CITY OF PATTERSON
City Council Special Meeting Agenda
September 28, 2026, 05:00 PM
City Council Chambers
1 Plaza, Patterson, CA 95363
PUBLIC MEETING GUIDELINES
City of Patterson City Council meetings are conducted in person at City Hall Council Chambers. As a courtesy, and technology permitting, members of the public may participate virtually. However, the City cannot guarantee that the public's access to teleconferencing and translating technology will be uninterrupted, and technical difficulties may occur from time to time.
REMOTE PARTICIPATION
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY PARTICIPATE IN THE MEETING IN PERSON OR VIA TELECONFERENCE BY CALLING 1-669-900-9128, MEETING ID: 693 538 4239, PASSWORD:
20995363. JOIN FROM A PC, MAC, IPAD, IPHONE, OR ANDROID DEVICE BY USING THIS URL: PattersonCA.gov/meeting
The meeting will be televised or available for public viewing on comcast cable channel 7 on the following days: Wednesday at 3:00 p.m., Friday at 8:00 p.m. and Saturday at 12:00 p.m. Or watch on internet Vimeo link: https://vimeo.com/channels/patterson/
TRANSLATION SERVICES
To access written translation during the meeting, click this link / Para acceder a la traducción escrita durante la reunión, haga clic en este enlace: https://attend.wordly.ai/join/HSEU-6978 Choose Language and Click Attend / Elija el idioma y haga clic en Asistir. Use a headset on your phone for audio or read the transcript on your device. Use audífonos en su teléfono para audio o lea la transcripción en su dispositivo.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (209) 895-8012. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. [28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II]
The City Council agenda and supporting public documents are available for viewing in City Hall, Administration Department, 1 Plaza, 2nd Floor, Patterson, California, during normal business hours.
The City Council agenda and supporting public documents are also available online on the City web site www.pattersonca.gov or please call or email the City Clerk at (209) 895-8012 or [email protected] If you wish to be notified of future City Council Meetings, please visit our web site www.pattersonca.gov and go to “City Council Agendas”.
Call to Order
Pledge of Allegiance
Statements of Conflict
Items from the Public
Any Member of the audience who wishes to address the Council on a matter listed on the agenda may do so by raising your hand and stepping to the podium. If you are joining the meeting through Zoom, please use the 'Raise Hand' feature. If you are calling in by phone, you may press *9 when the Mayor announces the item. Council will take no action other than referring the item to staff for study and analysis and may place the item on a future agenda (Resolution 92-25).
In order that all interested parties have an opportunity to speak, any person addressing the Council will be limited to a maximum of three (3) minutes unless the Mayor grants a longer period of time (Resolution 2025-11).
Please State Your name and City for the Record.
Public Hearing
The Rules Committee will receive and consider the request for disciplinary action concerning the Mayor; review the supporting materials, including the executive summary of the third-party investigation; receive oral or written evidence submitted by the Mayor; and determine whether to:
1. Dismiss the matter;
Determine that the existing investigation and record are sufficient and direct preparation of a Rules Committee report for City Council consideration of disciplinary action; or
2. 1.
2. 3.
4. 5.
5.1
Recommend further investigation and direct preparation of a Rules Committee report for submission to the City Council.
3. Staff Report: Deputy City Attorney Pritchard
Adjournment
DECLARATION OF POSTING
I, Aracely, Alegre, City Clerk of the City of Patterson, California do hereby declare that the foregoing notice was posted on the Bulletin Board at City Hall, 1 Plaza, Patterson, California on September 24, 2026.
The Agenda is also posted for public view on the Bulletin Boards of the Patterson Branch Library, 46 N. Salado Avenue, Patterson, and the City of Patterson City Web Site www.pattersonca.gov Dated this September 24, 2026
/s/ Aracely Alegre, CMC
6.
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Mayor Clauzel and Members of the City Council
FROM: Fernando Ulloa, City Manager
BY: Christina M. Pritchard, Deputy City Attorney
MEETING
DATE:
September 28, 2026
ITEM: 5.1
SUBJECT : Review of request for disciplinary review
RECOMMENDATION
The Rules Committee will receive the staff report and supporting materials; receive oral or written evidence submitted by the Mayor; receive public comment;and determine the appropriate disposition under the City Officials’ Handbook.
