Patterson City Council
May 19, 2026

Plans, applicable EIRs pursuant to CEQA, effective
Development Agreements, and the GSP.

TCAC Opportunity
Areas

5. Comments on Appendix A-Assessment of Fair Housing
The RDHE claims that the vacant, undeveloped Master Plan areas are “high resource” areas. How and why was this determination made? As noted above, per the State’s 2025 AFFH Mapping Tool, the Zacharias Master Plan area is located in a Moderate Resource area and is located adjacent to Low and Moderate Resource areas. By comparison, the Baldwin Ranch Master Plan does appear to be located in a High Resource area. Explain how the Baldwin Ranch South developer and City will prioritize affordable housing in this High Resource area.

The Housing Element relies on the state-approved HCD AFFH Data Viewer for the TCAC Opportunity Area analysis. According to the HCD AFFH Data Viewer, the city consists of Moderate and High Resource areas; there are no Low Resource areas within the city limits. See Figure A-11 in the Revised Draft Housing Element for an illustration of TCAC Opportunity Areas in Patterson.

August 20, 2025
Revised Draft
Housing Element
(published on
August 6, 2025)
YIMBY Law
Dear Patterson Planning Commission and City Council,
YIMBY Law is a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation, whose mission is to increase the accessibility and affordability of housing in California. YIMBY Law sues municipalities when they fail to comply with state housing laws, including the Housing Element Law.

The August 2025 draft Housing Element makes many substantial commitments in order to meet state requirements, but it also makes commitments which are This comment has been noted. The Revised Housing Element addressed the items outlined in HCD’s May 2, 2025 findings letter. The City is diligently working to address water infrastructure challenges and provide further information about implementation of required infrastructure improvements.

Packet Pg. 1608
Appendix C Public Participation and Outreach C-36 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Revised Draft October 2025 Date
Received/
Draft Iteration
Topic Comment Response
insubstantial and unlikely to result in new housing. California HCD’s letter in May of 2025 noted many concerns, including the need for realistic capacity for development and an analysis of environmental and government constraints.

Related to those constraints, HCD specifically noted a need to analyze how improvement costs would impact total development cost and support realistic capacity of development. The draft is internally inconsistent, unsupported by substantial evidence, and reliant on programs that are either vague or deferred until 2028, far too late to realistically meet RHNA obligations.

Infrastructure Concerns
The RDHE repeatedly cites potable water supply as a citywide challenge. Yet, the City has used this issue selectively, denying the Keystone Ranch Project (719 units, including 213 high-density units) in April 2025 on the grounds that it must first fund an estimated $20 million water supply project. The City relied on the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to justify this denial, despite the fact that the GSP’s pumping reductions are listed only as targets subject to revision based on future data. That GSP ostensibly applies to the entire City, but Patterson is moving forward with new warehouse and residential projects without imposing comparable water supply conditions. The February 2025 draft Housing Element and the 2022 Master Plan EIR found no significant water supply impacts from Keystone or related projects. In 2023, the City represented to LAFCO that annexation of the Master Plan areas would not adversely affect water supply.

If major infrastructure improvements are necessary to support new housing, those sites cannot logically or legally be considered suitable or available to meet Patterson’s RHNA. While the Housing Element vaguely asserts the City will seek fair share payments from developers, there is no discussion of what that cost is or how it will impact the feasibility of development. This is besides the fact that Patterson has already denied the Keystone Ranch Project, and cannot rely on a denied project for 719 units of its RHNA.

Adequacy of Housing Element Programs
Housing Element programs cannot be adequate if they make no genuine, enforceable commitments. Program 1.11 states that if Patterson does not complete necessary zoning amendments by December 2025, it will identify alternate sites. Program 1.15 similarly commits to alternative sites if infrastructure improvements are not underway by January 2028. This reasoning is illogical and circular. If the sites are not suitable because of lack of adequate infrastructure (e.g., a recharge basin), how does identification of alternative sites address the infrastructure issue? After denying the Keystone Ranch As stated in previous responses, the City disagrees with claims of arbitrary application of infrastructure requirements to Keystone Ranch LLC.

Regarding development within the Zacharias / Baldwin Ranch Master Plan (Master Plan), the requirements of the EIR and the applicable settlement agreement apply to all developers and properties within the Master Plan.

This comment has been noted. The Housing Element programs have timelines, quantified objectives, performance metrics, geographic targeting, responsible agencies, funding sources, and implementing policies.

Packet Pg. 1609
Appendix C Public Participation and Outreach C-37 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Revised Draft October 2025 8 CA Gov. Code § 65583(a)(5)-(a)(6) & (c).

Date
Received/
Draft Iteration
Topic Comment Response
More fundamentally, the Housing Element must identify suitable and available sites to meet the City’s RHNA. Those sites must have sufficient water, sewer, and dry utilities available or be included in an existing plan program to secure sufficient water, sewer, and dry utilities to support housing development. (Gov.

Code § 65583.2(b)(5)(B).) The identification of such sites cannot be deferred or postponed to a future time. Even if the timing could be put off, how will the new sites be identified, what criteria will be used, and how will the public and HCD have input into this process?
Program 1.14 states that “[i]f infrastructure improvements are not funded or underway by January 2028, the City will consider alternative land use strategies, such as identifying alternative sites with appropriate densities to support lowerincome units, amending zoning or other land use documents to make suitable land available for housing development to meet the RHNA or increasing permitted residential densities to ensure no net loss.” “Considering” alternative land use strategies is no commitment at all. Patterson could consider those strategies and decide to use none of them. This program only requires Patterson to agendize the item at some City meeting but binds it to no definite, enforceable action. Again, it makes a commitment to nothing other than, theoretically, taking unidentified actions in the future. Unless it decides not to.

Program 1.17 commits the City to identifying opportunities to promote a greater variety of dwelling types, and remove barriers to housing production within Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan. California already has a statutory program for cities to identify and remove barriers to housing. That’s the Housing Element process. The Element is already required to identify constraints to housing and set strategies to reduce those constraints.8 Patterson’s Housing Element commits to future actions where it will identify adequate sites for housing, identify and reduce constraints to development, and create strategies to support residential housing. In essence, the Housing Element only commits to creating a future Housing Element, containing little actionable or enforceable strategies of its own. Without significant revision the Housing Element cannot support Patterson’s RHNA responsibilities, and cannot be found in substantial compliance with state law.

Sites included in the Master Plan are available for development in the City’s RHNA. Keystone’s project is the not the only area of the Master Plan available for housing development. Keystone may also refile its project application.

Housing Element Chapter 2 Housing Constraints Assessment identifies governmental, non-governmental, environmental, and infrastructure constraints, and corresponding programs to address them are identified in Chapter 3 Housing Action Plan.

August 22, 2025
Revised Draft
Housing Element
Infrastructure/Water
Availability
Rutan and Tucker LLP
Supplemental comments on August 6, 2025 Revised Draft Housing Element

1. Groundwater Supplies
Comment noted. Please refer to the City’s responses to this commenter’s comment letter from August 13, 2025.

Packet Pg. 1610
Appendix C Public Participation and Outreach C-38 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Revised Draft October 2025 Date
Received/
Draft Iteration
Topic Comment Response
(published on
August 6, 2025)
The RDHE states that under the 2024 Delta-Mendota Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan (“GSP”), “there is a pumping reduction plan in effect which requires the City to reduce its groundwater pumping to 2,626 acre feet per year by 2030.” (RDHE, p. 2-52; see also RDHE, p. 3-23.) Please cite to the specific pages or portions of the GSP which contains this language.

Further, please explain how and why the City has nonetheless been able to approve over four million square feet of warehouse and distribution center space and the 162-unit Villages of Patterson-Olive Avenue project without requirements or conditions for a recharge basin, moratorium on development until the recharge basin has been constructed, and/or purchase of surface water.

The RDHE states the City is aggressively pursuing multiple projects to diversify its water supply and “resolve supply issues” by mid-cycle. (RDHE, p. 2-54.) Please confirm by mid-cycle you mean 2027 and explain in detail the supply issues, what projects the City is aggressively pursuing to resolve them, and the status of the City’s funding, design, environmental, and construction of those projects. Also, the RDHE states that the City is actively seeking funding opportunities and “recently secured $10 million in funding.” (RDHE, p. 2-54.) Please explain in detail the source of this $10 million in funds, the date funding was secured and from which agencies, and which project(s) it is earmarked/allocated for.

The RDHE also states the City “has identified and is exploring multiple options to support planned and future development, while remaining in compliance with the 2024 GSP.” (RDHE, p. 2-54.) Are these “options” referencing the same activities described as “projects” above? What criteria and process will the City employ in determining which options to implement? To date, the City seems to have unilaterally and on an ad hoc and inconsistent basis imposed all of the options on one project (Keystone Ranch), none of the options on other projects (Patterson Logistics Center and Project Zach), and one of the options on another project (Villages of Patterson-Olive Avenue).

