Agenda packet — Sonora City Council, March 2, 2026

CITY OF SONORA
City Council Regular Meeting
Agenda
Monday, March 02, 2026
5:00 PM
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Sonora City Council will have their regular meeting on March 2, 2026, at 5:00 PM in the City of Sonora Council Chambers located at 94 N. Washington Street Sonora, CA 95370.

This meeting is physically open to the Public and citizens who wish to provide public comment during the meeting will be invited to do so by the Mayor.

Written comments can be submitted to be included as part of the administrative record; they will not be read during the meeting. All comments must be received by 3:00 pm on the day of the noticed meeting and can be submitted to the City Clerk at 94 N. Washington Street Sonora, CA 95370, or via email to [email protected].

Public Access Audio and Video Live Streaming
The Public will not have access to give public comments via public access audio and video live streaming; they are available for audio and visual only; and can be accessed via our website at www.sonoraca.com.

Remote viewing of the meeting via live streaming is provided to members of the public as a courtesy. If the live streaming connection malfunctions for any reason and no Council Members are attending via teleconference, the City Council will continue the public meeting in Chambers without remote access.

CITY COUNCIL appreciates your interest and encourages participation. Regularly scheduled meetings are held on the 1st and 3rd Monday of each month.

The numerical order of the items on this agenda is for convenience of reference. Items may be taken out of order upon request of the Mayor or Council Members. All questions shall be directed to the Mayor who, at their discretion, will refer to Staff.
___________________________________________________________________________________________ Mayor Ann Segerstrom
Vice Mayor Andy Merrill
Council Members Bess Levine, Stephen Opie, Mark Plummer City Administrator Christopher Gorsky
City Attorney Douglas White
___________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 Mission Statement: To foster a safe, vibrant, and prosperous community that enhances the quality of life for all
Vision Statement: With leadership and integrity, the City of Sonora commits to excellent service through collaboration and innovation
CLOSED SESSION - 4:00 PM

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. PUBLIC COMMENTS

4. ADJOURN INTO CLOSED SESSION
A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation, Initiation of Litigation Pursuant to Gov. Code, 54956.9(d): (1 case); Chris Gorsky, City Administrator, Tyler Summersett, Community Development Director.

5. RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION
OPEN SESSION - 5:00 PM

6. REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION

7. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

8. ROLL CALL

9. CITY CLERK’S REPORT ON AGENDA POSTING

10. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

11. PUBLIC COMMENT (NON-AGENDA ITEMS)
The public may address the Council on any item of public interest not otherwise on the agenda that is within the jurisdiction of the City. No action may be taken. Matters to be addressed may be referred to City Staff or placed on a subsequent meeting Agenda. Speakers are limited to a three (3) minute presentation.

12. CONSENT CALENDAR
Items on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and will be voted on in one motion unless a Council member or member of the public has a question or wishes to discuss an item. In that case, the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered separately.

A. Consider Approval of the Meeting Minutes from February 2, 2026, and February 17, 20206; Stacy EnosDel Razo, Deputy City Clerk. 2 Mission Statement: To foster a safe, vibrant, and prosperous community that enhances the quality of life for all
Vision Statement: With leadership and integrity, the City of Sonora commits to excellent service through collaboration and innovation

13. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Waive First Reading by Title only, and Introduce Ordinance No. 908, Rezoning Assessor Parcel Number (APN: 044-430-055) to the Regional Housing Needs Overlay Zone and add Chapter 17.21 Entitled Regional Housing Needs Overlay (RHNO) Zone to Title 17 of the City of Sonora Municipal Code; and Consider Re-Approving Program 3.1 of the Adopted 2024-2029 City of Sonora Housing Element, Including Adoption of an Initial Study/Negative Declaration as the Appropriate Level of Environmental Review in Accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines; Tyler Summersett, Community Development Director.

B. Conduct a Public Hearing to Receive Public Comment Regarding Possible Application for State of California Community Development Block Grant (CDBG); and Consider Adopting Resolution 03-02-2026-A Supporting a City Application to the Community Development Block Grant Program in the Amount of $995,000 to Rehabilitate the Structure at 290 S. Stewart Street; Tyler Summersett, Community Development Director.

14. NEW BUSINESS
A. Accept the Fiscal Year 25/26 Mid-Year Budget Update and Approve the Recommended Budget Adjustments; Chris Gorsky, City Administrator
B. Consider Acceptance of $59,107 in Grant Funding from the Sonora Area Foundation to Complete Playground Re-Surfacing at Woods Creek Park; Tyler Summersett, Community Development Director.

15. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS

16. ADJOURNMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at City Hall (209) 532-4541, [email protected]. 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).

Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the City Administrator’s Office at 94 N. Washington Street, Sonora, CA 95370 during normal business hours (8:00 am - 4:00 pm, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays). The agenda and supporting public documents are also available on our City website www.sonoraca.com listed under the agenda/minutes link on the Government page.
3 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

C I T Y H A L L
CITY OF SONORA 94 N. WASHINGTON STREET, SONORA, CA 95370 P: (209) 532-4541

SERVICE, INNOVATION, INTEGRITY, COLLABORATION, RESPECT, LEADERSHIP DATE: March 2, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Stacy Enos-Del Razo, Deputy City Clerk
SUBJECT: Meeting Minutes from February 2, 2026, and February 17, 20206.

RECOMMENDATION:

Consider Approval of the Meeting Minutes from February 2, 2026, and February 17, 20206.

BACKGROUND:

Staff Recommends the City Council Approve the Meeting Minutes from February 2, 2026, and February 17, 20206.

FISCAL IMPACT:

No Fiscal impact to the General Fund.

ATTACHMENTS:

Meeting Minutes from February 2, 2026, and February 17, 20206.

CORE COUNCIL PRIORITIES:

CITY OF SONORA
City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes
Monday, February 02, 2026
5:00 PM
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Sonora City Council will have their regular meeting on February 2, 2026, at 5:00 PM in the City of Sonora Council Chambers located at 94 N. Washington Street Sonora, CA 95370.

This meeting is physically open to the Public and citizens who wish to provide public comment during the meeting will be invited to do so by the Mayor.

CITY COUNCIL appreciates your interest and encourages participation. Regularly scheduled meetings are held on the 1st and 3rd Monday of each month.

CALL TO ORDER
Called to order at 4:00 pm.

ROLL CALL

PRESENT
Mayor Ann Segerstrom
Vice Mayor Andy Merrill
Councilmember Bess Levine
Councilmember Stephen Opie
Councilmember Mark Plummer

PUBLIC COMMENTS
No public comment.

ADJOURN INTO CLOSED SESSION

1. Conference with Legal Counsel—Consideration of Initiation of Litigation (Government Code section 54956.9(d)(4)) (one matter); Douglas White, City Attorney, Chris Gorsky, City Administrator, Tyler Summersett, Community Development Director.

RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION
OPEN SESSION - 5:00 PM

REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Ann Segerstrom stated direction was given to staff.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Councilmember Mark Plummer led the Pledge of Allegiance. 6 Item A.

ROLL CALL

PRESENT
Mayor Ann Segerstrom
Vice Mayor Andy Merrill
Councilmember Bess Levine
Councilmember Stephen Opie
Councilmember Mark Plummer
CITY CLERK’S REPORT ON AGENDA POSTING
The Agenda was posted on Thursday, January 29, 2026, at 10:49 am.

APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Motion made by Vice Mayor Andy Merrill, Seconded by Councilmember Mark Plummer. Voting Yea: Mayor Ann Segerstrom, Vice Mayor Andy Merrill, Councilmember Bess Levine, Councilmember Stephen Opie, Councilmember Mark Plummer

PUBLIC COMMENT (NON-AGENDA ITEMS)
The public may address the Council on any item of public interest not otherwise on the agenda that is within the jurisdiction of the City. No action may be taken. Matters to be addressed may be referred to City Staff or placed on a subsequent meeting Agenda. Speakers are limited to a three (3) minute presentation.

Nathan Alonzo PG&E Local Government Affairs Representative addressed the Council on rates Caleb Brock Cal Trans Deputy District 10 Director Planning, Local Assistance and Environmental addressed the Council on the upgrades to the crosswalk near the Fairgrounds.

A member of the public addressed the Council on the Tobacco Coalition for Tuolumne County.

PRESENTATIONS

2. Receive an Update from Tuolumne County District 1 Supervisor Mike Holland; Chris Gorsky, City Administrator.

Mike Holland Tuolumne County District 1 Supervisor informed those in attendance of two possible new businesses; the County has decided to extended parking for RV's and trailers at Camp Justice for the next 60 days; Ambulance Service is still being worked on; and shared an idea for Christmas Town Sonora.

Councilmembers made comments.
7 Item A.

3. Recognize the Actions of Lieutenant Jennifer Hannula and Officer Rodolfo Figueroa with a Sonora Police Department Lifesaving Award; Turu VanderWiel, Police Chief.

Turu VanderWiel Police Chief read a statement and recognized Lieutenant Jennifer Hannula with the Department Lifesaving Award. Ashley Brandow assisted in presenting the awards.

Turu VanderWiel Police Chief read a statement and recognized Officer Rodolfo Figueroa with the Department Lifesaving Award. Ashley Brandow assisted in presenting the awards.

Mayor Ann Segerstrom made comments.

4. Receive Introduction and Swearing-in of Police Dispatcher-Records Specialist, Raelene Carter; Turu VanderWiel, Police Chief.

Turu VanderWiel Police Chief read a statement on Dispatcher-Records Specialist Raelene Carter.

Turu VanderWiel Police Chief officiated the Ceremonial Swearing-In of Dispatcher-Records Specialist Raelene Carter.

The Council congratulated and thanked Dispatcher-Records Specialist Raelene Carter.

5. Receive Introduction and Swearing in of Police Corporal Rodolfo Figueroa; Turu VanderWiel, Police Chief.

Turu VanderWiel Police Chief read a statement on Officer Figueroa.

The Figueroa Family was invited to come up and assist with the tradition of pinning the Corporal Badge.

Turu VanderWiel Police Chief officiated the Ceremonial Swearing-In of Corporal Rodolfo Figueroa.

The Council congratulated and thanked Corporal Rodolfo Figueroa.

CONSENT CALENDAR
Items on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and will be voted on in one motion unless a Council member or member of the public has a question or wishes to discuss an item. In that case, the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered separately.

6. Consider Approval of the Meeting Minutes from December 15, 2025, and January 5, 2026; Stacy Enos-Del Razo, Deputy City Clerk.

7. Consider Acceptance of the Administrative Services Department Report for the 2nd Quarter of FY25/26; Chris Gorsky, City Administrator.
8 Item A.

8. Consider Acceptance of the Quarterly Investment Report for the Second Quarter of Fiscal Year 2025/26, for the period ended December 31, 2025; Chris Gorsky, City Administrator.

No public comment.

Motion made by Councilmember Mark Plummer, Seconded by Councilmember Levine. Voting Yea:

Mayor Ann Segerstrom, Vice Mayor Andy Merrill, Councilmember Bess Levine, Councilmember Stephen Opie, Councilmember Mark Plummer

COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS
Councilmember Stephen Opie attended IRWM (Integrated Regional Water Management).

Councilmember Bess Levine had nothing to report.

Vice Mayor Andy Merrill had nothing to report.

Councilmember Mark Plummer attended Cable 8-Access Tuolumne; and TCTC (Tuolumne County Transportation Council).

Mayor Ann Segerstrom reminded everyone property taxes are due; prepared a quote for the Blue Zones presentation final event with the help of Tyler; encountered the surveyors at the Lyons and Shepherd parking lot; participated in the Tobacco Pick Up; and reminded those in attendance of the Special Olympics Polar Plunge.

ADJOURNMENT
Adjourned at 5:38 pm.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at City Hall (209) 532-4541, [email protected]. 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).

CITY OF SONORA
City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes
Tuesday, February 17, 2026
5:00 PM
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Sonora City Council will have their regular meeting on February 17, 2026, at 5:00 PM in the City of Sonora Council Chambers located at 94 N. Washington Street Sonora, CA 95370.

This meeting is physically open to the Public and citizens who wish to provide public comment during the meeting will be invited to do so by the Mayor.

CITY COUNCIL appreciates your interest and encourages participation. Regularly scheduled meetings are held on the 1st and 3rd Monday of each month.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Councilmember Mark Plummer led the Pledge of Allegiance.

ROLL CALL

No public comment.

PRESENTATIONS

1. Receive an Introduction and Swearing in of Fire Engineer Hayden Fleming; Brittan Gregory, Fire Chief.

Brittan Gregory Fire Chief gave a brief background on Hayden Fleming and invited his girlfriend, Shelby to assist with the tradition of pinning the Fire Engineer Badge.

Brittan Gregory Fire Chief officiated the Ceremonial Swearing in of Hayden Fleming.

Hayden Fleming Fire Engineer thanked his family, Chief, co-workers, and City. 11 Item A.

2. Receive a Presentation on Visit Tuolumne County’s Quarterly Report; Lisa Mayo, Visit Tuolumne County President & CEO, Jen Lopez, Visit Tuolumne County Marketing Manager, and Amariah Richards, Visit Tuolumne County Business Development Manager.

Jen Lopez Visit Tuolumne County Marketing Manager presented the Quarterly Report including NBC/Universal Bay Area Commercial and California Live; Print and Social Ads; Paid Media Digital Billboards; Web Views; Special Seasonal Campaign; So Beautiful; Public Relations and Media Coverage.

Amariah Richards Visit Tuolumne County Business Development Manager presented New and Around the Bend; and International Trends and Looking Ahead.

Jen Lopez Visit Tuolumne County Marketing Manager informed those in attendance the February Marketing meeting will now be on Zoom.

Councilmembers asked questions and made comments.

3. Consider Approval of the Meeting Minutes from January 20, 2026; Stacy Enos-Del Razo, Deputy City Clerk.

4. Consider Acceptance of an Informational Report for January 2026 Accounts Payable Payment Register and Void Report; Chris Gorsky, City Administrator

5. Consider Acceptance of Disbursements in the Amount of $200,746.69 and $208,580.27 for Payroll, Including Employee Salaries, Employer and Employee Taxes, Retirement Contributions, Miscellaneous Voluntary Employee Deductions, Holiday Pay, and Other Adjustments, Including Retro-Pay; Tracy Skelly, Administrative Services Officer.

6. Consider Adoption of Resolution No. 02-17-2026-B Approving a Side Letter to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Sonora Fire Fighters Association (SFFA) to Comply with California Code of Regulations (CCR) Sections 571 and 571.1, and Resolution No. 02-17-2026-C Approving the Updated Salary Range Table for the Group Reflecting Accurate Reporting of Compensation to CalPERS; Tracy Skelly, Administrative Services Officer, Chris Gorsky, City Administrator. 12 Item A.

7. Consider Adoption of Resolution No. 02-17-2026-D Approving the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and Updated Salary Range Table for the Sonora Fire Fighters’ Association (SFFA) for FY2025-2028 and Authorize the Mayor to Sign the Agreement; Tracy Skelly, Administrative Services Officer, Chris Gorsky, City Administrator.

8. Consider Adoption of Resolution No. 02-17-2026-E Approving the Updated Salary Range Tables for Sonora Part-Time/Relief/Unrepresented Employees to Ensure Compliance with California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) Regulations; Tracy Skelly, Administrative Services Officer, Chris Gorsky, City Administrator.

Councilmembers made comments.

Mayor Ann Segerstrom had a question on the Side Letter.

Chris Gorsky City Administrator responded to the question.

Motion made by Councilmember Mark Plummer, Seconded by Vice Mayor Andy Merrill. Voting Yea:

Mayor Ann Segerstrom, Vice Mayor Andy Merrill, Councilmember Bess Levine, Councilmember Stephen Opie, Councilmember Mark Plummer

PUBLIC HEARINGS

9. Conduct a Public Hearing to Receive Public Comment Regarding the Accomplishments Under State Administered Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program 22-CDBG-00009; Tyler Summersett, Community Development Director.

Tyler Summersett Community Development Director conducted a public hearing regarding the accomplishments under state administrated Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program 22- CDBG-00009.

No public comment.

No Action Required.

Mayor Ann Segerstrom closed the public hearing.

NEW BUSINESS

10. Adopt Resolution No. 02-17-2026-A Designating Authorized Agents to Execute and File Applications for Disaster Assistance and Grants on Behalf of the City of Sonora through the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES); Brittan Gregory, Fire Chief. 13 Item A.

Mission Statement: To foster a safe, vibrant, and prosperous community that enhances the quality of life for all
Vision Statement: With leadership and integrity, the City of Sonora commits to excellent service through collaboration and innovation
Brittan Gregory Fire Chief gave a background on the Resolution designating authorized agents to execute and file applications for disaster assistance and grants on behalf of the City through the Governor's Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES).

No public comment.

Motion made by Councilmember Mark Plummer, Seconded by Councilmember Stephen Opie. Voting Yea: Mayor Ann Segerstrom, Vice Mayor Andy Merrill, Councilmember Bess Levine, Councilmember Stephen Opie, Councilmember Mark Plummer

COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS
Councilmember Stephen Opie attended YES Council.

Councilmember Bess Levine had nothing to report.

Vice Mayor Andy Merrill attended TCTC meeting (Tuolumne Transportation Council); and ATCAA meeting (Amador Tuolumne County Community Action Agency).

Councilmember Mark Plummer attended the TCTC Ad Hoc Committee meeting; and the Questa Heights development meeting.