BACKGROUND
Chapter 7, Section D of the City Officials' Handbook provides that City Officials who violate the Handbook, state or federal law, or the Patterson Municipal Code may be subject to disciplinary measures, including admonishment, reprimand, or censure. The Handbook defines censure as a formal resolution reprimanding an individual for misconduct and identifies censure as a disciplinary action.
The City Officials' Handbook establishes a Rules Committee as the first level of review for a request to discipline a member of the City Council, including the Mayor. The Rules Committee is asked to evaluate a written request for disciplinary action concerning Mayor Michael Clauzel. The request is based on an independent third-party investigation commissioned by the City after Human Resources received employee complaints regarding the Mayor's conduct and involvement in City operational matters.
The investigator issued a report dated July 21, 2026. The Committee's role at this stage is not to impose final discipline. It is to review the request, the supporting investigative record, and the Mayor's response, and then determine whether the matter should be dismissed, may proceed on the existing record, or requires further investigation.
DISCUSSION
Human Resources initially reviewed complaints raised by City employees. Following that review, the City retained Liebert Cassidy Whitmore to conduct an independent investigation. The investigator interviewed witnesses, reviewed documents, made credibility determinations when necessary, and applied the civil preponderance-of-the-evidence standard. Under that standard, an allegation was sustained when the investigator concluded that it was more likely than not that the alleged conduct occurred.
The Mayor was interviewed during the investigation and was given an opportunity to respond to the allegations. The investigation report reflects the Mayor's responses, including admissions, denials, explanations, and contextual information offered in response to the allegations.
After the investigation was completed, a written request for disciplinary action was submitted pursuant to Chapter 7, Section D of the City Officials' Handbook. The request and the redacted investigation report are included with this item.
A. Summary of Investigator’s Findings
The following summarizes the investigator's conclusions. These are the investigator's findings and do not constitute findings independently made by the Rules Committee or the City Council. • Not sustained: The investigator did not sustain the allegation that the Mayor engaged in unlawful harassment, discrimination, or retaliation in violation of state or federal law.
• Sustained: The investigator sustained the allegation that the Mayor violated City policies by engaging in bullying and abusive conduct toward City employees and City Councilmembers.
• Sustained: The investigator sustained the allegation that the Mayor violated City policies and the Patterson Municipal Code by becoming directly involved in City operations and bypassing the City's organizational structure.
B. Applicable Handbook Procedure
Chapter 7, Section D of the City Officials' Handbook provides that a City official who violates the Handbook, state or federal law, or the Patterson Municipal Code may be subject to admonishment, reprimand, censure, or other disciplinary measures. The procedure applicable to the Mayor is the same procedure that applies to Councilmembers.
The Council selected three Councilmembers to serve as the Rules Committee. Because the Mayor is the subject of the request, the Mayor may not serve on the Committee. The Committee acts by a majority vote; for a three-member Committee, two affirmative votes are required.
The Mayor must be served with the written request and notice of the Rules Committee meeting at least 72 hours before the meeting. The notice must advise the Mayor of the right to submit oral or written evidence. At the meeting, the Mayor must be given an opportunity to respond to the allegations.
C. Rules Committee Review
The Committee should consider the request, the redacted investigation report and other properly submitted materials, the Mayor's oral or written response, and any relevant procedural advice provided by the City Attorney. The Committee should distinguish between the investigator's factual findings and the procedural determination now assigned to the Committee.
Following its review, the Committee may select one of the following dispositions:
1. Dismiss the matter. The Committee may determine that no further investigation or disciplinary action is warranted and direct preparation of a report documenting that determination.
2. Proceed on the existing record. The Committee may determine that no additional investigation is necessary and direct preparation of a report for City Council consideration of disciplinary action based on the existing investigative record.
3. Recommend further investigation. The Committee may determine that additional investigation is necessary and direct preparation of a report recommending appointment of a five-member ad hoc committee. Because the Mayor is the accused official, the City Council, rather than the Mayor, would appoint the ad hoc committee.
The Rules Committee must serve its report on the Mayor and the City Council within ten days after the Committee meeting. Any subsequent proceedings must comply with the notice, hearing, and voting requirements applicable to the disposition being considered.
FISCAL IMPACT
Costs associated with this item include staff and legal time. If the Committee recommends further investigation, additional costs may be incurred for the ad hoc committee's investigation and preparation of a public report.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed action is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it is an organizational and administrative activity that will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15378(b)(5).)