One of the options requires developers to offset their water use by the purchase of surface water which will be diverted for recharge in the Del Puerto Creek Capture and Recharge Project. Please confirm that this project refers to the one identified in the GSP as the City of Patterson Percolation Ponds for Stormwater Capture and Recharge Project. (GSP, Chapter 15, Table PMA-1, p. 9 and Table PMA-2, p. 5; see also RDHE, p. 4-41 [referring to this project as a GSP project] and HCD DHE, p. 2-50 [stating “Patterson is responsible for the Percolation Ponds for Stormwater Capture and Recharge Project . . ..”].) Please explain the water supply source, timing, and funding assumptions for this project per the GSP.

Under SGMA, Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSA) are obligated to manage groundwater resources within their
designated basins to achieve long-term sustainability pursuant to adopted GSPs. New development may therefore be impacted by local GSA requirements, such as groundwater pumping
limits, fees or water availability constraints.

The City is required to comply with SGMA and enforce the GSP and PRP, including by requiring appropriate conditions of approval and mitigation measures for new development which increases water demand in the City. The City is committed to diligently working to address all infrastructure challenges that may affect housing development.

Packet Pg. 1611
Appendix C Public Participation and Outreach C-39 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Revised Draft October 2025 Date
Received/
Draft Iteration
Topic Comment Response
Further, where is this recharge basin located? It appears to refer to the 30-acre parcel in private ownership north of the Zacharias Master Plan. If so, what steps, funding arrangements, or other activities has the City taken to acquire that property?
The City indicates that it will, among others, expand its Water Quality Control Facility by installing a membrane bioreactor superstructure, allowing it to treat wastewater for non-potable reuse or transfers with lower aquifer pumpers. (RDHE, p. 3-21.) Explain the estimated amount of non-potable and potable water expected to be generated by this project.

In Program 3.1, the RDHE states that the City will implement water use restrictions during periods of drought and require water-efficient designs and landscaping. These programs should already exist per state law. (See, e.g., Urban Water Management Planning Act, CalGreen Building Code, and Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance Regulations.) Assuming that is the case, explain what is new or novel about these features.

Infrastructure 2. Temporary Sewer Connections
The adopted Master Plan states that temporary sewer connections will be made to the east through Vicki Lynn Lane and Ward Avenue. (Master Plan, pp. 103- 105.) However, the RDHE claims that temporary sewer will be supported by tying into an existing sewer main to the west along Keystone Pacific Parkway. (RDHE, pp. 4-14, 4-42.) What sewer capacity analysis supports this statement? Is the City planning to amend the Master Plan to identify a new sewer connection route? If not, why not?
For further information about the sewer plans and requirements for the Zacharias / Baldwin Ranch Master Plan, the commenter is referred to the Zacharias / Baldwin Ranch Master Plan document – available here -
https://www.pattersonca.gov/658/Master-Plan-EIR-Documents Housing 3. Affordable Housing Assumptions
Under Program 1.5, the RDHE states that the City will dedicate staff to enforce the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to promote affordable housing production instead of in-lieu fee payments. What evidence does the City have that lack of staffing is an issue or problem? Has the City done any analysis or assessment to indicate the amount of funds needed to produce an affordable housing unit and the level of local, state, and federal funding required? The RDHE states that accessory dwelling units (“ADU”) provide additional housing units and may be an alternative source of affordable housing for lower income households and seniors. (RDHE, p. 2-22; see also RDHE, p. 4-23 [referring to junior accessory dwelling units (“JADU”) as a “cost-effective way to expand affordable housing options through new construction”].) It notes that ADUs may be permitted on single-family and multi-family lots and that the City is limited in regard to the development standards that it can impose on ADUs. (Id.) Comment noted. The City is working on increasing staffing to better serve the community at large. The City’s population is expected to increase substantially through full development of the Zacharias / Baldwin Ranch Master Plan and other existing master plans under development. Many low-income units and in-lieu fee collections are anticipated to result. Staffing will need to adjust to accommodate the additional review, monitoring, and compliance obligations in accordance with the City’s
inclusionary housing ordinance.

The Housing Element Site Inventory includes Keystone Ranch, Lakeside Hills, and Baldwin Ranch South development areas within the Master Plan area. Based on correspondence received on December 5, 2024, no accessory dwelling unit (ADU)
Packet Pg. 1612
Appendix C Public Participation and Outreach C-40 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Revised Draft October 2025 Date
Received/
Draft Iteration
Topic Comment Response
The RDHE states that the City will require that at least 15 percent of new singlefamily units in the Master Plan area include either an accessory dwelling unit (“ADU”) or junior accessory dwelling unit (“JADU”). (RDHE, p 3-22.) However, Tables 4-2, 4-5, and 4-7 only apply these ADU/JADU assumptions (and assumed affordability levels) to Lakeside Hills and Baldwin Ranch South. (RDHE, pp. 4-3, 4-8 to 4-9, 4-13, 4-18 to 4-19, 4-24, 4-26.) No similar assumptions are made for Keystone Ranch or any other Master Plan development. Why not?
Further, the RDHE states that it applies the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance percentages to the Keystone Ranch and Lakeside Hills developments. (RDHE, p. 4-12.) No such assumptions were applied to Baldwin Ranch South, another site in the inventory. (RDHE, p. 4-26.) Why not? The RDHE also inconsistently states that Keystone Ranch is “set for lower-and moderate-income units” while omitting any reference to above moderate-income units. (RDHE, p. 4-10.) As noted in our August 13th letter, the High Density Residential portion of Keystone Ranch has densities exceeding 20 units per acre when the permitted density range is 12.1-25 units per acre. Still the RDHE states that “higher intensity development could be supported.” (RDHE, p. 4-16.) Yet, Baldwin Ranch South has permitted densities of 5.1 to 12 units per acre, but is only assigned a density of 5.1 units per acre. Why is no similar statement made about that project supporting higher intensity development. (RDHE, p. 4-26.) assumptions are applied to Keystone Ranch. Accordingly, unit assumptions for Keystone Ranch remain consistent with the Master Plan.

The Housing Element has been revised to state that Keystone Ranch is expected to accommodate housing across all income levels (page 4-10).

The Master Plan’s High Density Residential designation permits

12.1–25.0 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) and assumes a density of 17.1 du/ac. The Housing Element applied this Master Plan assumption for density.

This comment has been noted. The Housing Element conducted a focused exercise to meet the RHNA. The Inclusionary Housing Ordinance will still apply to all new development, including Baldwin Ranch South.

Impact Fees 4. Impact Fees
Under its discussion of Development Impact Fees, the RDHE acknowledges that the City “has the highest total fees for single-family and multi-family dwellings among nearby jurisdictions . . ..” (RDHE, p. 2-38; see also RDHE, p. 2-39 [showing City’s fees as approximately two to three times that of nearby agencies].) On pages 2-36 and 2-37, the RDHE states that it adopted updated impact fees in October 2024 per Resolution 2024-59. The RDHE should note that a lawsuit challenging the validity of the fees is currently pending, and as a result of that lawsuit, the City is enjoined from applying or enforcing those fees. (See Building Industry Assn. of the Greater Valley v. City of Patterson, Stanislaus County Superior Court Case No. CV-24-010405, Ruling on Motion for Issuance of Injunctive and Declaratory Relief: “The Court hereby ENJOINS Respondents City of Patterson, Mayor Michael S. Clauzel, and the Members of the City Council of the City of Patterson from in any way implementing or attempting to enforce or apply any of the fees and exactions included in Resolution No. 2024-59, Resolution No. 2024-65 and the amended Quimby Act The City acknowledges that the 2024 adopted development impact fee schedule is subject to a preliminary injunction pending the outcome of the cited superior court case (Building Industry Assn. of the Greater Valley v. City of Patterson, Stanislaus County Superior Court Case No. CV-24-010405).

The preliminary injunction prohibits the City from imposing the recently-adopted development impact fees until the case is decided.

Table 2-11 in the Revised Draft Housing Element has been revised to report the fee schedule enacted on January 1, 2021 (page 2-39).

Packet Pg. 1613
Appendix C Public Participation and Outreach C-41 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Revised Draft October 2025 SOURCE: City of Patterson, 2025
Date
Received/
Draft Iteration
Topic Comment Response
Ordinance, Ordinance No. 878.”) Further the fees in Table 2-11 are listed as the 2024 fees, but the notes to this table indicate the fees are the 2021 fees.

Packet Pg. 1614
Appendix C Public Participation and Outreach C-42 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Revised Draft October 2025 C.4 Housing Needs Survey
The City prepared and distributed an online Housing Needs Survey requesting feedback on a variety of housing topics, including current housing conditions and opportunities for future housing in Patterson. The survey was provided in both English and Spanish. The City’s Housing Element webpage9 provided a link to the Housing Needs Survey, which was available for public input from September 2024 to December 2024. There were 41 survey participants. The following are key concerns expressed by survey respondents:
▪ Interest in accessory dwelling units;
▪ Housing for seniors and persons with disabilities;
▪ Expanded housing types to accommodate small households; ▪ Rental assistance; and
▪ Rehabilitation and maintenance assistance.

