Agenda packet — Patterson City Council, April 7, 2026 (part 2 of 2)

Maps, at Page 11 with Stanislaus County Recorder’s Office.

ANALYSIS
The proposed public utility easement is necessary for Patterson Irrigation District to have access to maintain and operate their pipeline system located on Walnut Ave within APN 047-031-013 and the surrounding area. This easement does not constitute a gift or conveyance of property in any way unethical or unlawful and does not violate the provisions of the California Land Surveyors Act or any other statute.

6.6 Packet Pg. 152

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no budget impact associated with this item.

ATTACHMENT
Resolution No. 2026-14
Public Utility Easement
Exhibit A – Legal Description
Plat Map
Crowmwell Shire Unit 2 Final Map
Clayton Shire Unit 1 Final Map

6.6 Packet Pg. 153
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-14

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PATTERSON,

AUTHORIZING THE DEDICATION OF A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ON WALNUT AVENUE WITHIN APN 047-031-013 AND SURROUNDING AREA WHEREAS, the Right-of-Way on Walnut Avenue was dedicated to the City of Patterson on the final map for Cromwell Shire Unit No. 2 that recorded on December 21, 2021, in Book 45 of Maps, Page 07, and on the final map for Clayton Shire Unit 1, recorded on March 11, 2022, in Book 45 of Maps, Page 11 with the Stanislaus County Recorder’s Office, which limited Patterson’s Irrigation District access to their pipelines on Walnut Avenue within APN 047-031-013 and surrounding area. The City Council of Patterson has considered the Public Utility Easement northerly 18 feet of the southerly 48 feet on Walnut Avenue within APN 047-031- 013 for utility maintenance and operation services.

WHEREAS, the public utility easement is necessary for Patterson Irrigation District to have access to maintain and operate their pipeline system located on Walnut Ave within APN 047-031-013 and the surrounding area. The public utility easement is not considered a gift or conveyance of property in any way unethical or unlawful, and does not violate the provisions of the California Land Surveyors Act or any other statute; and WHEREAS, a Public Meeting was held April 7, 2026, to receive public comments.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Patterson, California, hereby approves the dedication of Public Utility Easement within the parcel recorded as APN 047-031-013 as described in Exhibit “A” (Legal Description for Public Utility) and depicted on Exhibit “B” (Plat Map of Public Utility Easement), attached hereto.

The foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Patterson held on the 7th day of April 2026, by ______________, who moved its adoption, which motion was duly seconded by __________________, and it was upon roll call carried and the resolution adopted by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

EXCUSED:

6.6 Packet Pg. 154
APPROVED:
___________________________
Michael Clauzel
Mayor of the City of Patterson
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Aracely Alegre
City Clerk of the City of Patterson
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, correct and true copy of a resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Patterson, a Municipal Corporation of the County of Stanislaus, State of California, at a regular meeting held on the 7th day of April 2026, and I further certify that said resolution is in full force and effect and has never been rescinded or modified.

DATED:
___________________________________
City Clerk of the City of Patterson

6.6 Packet Pg. 155

6.6 Packet Pg. 158

6.6 Packet Pg. 159

6.6 Packet Pg. 160

6.6 Packet Pg. 161

6.6 Packet Pg. 162

6.6 Packet Pg. 163

CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA REPORT
TO: Mayor Clauzel and Members of the City Council
FROM: Fernando Ulloa, City Manager
BY: Diana Hernandez, Acting Recreation and Community Services Director MEETING DATE: April 7, 2026
ITEM NO: 6.7
SUBJECT: Approve Street Closure Request for Love Patterson Event, Scheduled Saturday, April 18, 2026, downtown at North Park.

RECOMMENDATION
Motion to Approve street closure for Love Patterson Event, scheduled for Saturday, April 18, 2026, downtown at North Park.

BACKGROUND
Love Patterson is a faith-based organization that exists for the building up of individuals and cities throughout Stanislaus County in order to maximize their impact on our community and demonstrate LOVE through an annual volunteer day.

ANALYSIS
The City of Patterson along with other community groups support the LOVE Patterson initiative to conduct a community cleanup day, which coordinates with all other LOVE events in Stanislaus County on April 18, 2026.

Love Patterson is requesting approval for street closures for its annual downtown event. The request for street closure is as follows:

W. Las Palmas between N 2nd Street and Plaza from 5am to 3pm Street Closure Cost- Public Works
Initial Street Closure:

Labor : $1,072 (4 Crew @ $134/HR x 2HRs) ($134/HR per person for any additional time spent working the event.)

6.7 Packet Pg. 164
Equipment:
-Barricades (8): $384 ($4/HR x 12HRs)
-Large Blocking Devices (2): $288 ($12/HR x 12HRs) (Large vehicles blocking intersection.) -Arrow Board Rental (2): $175
-Safety Cones (50): $323
Delivery: $90 Barricade delivery/pick up charge.

Encroachment Permit: $198 Standard Permit
SUB-TOTAL: $2,530
One Street Opening:

Labor: $1,072 (4 Crew @ $134/HR x 2HRs)
Equipment: $52 (Trucks & vehicles to pick up cones, barricades, arrow boards, etc.) (No Street Sweeper Necessary)
SUB-TOTAL: $1,124
Other: $548.10 (15%) Administrative Fee
TOTAL: $4,202.10

FISCAL IMPACT
This is a community event co-sponsored by the City of Patterson. The city's costs associated with the event are included in the annual budget and are primarily related to staff time spent to support the event.

6.7 Packet Pg. 165

6.7 Packet Pg. 166

6.7 Packet Pg. 167

CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA REPORT
TO: Mayor Clauzel and Members of the City Council
FROM: Fernando Ulloa, City Manager
BY: Xavier Guluarte, Interim Public Works Director
MEETING DATE: April 7, 2026
ITEM NO: 6.8
SUBJECT: Approve Resolution Nos. 2026-17 and 2026-18 Declaring the City Council's Intention to Initiate Proceedings for the Annual Levy of Assessments and Ordering the Preparation of Engineer’s Reports for the Landscape Maintenance Districts (LMDs) and County Service Area (CSA) No. 15 for FY 2026/27.

RECOMMENDATION
Motion to Approve Resolutions Nos. 2026-17 and 2026-18 Declaring the City Council's Intention to Initiate Proceedings for the Annual Levy of Assessments and Ordering the Preparation of Engineer’s Reports for the Landscape Maintenance Districts (LMDs) and County Service Area (CSA) No. 15 for FY 2026/27.

BACKGROUND
LMDs and Benefit Assessment Districts (BADs) are special purpose districts established to fund specific maintenance activities. Properties within these districts receive a special benefit from the activities and are assessed an annual levy to fund those activities. The use of LMDs and BADs in Patterson dates back to the late 1980s. Most residential subdivisions built since then are required to establish an LMD and/or BAD.

Specifically, an LMD typically funds the on-going maintenance and repair of park equipment, structures, and landscaping. City street trees and sidewalk maintenance may also be included.

Typical BAD funds the operation and maintenance of storm drain inlets, drainage lines, pump stations, and streetlights. A BAD may also fund storm water management activities and limited street maintenance work. Included in the budgets for both LMDs and BADs is a city administrative charge to cover staff time spent preparing and administering the budgets and otherwise managing each district. The typical administrative fee is established at 15% of the annual operations and maintenance budget.

6.8 Packet Pg. 168
The attached Resolutions do not cover the BADs since those districts do not require a Resolution Initiating Proceedings. The second Resolution is for County Service Area (CSA) No. 15, which covers the Villa del Lago (Rogers Road) commercial area. Since that project was initially developed outside the city limits, the maintenance district was set up in a County Service Area (CSA). In 2005, the city annexed the Villa Del Lago commercial area into the city limits and therefore took over the administration of the CSA. This district provides for maintenance of the signal light at Sperry Ave and Rogers Rd, the on-site storm drain basin and the sewer collection system on Rogers Rd.

The budget for each district is prepared and included in a document called the “Engineer’s Report.” This report and resolution declares the City's intention to initiate proceedings and direct the preparation of Engineer’s Reports applies to CSA No. 15 (Villa Del Lago) and the following Landscape Maintenance Districts:

LMDs
County Hollow Estates District
Kinshire Estates District
Patterson Estates I, III, IV District
Shirepark Estates District
Walnut Square Estates District
Heartland Ranch Landscape Maintenance District
Heartland Ranch Overlay Landscape Maintenance District
Miraggio Landscape Maintenance District
Sutter Pointe Landscape Maintenance District
Walker Ranch Landscape Maintenance District
Patterson Gardens Landscape Maintenance District
Keystone Pacific Business Park Landscape Maintenance District Keystone Pacific Business Park Landscape Maintenance District Annex No. 1 The next step in the process is for the preparation of the Engineer’s Reports for the LMDs, BADs, and CSA NO. 15. Once completed staff will bring those to Council for review and approval at the Intent Meeting scheduled for Tuesday, May 19, 2026. At that time Council will also establish the date and time for the Public Hearing, which is tentatively scheduled for Tuesday, June 16, 2026.