Mayor Ann Segerstrom discussed the TCTC Ad Hoc Committee meeting; and the Questa Heights development meeting.

ADJOURNMENT
Adjourned at 5:44 pm.

35.102-35.104 ADA Title II).

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

C I T Y H A L L
CITY OF SONORA 94 N. WASHINGTON STREET, SONORA, CA 95370 P: (209) 532-4541

SERVICE, INNOVATION, INTEGRITY, COLLABORATION, RESPECT, LEADERSHIP DATE: March 2, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Tyler Summersett, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Waive First Reading by Title Only, and Introduce Ordinance No. 908, Rezoning Assessor Parcel Number (APN: 044-430-055) to the Regional Housing Needs Overlay Zone and add Chapter 17.21 Entitled Regional Housing Needs Overlay (RHNO) to Title 17 of the City of Sonora Municipal Code and Consider Re-Approving Program 3.1 of the Adopted 2024-2029 City of Sonora Housing Element.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Waive First Reading by Title only, and Introduce Ordinance No. 908, Rezoning Assessor Parcel Number (APN:
044-430-055) to the Regional Housing Needs Overlay Zone and add Chapter 17.21 Entitled Regional Housing Needs Overlay (RHNO) Zone to Title 17 of the City of Sonora Municipal Code.

2. Consider Re-Approving Program 3.1 of the Adopted 2024-2029 City of Sonora Housing Element, Including Adoption of an Initial Study/Negative Declaration as the Appropriate Level of Environmental Review in Accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines.

BACKGROUND:

The Planning Commission considered the Regional Housing Needs Overlay Zone at its February 9, 2026, Special Planning Commission meeting (Attachment A – Planning Commission Staff Report dated February 9, 2026). After receiving public comment, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended that the City Council approve Ordinance 908, as presented.

Since adoption of the 2024-2029 Housing Element, staff have been working with Mr. Lemke and the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on a revised Regional Housing Needs Overlay Zone language that addresses both Mr. Lemke’s concerns and HCD’s statutory requirements.

The Regional Housing Needs Assessment Overlay Zone is an HCD requirement for HCD Certification of the City’s 2024-2029 Housing Element (See HCD’s June 9, 2025, correspondence in Attachment C). HCD Certification is necessary to ensure compliance with Housing Element law (Article 10.6) of the Government Code.

DISCUSSION / ANALYSIS:

It should be noted that the City is not rezoning to meet the RHNA and no rezoning to residential use is necessary.

However, as noted in Housing Element Program 3.1 and consistent with HCD’s correspondence dated June 9, 2025, 15 Item A.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

C I T Y H A L L
CITY OF SONORA 94 N. WASHINGTON STREET, SONORA, CA 95370 P: (209) 532-4541

SERVICE, INNOVATION, INTEGRITY, COLLABORATION, RESPECT, LEADERSHIP the 5th and 6th Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) candidate site(s) (Lemke) are to be rezoned to accommodate by-right housing pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2 (c). Specifically, Program 3,1 requires the City to amend the City’s Municipal Code by adding Chapter 17.21 entitled Regional Housing Needs Assessment Overlay Zone (RHNAOZ) to Title 17 of the City of Sonora Municipal Code. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment Overlay Zone (RHNAOZ) applies solely to the Lemke Property (APN: 044-430-055). The rezone to the Regional Housing Needs Assessment Overlay Zone does not authorize land uses not otherwise permitted currently in the R3 Zone, it merely provides full disclosure via zoning that a bi-right process is afforded a developer should 20 percent of the units be reserved for lower income households (50 to 80 AMI)($81,300 for a family of four).

Accordingly, the Lemke Property will remain in the R3 Zone with an RHNA Overlay Zone (Attachment B – Ordinance No. 908 Regional Housing Needs Overlay Zone).

CEQA DETERMINATION:

An Initial Study and Negative Declaration (IS/ND) was prepared for the 2024-2029 Housing Element Project as the appropriate level of environmental review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines (Attachment D – Initial Study and Negative Declaration).

FISCAL IMPACT:

Preparation of the 2024-2029 Housing Element Program 3.1 and Ordinance has been prepared in coordination with CSG and City staff. The cost for this work has been allocated within the adopted 24-25 budget.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A – Planning Commission Staff Report dated February 9, 2026 Attachment B -- Ordinance No. 908
Attachment C – HCD Correspondence dated June 9, 2025
Attachment D – Initial Study and Negative Declaration
CORE COUNCIL PRIORITIES:

Fiscal Responsibility and Stability, Economic Development/Growth and General Plan 16 Item A.
17 Item A.
18 Item A.
19 Item A.
20 Item A.
21 Item A.

THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF SONORA
ORDINANCE NO. 908
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SONORA ADDING CHAPTER 17.21 ENTITLED REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS OVERLAY ZONE TO TITLE 17 OF THE CITY OF SONORA MUNICIPAL CODE.

WHEREAS, State Housing Element Law (Government Code Sections 65580 et. seq.) requires that the City of Sonora adopt a Housing Element for a five-year period 2024-2029 to accommodate the City of Sonora’s regional housing need allocation (RHNA) of 2 units, comprised of one low and one very low-income units; and WHEREAS, to comply with State Housing Element Law, the City has prepared the 7 th
Cycle 2024-2029 Housing Element in compliance with State Housing Element Law and has identified sites that can accommodate housing units meeting the City’s RHNA; and, WHEREAS, on August 25, 2025, the Planning Commission conducted a duly and properly noticed public hearing regarding the proposed Housing Element, reviewed the Housing Element and all pertinent maps, documents, and exhibits, including HCD’s Certification Findings as outlined in corresponded dated June 9, 2025, the staff report, and all attachments, and oral and written public comments and recommended approval of the Housing Element to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on October 20, 2025, the City Council adopted the City’s Sixth Cycle Housing Element 2024-2029 for the five-year period in compliance with State law; and WHEREAS, the adopted Housing Element includes Section 3.6, which contains objectives and policies the City will implement to address a number of important housing related issues. Section 3.6 also contains quantified objectives for housing construction, rehabilitation, and the preservation of affordable housing; and WHEREAS, Program 3.1 – Update No Net Loss Inventory as necessary to maintain adequate RHNA sites. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2, the City commits to amending the zoning ordinance to require by-right approval of any “reuse” 5th and 6 th Cycle
sites being used to meet the 7th Cycle RHNA at appropriate densities to accommodate lowerincome households, if 20 percent of the units in the development are affordable to lower income households by June 30, 2025; and
WHEREAS, to comply with Government Code Section 65583.2, the City is establishing by Ordinance the Regional Housing Needs Overlay Zone (RHNO) covering those 5th and 6th cycle reused sites to allow development by-right when 20% or more of the residential units are affordable to lower income households; and
22 Item A.

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a properly noticed public hearing on Febraury 9, 2026 carefully considered all of the information presented to it, including the staff report and information submitted at the public hearing by interested persons, and recommended the City Council adopt an ordinance establishing the RHNO zone; and WHEREAS, based upon the Initial Study and proposed Negative Declaration prepared for the 2024-2029 Housing Element and incorporated by reference herein, there are no substantial changes proposed by the Project or under the circumstances in which the RHNO zone would be undertaken that would require major revisions to the City of Sonora Housing Element Initial Study. The proposed overlay does not require preparation of a new subsequent or supplemental EIR due to either 1) the involvement of new significant environmental effects; 2) a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects, or 3) new information of substantial importance. No mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible; and  NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF SONORA CITY COUNCIL DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY. The purpose of this ordinance is to amend Title 17, Zoning by adding Chapter 17.21 of the Sonora Municipal Code.

SECTION 2. FINDINGS:

1. That the Initial Study and Negative Declaration prepared for the 2024-2029 Housing Element includes the environmental ramifications of the text amendments to the City of Sonora Zoning Code.

2. That the proposed amendments are in general conformance with the City of Sonora General Plan, including the 2024-2029 Housing Element.

3. That the public necessity, convenience and general welfare require the adoption of the proposed amendments, in that, the proposed zoning ordinance amendments are necessary for the City to comply with State Housing Element law.

SECTION 3. AMENDMENT. Chapter 17.21. Regional Housing Needs Overlay Zone shall be added to Title 17, Zoning, of the City of Sonora Municipal Code as follows:
23 Item A.

EXHIBIT A
Chapter 17.21
Regional Housing Needs Overlay Zone
Sections:

17.21.010 Purpose and Intent

17.21.020 Applicability

17.21.030 By-Right Development

17.21.010 Purpose and Intent
The Regional Housing Needs Overlay Zone is intended to facilitate the development of affordable housing while promoting infill development on sites previously identified on housing inventories in the City’s Fifth and Sixth Housing Element Cycles. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment Overlay Zone does not mandate any affordability requirements for properties with the RHNOZ designation. Further, only those projects that have 20% of the total number of units deed restricted for low-and very-low-income units are eligible for by-right development in the Overlay Zone District.

The Regional Housing Needs Overlay Zone does not alter, revise or otherwise change the type or intensity of allowed uses or standards of the underlying zoning designation. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment Overlay Zone merely provides full disclosure that a by-right process is afforded a developer should 20% of the total number of units be deed restricted for low-and very-lowincome units.

17.21.020 Applicability
The Regional Housing Needs Assessment Overlay Zone District is applicable to the site identified in the table below. This site is the reused sites in the 5th and 6th Housing Element Cycles. This site is also identified in Table 3-27: Available Vacant Sites for Residential Development of the 7 th Cycle
Housing Element in the Site Inventory List.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment Overlay Zone Sites
Site
Name APN
Existing
Zoning/General
Plan
Approx.

Acreage
Maximum
Density
Unit
Potential Affordability
Lemke 044-430-055 R3/HDR 16* 21.75
du/acre
106 Low/Very
Low
*Based on the site constraints and the topography of the area, the portion of this parcel that falls within the range of 0-15% slope would be developable at 9.19 acres.

A. The Overlay Zoning District provides optional incentives and streamlining for qualifying affordable housing projects. Development proposals that do not utilize the overlay, including market-rate residential projects, may proceed under existing General Plan, zoning standards, and applicable Sonora Municipal Code provisions without penalty or adverse evaluation.

B. The Overlay Zoning District provides optional incentives and streamlining for qualifying affordable housing projects. Nothing in this section shall be constructed to 24 Item A.
require the development of affordable housing. Projects that propose market-rate housing or otherwise do not utilize the streamlining provisions of the Overlay Zoning District, shall be processed under the applicable base zoning regulations and shall not be subject to penalty, adverse treatment, or additional discretionary review solely on that basis.

C. The City, shall be solely responsible for identifying other sites that can accommodate housing units meeting all City’s RHNA.

D. This Ordinance and Overlay Zone shall terminate when the current State Housing Element law (Government Code Section 65583.2 et. seq.) sunsets, as applicable.

17.21.030 By-Right DevelopmentAlthough not an affordability requirement of the property(s) listed in the above table, the City shall implement by-right development for the sites identified in Section 17.21.020 when a developer builds a project with at least 20% affordable units deed restricted for low-income households. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2 (c), byright development means the following are not required for development:

1. Conditional Use Permit;

2. Planned Unit Development;

3. Design Review other than Objective Development Design Standards; or

4. Other discretionary, review or approval that would constitute a “project” as defined in Section 2100 et. seq. of the Public Resources Code (California Environmental Quality Act “CEQA” SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.

SECTION 3. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its final passage and adoption, provided it is published in a newspaper of general circulation at least within fifteen (15) days after its passage or a summary of the Ordinance is published in a newspaper of general circulation at least five (5) days prior to adoption and again at least within fifteen (15) days after its passage.

SECTION 4. CERTIFICATION OF COUNCIL ADOPTION AND APPROVAL. This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on INSERT DATE, 2026, and passed and adopted as Ordinance No. 908 at a regular meeting of the City Council held on INSERT DATE, 2026 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT OR ABSTAIN:
25 Item A.
____________________________________
Ann Segerstrom, Mayor
ATTEST: ____________________________________
Tracy Skelly, Deputy City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
__________________________________
Douglas L. White, City Attorney
Publish: The Union Democrat, Sonora
____________________, 2026
26 Item A.

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
June 9, 2025
Tyler Summersett, Director
Community Development Department
City of Sonora
94 North Washington Street
Sonora, CA 95370
Dear Tyler Summersett:

RE: City of Sonora’s 7th Cycle (2024-2029) Revised Draft Housing Element Thank you for submitting the City of Sonora’s (City) revised draft housing element received for review on June 5, 2025. Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is reporting the results of its review.

The revised draft element meets the statutory requirements that were described in HCD’s March 10, 2025 review. This finding, among other items, is based on completion of Program 3.1 (Adequate Sites), to make prior identified sites available, by June 30, 2025 (see below for more information). 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.

For your information, pursuant to Assembly Bill 1398 (Chapter 358, Statutes of 2021), as the City did not adopt a compliant housing element within 120 days of the statutory deadline (June 30, 2024), Program 3.1 (Adequate Sites), to make prior identifies sites available, must be completed no later than one year from the statutory deadline pursuant to Government Code sections 65583, subdivision (c) and 65583.2, subdivision (c). Please be aware, if the City does not complete rezoning (Program 3.1 – Adequate Sites) by June 30, 2025, the element cannot be found in substantial compliance until rezones are completed.

As a reminder, the City’s 7th cycle housing element was due June 30, 2024. As of today, the City has not completed the housing element process for the 6th cycle. The City’s 6th cycle housing element no longer satisfies statutory requirements. HCD encourages the City to adopt and submit to HCD to regain housing element compliance. 27 Item A.

Tyler Summersett, Director

Page 2 ends

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 should continue to engage the community, including organizations that represent lower-income and special needs households, by making information regularly available and considering and incorporating comments where 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].

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 of the housing element update team during the update and review. HCD looks forward to receiving the City’s adopted housing element and welcomes the opportunity to provide technical assistance during the rezoning process. 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
28 Item A.

DRAFT
Prepared by:

CSG CONSULTANTS
3707 W. Garden Grove Boulevard,
Suite 100
Orange, California 92868
Contact: Glenn Lajoie, AICP
JULY 2025
Prepared for:

City of Sonora
94 Washington Street
Sonora, California 95370
Contact: Tyler Summersett
2024-2029 Housing Element Update
and Safety Element Update
Initial Study/Negative Declaration
29 Item A.

This was printed on 30% recycled material.
30 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS iii
Table of Contents

SECTION PAGE
Acronyms and Abbreviations.........................................................................................................v 1 Introduction and Purpose.......................................................................................................1

1.1 Project Overview ................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Statutory Authority Requirements .......................................................................................... 1

1.3 Purpose of the Initial Study .................................................................................................... 1

1.4 California Environmental Quality Act Compliance .................................................................. 2

1.5 California Environmental Quality Act Review and Comment.................................................... 2

1.6 Organization of the Initial Study.............................................................................................. 2 2 Project Description................................................................................................................3

2.1 Project Location and Setting .................................................................................................. 5

2.2 Project Background ............................................................................................................... 5

2.3 Project Characteristics.......................................................................................................... 8

2.4 Project Construction and Phasing ........................................................................................ 14

2.5 Project Approvals ................................................................................................................ 14 3 Environmental Checklist...................................................................................................... 15

3.1 Aesthetics........................................................................................................................... 18

3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources...................................................................................... 21

3.3 Air Quality ........................................................................................................................... 23

3.4 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................... 25

3.5 Cultural Resources.............................................................................................................. 28

3.6 Energy................................................................................................................................. 29

3.7 Geology and Soils................................................................................................................ 30

3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions................................................................................................. 34

3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials........................................................................................ 35

3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................... 39

3.11 Land Use and Planning ........................................................................................................ 42

3.12 Mineral Resources............................................................................................................... 43

3.13 Noise .................................................................................................................................. 44

3.14 Population and Housing ...................................................................................................... 45

3.15 Public Services.................................................................................................................... 46

3.16 Recreation .......................................................................................................................... 48

3.17 Transportation..................................................................................................................... 49

3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources .................................................................................................... 51

3.19 Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................................... 53

3.20 Wildfire ............................................................................................................................... 56

3.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance...................................................................................... 59 4 List of Preparers .................................................................................................................. 61 31 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS iv

EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 Regional Location.................................................................................................................. 6 Exhibit 2 Local Vicinity......................................................................................................................... 7 TABLES
Table 2-1 Summary of Ability to Meet RHNA ........................................................................................ 10 Table 2-2 RHNAOZD Site .................................................................................................................... 10 32 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS v
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
AB 52 Assembly Bill 52
BMP Best Management Practices
HCD California Department of Housing and Community Development HEU Housing Element Update
IS Initial Study
LHMP Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
MS4 Permit Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permit ND Negative Declaration
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric Company
RHNA Regional Housing Needs Allocation
RHNP Regional Housing Needs Plan
SB 18 Senate Bill 18
SEU Safety Element Update
SFD Sonora Fire Department
SR 49 State Highway/Route 49
SR 108 State Highway/Route 108
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
TUD Tuolumne Utilities District
UWMP 2020 TUD Urban Water Management Plan
VHFHSZ Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
33 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 1
1 Introduction and Purpose

1.1 Project Overview
The City of Sonora (Lead Agency) is proposing updates to both the Housing Element and Safety Element of the City’s General Plan (“project”), to align with recently enacted State laws. The City previously updated the Safety Element in 2020 as part of its comprehensive General Plan Update 2020. The Housing Element was previously updated in 2019. The proposed project includes the Seventh Cycle, 2024-2029 Housing Element Update of the General Plan and an update to the City’s Safety Element to address various hazards the City has faced, including wildfires, floods, and severe weather. The Housing Element and Safety Element Updates are policy updates only, and no specific development is proposed at this time.