Responses from the Housing Needs Survey have been used to inform the policies and programs included in Chapter 3 of this Housing Element. A summary report of the Housing Needs Survey is included as Attachment A to this appendix.

C.5 Tribal Consultation
Pursuant to Government Code §65352.3, formal consultation was conducted with representatives from the following tribes that are present and active in Stanislaus County. Consultation is in process.

Amah Mutsun Tribal Band
Valentin Lopez, Chairperson
P.O. Box 5272
Galt, CA 95632
Amah Mutsun Tribal Band
Ed Ketchum, Vice-Chairperson
P.O. Box 5272
Galt, CA 95632
North Valley Yokuts Tribe
Katherine Perez, Chairperson
P.O. Box 717
Linden, CA 95236
[email protected]
9 https://www.pattersonca.gov/150/City-of-Patterson-Housing-Element North Valley Yokuts Tribe
Timothy Perez, Tribal Compliance Officer
P.O. Box 717
Linden, CA 95236
[email protected]
Southern Sierra Miwuk Nation
Sandra Chapman, Chairperson
P.O. Box 186
Mariposa, CA 95338
Packet Pg. 1615
Appendix C Public Participation and Outreach C-43 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Revised Draft October 2025 Southern Sierra Miwuk Nation
Jazzmyn Gegere, Director of Cultural
Resource Preservation
P.O. Box 186
Mariposa, CA 95338
Tule River Indian Tribe
Neil Peyron, Chairperson
P.O. Box 589
Porterville, CA 93258
Wuksachi Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band
Kenneth Woodrow, Chairperson
1179 Rock Haven Ct.

Salinas, CA 93906
C.6 List of Contacted Organizations
This section provides contact information for organizations and agencies in the Stanislaus region that were contacted during housing element preparation.

California Housing Partnership
Danielle M. Mazella, Senior Research Manager
[email protected]
Disability Resources Agency for Independent
Living
(209)-521-7260
Stanislaus County Clerk-Recorder
(209)-525-5250
C.7 City of Patterson Contact List
This section provides contact information for City of Patterson officials that were contacted during housing element preparation.

Bryan Stice
Community Development Director
209-895-8074
[email protected]
Joel Andrews
City Planner
209-895-8024
[email protected]
Teresa Rodriguez
Associate Planner/Housing Program
Coordinator
209-895-8026
[email protected]
Packet Pg. 1616
Housing Needs Survey
September 16 – December 5, 2024 A
Attachment
Packet Pg. 1617
Table of Contents
HOUSING NEEDS SURVEY......................................................................................................A-1 A.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... A-1 A.2 Online Survey Results ............................................................................................................... A-1 A.3 Discussion................................................................................................................................. A-13 A.4 Conclusion and Recommendations ...................................................................................... A-15 A.5 Open-Ended Questions..........................................................................................................A-16 Packet Pg. 1618
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-1 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 Housing Needs Survey
A.1 Introduction
From September 16, 2024 to December 5, 2024, the City of Patterson conducted a bilingual Housing Needs Survey in English and Spanish to gather insights from residents, business owners, visitors, and individuals working in the city. The survey consisted of 22 targeted questions designed to assess the demographic composition of Patterson, evaluate affordable housing needs, and identify potential solutions to address those needs. It was made accessible online through the City’s Housing Element webpage,
1 and outreach efforts included an announcement during the November 12 Joint Planning Commission and City Council Community Workshop.

A total of 41 responses were received from a self-selected sample of community members, reflecting the perspectives of those actively engaged in the Housing Element update process. While the selfselection bias and limited sample size restrict the generalizability of the findings, the responses provide meaningful qualitative insights. The following section presents a summary of the survey results.

A.2 Online Survey Results
Respondent Demographics
The City collected a total of 41 responses to the survey. Figure 1 illustrates the age distribution of survey respondents, ranging from 18 to 65 years and older. The highest proportion of responses was received from individuals aged 35 to 44, whereas the lowest participation was observed among respondents aged 65 and older. The age distribution of survey respondents suggests greater engagement in housing issues among respondents aged 35 to 44, likely due to life events such as homebuying or family formation. Lower participation from those 65 and older may reflect residential stability or accessibility challenges in survey outreach. 1 https://www.pattersonca.gov/150/City-of-Patterson-Housing-Element Packet Pg. 1619
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-2 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 As shown in Figure 2, 49 percent of respondents identified as Hispanic or Latino, 37 percent as White, 5 percent as two or more races, and 2 percent each as Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, Black or African American, and Asian.

Figure 3 illustrates the distribution of survey respondents based on various demographic identifiers.

The largest group, at 41 percent, did not select any of the listed options. Among those who identified with specific categories, the most represented group was female heads of household (29 percent), followed by seniors aged 55 and older (22 percent) and single-parent households (17 percent). Individuals living with disabilities accounted for 12 percent of respondents, and 5 percent 37%
29%
12%
12%
10%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
35-44
18-34
45-54
55-64
65+
Figure 1: How old are you?
49%
37%
7%
5%
2%
2%
2%
0%
0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Hispanic or Latino
White
Not Hispanic or Latino
Two or More Races
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander
Black or African American
Asian
Some Other Race
American Indian and Alaska Native
Figure 2: With which of the following ethnic or racial
group(s) do you idenitfy?
Packet Pg. 1620
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-3 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 identified as unhoused. This data highlights the diverse backgrounds of respondents while also emphasizing the substantial proportion who did not associate with the provided categories.

Figure 4 reports the annual income distribution of survey respondents. The largest proportion of respondents (22 percent) reported an income between $25,001 and $50,000, while an equal percentage (22 percent) chose not to disclose their income. Other notable income brackets included $0-$25,000 (17 percent), $50,001-$75,000 (15 percent), $75,001-$100,000 (15 percent), and $100,001- $200,000 (10 percent). No respondents reported incomes above $200,000. This data highlights a concentration of respondents in lower to moderate income brackets, with a significant portion opting not to disclose their financial information.
41%
29%
22%
17%
12%
5%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
None of the above apply / Ninguno de los anteriores aplica Female head of household / Hogar encabezado por una…
Senior (55+) / Mayor (55+)
Single-parent household / Hogar monoparental
Person living with disabilities / Residentes viviendo con… Unhoused / Desarzonado
Figure 3: With which of the following do you
identify? Select all that apply.
22%
22%
17%
15%
15%
10%
0%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
$100,001 - $200,000
$25,001 - $50,000
I prefer not to say
0 - $25,000
$75,001 - $100,000
$50,001 - $75,000
$200,000+
Figure 4: What is your annual income?
Packet Pg. 1621
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-4 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 Respondent Housing Occupancy and Living Characteristics Figure 5 demonstrates that the majority of respondents (93 percent) are residents of Patterson, with smaller proportions identifying as working in Patterson (41 percent), owning property (37 percent), or owning/operating a business (10 percent). This indicates that the survey primarily reflects the views of local residents.

Figure 6 summarizes respondents' current housing situations. Nearly half (49 percent) own their homes, while 29 percent rent. Smaller proportions live with friends or family, pay rent plus utilities to family, or reside in transitional housing. Less than 1 percent of respondents identified as landlords or unhoused. This suggests that most respondents have stable housing, with homeownership being the most common situation.
93%
41%
37%
10%
5%
2%
2%
2%
0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
I am a resident of Patterson.

I own property in Patterson.

I live near Patterson.

My boyfriend lives in patterson.

Other
Figure 5: Which of the following describes you? Check all descriptions that apply to you.
49%
29%
7%
5%
2%
2%
2%
2%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Own my house, condominium, apartment, or mobile home
Rent a house, condominium, apartment, or mobile home
Live with roommates/family and pay rent or assist with… Live with friends/family, do not own or pay rent
Live in emergency, transitional, or supportive housing
Live with family but pay rentplus utilities
Landlord
Unhoused, living in vehicle.

Figure 6: Which best describes your current housing
situation?
Packet Pg. 1622
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-5 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 Figure 7 highlights the types of housing occupied by survey respondents. The majority (71 percent) live in single-family homes, followed by 15 percent in mobile homes. Other housing types, including condominiums, duplexes, and accessory dwelling units, account for smaller proportions. This suggests that single-family homes dominate the housing landscape among respondents, with limited representation of alternative housing options.

Figure 8 outlines respondents' current living situations. Nearly half (49 percent) live with a spouse or significant other, making it the most common arrangement. Smaller proportions live alone (12 percent), in multigenerational households (12 percent), with parents (10 percent), or with housemates (5 percent). Notably, 10 percent of respondents identifies as being single-parent households living with children. This suggests a predominance of traditional couple households among respondents.