The reason for the assessments is to generate the revenue necessary to operate and maintain the facilities in each district.

FISCAL IMPACT
All costs associated with preparing the Engineer’s Reports, the annual levy, and collection of assessments and advertising are charged to the respective Districts. There is no budget impact at this time.

ATTACHMENT
Resolution No. 2026-17 – Initiating Proceedings for the Annual Levy of Assessments and Ordering the Preparation of an Engineer’s Reprot for County service Area No. 15 Resolution No. 2026-18 - Initiating Proceedings for the Annual Levy of Assessments and Ordering the Preparation of an Engineer’s Reprot for Special maintenance Assessment Districts

6.8 Packet Pg. 169
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-17

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PATTERSON INITIATING

PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ANNUAL LEVY OF ASSESSMENTS AND ORDERING THE PREPARATION OF AN ENGINEER’S REPORT FOR COUNTY SERVICE AREA NO. 15 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Patterson (“City Council”), has previously adopted Resolution No. 2005-62 on June 21, 2005, authorizing the City to take over administration of County Service Area No. 15 (“CSA No. 15”). Further, on February 8, 2005, the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors and Stanislaus Local Agency Formation Commission approved the transfer of CSA No. 15 from Stanislaus County to the City of Patterson. CSA No. 15 was formed on November 7, 1995, by resolution of the Board of Supervisors pursuant to the terms of the Government Code §25210 et. seq.

WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to initiate proceedings to provide for the levy and collection of assessments for Fiscal Year 2026/27 in order to provide for the costs and expenses necessary to pay for the maintenance and operations within CSA No. 15; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has retained NBS for the purpose of assisting with the annual levy and to prepare and file a report in accordance with Government Code Section §25215.3.

NOW, THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:

RECITALS

1. That the above recitals are all true and correct.

DECLARATION OF INTENTION

2. That the public interest and convenience requires, and it is the intention of this legislative body, to levy and collect assessments to pay the annual costs and expenses to provide extended storm drainage to the Patterson Gateway development and maintain the traffic signals at the Sperry Road/Rogers Road intersection for CSA No. 15. Street maintenance services will also be provided.

ENGINEER’S REPORT

3. The City Council hereby orders NBS to prepare and file a report containing a description of each parcel of real property receiving the particular extended service and the amount of the assessment for each parcel be prepared once a year and filed with the City Clerk in accordance with Government Code §25210.77(A).

FISCAL YEAR

4. That the assessments as above authorized and levied for these proceedings will provide revenue and relate to the Fiscal Year commencing July 1, 2026 and ending June 30, 2027.

6.8 Packet Pg. 170
The foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Patterson held on the 7th of April 2026 by _________________, who moved its adoption, which motion was duly seconded by __________________, and the resolution adopted by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

EXCUSED:

APPROVED:

Michael Clauzel
Mayor of the City of Patterson
ATTEST:

Aracely Alegre
City Clerk of the City of Patterson
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, correct and true copy of a resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Patterson, a Municipal Corporation of the County of Stanislaus, State of California, at a regular meeting held on the 7th day of April 2026, and I further certify that said resolution is in full force and effect and has never been rescinded or modified.

DATED:

City Clerk of the City of Patterson

6.8 Packet Pg. 171
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-18

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PATTERSON, CALIFORNIA,

INITIATING PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ANNUAL LEVY OF ASSESSMENTS AND ORDERING THE PREPARATION OF AN ENGINEER’S REPORT FOR SPECIAL MAINTENANCE

ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Patterson (the “City Council”) pursuant to the terms of the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, Division 15, Part 2 of the California Streets and Highways Code (commencing with Section 22500) (the “Act”), previously formed the special maintenance assessment districts known and designated as follows:

Country Hollow Estates Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District Kinshire Estates District Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District Patterson Estates I, III, and IV Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District Shirepark Estates Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District Walnut Square Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District Heartland Ranch Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District Heartland Ranch Overlay Zone 1 Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District Miraggio Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District
Sutter Point Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District Walker Ranch Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District Patterson Gardens Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District Keystone Pacific Business Park Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District Keystone Pacific Business Park Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District Annexation 1 (the “Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Districts”); and, WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to initiate proceedings to provide for the levy of assessments for Fiscal Year 2026/27 in order to provide for the necessary costs and expenses pertaining to the maintenance of the improvements within the Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Districts; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has retained NBS for the purpose of assisting with the annual levy and to prepare and file a report in accordance with the Act.

NOW, THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:

RECITALS

1. The above recitals are true and correct.

DECLARATION OF INTENTION

2. The public interest and convenience requires, and it is the intention of this legislative body, to levy and collect assessments to pay the annual costs and expenses for the installation, replacement, maintenance and/or servicing of the improvements within the Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Districts. No new improvements or substantial changes to the existing improvements are being proposed at this time.

6.8 Packet Pg. 172
ENGINEER’S REPORT

3. The City Council hereby orders NBS to prepare an Engineer’s Report regarding the Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Districts containing the following information:

A. The plans and specifications describing the general nature, location and extent of the improvements to be maintained.

B. An estimate of cost of the maintenance and/or servicing of the improvements for the referenced fiscal year.

C. A diagram showing the areas and the properties proposed to be assessed.

D. An assessment of the estimated costs of the maintenance and/or servicing, assessing the net amount upon all assessable lots and/or parcels in proportion to the benefits received.

NBS shall file the Engineer’s Report with the City Clerk of the City of Patterson, who shall then submit the Engineer’s Report to the City Council for immediate review and consideration.

FISCAL YEAR

4. The assessments relating to these proceedings will constitute the Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District revenues for the Fiscal Year commencing July 1, 2026 and ending June 30, 2027.

IMPROVEMENTS

5. There are no changes to existing improvements nor are there any items being added to the list of improvements previously approved at the formation of the Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Districts.

The foregoing resolution was introduced at a (regular or special) meeting of the City Council of the City of Patterson held on the 7th of April 2026 by _________________, who moved its adoption, which motion was duly seconded by __________________, and the resolution adopted by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

EXCUSED:

6.8 Packet Pg. 173
APPROVED:
__________________________
Michael Clauzel
Mayor of the City of Patterson
ATTEST:
__________________________
Aracely Alegre
City Clerk of the City of Patterson
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, correct and true copy of a resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Patterson, a Municipal Corporation of the County of Stanislaus, State of California, at a regular meeting held on the 7th day of April 2026, and I further certify that said resolution is in full force and effect and has never been rescinded or modified.

DATED:
___________________________
City Clerk of the City of Patterson

6.8 Packet Pg. 174

CITY COUNCIL

RECOMMENDATION
Motion to Approve Resolution No. 2026-19 Proclaiming Arbor Week during March 7-14, 2026, in the City of Patterson.

BACKGROUND
The City of Patterson and many other communities in California work together to celebrate and promote the importance of California Arbor Week. The City of Patterson understands the importance of trees and obtained its Tree City USA status in 2016 through the Arbor Day Foundation with the assistance of the Cal-Fire Grant funds secured by the City. The City of Patterson has a goal to preserve as many trees as possible to obtain the benefits they supply, such as reduced energy costs, increased property values, aesthetics, and clean air.

This is a nationwide movement that provides the framework necessary for communities to manage and expand their urban forest. This is achieved by meeting four (4) core standards of sound: Urban Forestry Management, maintaining a tree department, having a community tree ordinance, and spending at least $2 per capita on Urban Forestry, and celebrating Arbor Day.

Currently, the city has an Urban Forestry Division and Parks Division whose primary responsibility is to maintain and preserve over 18,000 street and park trees. However, it is important that the city expands its efforts to the community through education and public outreach.

6.9 Packet Pg. 175

ANALYSIS
Every year during March 7-14, Californians celebrate Arbor Week by planting and maintaining trees within their communities. California Arbor Week helps unite the community and helps educate on the value trees provide to building successful, healthy cities, and neighborhoods.

Every year, the city holds Arbor Day events at various elementary schools and at city parks.

Food, activity stations, prizes, free giveaways, and educational tree plantings are held. This year, the city will not only focus on the importance of a healthy Urban Forest but also educating them about the importance of protecting the environment, through “Green Week.” Green Week is filled with activities developed around Trees, Water Conservation, Stormwater Management, Recycling, and Fats, Oils & Grease (FOG) Programs. This year’s Green Week includes school visits, tree plantings, a presentation, and an Arbor Day poster contest. Students will learn good environmental practices and inspire them to become Green Ambassadors in our community.

Green Week is also be promoted on all Social Media platforms to educate residents about environmental responsibility and sustainability in our community. The schedule of events for Green Week (March 10 - 14, 2026) are as follows:

Date Duration School Activities
March 11, 2026 11:00am to 12:30pm Del Puerto High
School
Arbor Day Presentation,
Tree Plantings, and Poster
Contest
March 13, 2026 8:00am to 12:00pm Las Palmas
Elementary School
Environmental Programs
Booth and Educational
Materials Distribution
Public Works is excited about “Green Week,” and we look forward to expanding this in years to come.