1.2 Statutory Authority Requirements
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (California Public Resources Code, Section 21000-21177) and pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations [CCR], Chapter 3, Section 15063), the City, acting in the capacity of the Lead Agency, is required to undertake the preparation of an Initial Study (IS) to determine if the project would have significant environmental impacts. The environmental document is intended as informational, undertaken to provide an environmental basis for subsequent discretionary actions on the project. The resulting documentation is not, however, a policy document and its approval and/or certification neither presupposes nor mandates any actions on the part of those agencies from whom permits and other discretionary approval would be required.

The environmental documentation and supporting analysis will be subject to a public review period. During this review, public comments on the documentation should be addressed to the City. Following the review of any comments received pertaining to the CEQA review, the City will consider these comments as part of the project’s environmental review and determination. The comments will be included in the IS document for consideration by the City of Sonora’s Planning Commission and City Council.

1.3 Purpose of the Initial Study
The purpose of the IS is to: (1) identify environmental impacts; (2) provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) or Negative Declaration (ND); (3) enable a Lead Agency or Applicant to modify a project, mitigating potential adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared; (4) facilitate an environmental assessment early in the design of a project; (5) provide documentation of the factual basis for the finding in an MND or ND that a project would not have a significant environmental effect; (6) eliminate needless EIRs; (7) determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used for a project; and (8) assist in the preparation of an EIR, if required, by focusing the EIR on the effects determined to be significant, identifying the effects determined not to be significant, and explaining the reasons for determining that potentially significant effects would not be significant.

Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines identifies specific disclosure requirements for inclusion in an IS.

Pursuant to those requirements, an IS must include the following: (1) a description of the project, including the location of the project; (2) an identification of the environmental setting; (3) an identification of environmental effects by use of a checklist; (4) a discussion of ways to mitigate significant effects identified, if any; (5) an examination of a project’s compatibility with existing zoning, plans, and other applicable land use controls; and (6) the name of the person or persons who prepared or participated in the preparation of the IS. 34 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 2

1.4 California Environmental Quality Act Compliance
In accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, this IS has been prepared for the proposed project and its associated discretionary approvals. The IS indicates that the project would not have any significant or potentially significant environmental impacts, and therefore, the project requires preparation of an Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND).

The IS/ND serves as the environmental document that presents the analysis of project impacts on each of the environmental topic areas in the CEQA Environmental Checklist provided in Section 3.0. This document will serve to inform City decision makers, representatives of affected trustee and responsible agencies, and other interested parties of the potential environmental effects that may occur with approval and implementation of the proposed project.

1.5 California Environmental Quality Act Review and Comment This IS/ND has been submitted to potentially affected agencies and individuals. Notices of the availability of the IS/ND for review and comment, as well as the environmental documentation, are available on the City of Sonora’s website (https://sonoraca.com/category/city-of-sonora-public-notices/) for review.

A 30-day public review period has been established for the IS/ND in accordance with Section 15073 of the State CEQA Guidelines. During review of the IS/ND, affected public agencies and the interested public should focus on the document’s adequacy in identifying and analyzing the potential environmental impacts. Comments on the IS/ND and the analysis contained herein must be received by 5:00 PM on August 12, 2025, and should be addressed to:

City of Sonora
Tyler Summersett
Community Development Director
94 North Washington Street
Sonora, CA 95370
[email protected]

1.209.532.3508
Following receipt and evaluation of comments from agencies, organizations, and/or individuals, the City will determine whether any substantial new environmental issues have been raised. If so, further documentation – such as an EIR or an IS/MND – may be required. If not, the project and the environmental documentation are tentatively scheduled to be submitted to the Sonora Planning Commission and City Council for consideration.

1.6 Organization of the Initial Study
The IS/ND is organized into sections, as described below:
• Section 1.0: Introduction and Purpose. This section provides an introduction, project summary, and overview of the conclusions in the IS/ND.
• Section 2.0: Project Description. This section provides a brief description of the project location and relevant background information. This section provides a description of the proposed project and necessary discretionary approvals.
• Section 3.0: Environmental Checklist. The completed Environmental Checklist Form from the State CEQA Guidelines provides an overview of the potential impacts that may or may not result from project implementation. The Environmental Checklist Form also includes “mandatory findings of significance”, as required by CEQA. The analysis concludes the significance of impacts and standard conditions, regulatory requirements, and mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant impacts. • Section 4.0: References. This section identifies the references used to prepare the IS/ND and lists the preparers of the document.
35 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 3
2 Project Description

1. Project Title:

City of Sonora 2024-2029 Housing Element Update and Safety Element Update

2. Lead Agency name and address:

City of Sonora
Community Development Department, Planning Division
94 North Washington Street
Sonora, CA 95370

3. Contact person and phone number:

Tyler Summersett, Community Development Director
[email protected]

1.209.532.3508

4. Project location:

Citywide; Sonora is located in Tuolumne County, in the Sierra Nevada foothills.

5. Project sponsor’s name and address:

City of Sonora
94 North Washington Street
Sonora, CA 95370

6. General Plan Designation:

Citywide. Under the existing General Plan, the project area consists of a range of land use designations including Commercial, Estate Residential, Heavy Commercial, High Density Residential, Historic Mixed Density Residential, Historic Mixed Use, Light Manufacturing, Medium Density Residential, Mixed Use, Public/Quasi Public, Park/Recreation/Resource/Open Space, and Single Family Residential.

7. Zoning:

Citywide. The project area consists of a range of zoning designations, including Residential Estates, Single Family Residential, Limited Multi-Family Residential, Multi-Family Residential, PD Limited MultiFamily Residential Combining, PD Multi-Family Residential Combining, Tourist and Administrative, Commercial, General Commercial, Limited Manufacturing, Agricultural/Residential, Planned Development Combining Zone, PD Commercial Combining, and Open Space. In order to receive certification of the City’s 2024-2029 Housing Element by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), the 5th and 6th Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) candidate site(s) are to be rezoned to accommodate by-right housing pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2 (c). Specifically, Program 3.1 requires the City to amend the City’s Municipal Code by adding Chapter 17.21, entitled Regional Housing Needs Assessment Overlay Zone District (RHNAOZD), to Title 17 of the City of Sonora Municipal Code. The RHNAOZD applies to the Lemke property (APN: 044-430- 055), which is zoned R3 (maximum density of 21.75 du/acre). As an overlay zone, the RHNAOZD would layer on top of the base R3 zoning regulations, leaving in place the option to develop under the base zoning, but providing the opportunity to develop the property through a ministerial by-right approval process should an applicant propose 20 percent low-income deed restricted affordable housing. 36 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 4

8. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.? Consultation with California Native American tribes is addressed in Section 3.18, Tribal Cultural Resources.
37 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 5

2.1 Project Location and Setting
The City of Sonora is in the western portion of Tuolumne County, California, covering approximately 3.18 square miles within the Sierra Nevada foothills. The City boundary extends to the Town of Browns Flat to the north and State Highway 108 (SR 108) to the south. The City is surrounded by unincorporated Tuolumne County. The communities of Columbia and Springfield are located to the north, East Sonora to the east, and Jamestown to the west; refer to Exhibit 1, Regional Location. The nearest highways to the City are SR 108, at the southern boundary of the City, and SR 49, which runs from the western portion of the City, through the City’s historical center, and is the primary access through the Downtown area; refer to Exhibit 2, Local Vicinity.

2.2 Project Background
The City is updating the General Plan Housing and Safety Elements in order to align them with other General Plan Elements, as required by State law, including the Land Use, Circulation, Conservation and Open Space, Noise, Public Facilities and Services, Air Quality, Cultural Resources, Economics, Community Identify, and Parks and Recreation Elements. Both updates strive to align with recently enacted State laws and meet State requirements. The Safety Element Update is intended to adopt new climate change and wildfire mitigation strategies that will help the City better prepare for possible new and more severe climate scenarios.

Housing Element Update
The 2020 Census indicates a citywide population of 5,003, which is estimated to have decreased to 4,940 people in 2021. The City is the only incorporated area in Tuolumne County, and therefore the largest city in the area. The City is proposing to adopt the Housing Element for the Seventh Cycle planning period from 2024 to 2029. The proposed Housing Element Update (HEU) is available on the City’s website through this link: Sonora Community Development Department. The Housing Element, which is part of the City’s General Plan, is a policy document designed to provide the City with a coordinated and comprehensive strategy for promoting the production of safe and affordable housing within the community. California Government Code Section 65580 states the following regarding the importance of creating housing elements:

The availability of housing is of vital statewide importance, and the early attainment of decent housing and a suitable living environment for every Californian, including farmworkers, is a priority of the highest order.

Per State law, the housing element has two main purposes:

1. To provide an assessment of both current and future housing needs and constraints in meeting these needs; and

2. To provide a strategy that establishes housing goals, policies, and programs.

The proposed Housing Element Update describes and analyzes the housing needs of Sonora residents and the issues confronted by the City, and provides goals, policies, and quantified objectives related to the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing. 38 Item A.

EXHIBIT 1
Regional Location
City of Sonora | 2024-2029 HEU and SEU IS/ND
Sources: City of Sonora, Tuolumne County
Map Export: 7/1/2024 3:03 PM.

Columbia
East Sonora
Jamestown
Phoenix Lake
Tuttletown
Sonora
Sphere of Influence
Sonora City Limits
39 Item A.

EXHIBIT 2
Local Vicinity
City of Sonora | 2024-2029 HEU and SEU IS/ND
Sources: City of Sonora, Tuolumne County
Map Export: 7/1/2024 2:59 PM.

Sonora
Sonora Creek
Woods Creek
Sphere of Influence
Sonora City Limits
40 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 8
Safety Element Update
The Safety Element Update (SEU), provided on the City’s website through this link: Sonora Community Development Department, analyzes potential natural and human-caused hazards to safety in the City and provides goals, policies, and actions to minimize these hazards. The SEU evaluates hazards that may affect existing and future development and growth and provides guidelines for protecting the community and minimizing harm to the extent feasible. The goal of the SEU is to reduce the risk of injury, death, property loss, and other hardships to acceptable levels. Periodic updates of the Safety Element ensure that goals and policies remain relevant and responsive to community needs, hazard situations, and State law. California Government Code Section 65302(g)(1) identifies the following list of safety risks that, at a minimum, must be examined in each Safety Element:
 Seismically induced surface rupture*
 Ground shaking*
 Ground failure*
 Flooding*
 Tsunami
 Seiche
 Dam failure
 Slope instability leading to mudslides and landslides*  Subsidence*
 Liquefaction areas
 Other seismic hazards
 Wildland and urban fires*
 Climate change*
Items denoted by an * are potential hazards relevant to the City of Sonora.

2.3 Project Characteristics
Housing Element Update
Background
The City’s Housing Element serves as an integrated part of the General Plan and is subject to detailed statutory requirements, including a requirement to be updated every five years and mandatory review by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). This action includes the adoption of the HEU, which is a policy document; no actual development of parcels is included as part of the HEU. The proposed HEU is a five-year plan for the 2024-2029 period.

Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583, a housing element is required to consist of an identification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs and a statement of goals, policies, quantified objectives, financial resources, and scheduled programs for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing.

Specifically, a housing element is required to contain the following:
 An assessment of housing needs and an inventory of resources and constraints revelant to meeting those needs (Government Code Section 65583[a])
 A statement of the community’s goals, quantified objectives, and policies relative to the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing (Government Code Section 65583[a]) 41 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 9
 A program that sets forth a schedule of actions during the planning period, each with a timeline for implementation of the policies and to achieve the goals and objectives of the housing element (Government Code Section 65583[c])
According to the Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP), the City of Sonora has a Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of two (2) new units for the 2024-2029 period. Of the two units needed, one new unit is needed for very low income and one for low income. This is half of the need of Tuolumne County, in which two units are needed for very low income and two for low income. Combined, the City and Tuolumne County need six new units. The Housing Element Update identified two adequate sites with appropriate densities to meet the current RHNA requirements. The City has sufficient vacant property that, once developed, would result in units across all income categories beyond the cycle’s requirement. The Seventh Cycle Housing Element was adopted in summer 2025. The Seventh Cycle Housing Element was submitted to HCD and found to be in compliance in summer 2025, contingent upon timely implementation of stated programs.

Housing Element Overview
The City’s HEU consists of the following major components:
 A review of the prior housing element and goals that were accomplished (Appendix B, Housing Accomplishments – Evaluation of the 2019 Housing Element)  An assessment of housing needs in the City including profile and analysis of the City’s demographics, housing characteristics, and existing and future housing needs (Section 3.2, Needs Assessment)  An assessment of resources available to meet the City’s objectives regarding housing production and preservation. Resources include land available for new construction and redevelopment, as well as financial and administrative resources available (Section 3.3, Site Inventory Analysis and Zoning)  A review of the constraints to housing production and preservation. Constraints include potential market, governmental policy, and environmental limitations to meeting the City’s identified housing needs (Section 3.4, Constraints)
 A statement of the housing plan to address the City’s identified housing needs, including housing goals, policies, and programs (Section 3.6, Housing Plan)
Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
State housing element law requires housing elements to be updated regularly to reflect a community’s changing housing needs, including preparation of a RHNA plan (Government Code Section 65584[a]). A critical measure of compliance is the ability of a jurisdiction to accommodate its share of the regional housing needs based on a RHNA prepared by HCD for each Council of Governments or regional jurisdiction in the State that identifies projected housing units needed for all economic segments based on the Department of Finance population estimates. HCD is responsible for allocating this total to the jurisdictions within Tuolumne County (the City of Sonora and Tuolumne County). This process is known as the RHNA and occurs every 8.5 years.

The RHNP creates the RHNA by allocating to each city and county a “fair share” of the region’s projected housing needs by household income group. In each jurisdiction, the RHNA is distributed among four different income groups. This ensures that each city or county is planning for housing that meets the needs of all economic segments of the community, including lower income households.

For the City of Sonora, the RHNA for 2024-2029 is 2 units. This includes one very low-income unit, and one low-income unit. The 2024-2029 Housing Element demonstrates that the City has the capacity to accommodate this projected housing need.
42 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 10
Summary of Ability to Meet RHNA
As shown in Table 2-1 below, the identified vacant sites can accommodate the RHNA allocation in all income categories. The table illustrates a surplus capacity of 52 very low-income sites, 52 low-income sites, 24 moderate income sites, and 24 above moderate-income sites based on the allowed density of the identified sites.

Table 2-1
Summary of Ability to Meet RHNA
Table 3-26: Capacity to Meet RHNA Requirement
Very Low Low Moderate Above Moderate Total
RHNA Requirement 1 1 0 0 2
RHNA Sites
Lemke 53 53 0 0 106
Cuesta Heights 0 0 24 24 48
Total Capacity 53 53 24 24 154
Surplus 52 52 24 24 152
Rezone
As noted in Housing Element Program 3.1 and consistent with the California Department of Housing and Community Development’s (HCD) correspondence dated June 9, 2025, the 5th and 6th Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) candidate site(s) are to be rezoned to accommodate by-right housing pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2 (c). Specifically, Program 3.1 requires the City to amend the City’s Municipal Code by adding Chapter 17.21, entitled Regional Housing Needs Assessment Overlay Zone District (RHNAOZD), to Title 17 of the City of Sonora Municipal Code. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment Overlay Zone District (RHNAOZD) applies to the following property:

Table 2-2
RHNAOZD Site
Regional Housing Needs Assessment Overlay Zone District Sites Site Name APN
Existing
Zoning/Genera
l Plan
Designation
Approx.

Acreage
Maximum
Density Unit Potential Affordability
Lemke 044-430-055 R3/HDR 11.05* 21.75 du/acre 106 Low/Very Low * Based on the site constraints and the topography of the area, the portion of this parcel that falls within the range of 0-15% slope would be developable at 9.19 acres.

The Lemke site is the sole remaining 5th and 6th RHNA site at 9.19 acres of vacant land of an 11.05-acre parcel in the R3 Zone. The R3 Zone has a maximum density of 21.75 dwelling units per acre, making the R3 zone suitable for lower-income housing. However, based upon site constraints, including topography, the realistic capacity of the site is 106 lower income units. The projection is based on taking the developable portion of the site (9.19 acres) at the average density of multi-family developments in the City (11.6) acres.

As an overlay zone, the RHNAOZD would layer on top of the base R3 zoning regulations, leaving in place the option to develop under the base zoning, but providing the opportunity to develop the property through a ministerial by-right approval process should an applicant propose 20 percent low-income deed restricted affordable housing. The by-right approval process is subject to objective design standards. Accordingly, the Lemke property will be rezoned to have a zoning designation of R3/(RHNAOZ), as required for HCD Certification of the City’s 2024-2029 Housing Element of the General Plan. 43 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 11
The purpose of the RHNAOZD is to acknowledge existing statutes, thereby memorializing an existing by-right approval process and application of objective design standards afforded to developers of projects that include 20 percent of the units as housing affordable to lower income households in accordance with Government Code Section 65583.2. Other than the by-right approval and objective design standards processes established by the RHNAOZ, no land use changes are proposed with the rezone of the Lemke property. 2024-2029 HEU Goals and Policies
Based on the City’s ability to meet the RHNA allocation as described above, the HEU is a policy document; no actual development of parcels is included as part of the approval. The project evaluated herein therefore does not include development. The Housing Element goals, policies, objectives, and programs, which can be found in Chapter 3.6, Housing Plan, reflect the City’s continued commitment to actively support residential development and plan for the City’s fair share of regional housing needs.