Housing Needs
Figure 9 ranks housing needs in the City of Patterson based on priority according to respondents’ input. The highest priorities, each identified by 41 percent of respondents, include the need for lower-priced rental options, lower-priced ownership options, and homes affordable to first-time buyers. Moderate priorities include housing for seniors (34 percent) and a greater variety of housing types (34 percent). Lower priorities include housing for large families (29 percent), workers in Patterson (29 percent), and residents experiencing homelessness (27 percent). The lowest-ranked option indicates that all current housing needs in Patterson are already being met, at 17 percent. This 71%
15%
5%
5%
2%
2%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Single-family home
I do not currently have a permanent home
Accessory dwelling unit
Pending help from Stanislaus housing Authority
Multi Family Home
Low income apartments
Condominium/townhome
Co-op housing
Duplex/triplex
Group home/assisted living
Mobile home
Figure 7: Which type of housing do you currently
occupy?
Packet Pg. 1623
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-6 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 indicates a strong focus on affordability and accessibility for lower-income and first-time buyers as key housing priorities.

Figure 10 highlights factors preventing respondents from obtaining permanent housing in Patterson.

Affordability was the most significant barrier, cited by 63 percent of respondents, followed by a lack of housing variety (34 percent) and a limited housing supply (29 percent). Employment opportunities were also identified as a barrier by 22 percent, while 32 percent of respondents indicated none of the listed factors applied. This underscores affordability as the primary challenge for securing permanent housing in Patterson.
49%
12%
12%
10%
10%
5%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Live with spouse or significant other
Live alone
Multiple generations living together (adult children,…
Live with parents
Single parent household
Live with housemates
Figure 8: Which best describes your current living
situation?
41%
41%
41%
34%
34%
29%
29%
27%
24%
17%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
Need housing choices in lower price range to rent
Need housing choices in lower price range to own
Need homes that are affordable to first-time homebuyers Need more housing for Seniors
Need more variety of housing types
Need more housing for large families
Need housing for people who work here
Need housing for residents experiencing homelessness
Need more housing for multiple-generation families
All housing needs are being met
Figure 9: Rank the housing needs facing the City of
Patterson from highest priority (1) to lowest priority
(10).

Packet Pg. 1624
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-7 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 Figure 11 identifies housing types respondents believe would be most successful in Patterson. The highest-ranked option was single-story houses and condos (66 percent), followed by larger custom homes (59 percent), residential care facilities (59 percent), duplexes/triplexes/townhomes (56 percent), and accessory dwelling units (49 percent). These preferences suggest a strong demand for diverse housing options, with a particular emphasis on smaller, flexible units and multi-family housing to address community needs.
63%
34%
32%
29%
22%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Affordability
Variety of housing options
None of the above apply
Limited supply of housing
Employment opportunities
Figure 10: What factors preven you from obtaining
permanent housing in Patterson? Select all that
apply.
66%
59%
59%
56%
49%
41%
34%
34%
32%
22%
20%
20%
10%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Single story houses and condominiums
Residential Care Facilities for Seniors or Persons with… Senior housing allowing for aging in place…
Duplexes, triplexes, townhouses and low-rise multi-…
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs/second units/granny…
Micro-units (small studio apartments with full…
Mid-rise (4-story) apartments
Larger, custom homes
Farmworker housing
Single room occupancy (small apartment that may…
Courtyard housing (housing arranged around a…
Live-work space for City employees
Co-housing (housing with an emphasis on community…
Figure 11: Which five housing types do you believe
would be most successful in Patterson today? Select
your top five choices.

Packet Pg. 1625
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-8 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 Figure 12 outlines the most important accessory dwelling unit (ADU) assistance services chosen by respondents. Financial assistance with construction was the highest priority, selected by 70 percent of respondents, followed by pre-approved ADU floorplans (60 percent) and homeowner one-onone consultations (55 percent). Educational webinars on ADU development was also significant (48 percent). These results highlight the need for financial and technical support as key to promoting ADU development in Patterson.

Figure 13 represents respondents' interest in developing an ADU on their property. An equal proportion of respondents (41 percent) indicated either interest in developing an ADU on their existing or future property or no interest at all. Additionally, 17 percent were unsure, and no respondents indicated already having an ADU. These results suggest a balanced level of interest and disinterest in ADU development, with a portion of respondents remaining undecided. 70%
60%
55%
48%
35%
33%
3%
3%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Financial assistance with construction expenses
Pre-approved ADU floorplans
Homeowner one-on-one consultations with an ADU expert
Educational “How To” Webinar series regarding …
Education on how to become a landlord
Advice on what type of ADU will work best for your…
Financial incenties and support to rent ADUs to…
Nothing
Figure 12: Which Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)
assistance services are most important? Select three.

Packet Pg. 1626
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-9 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 Fair Housing Issues
Figure 14 identifies the most urgent housing issues in Patterson based on respondents' rankings.

Affordability of housing emerged as the top concern, ranked by 54 percent of respondents, followed by availability of housing (39 percent) and fair housing or housing discrimination (37 percent).

Homelessness was also a significant concern at 32 percent. Other issues, such as overcrowding (27 percent) and housing quality (24 percent), were rated lower in urgency, while 29 percent of respondents indicated that there are no urgent housing issues. These results highlight affordability and availability as the primary housing challenges in Patterson. 41%
41%
17%
0%
Figure 13: Would you be interested in developing an
ADU (e.g. granny flat, in-law unit) on your property?
Yes, on my existing or future property
No
Not sure
I already have an ADU on my property
54%
39%
37%
32%
29%
27%
24%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Affordability of housing
Availability of housing
Fair Housing/housing discrimination
Homelessness
There are no urgent housing issues
Overcrowding
Housing quality
Figure 14: What do you believe are the most urgent
housing issues in Patterson? (Rank the issues below
with 1 being most urgent)
Packet Pg. 1627
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-10 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 Figure 15 highlights housing quality issues experienced by respondents. The most common issues reported were a lack of access to adequate plumbing and kitchen facilities, each indicated by 22 percent of respondents, followed by poor indoor air quality (17 percent) and household overcrowding (15 percent). Less applicable issues among respondents included homelessness, lack of transitional housing, and houses being too close together (each at 2 percent). These findings indicate that basic infrastructure and indoor air quality are the primary housing quality concerns for respondents, as well as a need for local services for unhoused residents.

Figure 16 identifies the fair housing services most needed in the community according to respondents. Rent stabilization was the top priority, selected by 66 percent of respondents, followed by education and information on tenant rights (46 percent). Landlord/tenant counseling, fair housing education, and promoting equal access to housing choice were each chosen by 39 percent.

Assistance with filing housing discrimination complaints was selected by 17 percent, while 5 percent of respondents indicated that none of the services were needed. These results emphasize the need for affordability and tenant-focused education and support services in the community. 22%
22%
17%
15%
2%
2%
2%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Lack of access to adequate plumbing
Lack of access to adequate kitchen facilities
Poor indoor air quality
Overcrowding within the household
No access to space to safely camp/create transitional…
Homelessness
Houses are too close together
Figure 15: Which of the following housing quality
issues, if any, do you feel apply to your current living situation? Select all that apply.

Packet Pg. 1628
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-11 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 Figure 17 highlights the housing assistance services respondents identified as most needed in the community. Down payment assistance for lower-income first-time homebuyers was the top priority, selected by 83 percent of respondents. This was followed by home repair assistance for low-income homeowners (73 percent), rental assistance (54 percent), and financial assistance to build accessory dwelling units (51 percent). Education seminars for aspiring homeowners were selected by 41 percent. These results underscore a strong demand for financial support and resources aimed at increasing homeownership and maintaining affordable housing. 66%
46%
39%
39%
39%
17%
5%
2%
2%
2%
2%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Rent stabilization
Education/information on tenant rights
Landlord/Tenant Counseling
Fair Housing Education
Promoting equal access to housing choice for all residents Assistance with filing a housing discrimination complaint None of the above
All
Senior homes
More homeownership opportunities
Easier way to get permits for ADUs
Figure 16: Which fair housing services do you feel are
most needed in our community? Select all that apply.
83%
73%
54%
51%
41%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Down payment assistance for lower-income first time…
Home repair assistance for low-income homeowners
Rental assistance
Financial assistance to build an accessory dwelling unit Education seminars for aspiring homeowners
Figure 17: Which housing assistance services do you
feel are most needed in our community? Select all that
apply.

Packet Pg. 1629
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-12 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 Figure 18 identifies factors that would attract individuals to live in Patterson. The top attractions include better employment opportunities (71 percent), parks (61 percent), and housing affordability (61 percent). Amenities (54 percent), recreational centers (51 percent), and public engagement (49 percent) were also significant factors. Less commonly mentioned were community events, safety, retail options, low crime, and small-town living, each indicated by 2 percent of respondents. These results indicate that economic opportunities and quality-of-life enhancements are key drivers for attracting residents to the city.

Open-Ended Questions
The survey featured three open-ended questions, providing respondents with the opportunity to share their thoughts and perspectives in response to the following topics outlined below. Full responses to the open-ended questions are included in Section A.5 at the end of this report for reference.

Respondents were asked, "What do you see contributing to homelessness in Stanislaus County?" Key themes identified included drug use, affordability, lack of shelters and transitional housing, insufficient regulation and enforcement, mental health issues, limited employment opportunities, inadequate supportive services, and a shortage of housing options for single-person or small households.