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the Rules Committee receive the request and supporting materials, receive and consider any oral or written evidence submitted by the Mayor, deliberate regarding the appropriate disposition, and adopt one of the following motions:
• Dismissal: Move that the Rules Committee determine that no further investigation or disciplinary action is warranted, dismiss the matter, and direct the City Attorney to prepare and serve the Committee's report within ten days.
• Existing record: Move that the Rules Committee determine that no additional investigation is necessary, direct the City Attorney to prepare a report for City Council consideration of disciplinary action based on the existing investigative record, and serve the report within ten days.
• Further investigation: Move that the Rules Committee determine that further investigation is warranted, recommend that the City Council appoint a five-member ad hoc committee, and direct the City Attorney to prepare and serve the Committee's report within ten days.
Attachments:
Written Request for Rules Committee Review
w/attachment: Redacted Investigation Report
WRITTEN REQUEST FOR RULES COMMITTEE REVIEW
Pursuant to Chapter 7, Section D of the City Officials’ Handbook, this letter services as a formal request that the Rules Committee initiate the disciplinary review process regarding Mayor Michael Clauzel.
This request is based on the third-party investigator’s sustained findings that the Mayor:
1. Engaged in bullying and abusive conduct toward City employees and Councilmembers; and
2. Became directly involved in City operations and bypassed the City’s organizational structure.
The attached redacted report is incorporated into this request and provides the supporting facts and applicable policies.
The Rules Committee is requested to review the matter, provide the Mayor an opportunity to respond, and determine the appropriate disposition under the Handbook.
Carlos Roque
City of Patterson City Council
Ms. Nubia Goldstein
Re: City of Patterson – Investigation
July 21, 2026
13399899.1 PA057-013
WHETHER MICHAEL CLAUZEL VIOLATED CITY POLICIES AND CODE
BY BECOMING DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN CITY OPERATIONS BYPASSING THE CITY ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE.
II. METHODOLOGY
A. WITNESSES INTERVIEWED
I interviewed each of the following witnesses. All interviews, except as noted below, were conducted via Zoom. I recorded each interview, except as noted below. A copy of all such recordings and Rev transcriptions is provided in the following link: ____.. – June 1, 20261
– June 5, 2026
– June 9, 2026
– June 9, 2026
– June 9, 2026
– June 15 and June 18
– June 16, 2026
Michael Clauzel – June 25, 2026 (in person at Patterson City Hall) – June 29, 2026
– June 29, 2026 (most not recorded due to technical difficulties) – July 1, 2026
– July 1, 2026
– July 8, 2026
– July 8, 2026
B. CREDIBILITY DETERMINATIONS
1 , a local AFSCME representative, attended ’ interview.
Ms. Nubia Goldstein
Re: City of Patterson – Investigation
July 21, 2026
13399899.1 PA057-013
I made credibility determinations during this investigation as necessary. To determine credibility, I used the following factors from the California Civil Rights Department investigation guidelines:
1. Inherent plausibility;
2. Motive to lie (based on the existence of a bias, interest or other motive);
3. Corroboration;
4. Extent a witness was able to perceive, recollect, or communicate about the matter;
5. History of honesty/dishonesty;
6. Habit/consistency;
7. Inconsistent statements;
8. Manner of testimony; and
9. Demeanor.
C. STANDARD OF PROOF
In weighing the available evidence, I used the civil law preponderance of evidence standard of proof. I could make one of two findings:
Not Sustained - There is insufficient evidence to determine whether the alleged conduct occurred.
Sustained - The alleged conduct occurred.
I analyzed the facts and determined whether the allegations were with or without merit under a preponderance of the evidence standard. “Preponderance of the evidence,” for purposes of this report, means that the evidence on one side outweighs, or is more than, the evidence on the other side.
D. DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
In conducting this investigation, I received and reviewed the attached documents forwarded to me, which are included in the following share link file: (_____).
III. RELEVANT WITNESS INTERVIEW SUMMARIES
A.
Ms. Nubia Goldstein
Re: City of Patterson – Investigation
July 21, 2026
13399899.1 PA057-013
. During the May 19, 2026
closed session, the City Attorney gave the Council Member’s Clauzel’s 20–25-page document.