Attached for Council consideration and approval is the Resolution proclaiming Arbor Week.

FISCAL IMPACT
Funds for this event will be obtained from our Urban Forestry budget. Budget will cover the purchase of trees, prizes, water, and education & outreach materials needed for the event.

ATTACHMENT
Resolution No. 2026-19

6.9 Packet Pg. 176
1 of 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2026–19

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PATTERSON PROCLAIMING ARBOR WEEK DURING MARCH 7-14, 2026 IN THE CITY OF PATTERSON WHEREAS, Arbor Day is celebrated nationally to encourage Americans to maintain and replenish our country's vast forests, orchards, and woodlands; and
WHEREAS, In California, we also observe Arbor Day starting on the birthday of Luther Burbank, a famed California horticulturalist whose life's labor produced hundreds of plants and trees that have contributed to the natural splendor and food production in our state; and WHEREAS, California Arbor Week has the involvement of the City of Patterson; and WHEREAS, The City of Patterson is improving our community by planting and maintaining over 18,000 trees and continues working to improve the quality of life in Patterson; and WHEREAS, Trees are a valuable economic asset in our cities that help maintain or increase property values and attract business and new residents in urban areas; and WHEREAS, Trees play an important role in energy conservation by modifying temperature extremes with shade and humidity, and are particularly important in reducing the amount of energy consumed in heating and cooling buildings and homes; and
WHEREAS, Trees planted in urban areas play a significant role in meeting the state's greenhouse gas emission reduction targets by sequestering carbon as well as reducing energy consumption; and WHEREAS, Trees directly contribute to improving California's air quality by reducing air pollution by removing airborne particulates from the atmosphere and helping to purify the air; and WHEREAS, Trees play a significant role in protecting and purifying California's limited water resources by reducing surface runoff, contributing to storm water management activity and protecting urban water resources; and
WHEREAS, Trees provide essential habitat for much of California's wildlife, including many listed, threatened, and endangered species; and
WHEREAS, Trees enhance the aesthetic quality of life in urban communities by providing a natural buffer for surface noise and natural recreational resources for California's children and at-risk youth.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PATTERSON HEREBY proclaim March 7 through March 14, of 2016 as California Arbor Week, and urge all citizens to observe and celebrate the week by planting trees for our own benefit and for the benefit of future generations.

6.9 Packet Pg. 177
1 of 1
The foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Patterson held on the 7th day of April 2026 by ________________, who moved its adoption, which motion was duly seconded by __________________, and the resolution adopted by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

EXCUSED:

APPROVED:

Michael Clauzel
Mayor of the City of Patterson
ATTEST:

DATED:
______________________________________
City Clerk of the City of Patterson

6.9 Packet Pg. 178

CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA REPORT
TO: Mayor Clauzel and Members of the City Council
FROM: Fernando Ulloa, City Manager
BY: Xavier Guluarte, Interim Public Works Director
MEETING DATE: April 7, 2026
ITEM NO: 6.10
SUBJECT: Approve Resolution No. 2026-20 Adopting the Revised and Reinstated Memorandum of Agreement Among the Delta-Mendota Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies and Authorize the City Manager or designee to Execute the Agreement and Related Documents.

RECOMMENDATION
Motion to Approve Resolution No. 2026-20 Adopting the Revised and Reinstated Memorandum of Agreement Among the Delta-Mendota Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies and Authorize the City Manager or designee to Execute the Agreement and Related Documents.

BACKGROUND
In 2024, the Delta-Mendota Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) adopted a single Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the Subbasin to coordinate efforts to meet groundwater sustainability goals as outlined in the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). On September 12, 2024, the Subbasin GSAs entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to implement the single GSP.

Under the MOA, the Subbasin GSAs had agreements with the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority (SLDMWA) whereby SLDMWA provided fiscal, contracting and administrative services for the Subbasin. SLDMWA’s Board directed that SLDMWA consolidate its mission to core objectives and therefore transition away from providing these services by the start of the next fiscal year (March 1, 2026). As a result, the Subbasin GSAs executed a Joint Powers Agreement to establish a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) in January 2026. The city approved this JPA agreement on November 4, 2025.

ANALYSIS
With the establishment of the DM Subbasin GSAs Joint Powers Authority (DM Authority), the

6.10 Packet Pg. 179
SLDMWA will no longer have a role in the management of the GSAs, and therefore, the revised MOA removes the role of SLDWMA in Article III and replaces it with the DM Authority.

Additionally, in the revised MOA, the Board of Directors of the DM Authority supersedes and replaces the Coordination Committee identified in Article IV of the original MOA. Lastly, since Widren Water District and Oro Loma Water District recently joined the Central Delta-Mendota GSA Joint Powers Authority, the MOA signatories reflect this change from 23 to 21 GSAs.

On February 4, 2026, the Delta-Mendota Joint Powers Authority Board of Directors was established and held a Special Joint Meeting with the Coordination Committee. During the meeting, the Revised and Restated MOA was presented by legal counsel. The Board directed legal counsel to modify Section 7.1 of the Agreement to state that the Parties agree to “coordinate to develop and maintain a monitoring network at the Subbasin level.” Please note that this is a non-substantive revision and does not change the terms or the Party responsibilities of the agreement.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact for the revision of this agreement.

ATTACHMENT
1) Resolution No. 2026-20
2) Revised DM GSA Memorandum of Agreement

6.10 Packet Pg. 180
1 of 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-20

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PATTERSON ADOPTING THE

REVISED AND RESTATED MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AMONG THE DELTA-MENDOTA

SUBBASIN GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY AGENCIES
WHEREAS, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requires groundwater basins designated as high or medium priority to be sustainably managed through the development and implementation of Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs); and
WHEREAS, in 2024, the Delta-Mendota Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) adopted a single Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the Subbasin to coordinate efforts to achieve groundwater sustainability; and
WHEREAS, on September 12, 2024, the Subbasin GSAs entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to facilitate coordination and implementation of the GSP; and WHEREAS, the MOA originally designated the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority (SLDMWA) to provide fiscal, contracting, and administrative services for the Subbasin; and WHEREAS, the SLDMWA Board of Directors has directed a transition away from providing such services effective March 1, 2026; and
WHEREAS, in response, the Subbasin GSAs executed a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) in January 2026 to establish the Delta-Mendota Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies Joint Powers Authority (DM Authority), which will assume administrative and governance responsibilities; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved participation in the Joint Powers Agreement on November 4, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the Revised and Restated Memorandum of Agreement removes references to SLDMWA and replaces its role with the DM Authority, updates governance structure by replacing the Coordination Committee with the DM Authority Board of Directors, and reflects updated membership totaling 21 GSAs; and WHEREAS, on February 4, 2026, the DM Authority Board of Directors reviewed the Revised and Restated MOA and directed a non-substantive modification to Section 7.1 clarifying that the Parties agree to “coordinate to develop and maintain a monitoring network at the Subbasin level”; and WHEREAS, the proposed revisions do not alter the substantive responsibilities of the Parties and result in no fiscal impact to the City.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PATTERSON HEREBY:
1) Approves and adopts the Revised and Restated Memorandum of Agreement Among the DeltaMendota Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies. 2) The City Manager, or designee, is hereby authorized to execute the Revised and Restated MOA and any related documents necessary to implement this Resolution.

6.10 Packet Pg. 181
1 of 1
The foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Patterson held on the 7th of April 2026 by _________________, who moved its adoption, which motion was duly seconded by __________________, and the resolution adopted by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

EXCUSED:

APPROVED:

Michael Clauzel
Mayor of the City of Patterson
ATTEST:

DATED:
______________________________________
City Clerk of the City of Patterson

6.10 Packet Pg. 182
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 1

REVISED AND RESTATED

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

AMONG THE DELTA-MENDOTA SUBBASIN

GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY AGENCIES
THIS REVISED AND RESTATED MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT (this “MOA”) is entered into and shall be effective as of March 1, 2026 (the “Effective Date”), by and among the groundwater sustainability agencies within the Delta-Mendota Subbasin listed in Exhibit “A” (each a “Party” and collectively the “Parties”) and is made with reference to the following facts:

RECITALS
A. On September 16, 2014, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law Senate Bills 1168 and 1319 and Assembly Bill 1739, known collectively as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (“SGMA”).

B. SGMA requires all groundwater subbasins designated as high- or medium-priority by the California Department of Water Resources (“DWR”) to manage groundwater in a sustainable manner.

C. The Delta-Mendota Subbasin (Basin Number 5-22.07, DWR Bulletin 118) within the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin (“Subbasin”), has been designated as a high-priority, critically overdrafted basin by DWR.

D. The Subbasin includes multiple groundwater sustainability agencies (each a “GSA” and collectively, the “GSAs”) that initially managed the Subbasin through the development and implementation of six different groundwater sustainability plans.