Respondents were also asked, "What do you expect from your city or county regarding homelessness/housing?" Key themes included educating residents on available resources and services, facilitating the production of affordable housing and job creation, and supporting local 71%
61%
61%
54%
51%
49%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Better employment opportunities
Parks
Housing affordability
Amenities
Recreational Centers
Public engagement
Thriving community events, safety
Movie theater, more shops like Target, wineries,…
Low crime, police presence
Farmland, small town
I already live here
Figure 18: If you would like to live in Patterson, check the boxes that identify what would attract you to the
City.

Packet Pg. 1630
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-13 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 organizations working to alleviate homelessness. Respondents emphasized the need for wraparound support services for individuals experiencing homelessness, assistance for first-time homebuyers, rental deposit support, and the development of homeless shelters while reducing regulatory barriers for shelter access. Additionally, respondents highlighted the importance of cleaning up parks and downtown areas to address encampments and loitering, as well as increasing law enforcement to ensure public safety. These responses underscore the community's expectation for a multi-faceted approach that combines education, housing development, supportive services, and enforcement to address homelessness effectively.

To end the survey, respondents were given the opportunity to note any other housing-related topics of concern. These responses are included in Section A.5 at the end of this report.

A.3 Discussion
The results of the Housing Needs Survey underscore a diverse set of housing-related challenges and priorities in the City of Patterson, as highlighted by the 41 respondents. Despite the limited sample size and inherent self-selection bias, the survey provides valuable qualitative insights into the housing needs, preferences, and barriers faced by the community.

Demographic and Economic Insights
The demographic data reveals an engaged respondent base, with notable representation from Hispanic/Latino residents and female heads of household. This demographic diversity, combined with the income distribution skewed towards lower to moderate-income brackets, emphasizes the economic challenges many residents face, particularly in accessing affordable housing options.

The age distribution of respondents, predominantly between 35 and 44 years, aligns with life stages where housing decisions are often more critical. Lower engagement from older residents highlights potential accessibility barriers or a perceived stability in housing among this demographic.

Housing Priorities and Barriers
Affordability emerges as the most significant barrier to housing, as identified by 63 percent of respondents. This aligns with the prioritization of lower-priced rental and ownership options, as well as homes affordable to first-time homebuyers. The lack of housing variety and supply further compounds these challenges, indicating a need for diverse housing solutions to meet varying community needs.

The high demand for financial and technical assistance with accessory dwelling units (ADUs) suggests a viable opportunity for the City to address housing shortages while promoting sustainable and flexible housing options. Similarly, down payment and home repair assistance for low-income households could significantly enhance homeownership rates and housing stability.

Packet Pg. 1631
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-14 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 Chapter 3 of the Housing Element details programs designed to facilitate the development of diverse housing options, including accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior ADUs (JADUs), family-friendly housing with four or more bedrooms, senior housing, and single-room occupancy (SRO) units, as outlined in Programs 4.12, 4.5, 4.4, and 4.10, respectively. Additionally, Program 5.5 proposes enhancing the City’s First-Time Homebuyer Down Payment Assistance program to better meet needs, while Program 4.12 includes initiatives to secure funding for low-interest loans to support ADU construction. Collectively, these efforts reflect the City’s commitment to addressing the evolving housing needs of Patterson residents.

Community Preferences and Attractors
Survey respondents expressed a clear preference for single-story houses, condos, and other housing types that cater to smaller households and seniors. This demand aligns with demographic trends and suggests a potential shift in housing development strategies to meet these preferences. Moreover, the community's focus on better employment opportunities and quality-of-life enhancements, such as parks and recreational centers, highlights the interplay between housing and economic development in attracting and retaining residents.

The City is actively collaborating with several developers, including KB Homes, DR Horton, SelfHelp Enterprises, LGI, Landsea Homes, and Lennar, to address Patterson's housing needs.

Negotiations focus on constructing smaller, more affordable units and designing projects that accommodate multigenerational living, such as incorporating ADUs on single-family lots. These efforts are guided by community preferences and aim to deliver practical and affordable housing solutions.

The City is also committed to revitalizing both the western and eastern regions of Patterson through targeted capital improvement projects (Program 5.7, see Chapter 3 of the Housing Element). These initiatives aim to enhance the quality of life in underserved areas east of State Route 33 while preparing the area west of Baldwin Road for future residential development.

Addressing Homelessness and Housing Quality
Homelessness remains a critical concern, driven by factors such as drug use, mental health issues, and affordability. Respondents emphasized the need for comprehensive solutions, including affordable housing development, supportive services, and shelters. Addressing these challenges requires a coordinated approach involving education, resource provision, and enforcement.

Housing quality issues, including inadequate plumbing and poor indoor air quality, also highlight the need for targeted interventions to improve existing housing stock. Rent stabilization and tenantfocused education emerged as key priorities, reflecting a broader concern for housing equity and tenant protections.

Packet Pg. 1632
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-15 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 Chapter 3 of the Housing Element outlines programs aimed at addressing homelessness through the development of emergency shelters, low-barrier navigation centers, transitional and supportive housing, and the provision of supportive services (Programs 4.6, 4.7, 4.9, and 4.8, respectively).

Additionally, Program 5.8 includes initiatives to promote shared housing and market available options, while Program 5.9 focuses on expanding economic mobility in Patterson. Together, these programs aim to support individuals experiencing homelessness by offering pathways to secure housing and stable employment.

A.4 Conclusion and Recommendations
The findings of this survey provide a roadmap for addressing Patterson's housing challenges. Key recommendations include:
▪ Expanding affordable housing options for lower-income and first-time buyers; ▪ Promoting diverse housing types, including ADUs and smaller units; ▪ Enhancing community engagement, particularly among underrepresented demographics; ▪ Addressing homelessness through a combination of supportive services, shelters, and affordable housing development; and
▪ Improving housing quality through targeted repair programs and tenant protections.

By aligning housing policies with these priorities, the City of Patterson can create a more inclusive and sustainable housing landscape that meets the diverse needs of its residents.

Packet Pg. 1633
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-16 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 A.5 Open-Ended Questions
What do you see contributing to homelessness in Stanislaus County? Substance abuse; lack of law enforcement; lack of affordable homes to own in relation to job opportunities in the area.

Not have in patient drug therapy or a place to go for them to get clean and sober Higher renting prices
alot of the persons just don't want to work and live humanly so if thats the case try to get em on the right path but if their option is not one that they want like to better themselves city needs to look for another way to keep em away from children.

Places to sleep
Our mayor/sheriff department are too lenient. Drug use is also a big factor Drugs and financial crisis
People not wanting to work and cost of living.

As someone who came from a family that severely struggles with this: drugs.

Allowing them to take over and set up camps everywhere especially in downtown and the parks and railroad tracks
Lack of resources and enforcement for homeless
Lack of shelters
Rent is way to high
Enabling the homeless to continue living on the streets High home/living costs. Affordability. Mental health and drug issues. Jobs do not meet the pay necessary to thrive.

People don’t want the help
Open parks
Packet Pg. 1634
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-17 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 Mental facilities
the lack of entry level jobs
Lack of affordable rental housing - rents are too high
Low wages, job market isn’t great, drug/alcohol abuse
Nuestra comunidad contribulle a tener y ayudar ala personas sin cada Drug and alcohol abuse/ mental illness
Drugs
Drug use and/or sufficient income/job availability
No places /programs to attend daily
Rent increases
People moving in forcing people out of their homes by driving up the property values in turn driving up property taxes in turn forcing people who barely scraping by as is not being able to afford that in turn losing their homes. Also drug use and mental instability.

Drugs
Choices made
Not enough options for single person living
Lack of affordable housing, employment opportunities, financial assistance, transitional housing and supportive services.

Not enough options for single person living
Nothing
Not too sure some because this has always been their home town Loss of employment, medical issues, addiction.

Loss of employment, medical issues, addiction.

Packet Pg. 1635
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-18 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 drugs, the homeless person would rather do drugs than seek help and follow rules. Lack of facilities that can handle a homeless person all hours of the day and night therefore they are on the street during the day and go into a shelter at night. If they could be in a place for day and night services could come to them.

How expensive and the requirements of owning/renting a home Drugs
Drugs, mental illness
Packet Pg. 1636
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-19 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 What do you expect from your city or county regarding homelessness/housing? Provide shelter, but prosecute for drug and criminal activity.

Crack down on them sleeping and dwelling on public or private property Help address the issue by coming up with a solution
i expect them to deal with and get it done no matter wath Getting them help /resources
If they are drug users they need to remove them. Our children/family/downtown areas are not safe with so many homeless/drug users. We should be proud of downtown Patterson. It needs to be revamped and have a lot more too offer.

They need to clean up or get out
Offer them resources. Unfortunately some people choose to be homeless Not to increase taxes, again, to pay for any additional services. Patterson has more taxes than most other cities already.

More homes being built and more resources for seniors
Use law enforcement to take care of this problem
Invest in not just cleaning up the streets but giving options for those homes I want them to help us get in to a place
Do not allow homeless to live within our city. It’s sad that we have them all over our downtown and parks.