Safety Element Update
Background
Throughout the history of the City of Sonora, the City has dealt with various natural and human-caused hazards, including earthquakes, wildfires, droughts, land movement, train derailments, flooding, and a pandemic.

Landslides and mudslides have occurred as a result of severe weather and flooding, and most of the City has been identified as being within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ). The City’s Safety Element is updated periodically to ensure the City continues to address the relevant natural and human-caused hazards of the time. In the twenty-first century, climate change has become a prevalent safety concern for all jurisdictions, as it increasingly affects other hazards such as severe weather, flooding, wildfires, diseases, extreme heat, and drought. Safety Element updates are now required to evaluate local hazard events and the likelihood of future hazards in the context of climate change.

Safety Element Overview
The City’s SEU addresses hazards of concern relevant to the City and provides goals, policies, and implementation measures to adapt to and minimize these hazards. The 2024 Sonora SEU was developed in conjunction with the development of the 2024 City of Sonora Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP). The LHMP identifies specific needs, goals, mitigation actions, capital improvement projects, and local and regional partnerships relevant to the City of Sonora, for the purpose of protecting the community from natural and human-caused hazards. Further details regarding natural disasters, including relevant mitigation actions to reduce vulnerability, are included in the LHMP. The LHMP incorporates a process where hazards are identified and profiled, the people and facilities at risk are analyzed, and mitigation actions are developed to reduce or eliminate hazard risk. The implementation of these mitigation actions, which include both short-term and longterm strategies, involve planning, policy changes, programs, projects, and other activities. The hazards identified in the SEU and many of the goals, policies, and implementation measures included in the SEU coincide with the hazards, goals, and actions included in the LHMP. 44 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 12
Natural and human-caused hazards determined relevant to the City of Sonora in the SEU include the following:

Wildfire and Urban Fire Hazards
Most of the City is designated a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. The City FHSZ is classified as a Local Responsibility Area and falls under the jurisdiction of the City of Sonora Fire Department. The terrain in the City consists of heavily wooded communities and steep terrain that limits and challenges vegetation management and fire suppression activities. Most of the VHFHSZ in the City is located in residential areas, in which many lots are surrounded by substantial vegetation and dense brush that, when combined with increasingly frequent drought conditions, presents a significant fire hazard as vegetative fuel. Additionally, the City is surrounded by unincorporated areas of Tuolumne County, which include fire hazard zones in State Responsibility areas. The majority of these unincorporated areas are VHFHSZs, indicating a significant risk of wildfire in the surrounding areas of Tuolumne County that could spread rapidly and threaten the City. The City of Sonora also has many historical buildings that were not built in compliance with modern fire codes and are at an increased risk of structural fire.

The threat of wildfire in Sonora has been increasing in recent decades and is expected to continue to worsen due to the effects of climate change. The foothill area in which Sonora is located offers a substantial fuel load for fires and experiences long, dry summers that further increase fire risk. More severe drought conditions, severe weather, and extreme heat are expected throughout the remainder of the century. The annual fire season is expected to become longer and more severe on average.

Seismic Hazards
The City of Sonora is located in an area of concern for seismic activity. The City is located on a pre-quaternary fault which is generally considered inactive, however, known active faults and potentially active faults are located west of the City in the Foothills Fault Zone. The nearest mapped fault of the Melones Fault Zone, which is part of the Foothills Fault Zone, is located approximately 3.5 miles southwest of the City. There are also four “capable” faults, faults with tectonic displacement within the last 35,000 years which could produce an earthquake, located within Tuolumne County. The City is therefore susceptible to seismic ground shaking as a result of seismic activity in the region. Major faults in the Bay Area could also trigger large earthquakes that could generate ground shaking in Sonora.

Downtown Sonora has many historic buildings that predate modern seismic codes and would be at risk in the event of seismic ground shaking. The City is also underlain by various tunnels and mines constructed prior to modern seismic codes that could collapse during ground shaking, causing ground failure and subsidence. The earthquake potential for the City is considered occasional. The City has a low potential for liquefaction.

Geologic Hazards
The City of Sonora consists of sloped terrain that may be subject to landslides and erosion. Steep slopes in the west, north, and east residential areas of the City are at risk of landslides that may occur as a result of earthquakes, heavy rain, floods, or wildfires. Mudslides may also occur in the City in areas where wildfires have removed vegetation from the soil, leaving the soil exposed and susceptible to movement in the event of heavy rain. The City is at risk of subsidence in the form of sinkholes occurring over historic mines. Heavy rains saturate the soil and pose a risk to structures located above the tunnels and mines. Additionally, the City is at risk of a variety of hazards associated with volcanoes, which are located in Mono County, east of the City. A volcanic eruption from the Long Valley Volcanic Region would have to be very large to directly reach the City of Sonora, however, volcanic ash and volcanic gas may impact the City depending on the size, location, and type of eruption and wind direction. Volcanic ash can pose a threat to buildings, roads, utilities, and communications, and can also cause respiratory effects such as asthma.

Flooding
The City is at risk of flooding caused by an overflow of Woods Creek, which is located within the Federal Emergency Management Agency 100-year flood zone. The areas adjacent to Woods Creek and Sonora Creek are 45 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 13
at risk of flooding in the event of extreme precipitation. Localized surface flooding poses a threat to City and emergency operations and historic structures in the Downtown area. The City’s primary stormwater conveyance system, the Main Drain, located under Downtown Sonora, is outdated and in need of improvements. The LHMP includes improvements to the Main Drain. The City is not at risk of dam inundation.

Hazardous Materials/Wastes
Hazardous materials are generated, used, and stored by facilities throughout the City of Sonora and in surrounding unincorporated communities for a variety of purposes in service industries, agriculture, businesses, schools, and households. The City does not contain the types of major industrial uses that typically result in larger amounts of hazardous materials, nor are significant areas of heavy industry located in adjoining areas of unincorporated Tuolumne County. According to the Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor database, three sites in the City are classified as “Evaluation Needed”. There is one active State response clean-up site at Sierra Launderers & Cleaners, located at 407 North Washington Street. All four of the above sites are assumed to pose a limited risk of hazardous materials release to the community.

Emergency Operations
The City of Sonora does not have a centralized communication system and lacks reliable internet service during emergency scenarios. The City also does not currently have proper emergency response equipment. Without proper emergency response equipment and communications technology, the City may be unable to provide adequate emergency response services. Hazard events are expected to increase in frequency and severity as a result of climate change; the City needs the necessary resources to be prepared for future hazards.

Additionally, the City of Sonora is at risk of pandemics, the most recent of which occurred in 2019 and caused hundreds of deaths in Tuolumne County and much of the City to shut down.

Human-Caused Hazards
Human-caused hazards in Sonora can include a variety of incidents, including active shooter events, terrorist attacks, aircraft crashes, civil disturbance, and cyberterrorism. These hazard types are often difficult to predict and impacts can vary greatly depending on the specific incident. The City of Sonora is at an increased risk of active shooter events, terrorist attacks, cyberterrorism, and civil disturbance because of the presence of multiple City/County governmental buildings, schools, churches, and other critical assets in the City.

Climate Change
The City of Sonora is expected to see the following changes as a result of climate change in coming years and decades: periods of very high and very low precipitation resulting in both droughts and severe flooding, severe weather events that may also cause flooding, an increase in extreme heat days per year and higher average annual temperatures, and more frequent and severe wildfires in the region.

Critical Facilities and Infrastructure
The City’s principal stormwater conveyance system, the Main Drain, includes stone tunnels dating back to the late 1880s. Portions of the Main Drain remain vulnerable, insufficient, and in need of modern improvements.

Structural deficiencies in the Main Drain increase the risk of future floods during severe weather events. Due to the location of the Main Drain, flooding as a result of the pipeline’s deficiencies could threaten access to critical City facilities.

Evacuation
The City of Sonora has several subdivisions and roads that do not meet ingress/egress requirements for evacuation purposes or are currently designed in a manner which inhibits evacuation and emergency response efforts. The Downtown area has many one-way streets, and several roads have a tight turning radius that prohibits access for emergency vehicles. The City of Sonora is increasingly at risk of wildfires and other hazard events, and evacuation planning necessary to reduce evacuation-related vulnerabilities. 46 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 14
SEU Goals and Policies
Similar to the HEU, the SEU is a policy document; no actual development of parcels is included as part of the approval. In addition to the goals and policies, the SEU includes implementation measures for action items for the City. The goals, policies, and implementation measures for the SEU are included in each hazard type analysis.

2.4 Project Construction and Phasing
The proposed project includes two policy documents that do not include any actual development of parcels.

Therefore, no construction would occur as a result of this project. Any development that might occur as a result of the goals, policies, and implementation measures contained within this project would be subject to further environmental review and approval on a project-specific basis. Any development that may occur pursuant to the RHNAOZD would not require additional environmental review; however, the RHNAOZD maintains the existing R3 zoning designation for the Lemke site, and no land use changes are proposed with the rezone of the Lemke property.

2.5 Project Approvals
The actions and/or approvals the City needs to consider for the proposed project include, but are not limited to, the following. This list is preliminary, and may not be comprehensive.

City of Sonora
• CEQA adoption of the Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND) • Adoption of the City of Sonora 2024-2029 Housing Element Update - Pursuant to State law, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is empowered to review the housing element of each community to ensure its compliance with the provisions of the Government Code related to facilitating the improvment and development of housing in order to make adequate provisions for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community. HCD has review but not approval authority. • Adoption of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation Overlay Zone District • Adoption of the City of Sonora Safety Element Update
- Prior to adoption of the Safety Element, coordination and feedback from the Sonora Fire Department and Sonora Police Department is required.
47 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 15
3 Environmental Checklist
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics Agriculture and
Forestry Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology and Soils Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population and Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities and Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance
48 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
� I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

D I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

D I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

D I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. 0 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including at are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. - -11
Date
CSG CONSULTANTS 16
49 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 17
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts

1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project would not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required.

4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.

5. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a. the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance 50 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 18

3.1 Aesthetics
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
I. AESTHETICS – Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality of public
views of the site and its surroundings? (Public
views are those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage point). If the project
is in an urbanized area, would the project
conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No Impact: Scenic vistas in the City of Sonora include views available from State Route 49 and State Route 108.

Scenic resources in the City include significant trees, hillsides, hilltops, scenic corridors, creeks, and historic resources. Woods Creek, Dragoon Gulch, Sonora Creek, public parks, and cultural facilities are all considered scenic resources in the City.1 The HEU identifies two sites in the City with the capacity to meet the City’s RHNA allocation, Lemke and Cuesta Heights. Neither site is located near or visible from SR 49 or SR 108. Potential future development on these sites is therefore not anticipated to be located within a scenic vista. Both sites have sloped terrain, are in hilly locations, and have a substantial number of trees. Potential future development would be required to comply with the City’s design standards, Hillside Preservation Ordinance, and requirements of the Tree City USA program. No rivers or creeks are located on either site. Any potential development on either of these sites would be required to undergo separate and project-specific environmental review which would be completed prior to project implementation.

The SEU includes programs that require the following improvements: a French Drain at Sonora High School Dunlavy Stadium, improving the bridge at Southgate Drive over Sonora Creek, the Main Drain Improvement Project, and expanding the capacity of Woods Creek to avoid flooding in the area. Woods Creek and Sonora Creek are both considered scenic resources and are located adjacent to SR 49 in certain areas. The Main Drain is located under the Downtown area, in the middle of the City, as well as partially under SR 49. However, any reduction in visual character of these sites due to construction would be temporary in nature and once implemented, it is anticipated that none of these developments would substantially alter the existing visual character of the sites. Furthermore, any development related to the implementation of these improvements 1 City of Sonora. 2020. City of Sonora General Plan. Website: https://sonoraca.com/city-services/general-plan/. Accessed June 11, 2024.
51 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 19
would be required to undergo separate and project-specific environmental review which would be completed prior to project implementation.

The HEU and SEU are both policy documents and do not include any changes to land use designations, building heights and intensities, or residential densities. Both Elements include policies intended to continue to make the City of Sonora a safe and desirable place to work and live. Potential aesthetic-related impacts are unique to a project’s location and design and cannot be meaningfully determined until a project site has been defined. All future development would be subject to the City’s zoning requirements. Therefore, the project would result in no impacts to scenic vistas. No mitigation measures are required. b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact: The City’s General Plan identifies the following as scenic resources: trees, hillsides, hilltops, corridors, creeks, historic and/or cultural facilities, public parks, Woods Creek, Sonora Creek, and Dragoon Gulch. The General Plan recognizes the following roadway sections as eligible for local designation as ScenicGateway Corridors: SR 49, South Washington Street to SR 108, SR 108, Hospital Road southbound to SR 108, and SR 108 to Sanguinetti Road. Views from SR 108 and SR 49 are considered scenic vistas. According to the California State Scenic Highway Program, SR 49, through the entire City, and SR 108 are eligible for State scenic highway designation. However, the City has not yet proceeded with maintaining official scenic highway designation for either SR 49 or SR 108 and has not established any officially designated Scenic-Gateway Corridor in the City.2 Therefore, there are no designated State scenic highways in Sonora. The California Public Resources Code Sections 5070-5077.8 designates SR 49 as a heritage corridor, which is a regional, state, or nationwide alignment of historical, natural, or conservation education significance. The Sonora General Plan includes policies and programs intended to preserve the scenic resources of Sonora, including those located adjacent to SR 49 and SR 108.

As mentioned in Threshold a) above, any potential development at the sites identified in the HEU would not be located adjacent to or visible from SR 49 or SR 108 and would be subject to compliance with the City’s Hillside Preservation Ordinance, the Tree City USA program, and the City’s design standards. Additionally, potential future development related to the programs included in the SEU may include development near or of scenic resources, including Woods Creek. However, it is not anticipated that the infrastructure improvement projects suggested in the SEU would alter the existing visual character of any scenic resources. Any future development related to the HEU or SEU would be subject to project-specific environmental review prior to project implementation, and any potentially significant impacts would be addressed through mitigation measures specific to the project and impact.

The HEU and SEU are both policy documents and do not include any changes to land use designations, building heights and intensities, or residential densities. Both Elements include policies intended to continue to make the City of Sonora a safe and desirable place to work and live. Potential aesthetic-related impacts are unique to a project’s location and design and cannot be meaningfully determined until a project site has been defined. All future development would be subject to the City’s zoning requirements. Therefore, the project would result in no impacts to scenic resources or State scenic highways. No mitigation measures are required. c) In non-urbanized areas, would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? No Impact: The project would implement policies intended to continue to make the City a safe and desirable place to work and live, including efforts such as development policies and critical infrastructure improvements. 2 California Department of Transportation. 2018. California State Scenic Highway Mapping System. Website:
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa. Accessed June 11, 2024.
52 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 20
The City’s current Zoning Code contains standards intended to preserve the natural beauty of the City, including provisions related to building standards (heights, setbacks, intensities), screening of utilities in development, outdoor improvements, hillside preservation, and tree preservation and management. The SEU includes suggested improvements to some of the City’s scenic resources; however, implementation of these improvements would result in only temporary visual impairments, would not substantially alter existing scenic resources and visual character, and would be subject to project-specific environmental review prior to project implementation. The HEU identifies two sites within the City that would be suitable for potential future residential development. Both sites contain trees and are located on hilly terrain, however any potential future development on either site would be required to comply with the City’s Hillside Preservation Ordinance and Tree City USA program. Future development in the City would be required to comply with the provisions of the City’s Zoning Code. The proposed project includes two policy documents and does not include any changes to land use designations, building heights and intensities, or residential densities. No development is proposed.

Therefore, the project would result in no impacts to the visual character or quality of public views or conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. No mitigation measures are required. d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
No Impact: Sources of light present throughout the City predominantly include residential and commercial uses of both interior and exterior lighting and vehicular traffic, while sources of glare include highly finished building materials such as glass, and roadway traffic. The project consists of two policy documents and would not directly involve construction or development. However, all potential future residential development enabled by the City’s General Plan is anticipated to introduce light and glare sources typical of development, and all future development in the City would be subject to the City’s zoning requirements. The City’s current Zoning Code contains lighting requirements intended to maintain public health, safety, and welfare from noxious or offensive illumination, glare, or similar effects. Capital improvement projects related to the programs included in the SEU are not anticipated to generate substantial sources of light or glare. All future development in the City would be required to comply with the provisions of the City’s Zoning Code and would be subject to approval by the City’s Design Review Commission. The proposed project would result in no impact related to light or glare which would adversely affect views. No mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to aesthetics; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
53 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 21

3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES – In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,
or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland
(as defined by Public Resources Code Section
4526), or timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Government Code
Section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland,
to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
54 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 22
a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?
d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact: The City does not contain any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, forest land, or timberland.
3 No land within the City limits is under a Williamson Act contract.4 The project involves updates to the City’s Housing Element and Safety Element, with no proposed changes to land use designations of parcels within the City. The City is primarily a residential and commercial community; some parcels in the southwest portion of the City and one parcel in the northern part of the City are zoned Agricultural/Residential, however there is no land within the City designated as forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. No provisions contained in the HEU or the SEU would convert Prime Farmland, farmland of unique or Statewide importance, or an agricultural use. No development is proposed on forest land or timberland zoned Timberland Production. Any future development projects in the City would not conflict with an existing Williamson Act contract, would not result in the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use, and would not result in the conversion or loss of forest land. Any future development on properties zoned Agricultural/Residential would be subject to project-specific environmental review. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on agricultural or forestry resources. No mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to agriculture and forestry resources; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
3 California Department of Conservation. 2022. California Important Farmland Finder. Website:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/. Accessed June 11, 2024. 4 California Department of Conservation. 2023. California Williamson Act Enrollment Finder. Website:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/WilliamsonAct/. Accessed June 11, 2024. 55 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 23

3.3 Air Quality
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
III. AIR QUALITY – Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
No Impact: The City is located in the Mountain Counties Air Basin, which is currently designated nonattainment for ozone and fine particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10). Tuolumne County is currently designated as nonattainment-transitional for ozone and is unclassified for PM10. 5 The Tuolumne County Air
Pollution Control District is included in a portion of the California State Implementation Plan, which includes regulations for all pollutants and was adopted in 2022. The United States Environmental Protection Agency approved the Tuolumne County portion in 2023.6 There is no air quality management plan specific to Tuolumne County or the Mountain Counties Air Basin in its entirety.