E. Pursuant to the requirements of SGMA (Wat. Code §§ 10720, et seq.) and DWR’s SGMA regulations (23 Cal. Code Regs., §§ 350, et seq.), and in recognition of the need to sustainably manage the groundwater within the Subbasin, the Parties entered into that certain Delta-Mendota Subbasin Coordination Agreement effective December 12, 2018 (“Coordination Agreement”), to outline the Parties’ obligations and responsibilities regarding SGMA coordination in the Subbasin among the multiple GSAs and multiple groundwater sustainability plans.

F. In 2024, the Parties adopted a single groundwater sustainability plan (“GSP”) to cover the entire Subbasin to comply with SGMA.

G. If there is only one GSP for the Subbasin, then the GSAs no longer need the Coordination Agreement, as defined by SGMA.

H. As part of the development of a single GSP, the Parties adopted a Memorandum of Agreement Among the Delta-Mendota Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies and San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority, effective September 12, 2024 (the “Original MOA”).

6.10 Packet Pg. 183
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 2
I. Through the Original MOA, the GSAs desired to coordinate the work and management of the Subbasin and clarify responsibilities of the respective GSAs, in accordance with SGMA, and develop a “Coordination Committee” to assist with said efforts.

J. As of December 1, 2025, the Parties entered into that certain “Delta-Mendota Subbasin GSAs Joint Powers Authority Agreement” to create a separate entity known as the DeltaMendota Subbasin GSAs Joint Powers Authority (the “Authority”).

K. The responsibilities of the Coordination Committee created by the Original MOA have been superseded by the Board of Directors of the Authority, rendering the Coordination Committee unnecessary.

L. With the creation of the Authority, the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority is no longer involved in the coordination of the GSAs in the Subbasin and is therefore no longer a signatory to this MOA.

M. The Parties desire to revise and restate the Original MOA as outlined in this MOA and it is the intent of the Parties that this MOA supersede and replace the Original MOA.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the Recitals, which are deemed true and correct and incorporated herein, and of the covenants, terms and conditions set forth herein, the Parties hereto agree as follows:

ARTICLE I– DEFINITIONS

1.1 “Authority” shall mean the Delta-Mendota Subbasin GSAs Joint Powers Authority.

1.2 “Coordinated Plan Expenses” are those Subbasin-wide Activities expenses incurred by the Authority, the Secretary, and the Plan Manager, at the direction of the Board of Directors, within approved annual cost estimates for purposes described in this MOA and in implementing this MOA, including actual expenses incurred in executing obligations under this MOA for intrabasin and interbasin coordination, which are shared equally amongst the seven representative seats of the Board of Directors, in accordance with the Participation Percentages.

1.3 “DWR” shall mean the California Department of Water Resources.

1.4 “Effective Date” shall be March 1, 2026.

1.5 “GSA” shall mean a groundwater sustainability agency established in accordance with SGMA and its associated regulations, and “GSAs” shall mean more than one such groundwater sustainability agency. Each Party is a GSA.

1.6 “GSP” shall mean the single Delta-Mendota Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan.

1.7 “MOA” shall mean this Revised and Restated Memorandum of Agreement by and among the Parties.

6.10 Packet Pg. 184
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 3

1.8 “Participation Percentages” shall mean that percentage of Coordinated Plan Expenses allocated to each GSA or GSA Group as described on Exhibit “B” to this MOA, which is attached and incorporated by reference herein, as updated from time to time, but not more frequently than annually.

1.9 “Party” or “Parties” shall mean a GSA or in the plural, two or more GSAs within the Subbasin, who are signatories to this MOA.

1.10 “Plan Manager” shall mean an entity or individual, appointed at the pleasure of the Board of Directors of the Authority to perform the role of the Plan Manager and to serve as the point of contact to DWR and/or the State Water Board.

1.11 “SGMA” shall mean the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, as amended from time to time, commencing at Water Code section 10720, together with its implementing regulations applicable to groundwater sustainability plans, set forth at California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Division 2, Chapter 1.5, Subchapter 2.

1.12 “SGMA Definitions” shall mean those SGMA-specific definitions provided by statute or regulation; in the event of any inconsistency between a term defined in this MOA and a SGMA-specific definition, the definition contained in this MOA shall prevail.

1.13 “State Water Board” shall mean the California State Water Resources Control Board.

1.14 “Subbasin” shall mean the Delta-Mendota Subbasin (Basin Number 5-22.07, DWR Bulletin 118) within the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin.

1.15 “Subbasin-wide Activities” shall mean those activities or actions that affect the Subbasin as a whole or are otherwise required by SGMA to be determined at the Subbasin level and as defined by a unanimous vote of the Board of Directors of the Authority. An initial list of Subbasin-wide Activities is identified in Exhibit “D”.

1.16 “Water Year” shall mean the period from October 1 through the following September 30.

ARTICLE II– PURPOSE & KEY PRINCIPLES

2.1 Purpose. The Parties shall continue to work together in mutual cooperation to implement and update the GSP in compliance with SGMA, for the sustainable management of the Subbasin. Each Party hereto shall implement the terms and conditions of the GSP within their respective GSA territories.

2.2 Collaboration. The Parties intend to mutually cooperate to implement the GSP within their respective GSA territories.

2.3 Each Party’s Rights. This MOA shall not limit or interfere with any Party’s rights or authorities over its own internal matters, including, but not limited to, a Party’s legal rights to surface water supplies and assets, groundwater supplies and assets, facilities, billing and collection

6.10 Packet Pg. 185
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 4
procedures, GSA powers and implementation or exercise of such powers, operations, and water management and water supply matters. Nothing in this MOA is intended to modify or limit a Party’s police powers, land use authorities, or any other authority, including the authority to pursue a comprehensive groundwater adjudication or other alternative SGMA compliance strategy, should the Party deem it to be in its best interest to do so.

2.4 Management and GSP Implementation. It is the responsibility and obligation of each Party to this MOA, and any applicable separate agreements, to manage its own GSA and implement the GSP within its GSA’s boundaries. It is further the responsibility and obligation of each Party to pay its proportionate share of the Participation Percentage and other payments required as part of implementation of SGMA Subbasin-wide Activities, as may arise from time to time.

ARTICLE III – JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY

3.1 Delta-Mendota Subbasin GSAs Joint Powers Authority. The Parties entered into that certain Delta-Mendota Subbasin GSAs Joint Powers Authority Agreement effective December 1, 2025, to form the Delta-Mendota Subbasin GSAs Joint Powers Authority (the “Authority”). The Board of Directors of the Authority superseded and replaced the Coordination Committee identified in the Original MOA. All of the Parties to this MOA are Members of the Authority.

ARTICLE IV – APPROVAL BY INDIVIDUAL PARTIES

4.1 Where law or this MOA require separate written approval by each of the Parties, such approval shall be evidenced in writing by providing the adopted resolution or minutes of the respective GSA’s Board of Directors’ meeting to the Secretary of the Authority.

ARTICLE V – POWERS RESERVED TO PARTIES

5.1 Nothing in this MOA shall be interpreted to deprive any Party of its right to:
(a) Act as a GSA within its boundaries;
(b) Exercise authorities granted to each of the Parties as a GSA under SGMA in a manner consistent with the adopted GSP;
(c) Exercise authority to implement SGMA and any GSP adopted pursuant to this MOA consistent with the terms and conditions set forth therein; and (d) Defend, with legal counsel of its own choosing, any challenge to the adoption or implementation of a GSP developed pursuant to this MOA.

ARTICLE VI – EXCHANGE OF DATA AND INFORMATION

6.1 Exchange of Data and Information. The Parties acknowledge and recognize pursuant to this MOA that the Parties will need to exchange data and information among and

6.10 Packet Pg. 186
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 5
between the Parties. Procedures for exchanging of such data and information are outlined in Article XI of the Delta-Mendota Subbasin GSAs Joint Powers Authority Agreement.

ARTICLE VII – MONITORING NETWORK

7.1 In accordance with SGMA, the Parties hereby agree to coordinate to develop and maintain a monitoring network at a Subbasin level. The Subbasin monitoring network description shall include monitoring objectives, protocols, and data reporting requirements specific to enumerated sustainability indicators. Each GSA is responsible for the following:
(a) Operating and maintaining the representative monitoring network within its boundary;
(b) Filling data gaps in its GSA on a defined schedule; (c) Collecting data per the approved Subbasin-wide monitoring protocol; (d) Considering developing and maintaining a supplementary network for collecting data in excess of the minimum need, for the purposes of supporting local management decisions (since the level of detail necessary may not be sufficient in a Subbasin level network); and
(e) Each GSA shall have a minimum of one representative monitoring well (measuring water level and water quality) from each aquifer (above the Corcoran Clay layer – shallow aquifer, or below the Corcoran Clay layer – deep aquifer) in which it has groundwater pumping either within its GSA boundaries or within the area of influence of the pumping that is occurring, sufficient to meet the recommendations of the Subbasinwide GSP consultant.

7.2 The minimum monitoring network shall be based on the evaluation performed by the Subbasin-wide GSP consultant and may change from time to time. The Subbasin-wide GSP consultant shall evaluate the monitoring network to ensure:
(a) There is a proper spatial and temporal coverage to inform a groundwater model;
(b) The level of monitoring is commensurate with the use in an area (e.g., limited monitoring well(s) in areas that do not pump or higher density of survey benchmarks in areas that have numerous deep wells); and (c) The network is balanced, so that should an exceedance occur, it is not biased or weighted as a function of a poorly distributed monitoring network.