The City Attorney indicated that if the Council does not accept the Mayor’s proposal, “He is prepared to go scorched earth on you guys, on Council, on City Manager, and on City Attorney’s office. He also wants to know who votes on the third-party investigation and how they vote.
And he will demand that the City pay for all of his legal services to protect himself.” What heard was if they follow City policy/handbook, Clauzel would come after them personally. And the City Attorney responded, “’It looks as so.’” said they were then asked what they wanted to do but were not given any guidance by the City Attorney. said at the meeting, “’So, what I’m hearing is that what he’s being accused of is exactly what he’s doing to us and nobody’s saying anything.’” said now they are being threatened by Clauzel who is a sheriff, and was concerned about being protected during the investigation, “but they literally just let him roll back into Council.” “And they just proceeded on like nothing happened.
And I’m still waiting, so what about us? So he gets to threaten us. He gets to say he’s going to come after us, he’s going to do all these things. And then he just gets to sit next to us and we’re just okay…” Then started thinking about the complainants. “This is what’s happening to the complainants. Still nothing’s been addressed.” feels threatened and concerned. does not feel physically threatened by Clauzel, but she does feel threatened by what he is capable of doing.
Before being on Council, had an incident with Clauzel where he told her about a community member, “’You better get your girl in line right now.’” Another incident occurred around the time first became a Council Member when Clauzel was upset when the Fire union picketed the City. Clauzel called and said, “’Oh, it’s just and Mike talking, but fuck him, fuck that. I’m never fucking having anything to do with him again. You’re going to have to deal with him because I don’t want to fucking see him.’” At first, Clauzel called her and would start the conversation with “’friend to friend,’” then he would start talking City business. stopped answering his calls. “I just do not communicate with him at all. If he needs something from me, I’ve made it very clear, just text me what you need. I will take care of it. Outside of that, I do not want to talk to him.”
H. MAYOR MICHAEL CLAUZEL
Clauzel has been the Mayor since December 2022. He is also a Lieutenant with the San Francisco Sheriff’s office, which he has been since 2007. Clauzel identified and confirmed he prepared and the documents he provided to me are accurate, including the first via email with a series of emails. Clauzel indicated he started preparing the document over the course of the last month and a half. The approximate 25-page document that he prepared and was given to Council, Clauzel said it took him a couple of weeks to put it together before it was given to Council. In response to being asked why he prepared the 25-page document, Clauzel said he knew they were going to be discussing “this issue.” Clauzel said he has had “literally hundreds, if not thousands of conversations with the city employees over the course of the last three and a half years, and it didn’t take a rocket scientist, ma’am, to figure out which ones would appear, Ms. Nubia Goldstein
Re: City of Patterson – Investigation
July 21, 2026
13399899.1 PA057-013
that there could be some sort of issue with them.” Clauzel denied seeing any written complaints related to what he is responding to. Clauzel also provided me with Council Member Romero’s two-and-a-half-page resignation letter, which is “straight off the Irrigator” – the local newspaper.
Clauzel said Jessica Romero was the Council Member he confided in the most, and they were the minority voices on the Council. Clauzel said it was important for me to speak to , who are witnesses to the “ABS investigation…which
is what spawned all of this.”
Clauzel said he thought about resigning from the position of Mayor before Romero resigned because the Council continues to go outside its scope of authority… “Just like what Jessica has articulated.” Clauzel said they called for an investigation of the Fire Chief and then put pressure on the City Manager to terminate him. Clauzel cited that the HR Director and Park and Rec Director have been let go. “The City Manager…is being heavily monitored as well at this time” by the three on the City Council. “Both Jessica and I feel we no longer have any capacity to make decisions whatsoever because the three consistently out vote us.” In response to being asked about the incident in October 2025 with and what alleged, Clauzel said he did have a conversation with and admitted that he (Clauzel) was “emotionally escalated before” he went to the event. “And I freely will admit to you that I should not have placed myself in that situation.” “I did not grab him, wrestle him, turn him in any way using force. And the reason why he hasn’t made a complaint until this time is because he knows the entire context of the whole conversation.” Clauzel noted it was 200 days between the incident and complaint.