Our city has allowed Cambridge Academies to run Naomi’s taking out tax money and offering little care to the community. They left Patterson when transparency was requested, taking furniture donated by our community members. Our city has done nothing to help obtain another program for the men’s shelter. Paying the mortgage is one step, when will you do more? Available housing for people when they are ready to get help.. less rules with the current housing offered
Packet Pg. 1637
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-20 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 Continue cleaning up of common known areas
Mental awareness
to treat them with respect at the bare least
To address the issue so children are no longer living in their cars or bundled up in homes..

I expect the city to not let homelessness get out of control. programs for people experiencing homelessness to find work.

Espero que puedan crear un lugar para las personas sin casa ya que hay personas que son muy groseras a las mujeres que caminan con sus niños y uno nose siente seguro I think they are doing all that they can
Kick them out. Have our parks free of tents/loitering.

Some sort of shelter/rehabilitation/education center or program that helps them work their way to get back on their feet. They must follow strict rules to qualify and stay in the program.

A solution!
Provide housing and jobs
I dont expect anything as its only getting worse and no one seems to care about fixing it.

More enforcement of law
Nothing
More options
Alternative living spaces for unhoused, such as tent and car camping space w/trash, bathroom and safe cooking facilities and electricity for phone charging, transitional shelters, creative employment opportunities such as internships and gig work for homeless.

More options
Help with rental deposits, first time home buyes
Packet Pg. 1638
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-21 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 Help then find places to stay
To provide information regarding available state, county & city assistance to 1) alleviate homelessness and 2) provide information and resources to persons seeking housing assistance; take an active role in supporting local private organizations engaged in alleviating homelessness.

To provide information regarding available state, county & city assistance to 1) alleviate homelessness and 2) provide information and resources to persons seeking housing assistance; take an active role in supporting local private organizations engaged in alleviating homelessness.

Develop laws so they can not hang around public places and beg for money. Make laws so being homeless is not an alternative. Make laws and provide funding, like foster care, for adults that are homeless.

Help with first time home buyers
House/ rehabilitation
To not allow other cities to send their homeless citizens to Patterson. Help with the willing homeless citizens find treatment.

Packet Pg. 1639
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-22 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 Are there any additional topics or concerns related to housing needs or resources in the City of Patterson that you would like to share or learn more about? No
no
when living here in patterson for the last 17 years so much change has there been but thats where the city needs to step up and provide for the community price gauging on gas and food, community events for all( mexico independence celebration in downtown) and any other that is large and brings everyone like the apricot fiesta.

The parks and rec department also need to get it together. It’s unbelievable that the soccer league all have the same uniforms. Not only that but they can’t even buy the correct size. Why even ask when enrolling for a sport. Clean up the downtown area! It would be nice to be able to take our children to the park there, have a nice dinner. Not with all those homelessness/drug users there.

We need to attract people to our downtown. Please go and look at Livermore, Tracy, Turlock, alameda.

Not sure
The increased pushing for additional dwellings in the backs of houses has us concerned about the cities future and safety. A lot of decisions being made has us reconsidering if we should continue to raise a family here or leave.

Need more stores, businesses, restaurants, and activities for KIDD When will the senior housing area be completed across from the skate park/true value? Your guys are doing an amazing job rehabbing this town… thank you!!! what is taking so long with the road adjustment between Olive Ave and Sycamore Ave.

Make sure this survey is done in Spanish and in person to get an accurate account of this groups concerns as they relate to housing
Plant trees that don’t shed berries
Don't become the next tracy. Stop building. Its only causes more problems for the city and the people who have lived there for generations. You're turing this town into something Packet Pg. 1640
Attachment A – Housing Needs Survey A-23 EMC Planning Group City of Patterson 6th Cycle Housing Element HCD Initial Draft December 2024 unrecognizable and it's a shame. All you care about is the money you all bring in and don't care about the people that live there or have lived there that want to return to what they once knew. no
Benefits for the disabled
Benefits for the disabled
"I am interested in the “Universal Design Ordinance” relative to seniors and persons with disabilities. I would like to attend workshops/meetings/discussions on the design of proposed units and, if appropriate, offer suggestions on amenities.

I am also interested in ADU’s and how Patterson can encourage homeowners to build or place units on their properties, focusing on incentives to encourage homeowners to take the step and add an ADU on their property. "
"I am interested in the “Universal Design Ordinance” relative to seniors and persons with disabilities. I would like to attend workshops/meetings/discussions on the design of proposed units and, if appropriate, offer suggestions on amenities.

I am also interested in ADU’s and how Patterson can encourage homeowners to build or place units on their properties, focusing on incentives to encourage homeowners to take the step and add an ADU on their property. "
No
Packet Pg. 1641
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
651 Bannon Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95811
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
December 2, 2025
Bryan Stice, Director
Community Development Department
City of Patterson
1 Plaza
Patterson, CA 95363
Dear Bryan Stice:

RE: City of Patterson’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Revised Draft Housing Element Thank you for submitting the City of Patterson’s (City) revised draft housing element received for review on October 3, 2025, along with technical edits received on November 27, 2025. Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is reporting the results of its review. Our review was facilitated by a conversation on November 13, 2025 with City staff and consultants. In addition, HCD considered comments from Rutan and Tucker, LLP on behalf of Keystone Rance, LLC, and YIMBY Law pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (c).

The revised draft element, including technical edits, meets the statutory requirements described in HCD’s May 2, 2025 review. However, the housing element cannot be found in substantial compliance until the City has completed and submitted the necessary rezones (see below) to make prior identified sites available and accommodate the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The housing element will substantially comply with State Housing Element Law (Gov. Code, § 65580 et seq) when rezoning is completed and the element is adopted, submitted to, and approved by HCD, in accordance with Government Code section 65585.

A jurisdiction that did not adopt a compliant housing element within 120 days from the statutory deadline (December 31, 2023) must rezone sites within one year of the statutory deadline and meet requirements pursuant to Government Code sections 65583, subdivision (c)(1)(A) and 65583.2, subdivisions (c), (h) and (i), as applicable. As this year has passed and Programs 1.11 (Shortfall Rezoning) and 1.12 (Prior Identified Sites) have not been completed to meet all statutory requirements, the housing element is out of compliance and will remain out of compliance until the rezoning has been completed and submitted to HCD to meet all statutory requirements. Once the City completes the rezoning, a copy of the resolution or ordinance should be transmitted to Packet Pg. 1642
Bryan Stice, Director

HCD. HCD will review the documentation and issue correspondence updating the status of the City’s housing element compliance.

As a reminder, the City’s 6th cycle housing element was due December 31, 2023. As of today, the City has not completed the housing element process for the 6th cycle. The City’s 5th cycle housing element no longer satisfies statutory requirements. HCD encourages the City to expeditiously complete rezoning and adopt and submit the housing element to HCD to regain substantial compliance.

In addition, HCD is aware of ongoing efforts to address infrastructure constraints relating to the Delta-Mendota Subbasin and Del Puerto Creek Capture and Recharge Project, which are necessary to make sites suitable to accommodate the RHNA.

Considering these constraints, the timely and effective implementation of Programs 1.14 (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Areas) and 1.15 (Water Supply to Support Development) are especially crucial to the success of the housing element and the City’s ability to regain and maintain housing element compliance.

Public participation in the development, adoption and implementation of the housing element is essential to effective housing planning. Throughout the housing element process, the City must continue to engage the community, including organizations that represent lower-income and special needs households, by making information regularly available while considering and incorporating comments where appropriate. The City should ensure that information is shared consistently through a variety of outreach methods and that public input is meaningfully considered and incorporated where appropriate. HCD encourages the City to continue working with the public, including commenters on this housing element review, and adjust policies and programs, as appropriate. Please be aware, any revisions to the element must be posted on the local government’s website and to email a link to all individuals and organizations that have previously requested notices relating to the local government’s housing element at least seven days before submitting to HCD.

Pursuant to Government Code section 65583.3, subdivision (b), the City must utilize standards, forms, and definitions adopted by HCD when preparing the sites inventory.

Please see HCD’s housing element webpage at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-andcommunity-development/housing-elements for a copy of the form and instructions. The City can reach out to HCD at [email protected] for technical assistance.

Please note, upon adoption of the housing element, the City must submit an electronic version of the sites inventory with its adopted housing element to [email protected].

Packet Pg. 1643
Bryan Stice, Director

Several federal, state, and regional funding programs consider housing element compliance as an eligibility or ranking criteria. For example, the CalTrans Senate Bill (SB) 1 Sustainable Communities grant, the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities program, and HCD’s Permanent Local Housing Allocation consider housing element compliance and/or annual reporting requirements pursuant to Government Code section 65400. With a compliant housing element, the City will meet housing element requirements for these and other funding sources.

For your information, some general plan element updates are triggered by housing element adoption. HCD reminds the City to consider timing provisions and welcomes the opportunity to provide assistance. For information, please see the Technical Advisories issued by the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation:
https://www.lci.ca.gov/planning/general-plan/guidelines.html.