The project would not directly result in construction or development activity, nor would it enable development beyond that which is currently provided for in the City’s General Plan. The number of residential units that could be developed under the HEU is consistent with the City’s current General Plan and zoning designations.

Potential air quality-related impacts, including potential increases of criteria pollutants, are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location and design of a project is known. At such time that a development proposal is considered that project would be subject to adopted development air quality standards. Short-term air quality impacts resulting from construction activities, such as dust generated by clearing and grading activities, exhaust emissions from gas- and diesel-powered construction equipment, and vehicular emissions associated with the commuting of construction workers, would be subject to State air quality management regulations and all other relevant regional rules and regulations. 5 California Air Resources Board. 2022. Maps of State and Federal Area Designations. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/maps-state-and-federal-area-designations. Accessed June 11, 2024. 6 United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2023. EPA-Approved Tuolumne County Air Pollution Control District Regulations in the California SIP. Website: https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/ca-sip-tuolumne-county-apcd. Accessed June 11, 2024.
56 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 24
Thus, the project would result in no impacts related to the implementation of any applicable air quality plan, and it would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard. No mitigation measures are required.
c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? No Impact: The HEU and SEU are both policy documents that do not include any changes to land use designations. The proposed project does not directly involve construction or development activities. Potential air quality-related impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site and project characteristics are known. The City’s General Plan and Municipal Code contain policies and measures related to maintaining air quality in the City and reducing emissions from commercial uses. For potential future projects in residential areas, development buffers would be considered necessary to protect neighbors from air pollution-generating activities. At the time that a development proposal is considered for any future development in the City, that project would be subject to the development review process.

Therefore, the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

No impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures are required. d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
No Impact: Impacts would be considered potentially significant if the project were to result in the creation of objectionable odors with the potential to affect substantial numbers of people, or if construction or operation of the project would result in the creation or nuisance odors that would be noxious to a substantial number of people. Residential development such as that described in the HEU is not a land use typically associated with odor complaints or noxious emissions. The SEU suggests infrastructure improvement projects that are not anticipated to generate noxious emissions or odors. The SEU also contains policies intended to minimize health hazards related to air quality impacts from wildfires.

The proposed project would not directly involve construction or development activities upon implementation.

The proposed project would therefore not result in impacts related to emissions adversely affecting a substantial number of people. No mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to air quality; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
57 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 25

3.4 Biological Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on any
species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors,
or impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact: The City’s environs have the capacity to house a range of plant and wildlife species, including State and federally listed species. The City’s General Plan identifies approximately ten special status species that have the potential to occur within the City’s Sphere of Influence. Potential impacts related to biological resources are unique to a project’s location and cannot be meaningfully determined until a project 58 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 26
site has been defined. Any potential future development would be subject to federal, State, regional, and local regulatory requirements related to biological resources.

The SEU includes policies intended to lessen impacts to biological resources, including policies for climate adaptation and resiliency. Both the HEU and SEU are policy documents and do not directly include any development, construction, or land use changes. Potential future projects, including those related to the HEU and SEU, would be evaluated by the City for their compliance with goals, policies, and measures contained in the City’s General Plan intended to mitigate potential impacts to natural and biological resources, including those contained in the Conservation and Open Space Element. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on candidate, sensitive, or special status species. No mitigation measures are required. b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No Impact: The City contains several riparian areas, including the habitats around Woods Creek, Sonora Creek, and Dragoon Gulch. The City’s General Plan also identifies several other vegetation types throughout the City’s Sphere of Influence that have the potential to contain sensitive natural communities, including valley foothill riparian, wet meadow, lake or pond, perennial stream, intermittent stream, blue-oak foothill-pine, mixed chaparral, montane hardwood, blue oak woodland, and annual grassland. The General Plan also identifies the habitats along Woods Creek, Sonora Creek, and Dragoon Gulch as wetlands. According to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory, Sonora Creek is classified as riverine habitat throughout the middle of the City and as freshwater forested/shrub wetland along its eastern section, Woods Creek is classified as a freshwater forested/shrub wetland, and Dragoon Gulch is classified as riverine habitat. The National Wetlands Inventory also identifies riverine habitat and freshwater forested/shrub wetland in the southeastern portion of the City.7 Potential future development pursuant to the policies and programs of the SEU and HEU could have the potential to impact State or federally protected wetlands as well as riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities.

However, the HEU and SEU are both policy documents and would not directly involve construction or development activity. Potential impacts related to sensitive natural communities, such as riparian or wetland habitats, are unique to a project’s location and characteristics and cannot be meaningfully determined until a project has been defined. Therefore, the project would have no impacts on riparian habitat, other sensitive natural communities, or on State or federally protected wetlands. No mitigation measures are required. d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
No Impact: The City is a heavily wooded community with numerous undeveloped hillsides and sloped terrain. A few creeks, identified by the City and US Fish and Wildlife Service as riparian habitat and wetlands, also pass through the City. Within these undeveloped areas, the potential exists for nesting birds and other species to occur, as well as for those areas to be wildlife nursery sites. However, the HEU and SEU are policy documents consistent with the City’s General Plan and do not propose any land use changes. Further, future development in the City would be subject to all applicable State, regional, and local regulations and standards regarding biological resources. Therefore, the project would have no impact on the movement of native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, corridors, or nursery sites. No mitigation measures are required. 7 United States Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. Website:
https://fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands-mapper/. Accessed June 14, 2024. 59 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 27
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
No Impact: The City has a Hillside Preservation Ordinance that governs residential development on hillsides and hilltops in the City in order to maintain visual quality, natural topography, resources, and amenities of the hillsides. The City also received official designation as a Tree City USA in 1995; the Tree City USA program provides standards for the City to manage its tree resources. Potential future development related to the HEU would occur in sloped, undeveloped areas of the City and may be subject to the development standards of the Hillside Preservation Ordinance and Tree City USA program. However, the HEU and SEU are policy documents consistent with the City’s General Plan and do not propose any land use changes. Future development in the City would be subject to all applicable State, regional, and local regulations and standards regarding biological resources. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on policies protecting biological resources or any local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. No mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to biological resources; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
60 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 28

3.5 Cultural Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
No Impact: The proposed project involves adoption of two policy documents, the HEU and SEU, which do not directly propose any ground disturbance or development that may impact historical resources. Potential impacts related to cultural resources are unique to a project’s location and cannot be meaningfully determined until a project site has been defined. Potential future development in the City would require project-specific environmental evaluation in order to determine any potential impacts to cultural resources. Future development would be subject to federal, State, and local regulatory requirements related to the discovery and proper handling of cultural and historic resources, including Public Resources Code Section 211083.2, which requires avoidance and other measures in the event of discovery. Therefore, no impact to cultural resources would occur with implementation of the proposed project. No mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to cultural resources; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
61 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 29

3.6 Energy
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
VI. Energy – Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
a) Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
No Impact: The HEU and SEU are consistent with the City’s General Plan and contain policies to conserve energy resources. The HEU includes programs intended to conserve energy through public education on the reduction of residential energy use. However, the SEU and HEU are policy documents and do not directly involve any development. Potential impacts related to energy resources are unique to a specific project and cannot be meaningfully determined until a project has been defined. Any future development would be required to comply with federal, State, and local regulatory requirements related to energy efficiency. Future development projects would incorporate site-specific infrastructure improvements, as necessary, and would be reviewed by relevant energy providers to identify necessary energy facility and service connections.

Additionally, future projects would be evaluated by the City for compliance with the goals, policies, and measures contained in the City’s General Plan intended to reduce potential impacts to energy resources.

Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on energy resources as a result of wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy consumption. No mitigation measures are required. b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
No Impact: The HEU and SEU are policy documents; the proposed project does not directly involve any development. Any future development in the City would be subject to federal, State, and local regulatory requirements related to energy efficiency. Any proposed buildings would be required to comply with the most recent version of the California Building Code, including the California Green Building Standards Code, which includes regulations for energy efficiency. Future projects would be evaluated by the City on a project-specific basis for compliance with goals, policies, and measures contained in the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code intended to reduce potential impacts to energy resources. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. No mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to energy; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
62 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 30

3.7 Geology and Soils
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent AlquistPriolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based
on other substantial evidence of a known
fault? Refer to Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in
on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or indirect
risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems where sewers
are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
63 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 31
a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides?
No Impact: Sonora is a region of California characterized by moderate seismic activity. According to the California Geological Survey, no active earthquake faults are known to exist within or around the City. The City is not within an Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone.8 The City is located on a pre-quaternary fault, which is a fault that ruptured over 1.6 million years ago and is generally considered inactive. However, Sonora is at risk of seismic ground shaking occurring as a result of seismic activity from regional faults in and around Tuolumne County.

Tuolumne County is located east of the Foothills Fault Zone, which includes the Melones Fault Zone along the east side of the system and the Bear Fault Zone on the west side. The closest known fault of the Melones Fault Zone is located approximately 3.5 miles southwest of the City of Sonora.9 The City is characterized by hilly, wooded terrain susceptible to landslide risks. Extreme flooding and erosion caused by wildfire burn scars have increased the risk of landslides and mudslides throughout the City in recent years. Liquefaction is considered unlikely as the City is not located within mapped liquefaction hazard zones.

According to the City’s General Plan, the potential for lateral spreading, lurching, or differential settlement to occur is low.
10 The SEU addressed the protection of the existing and future population and development from both natural and human-caused hazards through a number of goals, policies, and implementation programs. Among these is Goal 2 of the SEU, which aims to “minimize risk of injuries, loss of life, property damage, and economic and social disruption resulting from seismic and geologic hazards in Sonora”. Additionally, the proposed project includes two policy documents, and no development is proposed at this time. Any future development would be subject to federal, State, and local regulatory requirements related to building design and construction, including the most recent version of the California Building Code. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts related to the cause of potential substantial adverse effects involving earthquake faults, seismic ground shaking, or seismic-related ground failure. No mitigation measures are required. b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? No Impact: The proposed project consists of two policy documents and would not directly involve construction or development activities. Any future development in the City would be subject to State, regional, and local requirements related to the prevention of erosion of onsite soils and the discharge of construction-related pollutants. Future projects would be required to prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and/or Best Management Practices (BMPs), as necessary. Future projects would also be evaluated by the City for their compliance with the goals, policies, and measures contained in the SEU intended to protect 8 California Geological Survey. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. Website:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/. Accessed June 13, 2024. 9 California Department of Conservation. 2015. Fault Activity Map of California. Website:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/. Accessed June 13, 2024. 10 City of Sonora. 2020. General Plan Safety Element. Website: https://sonoraca.com/wpcontent/uploads/2018/09/SonoraGeneralPlan2020-revision-2017-10-16-17-CC-adopted.pdf. Accessed June 13, 2024. 64 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 32
lives and property. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.

No mitigation measures are required.
c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
No Impact: The City of Sonora is characterized by wooded, sloped terrain that is susceptible to landslide risks.

Areas with recent wildfire burn scars or where stormwater drainage systems are insufficient are particularly at risk of landslides and mudslides. Additionally, the City is underlain by various tunnels and historic mines constructed prior to modern seismic codes. These mines and tunnels are not mapped. Underground mines and tunnels could collapse during strong seismic ground shaking or as a result of severe storm events. As a result, sinkholes are a concern for the City. However, the potential for lateral spreading and liquefaction is low.

The HEU and SEU are policy documents; the proposed project does not propose physical changes in the environment and does not directly involve development. To account for any potential instability, all future development projects in the City would be subject to federal, State, and local regulatory requirements related to building design and construction. Pursuant to the CBC, project-specific geotechnical investigations would be required, subject to review by the City’s Public Works Department, and any recommendations contained within would be required to be implemented. Additionally, all future development projects would be evaluated by the City for compliance with the goals and programs set forth in the SEU to decrease vulnerability to geologic hazards. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts related to unstable soil or geologic hazards, including landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, or liquefaction. No mitigation measures are required. d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? No Impact: Expansive soils are characterized as fine-grained, such as silts and clays or soils with variable amounts of expansive clay materials that can change in volume due to changes in water content. According to the City’s General Plan, soil types within the City consist predominantly of deep, well drained soils that present only a slight erosion hazard.11 The risk of expansive soil in the City is considered low.

The HEU and SEU are policy documents and do not directly propose physical changes in the environment. The proposed project does not directly involve future development. Future development in the City would be subject to federal, State, and local regulatory requirements related to building design and construction.

Pursuant to the CBC, project-specific geotechnical investigations would be required, subject to review by the City’s Public Works Department, and any recommendations contained within would be required to be implemented. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on sites with expansive soil. No mitigation measures are required.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
No Impact: Most of the City of Sonora is serviced by the Tuolumne Utilities District sewage collection system.

However, some properties may require the use of a septic tank or alternative waste disposal system. Given the geologic and slope constraints in Sonora, the viability of a septic tank or alternative waste disposal system for a project would depend on the size of the project and the project’s location. The HEU and SEU are policy documents consistent with the City’s General Plan and do not propose any land use changes. The proposed project would not directly involve any development. All future development in the City would be subject to federal, State, and local regulatory requirements related to building design and construction. Pursuant to the CBC, project-specific geotechnical investigations would be required, subject to review by the City’s Public 11 City of Sonora. 2020. General Plan Appendix 6b. Website: https://sonoraca.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/apdx-sonorageneral-plan-2020.pdf. Accessed June 13, 2024. 65 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 33
Works Department, and any recommendations contained within would be required to be implemented.

Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste disposal systems. No mitigation measures are required. f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
No Impact: The proposed project includes two policy documents and does not directly involve any development.

Potential impacts related to paleontological and geologic resources are unique to a project and site and cannot be meaningfully determined until a project has been defined. In the event that paleontological resources are discovered during the implementation of future development projects, applicants will be required to comply with regulatory standards enumerated in Public Resources Code Section 5097.574, which identifies the protocol for proper handling. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts related to paleontological resources or unique geologic features. No mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to geology and soils; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
66 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 34

3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS – Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of greenhouse gases?
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b) Would the project generate conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
No Impact: The HEU and SEU are policy documents consistent with the City’s General Plan. The proposed project does not directly propose physical changes in the environment and does not directly propose future development. Impacts related to GHG emissions are unique to a project and cannot be meaningfully determined until a project has been defined. Any future development in the City would be required to comply with the most recent California Building Code, including the CALGreen code, which is intended to reduce GHG emissions through sustainable design and renewable energy considerations. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts related to the generation of GHG emissions or conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emission of GHGs. No mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
67 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 35

3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS – Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site that is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project result in a
safety hazard or excessive noise for people
residing or working in the project area?
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires?
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
No Impact: The HEU and SEU are policy documents consistent with the City’s General Plan. The proposed project does not include physical changes in the environment and does not directly involve future development.

The SEU addresses the protection of the existing and future population and development from both natural and human-caused hazards through goals, policies, and implementation programs. Among these are measures to reduce risks related to hazardous materials. SEU Goal 4 aims to “reduce likelihood of hazardous materials release, exposure, and contamination in Sonora”.

Construction activities associated with future development projects would likely involve the temporary transportation, management, and use of oils, fuels, and other potentially flammable substances, such as paints, solvents, and cleaners. Hazardous materials that may be present during operation of future development projects are usually associated with landscaping and building maintenance and are not 68 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 36
considered a significant risk. However, all future development in the City would be subject to federal, State, and local regulatory requirements related to the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. No mitigation measures are required.
b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
No Impact: Potential future residential uses enabled by the City’s HEU are generally not characterized as substantial generators or hazardous materials, nor are they anticipated to result in upset or accident conditions involving the release thereof. The capital improvement projects suggested in the SEU are not anticipated to result in upset or accident conditions involving hazardous materials either. The SEU addresses the protection of the existing and future population and development from hazardous materials through hazard-specific policies and implementation measures.