In response to being asked if he said, “If you come after me, I’m coming after you,” Clauzel said “context is important.” Clauzel described how the union “pelted this community with a whole slew of lies that I was not acting in good faith to try and correct the grievances that they had, that I wasn’t communicating with the City Manager. It was just a huge amount of slander against my character and that with which that ‘coming after you,’ as I fully admit and document, right, I absolutely said it, but the context wasn’t like I’m coming after him as a person. He knew exactly what I was referring to because there was a whole bit of conversation that happened surround that.” Clauzel said he was “advocating for peace between the unions…’You guys come to these meetings. We need to resolve this. We can find a way. I know we can.’ Again, I wasn’t talking about direct negotiations. It was more the tenor and tone of like, ‘We can work together to resolve all these issues. I know we can.” Clauzel said he admits to using the language “if you come after me, I’m coming after you.” “And I admit to fault that night. I should have been out of character. I should always maintain my composure and I did not. I fully admit that, right.” “That part of the wrongdoing to me is clear and a bright line.” But Clauzel said his words needs to be seen within the full context of “all the lies and defamation.” “Had the context or the inference that night been any type of threatening behavior, believe me, they would have gone after the authorities,” in reference to and his girlfriend. Clauzel said knew it was not a threat.
Ms. Nubia Goldstein
Re: City of Patterson – Investigation
July 21, 2026
13399899.1 PA057-013
character and not about specific employees. Clauzel admitted to raising his voice and cussing, but nothing intended by him to intimidate. “It was intended to make sure that they fully understood my position, right, and that I was passionate about resolving problems.” Clauzel does not remember the 2021 allegations of Clauzel yelling at and Regarding the 2024 / 2025 allegation about Clauzel pulling up on a motorcycle and being unhappy with the union, Clauzel said, “This is kind of like an asked and answered situation in the sense that it’s the same thing, ma’am. I continued to communicate with them that we need to resolve these issues.”
Clauzel said, “so there’s a lot of stuff. I make no excuses for my actions. I want to get that on the record. I messed up in many cases. I have corrected my behavior…I wizened up that I can’t trust these people at all as far as I can throw them. Because if their interests are threatened, they’re going to throw me under the bus.” “The problem is I’m interacting so much with these people. I’m having too many free-wheeling conversations with them, but there’s no malice intent. There’s none of that. It is just trying to resolve problems and I’m trying to get the crux of it so we can move on and get to building parks and doing other things that are important, right. And so, I am going to restrict myself from even talking to any of these people anymore.
That’s what the offer was, so that we can resolve the issue and move on. The employees can get notified. I’m just going to say hi and bye. How you doing? Stuff like that. But other than that, I am stepping back and it’s all going to go through the City Manager.” In response to being asked about the allegation that his document made the Council Members feel threatened, Clauzel said, “Of course.” Clauzel believes this is in reference to a line in his document that refers to him going to file a civil grand jury complaint “and we’re going to get to the bottom of this.” “What happened to Jessica, and myself, and a lot of the employees in this building once you talk to them is not right.” “And this Council is basically…digging up whatever they can find to throw dirt on me. And again, rightfully so, ma’am, I’m not trying to excuse my actions at all. Okay. I’m a cop. What’s done is done. What I did, I did. But believe me, I wasn’t trying to threaten or intimidate anybody.” “I’m a passionate guy…they probably felt that that line where I basically state…’I am going to get to the bottom of this and I’m going to prosecute those individuals that have falsely accused me because this is retaliatory.’ It is very clearly retaliatory. They know what they did. They know that there are very clear, what I believe, are very clear Brown Act violations that have occurred. There has been undue influence by having them present in staff meetings.” Clauzel referred to one City Council Member telling the City Manager to take two options off related to the ABS project and just have “approved” on the item. Clauzel said was made to feel extremely uncomfortable in this situation and voiced her concerns to Clauzel.
Clauzel said, “I know that once we go through this investigation…I’m going to have my own comeuppance with this because I shouldn’t be talking to employees…without questions.
That’s why I don’t do it anymore.”
Clauzel said, “I stopped communicating with any of those Council Members. So when I wrote down that statement, honestly, probably shouldn’t have done that. But again, you’ve seen
Ms. Nubia Goldstein
Re: City of Patterson – Investigation
July 21, 2026
13399899.1 PA057-013
Manager will report the concern to the full Council with potential action taken against the Councilmember as outlined in Chapter 7, “Ethics and Civility,” of this Handbook.