ARTICLE VIII – COORDINATED DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

8.1 The Parties developed and currently maintain a coordinated data management system that is capable of storing and reporting information relevant to the reporting requirements and/or implementation of the GSP and monitoring network of the Subbasin. After providing the

6.10 Packet Pg. 187
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 6
Board of Directors of the Authority with data from the individual GSAs, the Plan Manager will ensure the data is stored and managed in a coordinated manner throughout the Subbasin and reported to DWR annually as required.

ARTICLE IX – ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

9.1 The Parties previously established an “Adaptive Management Framework” applicable to all GSAs in the Subbasin, which is attached hereto as Exhibit “C” and incorporated herein by this reference. This Adaptive Management Framework shall be further refined as part of the GSP development and implementation.

9.2 If and when required pursuant to Exhibit “C”, each Party to this Agreement shall participate in the procedures discussed therein without regard to whether the Party is represented by another entity on the Authority’s Board of Directors.

9.3 As part of the Adaptive Management Framework, each Party commits to continue to evaluate and implement projects and management actions (“P&MAs”) within its boundaries to reach sustainability in compliance with SGMA.

ARTICLE X – MODIFICATION OF THIS MOA

10.1 Addition of a Party. A Party may be added to this MOA only upon the unanimous vote of Board of Directors of the Authority at a regular or special meeting, the Party’s execution of a counterpart of this MOA, and its provision of any additional documentation required by this MOA. No Party may be added that is not a GSA within the Subbasin or that fails to share in Coordinated Plan Expenses.

10.2 Modification or Amendment of this MOA. The Parties hereby agree that this MOA may be supplemented, amended, or modified only by a writing signed by all Parties.

10.3 Amendment for Compliance with Law. Should any provision of this MOA be determined to not be in compliance with legal requirements under circumstances where amendment of the MOA to include a provision addressing the legal requirement will cure the noncompliance, the Parties agree to promptly prepare and shall not unreasonably withhold approval of such amendment.

ARTICLE XI – WITHDRAWAL, TERM, AND TERMINATION

11.1 Withdrawal. A Party may unilaterally withdraw from this MOA without causing or requiring termination of this MOA, effective upon one (1) year written notice to the Authority’s Secretary and all other Parties. The Plan Manager shall report any such withdrawal to DWR and/or the State Water Board within five (5) days of receipt of the written notice.

Any Party who withdraws shall remain obligated for Coordinated Plan Expenses.

The withdrawing Party is obligated to pay its share of all debts, liabilities, and obligations the Party incurred or accrued under the MOA prior to the effective date of such withdrawal, which is one (1) year after providing written notice to the Secretary and all other Parties, and as also may be

6.10 Packet Pg. 188
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 7
established under its separate GSA Group agreement, as applicable, concerning such share of obligations.

Upon withdrawal, a Party agrees that it has a continuing obligation to comply with SGMA and any coordination guidelines and regulations issued by DWR, which require a coordination agreement if there are multiple groundwater sustainability plans in the Subbasin. This obligation shall survive the withdrawal from this MOA and is for the express benefit of the remaining Parties.

11.2 Termination. This MOA may be terminated or rescinded by the unanimous written consent of all Parties. Nothing in this MOA shall prevent the Parties from entering into a coordination agreement for coordination with any other subbasin.

11.3 Indemnification. No Party, nor any director, officer or employee of a Party, shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by another Party under or in connection with this MOA. Each Party shall fully indemnify and hold harmless each other Party and its agents, directors, officers, employees and contractors from and against all claims, damages, losses, judgments, liabilities, expenses and other costs, including litigation costs and attorney fees, arising out of, resulting from, or in connection with any work delegated to or action taken or omitted to be taken by such Party pursuant to this MOA.

ARTICLE XII – PROCEDURES FOR RESOLVING CONFLICTS

12.1 In the event of any dispute arising from or relating to this MOA, the procedures for resolving conflicts described in Article XIII of the Delta-Mendota Subbasin GSAs Joint Powers Authority Agreement shall control.

ARTICLE XIII – GENERAL PROVISIONS

13.1 Authority of Signers. The individuals executing this MOA represent and warrant that they have the authority to enter into this MOA and to legally bind the Party for whom they are signing to the terms and conditions of this MOA.

13.2 Governing Law. The validity and interpretation of this MOA will be governed by the laws of the State of California without giving effect to the principles of conflict of laws, with venue for all purposes to be proper only in the County of Merced, State of California.

13.3 Severability. Except as provided for cure by amendment in Articles 10.2 and 10.3, if any term, provision, covenant, or condition of this MOA is determined to be unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, it is the Parties’ intent that the remaining provisions of this MOA will remain in full force and effect and will not be affected, impaired, or invalidated by such a determination.

13.4 Counterparts. This MOA may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which will be an original, but all of which will constitute one and the same agreement.

13.5 Good Faith. The Parties agree to exercise their best efforts and utmost good faith to effectuate all the terms and conditions of this MOA and to execute such further instruments and

6.10 Packet Pg. 189
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 8
documents as are reasonably necessary, appropriate, expedient, or proper to carry out the intent and purposes of this MOA.

6.10 Packet Pg. 190
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 9
Signatures on following page

6.10 Packet Pg. 191
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 10
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this MOA as of the Effective Date.

Dated: ________________________ ALISO WATER DISTRICT GSA Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________
Dated: ________________________ CENTRAL DELTA-MENDOTA GSA Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________
Dated: ________________________ CITY OF DOS PALOS GSA
Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________
Dated: ________________________ CITY OF FIREBAUGH GSA
Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________
Dated: ________________________ CITY OF GUSTINE GSA
Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________
Dated: ________________________ CITY OF LOS BANOS GSA
Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________

6.10 Packet Pg. 192
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 11
Dated: ________________________ CITY OF MENDOTA GSA
Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________
Dated: ________________________ CITY OF NEWMAN GSA
Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________
Dated: ________________________ CITY OF PATTERSON GSA
Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________
Dated: ________________________ COUNTY OF MADERA GSA – DELTAMENDOTA Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________
Dated: ________________________ COUNTY OF MERCED DELTA-MENDOTA GSA Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________
Dated: ________________________ DM II GSA
Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________
Dated: ________________________ FARMERS WATER DISTRICT GSA Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________

6.10 Packet Pg. 193
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 12
Dated: ________________________ FRESNO COUNTY MANAGEMENT AREA A GSA
Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________
Dated: ________________________ FRESNO COUNTY MANAGEMENT AREA B GSA
Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________
Dated: ________________________ GRASSLAND GSA
Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________

6.10 Packet Pg. 194
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 13
Dated: ________________________ NORTHWESTERN DELTA-MENDOTA GSA

STANISLAUS COUNTY
___________________________________________
Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________

APPROVED AS TO FORM
By: ___________________________
___________________________

MERCED COUNTY
___________________________________________
Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________

APPROVED AS TO FORM
By: ___________________________
___________________________
Dated: ________________________ PATTERSON IRRIGATION DISTRICT GSA Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________
Dated: ________________________ SAN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE

CONTRACTORS WATER AUTHORITY GSA
Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________

6.10 Packet Pg. 195
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 14
Dated: ________________________ TURNER ISLAND WATER DISTRICT–2 GSA Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________
Dated: ________________________ WEST STANISLAUS IRRIGATION DISTRICT GSA
Print Name: __________________________
Print Title: ___________________________

6.10 Packet Pg. 196
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 15
EXHIBIT “A”
Parties to the MOA

1. Aliso Water District GSA

2. Central Delta-Mendota GSA
(Includes: County of Fresno, County of Merced, Eagle Field Water District, Fresno Slough Water District, Mercy Springs Water District, Oro Loma Water District, Pacheco Water District, Panoche Water District, San Luis Water District, Santa Nella County Water District, Tranquillity Irrigation District, and Widren Water District GSA)

3. City of Dos Palos GSA

4. City of Firebaugh GSA

5. City of Gustine GSA

6. City of Los Banos GSA

7. City of Mendota GSA

8. City of Newman GSA

9. City of Patterson GSA

10. County of Madera GSA – Delta-Mendota

11. County of Merced Delta-Mendota GSA

12. DM II GSA

13. Farmers Water District GSA

14. Fresno County Management Area A GSA

15. Fresno County Management Area B GSA

16. Grassland GSA

17. Northwestern Delta-Mendota GSA

18. Patterson Irrigation District GSA

19. San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSA
(Includes: Central California Irrigation District, San Luis Canal Company, Firebaugh Canal Water District, and Columbia Canal Company)