The proposed project involves two policy documents and would not directly result in physical changes in the environment. Any future development would be subject to all applicable regulatory requirements concerning the proper handling, treatment, and disposal of hazardous materials. The proposed project would have no impacts related to upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials. No mitigation measures are required.
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact: The City of Sonora has three high schools (Sonora High School, Theodore Bird High School, and Dario Casina High School), two pre-schools, and one elementary school within City limits. The Lemke site identified by the HEU as a potential residential development site is located approximately 0.25-mile from Sonora Elementary School. Additionally, the capital improvement projects suggested in the SEU may be located within 0.25-mile of a school. However, potential hazardous material-related impacts are location-specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. At such time that a development proposal is considered that project will be subject to the development review process. Potential future residential uses enabled by the City’s HEU are generally not characterized as substantial generators or hazardous materials, nor are they anticipated to result in upset or accident conditions involving the release thereof. The capital improvement projects suggested in the SEU are not anticipated to result in upset or accident conditions involving hazardous materials either. The SEU addresses the protection of the existing and future population and development from hazardous materials through hazard-specific policies and implementation measures. The proposed project evaluated herein includes two policy documents and does not directly propose physical changes in the environment. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts related to the emission or handling of hazardous materials within 0.25-mile of a school. No mitigation measures are required.
d) Would the project be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact: According to the Department of Toxic Substances Control, there are 16 potential hazardous waste sites active, certified, historical, or needing evaluation in and near Sonora city limits.12 None of the listed sites coincide with potential project sites identified in the HEU and SEU. The City and surrounding area do not contain 12 California Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2024. EVIROSTOR Project Search Results. Website:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search?CMD=search&city=Sonora&zip=&county=&case_number=&business_name=&FE DERAL_SUPERFUND=True&STATE_RESPONSE=True&VOLUNTARY_CLEANUP=True&SCHOOL_CLEANUP=True&CORRECTIVE_ACTION= True&tiered_permit=True&evaluation=True&operating=True&post_closure=True&non_operating=True&inspections=True&inspecti onsother=True. Accessed June 14, 2024.
69 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 37
heavy industrial uses that would create a hazardous material risk in the event of a spill, release, or natural disaster. SR 49 and SR 108 pass through Sonora and are the two primary transit routes through the surrounding area. However, the transport of hazardous materials along SR 49 and/or SR 108 would be subject to all applicable State, regional, and local regulations regarding safe transport of hazardous materials.

The proposed project involves two policy documents and does not directly propose development. Any future development would be subject to all applicable regulatory requirements concerning the proper handling, treatment, and disposal of hazardous materials. Hazardous materials concerns are location- and projectspecific and cannot be meaningfully assessed until a project and project site have been defined. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts related to sites that are included on a list of hazardous materials sites.

No mitigation measures are required.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact: There are no public use airports in Sonora, and the City is not located within an airport land use plan. The nearest public use airport is located approximately 2.1 miles northwest in Columbia. The HEU and SEU are policy documents that analyze housing and safety needs in the City. The SEU considers aircraft hazards and risks associated with the Columbia Airport and includes a policy to coordinate with Tuolumne County regarding aircraft and flight safety regulations implemented at the airport. It is not anticipated that any future development in the City would result in a safety hazard or excessive noise related to proximity to Columbia Airport. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to excessive noise and safety hazards within an airport land use plan or two miles of a public use airport. No mitigation measures are required. f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact: The City of Sonora does not currently have an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. At the time of publication of this IS/ND, the City is in the process of developing its Emergency Operations Plan. The City is within the boundaries of the Tuolumne County Emergency Operations Plan. State Routes 49 and 108 are the only two transit routes that provide ingress and egress for the City; SR 49 and SR 108 would be the primary evacuation routes for any emergency in the City. The City’s General Plan identifies South Washington Street as the primary evacuation route toward SR 108 (southern and western route), North Washington Street (SR 49) as the primary evacuation route toward northbound SR 49, and Mono Way East as the primary evacuation route eastward toward SR 108.13
The SEU addresses the protection of the existing and future population and development from both natural and human-caused hazards through a number of goals, policies, and implementation measures. Among these are implementation measures related to the creation of an emergency evacuation plan and a study of the existing conditions for evacuation in the City, as well as measures to provide and maintain a sufficient emergency response system for the City. All future development in the City would be required to comply with the provisions of the City’s General Plan, Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, and all regional and local regulations and plans related to evacuation and emergency response. The proposed project includes two policy documents and does not directly involve development. Therefore, the proposed project would result in no impacts related to an emergency response or evacuation plan. No mitigation measures are required. 13 City of Sonora. 2020. General Plan Safety Element. Website: https://sonoraca.com/wpcontent/uploads/2018/09/SonoraGeneralPlan2020-revision-2017-10-16-17-CC-adopted.pdf. Accessed June 14, 2024. 70 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 38
g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact: Almost the entire City is designated as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) by CALFIRE.

The unincorporated areas of Tuolumne County surrounding the City are designated as VHFHSZ or High FHSZ.14 The SEU addresses the protection of the existing and future population and development from both natural and human-caused hazards through goals, policies, and implementation measures. Among these are measures to minimize the risk from the hazards of wildfire and to ensure the protection of people and wildlife from hazardous materials in the community.

Future development in the City would be required to comply with the provisions of the City’s General Plan and all State, regional, and local regulatory requirements related to hazardous materials and wildfire. The proposed project involves two policy documents and does not directly propose any development. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. No impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
14 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2024. Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Website:
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/03beab8511814e79a0e4eabf0d3e7247/. Accessed June 14, 2024. 71 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 39

3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or ground water
quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of the
basin?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river or
through the addition of impervious surfaces, in
a manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation onor off-site; ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would
result in flooding on- or offsite;
iii) create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? No Impact: The proposed project includes two policy documents which are consistent with the City’s General Plan and do not directly propose physical changes to the environment. Potential future projects suggested in the SEU would include capital improvement efforts intended to preserve and enhance water drainage in the City. Future development in the City would be required to follow State, regional, and local regulations regarding onsite stormwater retention, to prevent contamination of surface waters and local groundwater. In order to comply with the federal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements and maintain the Central Valley Region Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit, the Tuolumne County Utilities District, which provides sewer and wastewater services to most of the City, is required to screen and monitor its runoff to avoid compromising downstream water quality standards. Future development projects would be 72 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 40
required by the City to implement BMPs for construction and, if appropriate, SWPPPs to avoid erosion, pollution, sedimentation, and runoff that would degrade water quality. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on water quality standards, waste discharge requirements, or surface or groundwater quality.

No mitigation measures are required.
b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
No Impact: The City’s water infrastructure is owned, maintained, and operated by the Tuolumne Utilities District (TUD). TUD has a contract with Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) which provides for a perpetual water supply from the South Fork of the Stanislaus River. The water is stored in Pinecrest Lake, Lyons Reservoir, Phoenix Lake, and other small reservoirs on the TUD ditch system, from which it is conveyed through a network of ditches, pipelines, and treatment plants to the TUD service area. The Tuolumne Main Canal, which leads from Lyons Reservoir to the Phoenix powerhouse, is a primary component of the conveyance system and includes

15.7 miles of pipeline, some of which is outdated. The surface water supply from the Stanislaus River accounts for approximately 97 percent of the potable water supply provided by the TUD. The TUD is not currently using groundwater as a primary source of water supply, however, when maintenance work must be conducted on the Tuolumne Main Canal, the TUD uses storage tanks and approximately 25 limited capacity groundwater wells to supply water. According to the TUD Urban Water Management Plan, groundwater is limited due to the impermeable bedrock that covers most of Tuolumne County.15 Any future development would also be subject to all applicable State, regional, and local regulatory requirements concerning the efficient use and conservation of water resources and preservation of groundwater resources and quality. The proposed project includes two policy documents and does not directly involve any development. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on groundwater supplies or recharge. No mitigation measures are required.
c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
No Impact: The proposed project includes two policy documents that are consistent with the City’s General Plan and do not directly propose physical changes to the environment. The City’s SEU contains goals, policies, and implementation measures intended to minimize risk from flooding or erosion. Any potential future development related to the SEU would include capital improvement projects designed to improve existing drainage patterns and minimize the risk of damage as a result of flooding. Potential impacts related to drainage are unique to a project and cannot be meaningfully determined until a project and project site have been defined. Future development in the City would be required to follow State, regional, and local regulations regarding drainage, erosion, and runoff. The TUD is required to screen and monitor its runoff to avoid compromising downstream water quality standards to comply with federal NPDES requirements and maintain the Central Valley Region MS4 permit. The City would also require BMPs for construction in order to avoid 15 Tuolumne Utilities District. 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan for Tuolumne Utilities District. Website:
https://tudwater.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/TUD-2020-UWMP_Adopted-June-2021.pdf. June. Accessed June 14, 2024. 73 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 41
erosion, pollution, sedimentation, and runoff that would degrade water quality. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to drainage patterns or the course of a stream or river. No mitigation measures are required.
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
No Impact: The City is located approximately 117 miles from the ocean and is not at risk from tsunamis. There are no bodies of water in the City that could put the City at risk from a seiche. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map, the Woods Creek area is mapped within the FEMA 100-year flood zone.16 A 100-year flood zone has a 1 percent chance of experiencing a major flood in any given year. There are no other federally mapped flood hazard zones in Sonora. However, the City has experienced extreme flooding in recent years as a result of severe weather events, and areas around Sonora Creek and the Downtown have experienced damage or been at risk. The SEU contains goals, policies, and implementation measures intended to minimize flood hazard risks and increase the resiliency of the community to flood events. Any potential future development projects related to the SEU would improve and reinforce existing drainage patterns and capabilities in flood-prone areas of the City.

Future development would be subject to all applicable federal, State, and local regulatory requirements concerning flood hazards, including measures identified in the City’s General Plan. The proposed project includes two policy documents and does not directly propose any development. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on the release of pollutants in a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone. No mitigation measures are required.
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
No Impact: The proposed project involves updating two policy documents and does not propose any land use changes or authorize any physical development. Any future development that occurs pursuant to the SEU or HEU would be subject to State, regional, and local regulations regarding water quality, runoff, and hydrology, as well as to City planning, engineering, and building requirements. The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
16 Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2009. FEMA Flood Map Service Center – Tuolumne County. Website:
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=sonora%20ca. Accessed June 14, 2024. 74 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 42

3.11 Land Use and Planning
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING – Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due
to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental effect?
a) Would the project physically divide an established community? b) Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
No Impact: The City has prepared its HEU and SEU in accordance with Section 65580 and Section 65302(g) of the Government Code, respectively. The updates have also been prepared consistent with the City’s General Plan and the community’s vision of its housing and safety needs and objectives. Accordingly, the HEU examines the City’s housing needs as they exist currently, and projects future housing needs based on RHNA allocation.

No change to the land use plan is proposed as part of the HEU. The HEU includes the establishment of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation Overlay Zone District at the Lemke site, however, this District would layer on top of the existing base R3 zoning regulations, leaving in place the option to develop under the base zoning, but providing the opportunity to develop the property through a ministerial by-right approval process should an applicant propose 20 percent low-income deed restricted affordable housing. The SEU identifies and evaluates both natural and human-caused hazards in the City and includes goals, policies, and implementation measures designed to minimize the City’s hazard risks and vulnerabilities. Any subsequent discretionary actions or development that occur(s) pursuant to the HEU or SEU policies would be reviewed and processed in accordance with City planning policies. The HEU and SEU have been prepared in compliance with State law, and no actual development is proposed at this time. No potential adverse impacts related to land use would occur as a result of the proposed project. No mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to land use and planning; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
75 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 43

3.12 Mineral Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact: The City of Sonora was historically a gold-mining town and is known for having rich mineral deposits.

According to the California Department of Conservation Mineral Land Classification Maps, the City of Sonora is comprised of three mineral resource zones (MRZ-2b, MRZ-3a, and MRZ-3b). MRZ-2b includes areas underlain by mineral deposits where geologic information indicates that significant inferred resources are present. MRZ-3a includes areas containing known mineral occurrences of undetermined mineral resource significance. MRZ-3b includes areas containing inferred mineral occurrences of undetermined mineral resource significance, but with geologic settings that appear to be favorable environments for the occurrence of specific mineral deposits.17 Additionally, the City’s General Plan recognizes three mineral resource zones throughout the City which are characterized as having precious metals, including lode gold and silver. Much of these mineral resources are no longer available because of existing development, however, the General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element seeks to preserve the City’s remaining mineral resources to the extent feasible.18 The proposed project includes two policy documents that are consistent with the General Plan. No land use changes are proposed, and the project would not result in direct physical changes to the environment. Future development would be subject to all State, regional, and local rules and regulations pertaining to the preservation of mineral resources. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on a known mineral resource or the availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site. No mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to mineral resources; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
17 California Department of Conservation. 2019. CGS Information Warehouse: Mineral Land Classification Maps (SMARA Study Areas). Website: https://maps-cnracadoc.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/0f5d685bb11e4c88abc73b7376d4bbca/explore?location=38.056064%2C-119.853535%2C9.11.

Accessed June 14, 2024. 18 City of Sonora. 2020. General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element. Website: https://sonoraca.com/wpcontent/uploads/2018/09/SonoraGeneralPlan2020-revision-2017-10-16-17-CC-adopted.pdf. Accessed June 14, 2024. 76 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 44

3.13 Noise
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XIII. NOISE – Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the vicinity of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration
or groundborne noise levels?
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
No Impact: The HEU and SEU are both policy documents and would not result in direct physical changes to the environment. Potential noise impacts are project-specific and cannot be meaningfully determined until a project and project site have been defined. Future development would be required to adhere to the goals, policies, and implementation measures outlined in the General Plan Noise Element and the City’s Municipal Code. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact associated with an increase in ambient noise or the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or noise. No mitigation measures are required. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact: The City of Sonora is located more than two miles from the nearest public use airport and is not located within an airport land use plan. The HEU and SEU are policy documents, and no development is proposed at this time. Future development would be required to adhere to the policies of the City’s General Plan Noise Element and the City’s Municipal Code. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to excessive noise levels within the vicinity of a public use airport or airport land use plan. No mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to noise; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
77 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 45

3.14 Population and Housing
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING – Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for example,
by proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact: The City of Sonora experienced a population growth of 0.75 percent from 2010 to 2021, however the population decreased at a rate of -1.26 percent between 2020 and 2021. The population of Tuolumne County has been decreasing as well, and according to the California Department of Transportation’s Economic Forecast for Tuolumne County, the population is expected to continue to decrease at a rate of approximately

0.5 percent through 2028, because a significant portion of the County’s population is elderly and continuing to age, and in-migration is minimal.19 The housing stock in Sonora increased by approximately 2.6 percent between 2015 and 2023; the City has experienced housing growth at a rate that corresponds with population growth. The RHNA allocation for the City’s 2024-2029 HEU is two units, including one very low-income unit and one low-income unit. As shown in Table 2-1, the City has two undeveloped sites with land use designations and zoning permissive of residential development that could accommodate the RHNA allocation in all relevant income categories. The table illustrates a surplus capacity of 152 units, including 52 very low income and 52 low-income units, based on possible residential development over the planning period.

Any potential future development pursuant to the HEU or SEU would be consistent with State and regional growth mandates. The proposed project includes two policy documents and does not directly involve any development. The proposed project would not displace housing or people and is intended to promote affordability and increase housing supply, which could support retention of households in all income categories. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to unplanned population growth or the displacement of a significant number of people. No mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to population and housing; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
19 California Department of Transportation. 2023. Tuolumne County Economic Forecast. Website: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/transportation-planning/documents/data-analytics-services/transportation-economics/socioeconomicforecasts/2023/2023-pdf/tuolumne-2023-a11y.pdf. Accessed June 14, 2024. 78 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 46

3.15 Public Services
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XV. PUBLIC SERVICES – Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire protection?
No Impact: The Sonora Fire Department (SFD) provides fire protection services to the City. The SFD has one fire station located at 201 South Shepherd Street. The proposed project, which includes the HEU and SEU, would implement policies to promote maintenance of acceptable service ratios, response times, and other performance objectives for fire protection. Additionally, since the City is within a CALFIRE-designated VHFHSZ, the SEU includes implementation measures to enforce the most recent California Fire Code standards during development, as well as wildfire adaptation and mitigation measures, including potential retrofitting efforts for outdated buildings. Compliance with these standards would reduce the fire vulnerability of new and old structures in the City. The HEU and SEU are policy documents, and do not directly involve any development. All future development would be subject to review and approval by the SFD. Additionally, all future development would be required to adhere to all State and local regulations regarding fire protection and building standards, as well as policies and implementation standards outlined in other sections of the General Plan. Therefore, the project would have no impact on fire protection services, and no mitigation measures are required.

Police protection?
No Impact: The Sonora Police Department provides police services and protection to the City. The Sonora Police Station is located at 100 South Green Street. The proposed project includes two policy documents and does not directly propose any development. The HEU and SEU would implement policies to promote maintenance of acceptable service ratios, response times, and other performance objectives for police protection. Future development would be required to adhere to State and local regulations, including any relevant policies in the General Plan, intended to maintain adequate police protection services. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on police protection services, and no mitigation measures are required. 79 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 47
Schools?
No Impact: The Sonora Union High School District and Sonora Elementary School District serve the City.

School-related impacts depend on the location, type, and size of a project, including students generated per household, and the capacity of facilities in a given attendance area. Impacts to schools cannot be meaningfully determined until a project is defined. The HEU and SEU are policy documents and do not directly involve any future development. Future development would be required to pay development impact fees, pursuant to the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code, to offset potential development impacts. Therefore, the project would have no impact on schools, and no mitigation measures are required.

Parks?
No Impact: Park-related impacts depend on the location, type, and size of a project. The City of Sonora has numerous parks, open space areas, and trails. However, the HEU and SEU are policy documents and do not directly involve any future development. All future development would be required to adhere to State and local regulations, including policies and measures outlined in the General Plan to preserve park and recreation facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on parks, and no mitigation measures are required.