2. Chapter 7: Code of Ethics and Civility, pages 19, 22-26 Number 2: Comply with both the spirit and the letter of the Law and City Policy.
Members shall comply with the laws of the United States, the State of California, and the City of Patterson in the performance of their public duties. These laws include but are not limited to:
…the City’s Municipal Code…employer responsibilities…and City ordinances and policies.
Number 3: Conduct of Members. The professional and personal conduct of members must be above reproach and avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Members shall refrain from abusive conduct, personal charges or verbal attacks upon the character or motives of other members of the Council, boards and commission, the staff, or public.
Enforcement of Misconduct
When a City official violates this chapter, this Handbook, state or federal law, or any part of the Patterson Municipal Code, they are subject to disciplinary measures including, but not limited to admonishment, reprimand, or censure..(See attached pages 22-26 for specific process)
3. Chapter 8: Anti-Harassment Policy, pages 28 -30
Abusive Conduct: is also knows as “workplace bullying.” This conduct is conduct that a reasonable person would find hostile, offensive, and unrelated to an employer’s legitimate business interests. Abusive conduct may include: i. Repeated infliction of verbal abuse such as derogatory remarks, insults, or epithets; ii. Verbal or physical conduct that a reasonable person would find threatening, intimidating, or humiliating…
Retaliation: any adverse conduct taken against an individual by a City Official because the individual has reported harassment, or has participated in the Complaint Procedure described below, is prohibited. A. Adverse conduct: includes…real or implied threats of intimidating to prevent an individual from reporting harassment.
4. Chapter 9 – City Official – Interaction with Staff and Officials, pages 34-37
Council-Manager Form of Government. Patterson governs under a Council-City Manager form of government…The council has appointed a City Manager to implement this policy and undertake the administration of the organization. The Council is to work through the City Manager in dealing with City staff. Indeed, the P.M.C. requires Councilmembers to work through the City Manager unless simply requesting information from other staff members.
Ms. Nubia Goldstein
Re: City of Patterson – Investigation
July 21, 2026
13399899.1 PA057-013
The City Manager is appointed by the Council…to direct the daily operations of City government…The City Manager is responsible to the Council rather than to individual Councilmembers and directs and coordinates the various departments.
Council-Manager Relationship. Employment relationship between the Council and City Manager: this relationship honors the fact that the City manager is the chief executive officer of the City. The Council should avoid situations that can result in City staff being directed, intentionally or unintentionally, by one or more members of the Council…All dealings with the City Manager, whether in public or private, should respect the authority of the City Manager in administrative matters. Disagreements should be expressed in policy terms, rather than in terms that question satisfaction with or support of the City Manager.
Staff roles: …Staff is obligated to take guidance and direction only from the Council as a whole through the City Manager or from the appropriate management supervisors. Staff is directed to reject any attempts by individual members of the Council to unduly direct or otherwise pressure them into making, changing or otherwise influencing recommendations.
City staff will make every effort to respond in a timely and professional manner to all requests made by individual City Officials for information or assistance, provided that, in the judgement of the City manager, the request is not of a magnitude, either in terms of workload or policy, which would require that it would be more appropriately assigned to staff through the direction of full Council.
Access to Information and Communications Flow…City Officials must avoid intrusion into those areas that are the responsibility of the staff. Individual City Officials may not intervene in staff decision-making, the development of staff recommendations, scheduling of work, and executing department priorities without the prior knowledge and approval of the Council as a whole. This is necessary to protect staff from undue influence and pressure from individual City Officials, and to allow staff to execute priorities given by management and the Council without fear of reprisal.
Council Roes:…Individual members of Council should not make attempts to pressure or influence staff decisions, recommendations, workloads, schedules, and department priorities without the prior knowledge and approval of the Council as a whole… B. CITY OF PATTERSON MUNICIPAL CODE
Chapter 2.16.030, 040, and 050
The city manager shall be the administrative head of the city government under the direction and control of the council, except as otherwise provided in this chapter. He shall have the authority to appoint the city clerk. He shall have the authority over all other department heads and employees except the city treasurer and city attorney.