6.10 Packet Pg. 197
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 16

20. Turner Island Water District–2 GSA

21. West Stanislaus Irrigation District GSA

6.10 Packet Pg. 198
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 17

EXHIBIT B

BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPRESENTATIVES & PARTICIPATION PERCENTAGES Board of Directors Representatives (alphabetically) Group Contact Agency Participation
Percentage
1 Aliso Water District GSA Aliso Water District GSA 1/7 Aliso Water District GSA
2 Central Delta-Mendota GSA Central Delta-Mendota GSA 1/7 Central Delta-Mendota GSA
3 Farmers Water District GSA Farmers Water District GSA 1/7 Farmers Water District GSA
4 Fresno County Management Area A and B
GSAs Group Fresno County 1/7
Fresno County Management Area A GSA
Fresno County Management Area B GSA
5 Grassland GSAs Group Grassland Water District 1/7
Grassland GSA
Merced County Delta-Mendota GSA
6 Northern Delta-Mendota GSAs Group West Stanislaus Irrigation District 1/7 City of Patterson GSA

DM-II GSA
Northwestern Delta-Mendota GSA
Patterson Irrigation District GSA
West Stanislaus Irrigation District GSA
7 San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSAs
Group
San Joaquin River Exchange
Contractors GSA 1/7
City of Dos Palos GSA
City of Firebaugh GSA
City of Gustine GSA
City of Los Banos GSA
City of Mendota GSA
City of Newman GSA
County of Madera GSA – Delta-Mendota
Merced County Delta-Mendota GSA
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSA
Turner Island Water District-2 GSA

6.10 Packet Pg. 199
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 18
EXHIBIT “C”

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK FOR THE SUBBASIN
The Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (“GSAs”) in the Delta-Mendota Subbasin (the “Subbasin”) acknowledge that the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (“SGMA”) has a long-term horizon to achieve sustainability and that management of the Subbasin will require an iterative process on the part of the GSAs and the Board of Directors of the Authority to review groundwater conditions at least annually and propose revisions to underlying data, methodologies, assumptions, sustainable management criteria, projects, management actions, and other Subbasinwide coordinated information as necessary to meet changing conditions. Accordingly, the GSAs in the Subbasin establish the following framework for addressing MT exceedances in the SGMA implementation period, as will be further described in the adopted GSP:

1. As a Subbasin-wide Activity, the Subbasin-wide GSP Consultant shall initiate a review of Subbasin-wide data within sixty (60) days after that data is due to be submitted by each GSA (the “Review”). As reporting dates vary based upon the Sustainable Management Criteria (“SMC”), this Review will be done on a regular basis and will be a regular agenda item on the Authority’s Board of Directors agenda.

2. The Review shall take into account all matters to be considered in the Annual Report pursuant to the DWR Regulations, section 356.2, including, but not limited to, changes in groundwater elevation, groundwater storage, subsidence, water quality and the status of minimum thresholds (“MTs”) and interim milestones in the Subbasin GSP.

3. Should GSA activities result in either a) a pattern of data showing a downward trend (towards a MT exceedance), or b) a MT exceedance, the Authority (at the recommendation of the Plan Manager, a designated subcommittee, or the Subbasin-wide GSP Consultant) shall immediately notify the GSA and add the downward trend or exceedance information to the next Authority’s Board of Directors agenda packet. That GSA shall also be provided with a checklist to help evaluate possible causes of the MT downward trend or exceedance.

4. The GSA may request the Subbasin-wide GSP Consultant to coordinate such trend or exceedance information with that GSA’s own consultant, as applicable. Within thirty (30) days of said notice, the GSA shall present a plan of action to the Board of Directors of the Authority to address how the GSA will mitigate any downward trend or exceedance and in what timeframe.

The intent is for the Board of Directors of the Authority to discuss the mitigation plan in an effort to provide helpful ideas to the GSA. However, the GSA is solely responsible for the management actions within its boundaries and the costs to remedy the cause of the MT exceedance if it is attributed to activities occurring within such GSA’s jurisdictional boundaries and/or that GSA is not operating within its Sustainable Yield (the “Responsible GSA”). At its sole cost and expense, the Responsible GSA may ask the Subbasin-wide GSP Consultant to further determine: (a) what caused the exceedance; (b) whether or not the Responsible GSA has control over the cause of the MT downward trend or exceedance; (c) whether it is an intra-basin impact from another GSA or an inter-basin impact by a neighboring subbasin; and (d) whether or not the MT exceedance caused injury.

6.10 Packet Pg. 200
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 19

5. If there is a determination by the Subbasin-wide GSP Consultant that any MT downward trend or exceedance was caused by intra-basin impacts from another GSA within the Subbasin, such determination will be brought back to the Authority’s Board of Directorsfor further discussion and potential Subbasin-wide action. The Authority’s Board of Directors will work with other GSAs to increase existing GSA coordination to remedy the issues causing the downward trend or exceedance and to remedy the responsibility of costs associated with identifying and mitigating the exceedance.

6. If there is a determination that any MT exceedance was caused by a neighboring subbasin, this should be brought back to the Board of Directors of the Authority for further discussion and potential Subbasin-wide action. Costs for initial investigation by the Subbasin-wide GSP Consultant of a MT downward trend or exceedance across Subbasin boundary lines (such as water quality issues, subsidence, or depletion of interconnected surface waters) shall be shared pursuant to the Participation Percentages of the Authority (i.e. 1/7th each). The Authority’s Board of Directors will work with other subbasins to expand existing inter-basin coordination to remedy the issues causing the downward trends or exceedances.

7. In the event that the GSA is unable to mitigate or avoid future MT exceedances with its existing projects and management actions (“P&MAs”) and within the timeframe presented to the Authority’s Board of Directors, the GSA may seek assistance from the Authority. The Board of Directors of the Authority may recommend policies or programs to the GSA that the GSA could, in its discretion, adopt to remedy the existence of a MT exceedance and to avoid undesirable results. Furthermore, the Board of Directors of the Authority may consider setting triggers in the GSP for GSAs to implement management actions [e.g., sequencing P&MAs] or work on alternative options.

6.10 Packet Pg. 201
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 20
The Authority’s Board of
Directors provides
immediate notice to each
GSA with a MT
Exceedance & discusses it
at the following
Authority’s Board of
Directors meeting. The
GSA is provided with a
checklist to help evaluate
possible causes.

On a rolling
basis, annual
data and
information is
due to the
Subbasin-wide
consultant.

Within 60 days of
deadline to submit
information,
Subbasin-wide
consultant Reviews
data for MT
Exceedances &
potential trends in
said exceedances.

Within 30 days of
receiving such
information, the GSA
with MT Exceedances
presents a mitigation
plan & timeline to the
Authority Board of
Directors.

GSA may decide
to have Subbasin
consultant do
further research,
at its sole cost.

Within timeframe
presented by GSA,
GSA presents to
Authority’s Board of
Directors mitigation
plan that is
successful.

Within timeframe
presented by GSA,
MT Exceedances
are still occurring.

GSA and Subbasinwide GSP Consultant
determine that MT
Exceedance is caused
by neighboring
subbasin GSA(s) or
intra-basin Subbasin
GSA impacts
Authority’s Board
of Directors meets
& negotiates with
neighboring
Subbasin GSA or
GSA(s)
GSA &
Authority’s Board
of Directors
recommend
triggers in GSP for
implementing
P&MAs GSA &
Authority’s
Board of
Directors work
on alternative
options.

6.10 Packet Pg. 202
3747954v4 / 21603.0005 21
EXHIBIT “D”

SUBBASIN-WIDE ACTIVITIES
(Initial List)
• Preparation of and submittal of annual reports
• Preparation of annual estimates of Coordinated Plan Expenses presented by the Secretary and any updates to such estimates, in accordance with the budgetary requirements of the respective Parties
• Plan Manager costs and expenses for the work directed by the Authority’s Board of Directors
• Subbasin-wide Consultant costs and expenses, including, but not limited to, collecting information from the Subbasin GSAs, processing technical data, and those identified in Exhibit “C” for the Adaptive Management Framework for the Subbasin
• Preparation of and submittal of five-year updates to the GSP • Revisions to this MOA
• Subbasin-wide outreach
• Litigation costs for an attorney coordinating the GSAs for litigation filed against the entire Subbasin
• Costs for initial investigation by the Subbasin-wide GSP Consultant of a MT downward trend or MT exceedance across Subbasin boundary lines

6.10 Packet Pg. 203

CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA REPORT
TO: Mayor Clauzel and Members of the City Council
FROM: Fernando Ulloa, City Manager
BY: Jeff Hakola, Acting Fire Chief
MEETING DATE: April 7, 2026
ITEM NO: 6.11
SUBJECT: Approve the Administrative Services and Facilities Use Agreement Between the City of Patterson and West Stanislaus County Fire Protection District.

RECOMMENDATION
Motion to Approve the Administrative Services and Facilities Use Agreement between the City of Patterson and the West Stanislaus County Fire Protection District.

BACKGROUND
The City of Patterson and the West Stanislaus County Fire Protection District have a longstanding history of collaboration in the delivery of fire protection services. Since the early development of the District in 1934, fire service delivery in the Patterson area has relied on coordination between the City and surrounding service areas to maximize resources and ensure effective emergency response.