Other public facilities?
No Impact: The HEU and SEU are policy documents and do not directly involve any development. All future development would be required to adhere to all applicable State and local regulations. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on other public facilities, and no mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to public services; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
80 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 48

3.16 Recreation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XVI. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
No Impact: Impacts to recreational facilities depend upon the location, type, and size of a project. The City of Sonora has numerous public parks, trails, and open space areas. Impacts to recreational facilities cannot be meaningfully determined until a project is defined. The HEU and SEU are policy documents and do not directly involve any development. Future development would be required to adhere to all applicable State and local regulations, including policies and measures outlined in other sections of the General Plan intended to preserve the City’s recreational facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on recreational facilities, and no mitigation measures are required.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact: The proposed project includes two policy documents and does not directly involve any development or construction. Therefore, the project would not construct any recreational facilities or require the expansion of recreational facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on new or expanded recreational facilities. No mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to recreation; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
81 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 49

3.17 Transportation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XVII. TRANSPORTATION – Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? No Impact: Impacts related to transportation and circulation depend on the location, type, and size of a project, and cannot be meaningfully determined until a project and project site are defined. The HEU and SEU are policy documents consistent with the City’s General Plan and Zoning Code. The updates do not include any changes to land use designations, building heights and intensities, or residential densities. The HEU includes the creation of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment Overlay Zone District on the Lemke site, which would layer on top of the base R3 zoning regulations, leaving in place the option to develop under the base zoning, but providing the opportunity to develop the property through a ministerial by-right approval process should an applicant propose 20 percent low-income deed restricted affordable housing. Any future development in the City would be required to adhere to all applicable State and local regulations, programs, ordinances, and policies that address circulation, including those in the General Plan Circulation Element and the City’s Municipal Code. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on circulation, and no mitigation measures are required.
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? No Impact: Many streets in Sonora lack proper width and turning radii for emergency vehicle access. Several streets allow for on-street parking that limits emergency vehicle access, and certain subdivisions within the City only have one point of ingress/egress that could become blocked during an emergency scenario. The SEU addresses the protection of existing and future population and development from both natural and humancaused hazards through goals, policies, and implementation measures. Among these include policies and programs intended to increase adequate emergency vehicle access and evacuation routes in the City; SEU Goal 8 aims for “decreased vulnerability to critical facilities, residents, and visitors to hazard events through proper evacuation planning”. To ensure adequate emergency access, future development in the City would be required to comply with the provisions of the Municipal Code during construction and operation. Future development 82 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 50
would also be required to adhere to all applicable local regulations and policies, including those of a potential future evacuation plan. The proposed project includes two policy documents and does not directly involve any development. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on emergency access, and no mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to transportation; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
83 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 51

3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in
its discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.

Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)? b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

No Impact: According to California Public Resources Code Section 21084, a project may have a significant effect on the environment if the project “may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource”. Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) specifies that a project with the potential for adverse effects on tribal cultural resources may be considered a significant effect on the environment. Senate Bill 18 (SB 18) requires a government-to-government consultation process initiated by the local governmental agency prior to adoption or amendment of a General or Specific Plan.

The City, as the Lead Agency pursuant to CEQA and as required by AB 52 and SB 18, initiated consultation on August 29, 2024 through mailing, via certified mail, and emailing AB 52 and SB 18 consultation letters for the proposed project, including project information and contact information to ten Native American tribes. The tribal governments provided with an AB 52 consultation letter include the following list of recipients:
84 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 52
• Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians20
• Calaveras Band of Mi-Wuk Indians21
• Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians22
• Ione Band of Miwok Indians
• Jackson Rancheria Band of Miwuk Indians23
• Nashville Enterprise Miwok-Maidu-Nishinam Tribe24
• Pakan’yani Maidu of Strawberry Valley Rancheria
• Southern Sierra Miwuk Nation25
• Tule River Indian Tribe
• Wuksachi Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band
Under SB 18, Native American tribes have 90 days to respond and request further project information and/or formal consultation. On August 29, 2024, the City received a response from the Calaveras Band of Mi-Wuk Indians stating that the Calaveras Band of Mi-Wuk Indians refers to Tuolumne Rancheria and Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians. No further consultation was requested. On August 30, 2024, the City received a response from the Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians confirming receipt of the notification and stating that Chicken Ranch Rancheria would reach out again if there were concerns found with the project. No further contact was received, and no consultation was requested. The City did not receive any other responses during the consultation period.

The HEU and SEU are policy documents that would not directly result in development or construction. To date, two Tribes responded during the consultation process and did not have any comments or concerns. The proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in the local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k). Therefore, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to tribal cultural resources; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
20 AB 52 and SB 18 letters were sent to two contacts at the Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians. 21 AB 52 and SB 18 letters were sent to three contacts at the Calaveras Band of Mi-Wuk Indians. 22 AB 52 and SB 18 letters were sent to four contacts at the Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians. 23 AB 52 and SB 18 letters were sent to two contacts at the Jackson Rancheria Band of Miwuk Indians. One contact was notified only by certified mail, as no email address was provided.
24 AB 52 and SB 18 letters were sent to two contacts at the Nashville Enterprise Miwok-Maidu-Nishinam Tribe. One contact only provided a phone number; the City called and left a voicemail for this contact. 25 AB 52 and SB 18 letters were sent to two contacts at the Southern Sierra Miwuk Nation. 85 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 53

3.19 Utilities and Service Systems
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XIX.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS – Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water drainage,
electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction
or relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably foreseeable
future development during normal, dry, and
multiple dry years?
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve
the project that it has adequate capacity to
serve the project’s projected demand in
addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or
local standards, or in excess of the capacity of
local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the
attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
No Impact: The proposed project includes the adoption of the City’s HEU and SEU, which are policy documents that would not directly result in development or construction. The HEU identifies two currently undeveloped sites as suitable for potential housing development to meet the RHNA allocation. According to the HEU, principal site improvements required upon development of a vacant property in the City include the undergrounding of electrical, gas, and telecommunication lines to the structure, installation of a public sewage system, grading and improvement of public and private streets, storm drainage and flood control facilities within and outside the subdivision, a water supply system providing an adequate supply of potable water to each lot and fire hydrant, and fire hydrants and connections.

All future development in the City would be subject to all applicable State, regional, local, and utility provider regulations and requirements concerning the installation of utilities. Utility services impacts depend on the project type and location and cannot be meaningfully determined until a project has been defined. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts related to the construction or expansion of new or expanded 86 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 54
water, wastewater treatment, stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities. No mitigation measures are required.
b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? No Impact: According to the 2020 Tuolumne Utilities District Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), approximately 97 percent of the District’s water is imported from the South Fork of the Stanislaus River through a contract with PG&E. The UWMP states that multiple dry years have minimal impact on the District’s water supply because the District’s water source does not rely on carry-over storage, and the reservoirs used to store water for the District are refilled every year to meet demand. According to the UWMP, TUD’s surface water supply from the South Fork of the Stanislaus River is expected to be 100 percent reliable during all year types, and all single dry year and multiple dry year projections for 2025, 2030, 2035, 2040, and 2045 demonstrate a significant surplus of water supply for the entire District.26 Therefore, the District expects that, under all hydrologic conditions, purchased water supplies (in combination with groundwater supplies) will fully serve potable water demands.

All future development would be required to comply with all applicable State, regional, and local regulatory requirements concerning the efficient use and conservation of water resources, including measures identified in the City’s General Plan. The proposed project includes two policy documents and does not directly involve any development. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on water supplies, and no mitigation measures are required.
c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
No Impact: Wastewater treatment in the City occurs through either private septic tanks or through the TUD Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant located in the southwestern portion of the City. The TUD owns, operates, and maintains the sewer system that services the majority of the City and consists of gravity sewers, lift stations, and approximately 140 miles of pipeline to collect wastewater from the TUD service area. The Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant provides advanced primary and secondary treatment for approximately 1.2 million gallons per day of wastewater.27 The plant is capable of treating an average of 2 million gallons of wastewater per day.28
The proposed project includes two policy documents and does not directly involve any development. All future development would be subject to all applicable State, regional, and local regulatory requirements concerning the efficient use and conservation of water resources, including measures identified in the City’s General Plan.

Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on wastewater treatment capacity, and no mitigation measures are required.
d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
No Impact: The City of Sonora contracts with Waste Management/Cal Sierra Disposal to provide solid waste services within the City. Cal Sierra Disposal operates the Buy Back Center Recycling Center, a Transfer Station, 26 Tuolumne Utilities District. 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan for Tuolumne Utilities District. Website:
https://tudwater.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/TUD-2020-UWMP_Adopted-June-2021.pdf. June. Accessed June 14, 2024. 27 Tuolumne Utilities District. 2024. TUD’s Sewer System. Website: https://tudwater.com/customer-service/sewer-services/.

Accessed June 14, 2024. 28 Tuolumne Utilities District. 2024. “Tuolumne Utilities District Celebrates Completion of New Sonora Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility.” May 28, 2024. Website: https://tudwater.com/sonora-regional-celebration/. Accessed June 14, 2024. 87 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 55
and the Cal Sierra Earth Resource Facility in Sonora.29 The proposed project involves two policy documents and does not directly involve any development. Future development would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, regional, and local standards, management and reduction statutes, and regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on solid waste generation or compliance with applicable regulations related to solid waste. No mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to utilities and service systems; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
29 Waste Management. 2024. Cal Sierra Disposal. Website:
https://www.wm.com/location/california/tuolumne/sonora/locations/index.jsp. Accessed June 18, 2024. 88 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 56

3.20 Wildfire
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XX. WILDFIRE – If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby
expose project occupants to pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines
or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or
that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts
to the environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
a) Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact: Most of the City is designated as a VHFHSZ by CALFIRE. As mentioned in Section 3.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the City of Sonora does not currently have an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. At the time of publication of this IS/ND, the City is in the process of developing its Emergency Operations Plan. The City is within the boundaries of the Tuolumne County Emergency Operations Plan. State Routes 49 and 108 are the only two transit routes that provide ingress and egress for the City; SR 49 and SR 108 would be the primary evacuation routes for any emergency in the City. The City’s General Plan identifies South Washington Street as the primary evacuation route toward SR 108 (southern and western route), North Washington Street (SR 49) as the primary evacuation route toward northbound SR 49, and Mono Way East as the primary evacuation route eastward toward SR 108.30
Many streets in Sonora lack proper width and turning radii for emergency vehicle access. Several streets allow for on-street parking that limits emergency vehicle access, and certain subdivisions within the City only have one point of ingress/egress that could become blocked during an emergency scenario. The SEU addresses the protection of existing and future population and development from both natural and human-caused hazards through goals, policies, and implementation measures. Among these include policies and programs intended to increase adequate emergency vehicle access and evacuation routes in the City; SEU Goal 8 aims for “decreased vulnerability to critical facilities, residents, and visitors to hazard events through proper evacuation planning”. The SEU also includes goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce the risk of fire hazards in the City. However, potential impacts related to emergency response and evacuation are unique to a project and cannot be meaningfully determined until a project has been defined. To ensure adequate 30 City of Sonora. 2020. General Plan Safety Element. Website: https://sonoraca.com/wpcontent/uploads/2018/09/SonoraGeneralPlan2020-revision-2017-10-16-17-CC-adopted.pdf. Accessed June 14, 2024. 89 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 57
emergency access, future development in the City would be required to undergo review by the SFD and to comply with the provisions of the Municipal Code during construction and operation. Future development would also be required to adhere to all applicable local regulations and policies, including those of a potential future evacuation plan. The proposed project includes two policy documents and does not directly involve any development. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, and no mitigation measures are required. b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, would the project exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
No Impact: Most of the City is designated as a VHFHSZ by CALFIRE, and a substantial amount of land in the City consists of hillsides and sloped terrain. The sites identified in the HEU as potential locations for future residential development both contain hilly, wooded terrain. The SEU includes measures intended to minimize the risk of fire hazards and increase the resiliency of the community to future wildfires. However, potential impacts related to fire exacerbation are unique to a project and cannot be meaningfully determined until a project has been defined. The proposed project includes two policy documents and does not directly involve any development. Future development in the City would require project-specific review on behalf of the SFD.

Future development would also be required to comply with the provisions of the City’s General Plan, LHMP, and all other local regulations pertaining to wildfire risks during construction and operation. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to exacerbated wildfire risks, pollutant concentrations from wildfire, or uncontrolled spread of wildfire. No mitigation measures are required. c) Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? No Impact: According to the HEU, principal site improvements required upon development of a vacant property in the City include the undergrounding of electrical, gas, and telecommunication lines to the structure, installation of a public sewage system, grading and improvement of public and private streets, storm drainage and flood control facilities within and outside the subdivision, a water supply system providing an adequate supply of potable water to each lot and fire hydrant, and fire hydrants and connections. Any potential future development on either of the housing sites identified in the HEU would require the installation of infrastructure that could exacerbate fire risks. The SEU includes measures to minimize the risk of fire hazards to existing and future development in the City. However, the proposed project includes two policy documents and does not directly involve any development. Any future development in the City, including development pursuant to the HEU or SEU, would require project-specific review on behalf of the SFD. Potential impacts related to utility installation and fire exacerbation are unique to a project and cannot be meaningfully determined until a project has been defined. Additionally, all future development would be required to comply with all applicable State, regional, local, and utility provider regulations pertaining to infrastructure improvements and wildfire risk.

Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk. No mitigation measures are required. d) Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
No Impact: Most of the City is designated as a VHFHSZ by CALFIRE, and a substantial amount of land in the City consists of sloped, wooded terrain susceptible to landslide risks. According to the HEU, principal site improvements required upon development of a vacant property in the City include storm drainage and flood control facilities within and outside the subdivision. The SEU includes measures intended to minimize the risk of fire hazards in the City. However, potential impacts related to post-fire instability and drainage changes are unique to a project type and location and cannot be meaningfully determined until a project has been defined.

Future development in the City would require review by the SFD. Future development would also be required to comply with all applicable State, regional, and local regulations regarding wildfire hazards, water quality 90 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 58
standards, and drainage. The proposed project includes two policy documents and does not directly involve any development. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts related to downslope or downstream flooding or landslides. No mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to wildfire; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
91 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 59

3.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat
of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal, or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable”
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
No Impact: As demonstrated throughout this document, the proposed project would have no impacts to Aesthetics, Agricultural and Forestry Resources, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, Tribal Cultural Resources, Utilities and Service Systems, or Wildfires.

Implementation of the City’s HEU and SEU would not create any significant or adverse impacts and would therefore not contribute to any cumulatively considerable impacts. The proposed project involves adoption of two policy documents consistent with the General Plan and does not include any changes to land use 92 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 60
designations, building heights and intensities, or residential densities. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts or cumulatively considerable impacts on the environment. 93 Item A.
2024-2029 HEU AND SEU IS/ND
CSG CONSULTANTS 61
4 List of Preparers
IS/ND Preparation:

CSG Consultants
3707 W. Garden Grove Boulevard,
Suite 100
Orange, California 92868
• Glenn Lajoie, AICP – Principal, Director of Environmental Planning • Kelli Allen – Associate Environmental Planner
• Jennifer French – Document/Publications Specialist
94 Item A.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

C I T Y H A L L
CITY OF SONORA 94 N. WASHINGTON STREET, SONORA, CA 95370 P: (209) 532-4541

SERVICE, INNOVATION, INTEGRITY, COLLABORATION, RESPECT, LEADERSHIP DATE: March 2, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Tyler Summersett, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Conduct a Public Hearing to Receive Public Comment Regarding Possible Application for State of California Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) RECOMMENDATION:

Conduct a Public Hearing to Receive Public Comment Regarding Possible Application for State of California Community Development Block Grant (CDBG); and
Consider Adopting Resolution 03-02-2026-A Supporting a City Application to the Community Development Block Grant Program in the Amount of $995,000 to Rehabilitate the Structure at 290 S. Stewart Street.

BACKGROUND / ANALYSIS:

The purpose of this meeting is to review Community Development Block Grant eligible activities and collect residents’ views on housing and community development needs (which includes services, facilities, and/or infrastructure that will improve livability within the community).

The primary federal objective of the CDBG program is the development of viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment and through expanding economic opportunities, principally, for persons of low- and moderate-income. “Persons of low and moderate income” are defined as families, households, and individuals whose incomes do not exceed 80 percent of the county median income, adjusted for family or household size.

Eligible Activities/Projects
Community Development (CD)
Housing
 Includes single- and multi-family rehabilitation, rental housing acquisition or homeownership assistance, and activities that support new housing construction.

Public Improvements
95 Item B.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

C I T Y H A L L
CITY OF SONORA 94 N. WASHINGTON STREET, SONORA, CA 95370 P: (209) 532-4541

SERVICE, INNOVATION, INTEGRITY, COLLABORATION, RESPECT, LEADERSHIP  Includes water and wastewater systems, and rural utilities such as gas and electric services.

Community Facilities
 Includes day care centers, domestic violence shelters, food banks, community centers, medical and dental facilities, and fire stations.

Public Services
 Includes staff and operating costs associated with the community facilities.

Planning and Technical Assistance (PTA)
 Includes studies and plans for housing, public works, and community facilities that meet CDBG national objectives and provide principal benefit to low-income persons.

Native American
 Housing and housing-related activities.
 Water, sewer, and housing.

Colonia (Unincorporated communities only)
 Needs related to water, sewage, and housing.

Economic Development (ED)
Enterprise Fund
 Grants for loans to businesses for working capital, land acquisition, equipment purchase, inventory purchase, debt restructuring, and other direct assistance. Grants to support businesses by providing water and sewer services, access roads, and other public facilities. Microenterprise funds may provide credit, general support (e.g., childcare, transportation), or technical assistance for persons developing microenterprises.