Ms. Nubia Goldstein
Re: City of Patterson – Investigation
July 21, 2026
13399899.1 PA057-013
The city council and its members shall deal with the administrative services of the city only through the city manager. The city manager shall take his orders and instructions from the city council as a body, and no individual councilman shall give any orders or instructions to the city manager or his subordinates…
…The city manager shall appoint and promote, discipline, suspend or dismiss all employees of the city except for the city attorney and the city treasurer. No department head shall be appointed or removed until the city manager shall have first reviewed such appointment or removal with the city council in executive session.
C. CITY OF PATTERSON PERSONNEL POLICIES MERIT SYSTEM
RULES & REGULATIONS
1. City of Patterson Code of Ethics, section 107, page 3, 6 The following value statement whether elected, appointed or employed, guides us, as officials and employees of the City of Patterson: “Ethical behavior is critical to this organizations ability to achieve Its mission, goals, and objectives. The community’s perception of and confidence in City employees and officials is fundamental to quality government. As public servant, we are accountable for high standards of conduct.” The uses of the term “employee” in this document is intended to apply to all employees and officials whether elected, appointed or employed.
Behavior in the Workplace. Employees are responsible for conducting themselves professionally and lawfully in the workplace. Employees are expected to be aware of and conduct themselves in accordance with the Administrative policies of the City of Patterson.
2. Causes for Disciplinary Action, Section 1002, page 35 Causes for disciplinary action against any employee may include, but shall not be limited to, the following: …Intemperance; Discourteous treatment of the public or other City staff; Violation of any of the Merit System Rules and Regulations…City’s Code of Ethics, State or Federal Law. Other failure of good behavior either during or outside of duty hours, which of such a nature, that causes discredit to the City.
V. FINDINGS, ANALYSIS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. FINDINGS
WHETHER MICHAEL CLAUZEL ENGAGED IN UNLAWFUL HARASSMENT,
DISCRIMINATION, OR RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF STATE OR FEDERAL LAW. NOT SUSTAINED.
Ms. Nubia Goldstein
Re: City of Patterson – Investigation
July 21, 2026
13399899.1 PA057-013
want you to stop a thing.’” There was no need for Clauzel to state let the process continue, and his stating so raising an air of his “allowing” it to continue.
In speaking about the Wine and Cheese event on May 23/24, 2026, Clauzel said, “And I even cleared up with that night. I told him I was totally out of pocket. I let him know straight up, right. My behavior’s unacceptable. At the end, it was not, I mean, it wasn’t great because again, I was acting like an idiot and I fully admit that to you, but we ended the conversation on an even keel and I left.” “And this Council is basically…digging up whatever they can find to throw dirt on me. And again, rightfully so, ma’am, I’m not trying to excuse my actions at all. Okay. I’m a cop. What’s done is done. What I did, I did. But believe me, I wasn’t trying to threaten or intimidate anybody.”
Clauzel either lacks self-awareness or is arrogant or both. He repeats that although he admits wrongdoing, he is not guilty of violating any laws because he had no intent. Clauzel either completely discounts or is unaware that his intent has no bearing on the receiver’s perceptions. In response to being told perceived the conversation as very intimidating and threatening to where he did not know if he should call law enforcement, Clauzel said that is not true “because I told him I’m not acting as Mayor, right. I’m acting as Mike. I’m calling you as Mike, because again, we have that tight relationship. So I find that very hard to believe based off the context of the conversation.” Separately, described Clauzel’s conduct as almost like “demanding friendship.” Clauzel’s continued belief, including during his interview, that there is no liability by simply stating he is not speaking as the Mayor and then discussing City business, is legally misplaced.