HCD appreciates the efforts the housing element update team provided during the update and review of the housing element and looks forward to receiving the City’s adopted housing element. HCD welcomes the opportunity to provide technical assistance through the adoption and rezone process, including reviewing draft rezoning documents. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Emily Hovda, of our staff, at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Paul McDougall
Senior Program Manager
Packet Pg. 1644
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
651 Bannon Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95811
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
March 24, 2026
Fernando Ulloa, City Manager
City of Patterson
1 Plaza, P.O. Box 667
Patterson, CA 95363
Dear Fernando Ulloa:

RE: City of Patterson Failure to Adopt a Compliant 6th Cycle Housing Element – Notice of Violation
The City of Patterson’s (City) 6th cycle housing element was due on December 31, 2023.1 The City's most recent housing element draft is not in substantial compliance with Housing Element Law2 because the City has not completed and submitted the necessary rezones to make prior identified sites available and accommodate the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The City’s proposed date of late August 2026 to adopt its rezones and submit rezone documentation to HCD is unsatisfactory. This timeline would delay HCD’s determination of whether the City achieves substantial compliance until the last quarter of 2026, nearly three years past its statutory due date. Therefore, the City is in violation of Housing Element Law.3
Under Government Code section 65585, subdivision (i)(1)(A), HCD has the authority to review any action or failure to act that it determines to be inconsistent with either an adopted housing element or Government Code section 65583 and to issue written findings of such noncompliance. Additionally, HCD must notify a local government when that local government takes actions that violate Government Code section 65583 and may refer such violations to the California Office of the Attorney General. 4 6th Cycle Housing Element Submission and Review History The 6th cycle planning period for the City is December 31, 2023, through December 31, 2031.

The City failed to adopt a compliant housing element by its 6th cycle due date of December 31, 2023. HCD records are as follows:
1 Gov. Code, § 65588, subd. (e)(3).
2 Article 10.6 (commencing with section 65580) of Chapter 3 of the Government Code. 3 Gov. Code, § 65585.
4 Gov. Code, § 65585, subds. (i)(1)(A) and (j).

Packet Pg. 1645
Fernando Ulloa, City Manager

• On May 13, 2024, HCD issued a Letter of Inquiry to the City requesting the City provide a specific timeline for (1) submitting its initial draft housing element and (2) obtaining compliance with Housing Element Law, no later than June 13, 2024. • On June 25, 2024, the City responded to HCD’s Letter of Inquiry with a detailed timeline.
• On September 30, 2024, HCD contacted the City by email noting the City had missed a submittal date in its timeline for a subsequent draft housing element, and requested the City provide an update to its timeline. • On October 21, 2024, HCD sent a follow-up email to the City repeating its inquiry about the City’s next submittal.
• On October 22, 2024, the City responded by email to HCD’s request with an update and committed to providing a timeline after an internal meeting. • On October 31, 2024, the City provided additional updates regarding its process, but without a timeline.
• On November 26, 2024, HCD requested by email that the City provide a new date for submitting a draft housing element to HCD.
• On November 26, 2024, the City responded by email that the consultants were finalizing the draft for submittal to HCD in the next few days. • On December 19, 2024, HCD emailed the City to request an update regarding the draft housing element submittal.
• On January 3, 2025, the City responded by email that HCD should expect a draft housing element submittal the following week.
• On January 10, 2025, HCD inquired by email noting HCD still had not received a subsequent draft housing element and requested that the City provide an update to its timeline.
• On January 15, 2025, HCD left a message by phone requesting an updated timeline and a phone call.
• On January 29, 2025, the City responded by email that its draft housing element may likely be ready for distribution to HCD that day.
• On February 3, 2025, the City submitted an initial draft housing element to HCD for review.
• On May 2, 2025, HCD issued a findings letter to the City noting multiple revisions necessary for the housing element to be compliant with Housing Element Law. • On September 19, 2025, HCD requested by email an updated timeline to reflect its recent findings letter by September 26, 2025.
• On September 22, 2025, the City responded by email to HCD’s request with a timeline showing January 9, 2026, as the date of submittal to HCD for certification.
• On October 3, 2025, the City submitted a subsequent draft housing element to HCD for review.
• On December 2, 2025, HCD issued a second findings letter to the City noting that the draft housing element met the statutory requirements described in HCD’s May 2, 2025 review, but could not be found in substantial compliance until the City had completed and submitted the necessary rezones to make prior identified sites available and accommodate the RHNA.

Packet Pg. 1646
Fernando Ulloa, City Manager

• On January 22, 2026, HCD inquired by email as to whether the City’s rezones had been adopted, and if not, requested that the City provide an updated timeline for adoption and submittal.
• On February 2, 2026, HCD inquired a second time by email as to whether the City’s rezones had been adopted.
• On February 5, 2026, HCD inquired a third time by email as to whether the City’s rezones had been adopted.
• On February 6, 2026, the City’s consultant responded that the rezones would require an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The City provided a proposed date of July 3, 2026, for EIR completion, and a City Council hearing for adoption on August 18, 2026.

Technical Assistance Offered
HCD has made resources and technical assistance available to assist local jurisdictions in creating comprehensive housing elements. HCD has offered extensive technical assistance, including numerous meetings and comprehensive written guidance to the City.

In addition, HCD has made available $123 million in planning grants for regions, cities, and counties to prepare, adopt, and implement plans that streamline housing approvals and accelerate housing production. Under that program, the City was eligible for, and received, an award of $310,000 through SB 2. The City was also eligible for, and received, $500,000 through the Local Early Action Planning Grant (LEAP) for local planning activities.

Consequences of Noncompliance
Consequences apply if the City does not have a housing element in substantial compliance with Housing Element Law. First, noncompliance results in ineligibility or delay in receiving state funds that require a compliant housing element as a condition precedent, including, but not limited to, the following:
• Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program
• Local Housing Trust Fund Program
• Infill Infrastructure Grant Program
• Senate Bill 1 Caltrans Sustainable Communities Grants • Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program Second, under the Housing Accountability Act, jurisdictions that do not have a substantially compliant housing element are subject to the Builder’s Remedy.5 5 Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subds. (d)(6), (f)(6), and (h)(11).

Packet Pg. 1647
Fernando Ulloa, City Manager

In addition, HCD may notify the California Office of the Attorney General. 6 Furthermore,
state law provides for court-imposed penalties for persistent noncompliance, including enhanced financial penalties. Government Code section 65585, subdivision (l)(1), establishes a minimum fine of $10,000 per month, up to $100,000 per month for jurisdictions that fail to comply with a court order to bring its housing element into compliance. If a jurisdiction remains noncompliant, a court may multiply those penalties by a factor of three and then six, depending on the duration of the continued noncompliance.7 If a jurisdiction fails to comply after six months from the imposition of fees, the court may also appoint a receiver.8
Finally, in any action brought by the Attorney General or HCD to enforce the adoption of housing element revisions, jurisdictions are subject to additional fines of between $10,000 and $50,000 per month for each violation, accrued from the date of the violation until the date the violation is cured, including investigation costs, expert fees, attorneys’ fees, costs, and any other relief the court deems appropriate.9 Findings and Conclusion
HCD finds that the City has failed to adopt a substantially compliant housing element and is therefore in violation of state law. Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (i)(1)(A), the City has until April 23, 2026, to provide a written response to this notice before HCD takes any of the actions authorized by section 65585, including, but not limited to, referral to the California Office of the Attorney General.

In addition, pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (k), HCD hereby offers the City two meetings within the next 30 days to discuss the City’s violations and its failure to adopt a substantially compliant housing element.

State housing laws are effective only with the cooperation of local governments. HCD understands that local governments may encounter staffing and resource constraints in their efforts to gain compliance. However, housing elements, and the timely implementation thereof, are essential to developing a blueprint for growth and are a vital tool to address California’s prolonged housing crisis. To meet the 6th cycle update requirements for a substantially compliant housing element, the City must complete its rezones, adopt the housing element and rezones, and submit a copy of the adopted housing element and rezone documentation to HCD for review and certification before it can be considered compliant.10
6 Gov. Code, § 65585, subd. (j).
7 Gov. Code, § 65585, subds. (l)(2) and (3).
8 Gov. Code, § 65585, subd. (l)(3)(B).
9 Gov. Code, § 65009.1, subd. (a).
10 Gov. Code, § 65585, subds. (b)-(h).

Packet Pg. 1648
Fernando Ulloa, City Manager

If you have any questions or would like to discuss the contents of this letter, please contact Mary Milner at [email protected]
Sincerely,
Melinda Coy
Housing Accountability Unit Chief
Packet Pg. 1649
Notice of Exemption
To: Office of Planning and Research From: City of Patterson P.O. Box 3044, 1400 Tenth Street, Room 212 1 Plaza (P.O. Box 667) Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 Patterson, CA 95363
County Clerk
County of Stanislaus
1021 I Street, Suite 101
Modesto, CA 95354
Project Title: City of Patterson 2023-2031 6th Cycle Housing Element Project Applicant: City of Patterson
Project Location – Specific: City-wide
Project Location – City: Patterson Project Location – County: Stanislaus Description of Nature, Purpose and Beneficiaries of the Project:

The proposed project involves updating the City of Patterson’s 2015–2023 Housing Element (adopted February 2, 2016) with the 2023–2031 6th Cycle Housing Element. This update is required to ensure consistency with the housing goals and requirements set forth in Government Code Sections 65580 through 65589. Adoption of the Housing Element update would constitute an amendment to the City’s General Plan.