Over time, this partnership evolved into shared staffing, facilities, and administrative functions, including joint Fire Chief and administrative support models. While prior agreements established cost-sharing structures to support these efforts, those agreements no longer fully reflect current operational practices, administrative responsibilities, or financial realities.

The updated Administrative Services and Facilities Use Agreement establishes a modernized and clearly defined framework for coordination between the City and the District. The Agreement formalizes the City’s role in providing administrative management services. It also defines the District’s use of City-owned fire facilities and training resources.

Importantly, the Agreement separates administrative services from operational fire response.

Emergency response services will continue to be governed by separate automatic and mutual aid agreements, ensuring that both agencies retain independent operational authority while continuing to support one another as needed.

6.11 Packet Pg. 204
Overall, the updated Agreement replaces prior cost-sharing models with a more transparent, predictable, and administratively efficient structure that aligns with current service delivery needs and supports long-term sustainability for both agencies.

FISCAL IMPACT
Approval of the proposed contract amendment, which revises the cost-share arrangement from 60/40 of two Division Chiefs, an Administrative Fire Manager, Fire Marshal, and Administrative Assistant II to solely the Administrative Manager at 50/50, will result in a reduction of reimbursement revenue to the General Fund.

With an effective date of April 1, 2026, the estimated fiscal impact is as follows:
• FY 2025-26: A $115,244.18 reduction in revenue, representing a three-month impact. • FY 2026-27: An ongoing annual revenue reduction of $460,976.73, representing a full twelvemonth impact.

The FY 2025-26 impact will be absorbed within the adopted Fire Department budget. The ongoing reduction beginning in FY 2026-27 will need to be addressed through the annual budget process and may require future adjustments to Fire Department revenues or expenditures.

ATTACHMENT
Administrative Services and Facilities Use Agreement

6.11 Packet Pg. 205

6.11 Packet Pg. 206

6.11 Packet Pg. 207

6.11 Packet Pg. 208

6.11 Packet Pg. 209

CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA REPORT
TO: Mayor Clauzel and Members of the City Council
FROM: Fernando Ulloa, City Manager
BY: Tiffany Rodriguez, Director of Engineering Services MEETING DATE: April 7, 2026
ITEM NO: 6.12
SUBJECT: Accept all bids for the Sunset Court Improvements Project, award construction to Platinum General Engineering, LLC., authorize Staff to execute the Contract, and authorize the Finance Department to make the necessary budget amendments.

RECOMMENDATION
Motion to Accept all bids for the Sunset Court Improvements Project, award construction to Platinum General Engineering, LLC., authorize Staff to execute the Contract, and authorize the Finance Department to make the necessary budget amendments.

BACKGROUND
The Sunset Court Improvements Project is located along Sunset Court and intersects with Ward Avenue in the City of Patterson. The purpose of this project is to improve aging roadways and utility infrastructure, to enhance pedestrian accessibility and roadway safety within the project area.

ANALYSIS
This project consists of construction of roadway improvements along Sunset Court in the City of Patterson. The work includes installation of 175 linear feet of water main, valves, water services, fire hydrants, and related appurtenances. The project also includes construction of one sewer manhole and connection of the existing sanitary sewer to the new manhole. Street improvements include removal and replacement of curb and gutter, sidewalk with subgrade, and one ADA curb ramp, valley gutter, aggregate base, hot mix asphalt concrete, and thermoplastic striping, markings, and markers. This is an effort to maintain and improve roadway safety within the City of Patterson.

All construction work will be done within the City of Patterson right-of-way. The contract time for completion is thirty (30) working days.

6.12 Packet Pg. 210

FISCAL IMPACT
This project was advertised on the Valley Builders Exchange, the City’s website, and the Patterson Irrigator Newspaper. Bids were originally scheduled to be opened on February 5, 2026. However, due to a fair number of questions, the bid opening was pushed back a week and bids were publicly opened on February 12, 2026, at 2:00 P.M. The City received a total of nine (9) bids for this project.

The nine bids received are listed below from lowest to highest.

Bids
Juarez Brothers General Engineering $332,150.09 – Deemed Non-Responsive Platinum General Engineering $339,300.64
TBS Contractors $404,218.14
United Pavement Maintenance $407,011.50
Mid Cal Pipeline & Utilities $457,096.00
Global Bay Construction $477,973.00
FBD Vanguard Construction $478,617.00
Dirty Dynasty $497,162.00
Cal Underground $514,382.29
After review of the bid documents, the apparent low bidder, Juarez Brothers General Engineering, was deemed non-responsive. Therefore, Platinum General Engineering, LLC., is hereby deemed to be the lowest responsive bidder.

Funding for this project is as follows:
$ 339,300.64 Base Bid
$ 33,930.06 10% Contingency
$ 50,000.00 Special Inspections & Certified Payroll Review $ 423,230.70 TOTAL
Budget for this Project is as follows:
$281,245.05 Local City Funds for Construction
(ACCT #329-000-7645)
Fund 329 Measure L
$126,767.83 Local City Funds for Construction
(ACCT #611-306-7645)
Water Enterprise Fund
$15,217.82 Local City Funds for Construction
(ACCT #606-306-7645)
Sewer Enterprise Fund
$423,230.70 Total Funds Available

6.12 Packet Pg. 211

CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA REPORT
TO: Mayor Clauzel and Members of the City Council
FROM: Fernando Ulloa, City Manager
BY: Diana Hernandez, Acting Recreation and Community Services Director MEETING DATE: April 7, 2026
ITEM NO: 6.13
SUBJECT: Approve Street Closure for the Patterson Apricot Fiesta, Scheduled for May 28 – May 31, 2026.

RECOMMENDATION
Motion to Approve Street Closure for the Patterson Apricot Fiesta, Scheduled for May 28 – May 31, 2026.

BACKGROUND
The Apricot Fiesta is requesting approval for street closures for its annual downtown event.

The request for street closures is as follows:

EVENT
South Salado - Center Circle - Hwy 33 5/28-5/31 7:00 am - 11:00 pm Plaza Circle - Center Circle to S. Salado 5/28-5/31 7:00 am - 11:00 pm E. Las Palmas - Center Circle - Hwy 33 5/29-5/31 7:00 am - 11:00 pm All Streets from the Center Circle - Alleyways 5/29-5/31 7:00 am - 11:00 pm All Streets from the Center Circle - El Circulo 5/29-5/31 12:00 pm - 11:00 pm Street affected are:

West Las Palmas Avenue
East Las Palmas Avenue - Between North & South Park
South 3rd Street
North 3rd Street
South Del Puerto
North Del Puerto
North & South Salado
5k
Closure starting at 6am

6.13 Packet Pg. 212
9th St. from Ward Ave to W. Las Palmas Ave.

W. Las Palmas Ave from 9th St. to Plaza Cir.

Plaza Cir.

N. 3rd St. from Plaza Cir. to K St. (route reverses)
Back down N. 3rd St. to Plaza Cir.

Plaza Cir.

W. Las Palmas Ave. From Plaza Cir. to N. 6th St.

North 6th St. from W. Las Palmas Ave. to H St.

H St from N.6 th St. to N. 7th St.
7 th Street from H St. to N. Salado Ave.

Parade Route
Staging on both S. 9th St. and N. 9th St.

West Las Palmas Ave from 9th St. to Plaza Cir.

Plaza Cir.

N. 3rd St. from Plaza Cir. to K St.

K St. (Temporary-Exiting of Parade and Safety from 10-11:30am) N. 7th St. Closure starting at 6am for horse trailers
S.9th St Closure from E St. to W. Las Palmas Ave. for Parade staging starting at 7am N.9th St. closure from Ward Ave. to W. Las Palmas for Parade staging West Las Palmas from 9th St to Ward Ave. (Parade Overflow) Fireworks Closure
Beginning at 3pm
Ward Ave (between W. Las Palmas Ave. and N. 9th St.)
W. Las Palmas Ave. (between Ward Ave. and N. 9th St.)
N. 9th St. (between W. Las Palmas and Ward Ave.)
Closure remains in effect until safety clearance at fireworks launch site.