Clauzel has a linguist pattern of: emphatically admitting fault; then immediately providing a justification or mitigation for his conduct; then saying his behavior should not be that of a Mayor; then demanding acceptance of his proposed resolution and to move past his transgression, and the demand is consistent with the bully behavior. He leaves the receiver feeling that must agree or else. Clauzel essentially says – I am guilty; I had a reason; you need to accept it and my resolution – or as he said to Council, I will come after you, “So help me God.” Clauzel’s linguist pattern, lack of self-awareness, and bully behavior is evident in his document provided to the Council on May 19, 2026. Clauzel offers to resolve the issues by stating he will have no direct communications with employees, but then he threatens in bold stating, “If the investigation determines these allegations or the investigation itself is retaliatory or politically motivated, I will prosecute the individuals responsible. So help me God.” And in bold he also states, “…I will vigorously, publicly, and relentlessly defend myself.” Whether Clauzel intended it or not, a reasonable interpretation of his communication is he is trying to pressure Council to not follow through on an investigation mandated not just by City policy but law. This is bully behavior. Clauzel compared his 2024 document to the Sherriff with his May 2026 document to Council. Clauzel said it is a similar document to what he shared with Council, “A resolution to the problem at hand, right. And so instead of allowing this problem to go on, I always decide, look, I acted like an idiot, no problem. I’m just going to admit to it and I’m going to provide a resolution and that’ll be that. We can bury this and we can
Ms. Nubia Goldstein
Re: City of Patterson – Investigation
July 21, 2026
13399899.1 PA057-013
City of Patterson Personnel Polices Merit System Rules and Regulations, Code of Ethics, Section 107
City of Patterson Personnel Polices Merit System Rules and Regulations, Code of Ethics, Section 1002
4. Michael Clauzel violated City policies and code by becoming directly involved in City operations and bypassing the City organizational structure.4
Based again on Clauzel’s own admissions, he has had and continued even after indicating he would cease, having direct communications with employees and involvement in operational matters, bypassing the required administrative structure. His repeatedly saying he spoke as a friend and “Mike” and not as the Mayor and then discussed City business and operations does not remedy the violation of City policies and code.
The example here is said, “It was almost as if the Mayor was running the City. Everything was coming from his shop.” But the problem seems to be bigger with staff also reaching out back to Council. said he reached out to the Mayor about another job offer he had, and when the Mayor told him not to take the job, said he ended up not taking the job because Clauzel told him not to take it.
Clauzel told “I got you hired…I got you the job, you work for me,” and “I’m the boss out here.” Clauzel told “They work for us. They do whatever the fuck we tell them to.” The plausible reaction to this is that the Mayor is seeking a quid pro quo in a transactional exchange.
Clauzel knows better and has known the required process for a while. At least going back to November of 2024 when he sent a written offer of resolution to Sheriff Dirkse, which says, “I make no excuses and assume full responsibility for my actions the night of Thursday, October 31st.” Clauzel committed in 2024 that he would not communicate with any member of Stanislaus County Law enforcement, and all communications between City employees and City Council with Stanislaus County Sheriff’s office would go through the City Manager or Assistant City Manager. Despite being aware of this issue, Clauzel repeated his direct interactions in operational matters after this written commitment. Up to April 28, 2026, when Clauzel reached out directly to to set up a meeting to discuss union issues, Clauzel continued the direct contacts.
Based upon the above, Clauzel has violated:
4 Allegations came up of other Council Members involving themselves in operational/personnel matters, which is outside the scope of this investigation; however, Council may want to consider this in following up on this sustained allegation against Clauzel.
Ms. Nubia Goldstein
Re: City of Patterson – Investigation
July 21, 2026
13399899.1 PA057-013
City of Patterson City Official Handbook, Chapter 9, City Official Interaction with Staff and Officials
City of Patterson, Municipal Code, Chapter 2.16.030
City of Patterson, Municipal Code, Chapter 2.16.040
City of Patterson, Municipal Code, Chapter 2.16.050
City of Patterson Personnel Polices Merit System Rules and Regulations, Code of Ethics, Section 1002
C. RECOMMENDATIONS
Since the allegations are sustained above, the City Official Handbook, Chapter 7 states that the City Official is subject to disciplinary measures, including but not limited to admonishment, reprimand, or censure, and sets for the process for going about such discipline. It is recommended that the Council follow that process.
The City should also advise the complainants that the investigation is complete and that the City is following up as it deems appropriate based on the investigation findings.
Council should also consider that although outside the scope of the investigation, witnesses identified by Clauzel noted that Council Members other than Clauzel involved themselves in personnel and/or operational matters. Council should consider either an open session or closed session training on the City policies and Code requirements for them staying out of personnel and operational issues and liability they can create for both the City and themselves individually when individually going outside their legislative lane.
CONCLUSION
Thank you for allowing us to assist the City. We appreciate the opportunity. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE
Shelline K. Bennett
SKB:mf
Enclosures
cc: Lakisha Callum
Ms. Nubia Goldstein
Re: City of Patterson – Investigation
July 21, 2026
13399899.1 PA057-013
bcc: BCCNameList