The Housing Element update plans for the development of 4,919 housing units over the eight-year planning period, which exceeds the City’s RHNA of 3,716 units by 1,548 units. Using the California Department of Finance’s (2025) average household size of 3.57 persons per household for the City of Patterson, development of 4,919 units would result in a projected population increase of approximately 17,560 residents. The Housing Element update establishes goals, policies, and programs to facilitate the development of these units.

Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Patterson Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: City of Patterson Exempt Status: (check one)
Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1); 15268);
Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269(a));
Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c));
Categorical Exemption. State type and section number: Common Sense Exemption (Sec. 15061(b)(3)) Statutory Exemptions. State code number:

Reasons why project is exempt:

The City has evaluated the potential environmental impacts of the proposed General Plan Amendment to adopt the 2023- 2031 Housing Element of the General Plan in compliance with State Housing Element law and determined that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption).

The 6th Cycle Housing Element is a State-mandated planning document that includes Goals, Policies, and Programs aimed at providing additional housing opportunities, removing governmental constraints to affordable housing, improving the condition of existing housing, and providing equal housing opportunities for all residents. The proposed project involves adoption of planning programs and policies; identifies sites subject to potential future development; and identifies zoning actions to advance attainment of the City’s RHNA targets. The 6th Cycle Housing Element does not grant any development entitlements or authorize development of new housing on any site identified in the Housing Element. Physical development of any site included in the proposed project would require formal development applications, technical studies, and further evaluation in accordance with CEQA and City plans, ordinances, and standards. Any future development would undergo project-specific developmental review to address potential impacts. The 6th Cycle Housing Element does not involve any physical changes with the potential to create an adverse effect on the environment. Without any tangible development Packet Pg. 1650
application for specific sites or other physical change to the environment, there is no foreseeable, reasonable possibility that adopting the proposed project would result in a significant effect on the environment.

Lead Agency
Contact Person: Bryan Stice, Community
Development Director
Area Code/Telephone/Extension: 209-895-8074
If filed by applicant:

1. Attach certified document of exemption finding.

2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: _____________________________________ Date: ____________ Title: __________________________ Signed by Lead Agency
Date received for filing at OPR: _____________________
Signed by Applicant Revised 2011
Packet Pg. 1651

CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA REPORT
TO: Mayor Clauzel and Members of the City Council
FROM: Fernando Ulloa, City Manager
BY: Lakisha Callum, Acting Director of Human Resources
MEETING DATE: May 19, 2026
ITEM NO: 9.1
SUBJECT: Receive Report on Vacancies, and Recruitment and Retention Efforts in Compliance with Legal Obligations for a Public Hearing on Vacancies in Accordance with Assembly Bill 2561 and Government Code Section 3502.3.

RECOMMENDATION
Receive report on vacancies in compliance with legal obligations for a public hearing on vacancies in accordance with Assembly Bill 2561 and Government Code Section 3502.3.

BACKGROUND
AB 2561 was introduced to address job vacancies in local government, which can adversely affect the delivery of public services and employee workload. Among other requirements, the bill mandates that public agencies conduct a public hearing to present the status of vacancies, and recruitment and retention before the agency’s governing body at least once per fiscal year. The report must identify any necessary changes to policies, procedures, and recruitment activities that may lead to obstacles in the hiring process. The bill was enacted into law and is codified as Government Code section 3502.3, effective January 1, 2025.

ANALYSIS
In compliance with the legal obligations, the City is required to do the following:

1. Public Hearing: At least once each fiscal year, at a public hearing before the City Council, the City shall present information regarding the status of vacancies, and recruitment and retention efforts and identify any necessary changes to policies, procedures, and recruitment activities that may lead to obstacles in the hiring process.

2. Employee Organization Participation: Allow the recognized employee organization for each bargaining unit at the City to make presentations during the public hearing concerning Packet Pg. 1652
vacancies, and recruitment and retention efforts. The three (3) represented bargaining units at the City were notified of their entitlement to make a presentation.

3. Additional Reporting for High Vacancy Rates: If vacancies within a single bargaining unit meet or exceed 20% of authorized full-time positions in that bargaining unit, upon request of the recognized employee organization for that bargaining unit, the City must provide additional information during the public hearing, including the following: (1) the total number of vacancies; (2) the number of applicants; (3) the average time to fill positions; and (4) opportunities to improve compensation and working conditions for employees in the bargaining unit.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with conducting the public hearing required under Government Code section 3205.3. However, should there be a budgetary need to address recruitment or retention issues in the future, they will be presented to the City Council as necessary.

Packet Pg. 1653
Packet Pg. 1654
Assembly Bill 2561 Summary
AB 2561 requires public agencies to hold at least one (1) public hearing per fiscal year to assess and discuss the status of vacancies, and recruitment and retention efforts. It also entitles recognized employee organizations to make a presentation.

This presentation is intended to address the City’s legal obligations under the new law.

Packet Pg. 1655
2025 Report on Vacancies
By Month
Month/Year # of Vacancies
Created
# of Vacancies
Filled
# of Remaining
Vacancies
# of Budgeted
FTEs % of Vacancies
Jan-25 1 1 9 161 5.6%
Feb-25 5 3 11 161 6.8%
Mar-25 1 0 12 161 7.5%
Apr-25 1 4 9 161 5.6%
May-25 0 1 8 161 5.0%
Jun-25 2 1 9 161 5.6%
Jul-25 4 1 12 163 7.4%
Aug-25 1 3 10 163 6.1%
Sep-25 1 3 8 163 4.9%
Oct-25 2 1 9 163 5.5%
Nov-25 0 1 8 163 4.9%
Dec-25 2 2 8 163 4.9%
Average % of vacancies for the City: 5.8%
Lowest % of vacancies for the City: 4.9%
Highest % of vacancies for the City: 7.5%
Packet Pg. 1656
2025 Year End Vacancy Rate by
Bargaining Unit
As of December 31, 2025
Bargaining Unit # of
Vacancies
# of
Budgeted FTEs
% of
Vacancies
AFSCME 5 85 5.9%
PMMEA 2 33 6.1%
IAFF 1 19 5.3%
BARGAINING UNIT TOTALS: 8 137
Unrepresented
# of
Vacancies
# of
Budgeted FTEs
% of
Vacancies
UNREPRESENTED 0 26 0.0%
TOTALS FOR ALL: 8 163
Packet Pg. 1657
Vacancy
Created
Recruitment
Request Job Posting
Conditional
Job Offer
Job
Placement
Recruitment Process
Application
Screening
Candidate
Interviews
PreEmployment
Process
Packet Pg. 1658
2025 Recruitment Summary
Total # of Vacancies Filled: 21
• Average Number of Calendar Days to Fill Vacancies: 85 • Number of Vacancies Filled by:
• Existing Eligibility List: 2
• New Recruitment: 15
• Internal Only: 4
Packet Pg. 1659
Hiring Issues
• Potential obstacles:
• Hard to fill positions
• Solutions to address obstacles:
• Targeted contact to applicants on Linked-In, various
social media platforms, and other agencies
• Postings at the public Library, local colleges and
universities, and local businesses
• Encourage individuals currently in the field to share with their social media networks
Packet Pg. 1660
2025 Retention Summary
Total # of Vacancies Created: 20
Total # of Vacancies Created by Newly Budgeted Positions: 5 • % of Vacancies Resulting from Staffing Growth: 25%
Total # of Vacancies Created by Internal Promotion: 3
Total # of Vacancies Created by Internal Transfer: 1
• % of Vacancies Resulting from Internal Opportunity: 20% Total # of Vacancies Created by Involuntary Separation: 2 Total # of Vacancies Created by Retirement: 3
• % of Vacancies Resulting from Attrition: 25%
Total # of Vacancies Created by Voluntary Separation: 6 • % of Vacancies Resulting from Turnover: 30%
Annual Staffing Turnover Rate: 4%
Packet Pg. 1661
Packet Pg. 1662

CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA REPORT
TO: Mayor Clauzel and Members of the City Council
FROM: Fernando Ulloa, City Manager
BY: Aracely Alegre, City Clerk, City Clerk
MEETING DATE: May 19, 2026
ITEM NO: A.1
SUBJECT: Appoint Two (2) Members to the Planning Commission for the Term February 2026-February 2028.

RECOMMENDATION
Motion to Appoint Two (2) Members to the Planning Commission for the Term February 2026- February 2028.

Packet Pg. 1663
Packet Pg. 1664
Packet Pg. 1665
Packet Pg. 1666
Packet Pg. 1667
Packet Pg. 1668
Packet Pg. 1669