 Ford F-150 1 $51,000 $52,500
2016 Ford F-250 1 $54,000 $55,600
2019 Ford Pickup 2 $58,000 $59,700
Subtotal 11 $535,000 $550,700
Public Works Equipment Inventory
2016 Big TX Ditch Witch 1 $83,011 $85,400
2011 New Holland Tractor, Loader, Backhoe 1 $103,000 $106,000 2022 US JETTER Trailers - Large 1 $101,100 $104,000
Subtotal 3 $287,111 $295,400
Total 20 $1,573,115 $1,619,000
Source: City of Newman; EPS.
[1] Vehicles and replacement costs (2023$) from Public Works Department 2023 list of vehicles. Excludes WWTP vehicles and equipment, which are included in the sewer costs. [2] Calculated as 2023 cost * (1+ percentage increase in CCI). [3] See Table B-24.

Existing Vehicles
Prepared by EPS 4/8/2025 Z:\Shared\projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 4.7.25 .xlsx B-7
DRAFT
Table B-8Newman Capital Facilities Fees UpdateEstimated Cost of New General Government Vehicles and Equipment (2025$) [1]Item Existing
Vehicles [2] Number
Cost per
Vehicle (2025$) [2]
Total Cost
(2025$)
Existing Service Population [3] 12,482New Service Population through Primary SOI Buildout [3] 15,444Ratio of New to Existing Service Population 1.2General City/Administration Cars 2 2 $20,600 $41,200 Public Works Vehicles
Dump Trucks 2 2 $77,000 $154,000
Aerial Lift Truck 1 1 $166,700 $166,700
Street Sweeper 1 1 $411,600 $411,600
General Purpose Trucks 11 13 $50,000 $650,000
Subtotal 15 17 $1,382,300
Public Works Equipment Inventory
Ditch Witch Trencher 1 1 $85,000 $85,000
Tractor, Loader, Backhoe 1 1 $106,000 $106,000Trailers - Large 1 1 $104,000 $104,000 Subtotal 3 3 $295,000
Total 20 22 $1,718,500
Source: City of Newman; EPS.[1] Excludes WWTP vehicles and equipment, which are included in WWTP costs.[2] See Table B-7.[3] See Table B-26.

New Vehicles
Prepared by EPS 4/8/2025 Z:\Shared\projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 4.7.25 .xlsx B-8
DRAFT
Table B-9Newman Capital Facilities Fees UpdateSummary of Transportation Improvement Costs [1] Source Total
Existing
Development Primary SOI Secondary SOI
Percentage of Total [2] Table B-14 23% 39% 38%Completion of 1992 GP Segments Table B-10 $53,580,000 $12,378,392 $20,703,430 $20,498,1782030 General Plan Circulation Element and Impacted Segments Table B-11 $42,846,000 $9,898,555 $16,555,789 $16,391,656Intersection Improvements Table B-12 $10,306,000 $2,380,958 $3,982,261 $3,942,781Traffic Signals Table B-13 $21,934,000 $5,067,332 $8,475,346 $8,391,322Total $128,666,000 $29,725,236 $49,716,826 $49,223,938Total (Rounded) $128,666,000 $29,725,000 $49,717,000 $49,224,000Source: City of Newman; Dowling and Associates; PMC; EPS.[1] Costs needed for existing and new development.[2] See Table B-14.

Estimated Cost (2025$)
Prepared by EPS 4/8/2025 Z:\Shared\projects\SAC\222000\222059 Newman Comprehensive Fee Update\Models\222059 m1 4.7.25 .xlsx B-9
DRAFT

Page 1 of 2 ends

Newman City CouncilApril 22, 2025

Newman City Council
April 22, 2025