ANALYSIS
This is a City Co-Sponsored Event:

Patterson Apricot Fiesta has complied with submitting the following information:
* Completed Application
Items Pending:
* CalTrans Encroachment Permit
* Liability Insurance Coverage and Additional Insured Endorsement * ABC License
* 2026 Schedule of Events
Street Closure Cost- Public Works
Labor: $1,072 (4 Crew @ $134/HR x 2HRs)
($134/HR per person for any additional time spent working at the event) Equipment:

Forklift Rental (2): $3,384 ($47/HR x 12HRs x 3 Days)
Arrow Board (2): $ ($/HR x 12HRS x 3Days) $498 (Outsourced)

6.13 Packet Pg. 213
Barricade (42): $ ($/HR x 12HRS x 3Days) No Fee- Covered by Fiesta Staff Encroachment Permit: $198 Standard Permit
TOTAL: $4,654 + Arrow Board Charge + Barricade Charge
Full Circle Opening:

Labor: $1,072
Equipment:

Steet Sweeper: $686 ($49/HR x 14HRS Total for Fri/Sat/Sun) SUB-TOTAL: $1,758
OPEN/CLOSE SUB-TOTALS: $6,412
Other: $961.80 (15%) Administrative Fee
TOTAL: $7,373.80

FISCAL IMPACT
City of Patterson is a Co-Sponsor for the Apricot Fiesta event: costs are transferred from City Promotion-Apricot Fiesta Account - 100-120-6607

6.13 Packet Pg. 214

6.13 Packet Pg. 215

6.13 Packet Pg. 216

6.13 Packet Pg. 217

6.13 Packet Pg. 218

6.13 Packet Pg. 219

6.13 Packet Pg. 220

6.13 Packet Pg. 221

6.13 Packet Pg. 222

6.13 Packet Pg. 223

6.13 Packet Pg. 224

6.13 Packet Pg. 225

6.13 Packet Pg. 226

6.13 Packet Pg. 227

6.13 Packet Pg. 228

6.13 Packet Pg. 229
.

CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA REPORT
TO: Mayor Clauzel and Members of the City Council
FROM: Fernando Ulloa, City Manager
BY: Xavier Guluarte, Interim Public Works Director
MEETING DATE: April 7, 2026
ITEM NO: 6.14
SUBJECT: Update on Staff Actions Related to Hexavalent Chromium (Chromium-6) Compliance and Groundwater Management-For Informational Purposes Only.

RECOMMENDATION
Update on Staff Actions Related to Hexavalent Chromium (Chromium-6) Compliance and Groundwater Management-For Informational Purposes Only.

BACKGROUND
The city of Patterson (City) relies entirely on groundwater from the Delta-Mendota Subbasin to meet its potable water demands. Monitoring data confirm that all active potable wells screened in the Lower Aquifer contain naturally occurring hexavalent chromium (Chromium-6) at concentrations exceeding the State Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 0.010 mg/L. Because the contaminant is naturally occurring, compliance requires treatment or blending rather than source control.

The City is also subject to Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requirements within the Delta-Mendota Subbasin, which is designated as a critically overdrafted basin. Under the adopted Groundwater Sustainability Plan, the City must reduce Lower Aquifer extractions to approximately 2,626 acre-feet per year (AFY) by 2030.

These combined regulatory requirements necessitate both a treatment solution for Chromium-6 compliance and a transition away from reliance on groundwater.

ANALYSIS
With the assistance of its consultants, staff has completed a comprehensive feasibility study evaluating long-term solutions to achieve Chromium-6 compliance while supporting SGMA6.14 Packet Pg. 230
driven groundwater reductions. The analysis incorporated regulatory requirements, water quality trends and projected system needs through 2045. The study evaluated the following Best Available Technologies for Chromium-6 treatment:
• Reduction-Coagulation-Filtration (RCF)
• Ion Exchange
• Reverse Osmosis (RO)
These technologies were analyzed under both distributed (wellhead) and centralized treatment approaches. In addition, the study considered future risks associated with increasing total dissolved solids (TDS) and nitrate concentrations, as well as system constraints related to groundwater pumping reductions. The alternatives were narrowed down to:
• Alternative 1: Centralized Reverse Osmosis (RO) Treatment • Alternative 2: Interim Wellhead or Centralized Treatment + Surface Water Treatment Plan utilizing California Aqueduct Surface Water
• Alternative 3: Interim Wellhead or Centralized Treatment + Surface Water Treatment Plan Utilizing Local Surface Water
Each alternative was evaluated for capital and lifecycle costs, operational feasibility, regulatory compliance and alignment with groundwater reduction requirements.

INTERIM TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
Due to the extended timelines associated with surface water alternatives, interim treatment is required to maintain compliance with the Chromium-6 MCL. The feasibility study evaluated Weak Base Anion (WBA) exchange as the preferred interim technology due to its relatively low cost, rapid deployment and lack of liquid waste requiring disposal.

Two interim approaches were evaluated:
• Interim Wellhead Treatment:

Treatment systems installed at individual wells
o Pros: Flexible, no need for early pipeline construction o Cons: Higher lifecycle costs and increased operational complexity • Interim Centralized Treatment:

A single treatment facility serving multiple wells
o Pros: Lower lifecycle costs and simplified operations o Cons: Requires early construction of conveyance infrastructure Updated analysis, including the inclusion of Well 11, indicates increased treatment capacity requirements and corresponding cost adjustments.

SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS
• All evaluated alternatives can achieve Chromium-6 compliance • Surface water alternatives are required to meet SGMA pumping reduction targets • Alternative 3 has the lowest lifecycle cost
• Interim treatment is required for all surface water options due to long implementation timelines

6.14 Packet Pg. 231
• RO remains constrained by unresolved brine disposal challenges

EVALUATION OF ADDITIONAL ALTERNATIVE
As staff approached a potential recommendation, an additional alternative was being evaluated to address concerns regarding long-term capital investment and the potential for stranded assets.

Both previously evaluated interim treatment approaches would require significant capital investment (estimated at approximately $50 million or more) and would result in permanent infrastructure intended to serve a temporary need.

Given the likelihood that these improvements could be in service for only a limited period (7-10 years) before being replaced by a long-term solution, staff is evaluating whether a more flexible and cost-effective approach is available.

This additional option involves a roll-up generation treatment approach, which may allow the City to:
• Rent or lease treatment equipment, avoiding large upfront capital expenditures • Purchase equipment outright, if determined to be beneficial • Deploy modular, temporary treatment systems
• Potentially achieve lower costs than traditional interim treatment options This approach could be implemented either as distributed treatment at individual well sites or as a centralized treatment facility. The centralized approach would require the upfront development of a conveyance system to transport water from the wells to the treatment facility, which represents a significant initial investment and would extend the overall timeline for implementation compared to a decentralized (wellhead) approach. However, this option is still under active evaluation to determine technical feasibility, regulatory compliance and long-term cost effectiveness.

CONCLUSION/NEXT STEPS
While significant progress has been made in evaluating options to address Chromium-6 compliance and SGMA requirements, the City is not yet prepared to make a recommendation.

Although staff would like to be closer to identifying a preferred solution, there remain key unknowns that must be fully resolved before committing to a multi-million-dollar investment.

Staff’s objective is to identify a solution that:
• Achieves compliance with the Chromium-6 MCL
• Supports SGMA groundwater reduction requirements and addresses overdraft • Minimizes capital and lifecycle costs
• Avoids unnecessary or stranded infrastructure
• Maintains reliable water service
In addition, staff is engaged in discussions regarding potential regional consolidation opportunities with neighboring communities. Expanding the customer base may help distribute costs and offset a portion of debt service for city of Patterson residents. Staff will continue to:
• Comply with its approved Chromium-6 compliance plan, including quarterly public notifications of the most recent sampling events, in accordance with regulatory requirements.

6.14 Packet Pg. 232
• Evaluate the roll-up generation treatment option for technical feasibility and regulatory compliance
• Refine cost comparisons across all alternatives
• Assess operational, infrastructure, and implementation considerations • Coordinate with regulatory agencies as needed
• Explore regional consolidation opportunities
• Return to City Council when sufficient information is available to support a comprehensive recommendation

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no immediate fiscal impact associated with this informational item. Future project costs will depend on the final alternative selected and will be brought back to City Council for consideration at a later date.

6.14 Packet Pg. 233

CITY COUNCIL

RECOMMENDATION
Motion to approve the dedication of the BBQ gazebo area at Veteran’s Memorial Park in honor of Caroline Bogdanich, to be named the “Caroline Bogdanich Market Memorial.”

BACKGROUND
Caroline Bogdanich played a pivotal role in revitalizing Veteran’s Memorial Park through her leadership of the Patterson Farmers Market. From April through September, the market transformed the park into a vibrant community gathering space, attracting residents, families, and local vendors.

Through her efforts, Caroline fostered a welcoming and inclusive environment that supported local businesses, strengthened community connections, and increased park utilization. Her work brought renewed energy and purpose to the park, making it a central hub for community activity.

Caroline Bogdanich passed away on January 3, 2026, after a courageous battle with cancer. Her contributions to the City of Patterson have left a lasting impact on the community and on Veteran’s Memorial Park.

ANALYSIS
The Parks, Recreation, and Beautification Commission has reviewed the proposal and is recommending that the City Council approve the dedication of the BBQ gazebo area at Veteran’s Memorial Park in honor of Caroline Bogdanich.

Dedicating this space recognizes her significant contributions to the community and ensures her legacy is permanently associated with the park she helped revitalize. The dedication will serve as

6.15 Packet Pg. 234
a meaningful tribute and provide a lasting reminder of her role in strengthening community engagement and local economic activity.

A commemorative plaque is proposed to be installed at the site, and a local nonprofit organization has expressed willingness to assist with funding the plaque if needed.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is minimal to no fiscal impact associated with this item. Costs related to a commemorative plaque may be offset through community or nonprofit support.

6.15 Packet Pg. 235

Patterson City CouncilApril 7, 2026

Patterson City Council
April 7, 2026