Planning and Technical Assistance (PTA)
 Studies and plans for economic development activities that meet CDBG national objectives and provide principal benefit to low-income persons.

DISCUSSION:

The home located at 290 Stewart Street was acquired by the City in 2021 for approximately $150,000. Since this time, the structure has sat vacant. The original intent of acquiring the building was to use it as an emergency shelter to house up to 15 community members. In light of similar resources already located in central Sonora, the vision for the historic residence has evolved to remodeling the building into a 4-unit rental property.

Staff considered both demolition and rehabilitation of the structure. Habitat for Humanity brought its team out to investigate the building. The project fitstheir mission and the work they are doing in the community. Ultimately, a partnership with Habitat for Humanity was formalized by a Memorandum of Understanding.

The City hired Thurmond Consulting to assist City staff in writing successful CDBG applications and helping to manage the award once received.
96 Item B.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

C I T Y H A L L
CITY OF SONORA 94 N. WASHINGTON STREET, SONORA, CA 95370 P: (209) 532-4541

SERVICE, INNOVATION, INTEGRITY, COLLABORATION, RESPECT, LEADERSHIP Together with Habitat for Humanity and Thurmond Consulting, the City has been preparing a funding application, due April 3, 2026. Habitat has prepared plans for the remodel and estimated costs based on past projects with similar elements. The house has been tested for asbestos and will require some remediation during rehabilitation.

The City has posted flyers on social media, at the Library, in the paper, and online regarding this funding opportunity and the proposed project for consideration. The application will request 995,000 in CDBG Program Income funds to complete this project.

This is a significant project for the City in many ways. It will add much-needed housing, and will rehabilitate a vacant, dilapidated building, which has been an eyesore for many years. Completing the project will hopefully draw additional investment into the City and downtown.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The City is requesting $950,000 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding to support the proposed project. If awarded, CDBG funds will cover eligible project costs in accordance with program guidelines.

To date, the City has incurred limited preliminary expenditures related to project preparation, including asbestos testing, minor winterization measures, and site clean-up activities. These costs total less than $5,000, including approximately $1,300 for asbestos testing.

Additionally, the City has allocated $20,000 for consultant services associated with grant preparation, environmental review, and project administration. Consultant costs will be reimbursed through CDBG funds.

Should the grant be awarded, staff will return to Council with any required budget amendments to formally appropriate the grant revenues and related expenditures. If the grant is not awarded, the City’s financial exposure will be limited to the preliminary costs incurred to date and consultant expenses already budgeted.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A- Conceptual Plans for the Stewart Street House Attachment B- Resolution 03-02-2026-A
CORE COUNCIL PRIORITIES:

Fiscal Responsibility and Stability, Infrastructure and Engineering, Public Safety and Disaster Preparedness, Economic Development/Growth and General Plan, Homelessness Issues 97 Item B.
98 Item B.
99 Item B.
100
Item B.
1 Department of Housing and Community Development
Resolution Form Revised 3/18/2025 2025 CDBG NOFA
Appendix C: Resolution Template of the Governing Body
(Required)
Applicants are required to use the resolution form on the following page with no changes to content other than what is in the fillable fields.

When completing and preparing the Resolution, please refer to section V.D. of the 2025 NOFA.

Please note: On the next page, hidden text is used to provide instructions. Once a document is printed or converted to a pdf, the hidden text will be omitted.

To display hidden text:

1. Go to the Files Tab

2. Select Options from the bottom of the left-hand column

3. Click on the “Display” option

4. Check the “Hidden Text” box.

5. Make sure the “Print hidden text” box is not checked. This will ensure that when you convert to PDF or print the document, the instructional, hidden text is not displayed.

Note 1: The attesting officer cannot be the person identified in the Resolution as the authorized signer.

Note 2: Unless there is a city ordinance stating otherwise, the mayor must be the designated official in Section 5.
101
Item B.

Resolution of the City of Sonora
RESOLUTION NO. 03-02-2026-A

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR FUNDING AND THE

EXECUTION OF A GRANT AGREEMENT AND ANY AMENDMENTS
THERETO FROM THE 2025 FUNDING YEAR OF THE STATE CDBG

PROGRAM
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Sonora as follows:

SECTION 1:

The City Council has reviewed and hereby approves the submission to the State of California of one or more application(s) in the aggregate amount, not to exceed, of $995,000 for the following CDBG activities, pursuant to the and 2025 CDBG NOFA:

List activities and amounts
Activity (e.g. Public Services,
Infrastructure, etc.)
Dollar Amount Being Requested for the
Activity
Infrastructure (290 S. Stewart House Restoration) $ 995,000 $
$
$
$
SECTION 2:

The City Council hereby approves the use of Program Income in an amount not to exceed $995,000 for the CDBG activities described in Section 1.

SECTION 3:

The City Council acknowledges compliance with all state and federal public participation requirements in the development of its application(s).

SECTION 4:

The City Council hereby authorizes and directs the Mayor or designee*, to execute and deliver all applications and act on the City’s behalf in all matters pertaining to all such applications.

SECTION 5:

If an application is approved, the Mayor or designee* is authorized to enter into, execute, and deliver the grant agreement (i.e., Standard Agreement), any recordable or 102
Item B.
nonrecordable contract documents, and any and all subsequent amendments thereto with the State of California for the purposes of the grant.

SECTION 6:

If an application is approved, the Mayor or designee*, is authorized to sign and submit Funds Requests and all required reporting forms and other documentation as may be required by the State of California from time to time in connection with the grant.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Sonora held on 3/2/2026 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Ann Segerstrom, Mayor
City Council

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
City of Sonora
I, Tracy Skelly, City Clerk of the City of Sonora, State of California, hereby certifies the above and foregoing to be a full, true, and correct copy of a resolution adopted by said City Council on this 2nd day of March, 2026 and that said resolution has not been amended, modified, repealed, or rescinded since its date of adoption and is in full force and effect as of the date hereof.

Tracy Skelly, City Clerk of the City of Sonora
State of California
______________________________________
By: Tracy Skelly, City Clerk
103
Item B.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

C I T Y H A L L
CITY OF SONORA 94 N. WASHINGTON STREET, SONORA, CA 95370 P: (209) 532-4541

SERVICE, INNOVATION, INTEGRITY, COLLABORATION, RESPECT, LEADERSHIP DATE: March 02, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Chris Gorsky, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Accept the FY2025/26 Mid-Year Budget Update and Approve the Recommended Budget Adjustments.

RECOMMENDATION:

Accept the Fiscal Year 25/26 Mid-Year Budget Update with recommended adjustments, as presented on page 25 of the report.

BACKGROUND:

The annual Mid-Year Budget Review is a critical governance tool that promotes financial transparency, accountability, and long-term fiscal stability. The review provides the City Council with an opportunity to evaluate General Fund performance, adjust appropriations as needed, and assess the City’s overall financial condition.

The City Council adopted a structurally balanced FY25/26 budget on June 16, 2025, incorporating conservative revenue projections and responsible expenditure assumptions. This mid-year update evaluates revenues and expenditures for the six-month period ending December 31, 2025, and provides updated projections for the remainder of the fiscal year.

DISCUSSION / ANALYSIS:

The attached FY 2025/26 Mid-Year Budget Update provides a comprehensive review of the City’s financial position through December 31, 2025, and includes recommended budget adjustments designed to maintain structural balance and strengthen long-term financial sustainability. Revenues are performing modestly above projections, expenditures are trending slightly below budget, and the City continues advancing the goals identified in the 2024 Strategic Plan.

While financial performance is positive at this time, staff will continue closely monitoring economic indicators given ongoing national economic uncertainty and the City’s reliance on sales tax revenues.

Revenue Performance
Revenues have demonstrated resilience despite moderating national economic conditions. 104
Item A.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

C I T Y H A L L
CITY OF SONORA 94 N. WASHINGTON STREET, SONORA, CA 95370 P: (209) 532-4541

SERVICE, INNOVATION, INTEGRITY, COLLABORATION, RESPECT, LEADERSHIP  Total sales tax revenues are at approximately 53.5% of the adopted budget and trending above the prior fiscal year.
 Measure Y revenues are performing 2.7% above budget and 3.5% higher than in the same period last year, resulting in a recommended upward adjustment of $75,000.  Bradley-Burns sales tax revenues are also trending above projections, with a recommended increase of $75,000.
 Transient Occupancy Tax revenues require a $125,000 upward adjustment due to the receipt of previously outstanding payments.

These adjustments reflect performance trends while maintaining conservative forecasting assumptions for the remainder of the fiscal year.

Expenditure Trends
General Fund expenditures are trending slightly below projections at mid-year.

Salaries and benefits, the largest General Fund expenditure category, are currently tracking at approximately 47% of budget, consistent with historical patterns. Vacancy savings and disciplined expenditure management have contributed to this favorable position.

Recommended expenditure adjustments include:
 Recognition of personnel savings from vacancies.
 Increased legal services funding related to labor negotiations and Public Records Act activity.  Reallocation of funding for parking lot capital projects.  Additional contributions to the Capital Improvement Reserve.  Additional contributions to the CalPERS Employer Prefunding Trust to proactively manage long-term pension obligations.

These actions reflect a strategic approach to strengthening reserves during stable revenue periods while maintaining ongoing operational balance.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The General Fund began FY 2025/26 with an available fund balance of approximately $12.3 million. As of December 31, 2025, the fund balance is approximately $13.3 million.

The recommended mid-year adjustments include:
 A net increase in revenues of $323,500.
 A net increase in expenditures of $21,049.
105
Item A.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

C I T Y H A L L
CITY OF SONORA 94 N. WASHINGTON STREET, SONORA, CA 95370 P: (209) 532-4541

SERVICE, INNOVATION, INTEGRITY, COLLABORATION, RESPECT, LEADERSHIP  Within those expenditure adjustments, $150,000 in additional contributions to the Capital Improvement Reserve and the CalPERS Employer Prefunding Trust.

The General Fund remains structurally balanced, with ongoing expenditures supported by recurring revenues.

Any remaining unused appropriations at fiscal year-end will either be re-budgeted in the subsequent fiscal year or transferred to designated reserve accounts, consistent with Council policy.

ATTACHMENTS:
 FY25/26 Mid-Year Budget Update
CORE COUNCIL PRIORITIES:

Fiscal Responsibility and Stability, Infrastructure and Engineering, Public Safety and Disaster Preparedness, Economic Development/Growth and General Plan, Homelessness Issues, Staffing - Salary, Benefits, Training, and Retention
106
Item A.
1 | Page
Mid Year Budget Report
FY 2025-2026
107
Item A.
2 | Page
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION 4
Timeframe and Limitations 5
Executive Summary 5
GENERAL FUND – KEY REVENUE ANALYSIS 11
Measure Y 12
Bradley Burns Sales Tax 13
Property Tax 14
Franchise Fees 15
Business License 16
Transient Occupancy Tax 17
Charges for Services 18
Licenses and Permits 19
Cannabis Dispensary Revenues 20
GENERAL FUND – KEY EXPENDITURE ANALYSIS 21
Salaries and Benefits 22
Operating Expenditures 23
Capital Improvements 24
FY25/26 RECOMMENDED FIRST HALF BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS 25
Summary of Recommended Budget Adjustments 25
FINANCIAL SUMMARIES, PROJECTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 27 General Fund 27
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND: MEASURE I 28
Measure I: Police Department 29
Measure I: Fire Department 30
Measure I: Public Works 31
DEPARTMENT UPDATES 32
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33
Mid-Year Goals and Accomplishments 33
POLICE DEPARTMENT 36
Mid-Year Goals and Accomplishments 36
FIRE DEPARTMENT 37
Mid-Year Goals and Accomplishments 37
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 38
Mid-Year Goals and Accomplishments 38
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 39
Mid-Year Goals and Accomplishments 39
ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENT 40
Mid-Year Goals and Accomplishments 40
CONCLUSION 41
108
Item A.
3 | Page
109
Item A.
4 | Page
Introduction
The City Council adopted the FY2025/26 Budget at its June 16, 2025, meeting. This mid-year financial report provides an analysis of the City’s General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, and Capital Improvement Program revenues and expenditures for the first half of FY2025/26, covering the six-month period ending December 31, 2025. Recommended adjustments are included to ensure the budget continues to reflect the City’s current revenue outlook and remains responsive to the evolving financial landscape and City priorities.

The mid-year budget update serves two important purposes. First, it provides the City Council with regular updates on revenue and expenditure trends, ensuring a clear understanding of the City’s current financial condition. This allows the Council to proactively respond to unanticipated changes or emerging fiscal trends. Second, and equally important, these reports strengthen transparency in City finances. The City remains accountable to its residents to use public revenues efficiently and effectively while delivering high-quality services. Ongoing financial reporting gives taxpayers the information they need to evaluate the City’s stewardship of public funds.

With respect to revenues: City staff continuously monitor revenue collections and updates year-end projections based on actual performance and forecasting models. This approach provides a more accurate estimate of the City’s anticipated year-end financial position.

With respect to expenditures: The expenditure figures presented in this report are drawn directly from the City’s financial management system. Adjustments are made to account for known payments, reimbursements, or interfund transfers that have not yet been processed as of the reporting date. The data presented represents a snapshot in time and does not reflect final FY2025/26 year-end adjustments.

With respect to fund balance: The City’s General Fund balance has grown in recent years following the passage of Measure Y, strengthening the City’s overall financial position and improving its ability to plan for future needs. This increase in reserves has allowed the City to proactively set aside resources for key priorities, including a fleet reserve, labor reserve, risk management reserve, capital replacement reserve, and General Plan reserves. Maintaining these designated reserves supports long-term fiscal stability, enhances the City’s capacity to address unforeseen costs, and ensures that essential infrastructure and operational needs can be met in a sustainable manner.
110
Item A.
5 | Page
Timeframe and Limitations
The information presented in this report reflects the most current financial data available at the time of publication and is intended for budget monitoring and policy decision-making purposes.

It should be noted that this document is not an audited financial statement. The figures included herein are preliminary, budget-based estimates and may be subject to revision as additional information becomes available or as the fiscal year progresses.

Unlike the City’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR), which is prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), this mid-year report is presented on a budgetary basis. The annual audit incorporates accruals, year-end adjustments, receivables, payables, depreciation, and other accounting entries that are not reflected in budget monitoring reports. As a result, final audited results may differ from the budgetary figures presented in this document.

The City’s independent annual financial audit, issued each year for the preceding fiscal year, provides formal verification of financial statements, internal controls, and compliance with applicable standards. That audit ensures the City Council and the public can rely on the accuracy, completeness, and integrity of the City’s financial reporting.

Executive Summary
The City of Sonora has made meaningful progress in advancing the goals established in its Strategic Plan, originally adopted in 2024 and refreshed in 2025 as part of the annual budget process. During the first half of the fiscal year, departments have continued aligning operations and investments with these strategic priorities. Departmental updates beginning on page 32 highlight key accomplishments and demonstrate continued progress in infrastructure improvements, public safety, and service delivery to the community.

The financial results for the first half of FY2025/26 are based on the most current financial data and economic indicators available. Recommended budget adjustments reflect updated revenue projections and expenditure trends to ensure the City remains structurally balanced through the end of the fiscal year.

At the midpoint of the year, it is important to consider the broader economic environment.

National economic growth has moderated, and inflation remains elevated, creating uncertainty for sales-tax-dependent communities such as Sonora.

For the City, sales tax remains the most significant revenue sensitivity within the General Fund.

Moderation in consumer spending could affect revenues generated through both Measure Y and the other sales and use taxes. While lower interest rates may eventually support economic stability, the timing and magnitude of recovery remain uncertain. 111
Item A.
6 | Page
In response, the City continues to emphasize conservative forecasting, ongoing monitoring of economic indicators, and disciplined expenditure management. Maintaining fiscal flexibility is essential to preserving service levels and responding appropriately to changing conditions.

As part of the recommended mid-year adjustments, staff have also reviewed the scope and timing of planned Capital Improvement Projects (CIP). Other than the specific CIP modifications presented as part of the mid-year adjustments, it is anticipated that all projects included in the originally adopted budget will continue to move forward as planned. These refinements reflect a prudent and measured approach to ensure fiscal stability while maintaining progress on the City’s infrastructure priorities.

This strategy allows the City to preserve long-term financial balance while continuing to invest in essential capital improvements in a responsible and sustainable manner.

Looking ahead the City remains committed to sustaining investments in public safety, infrastructure, and service delivery. By connecting budgetary adjustments to strategic priorities, the City ensures continued progress while maintaining the financial resilience necessary to adapt to evolving economic conditions.

Key Takeaways – Mid-Year FY2025/26
• Strategic Progress: The City continues advancing 2024 Strategic Plan priorities, with notable improvements in infrastructure and service delivery. • Revenue Outlook: Sales tax collections remain the most significant source of General Fund revenue. Slowing consumer spending poses risks to both Measure Y and BradleyBurns revenues. • Economic Context: The national economy is slowing. The Federal Reserve has begun cutting interest rates to encourage growth, but the timing and strength of recovery remain uncertain.
• Budget Adjustments: Recommended changes on page 25 align the budget with current revenue and expenditure trends to maintain financial stability. • Fiscal Stewardship: Vigilant monitoring, prudent adjustments, and alignment with the Strategic Plan will ensure the City continues to deliver essential services while protecting long-term financial resilience.

Key Accomplishments in the First Half of FY25/26
Despite the potential economic headwinds, the City of Sonora has made significant progress in the first half of the fiscal year, achieving milestones that reflect the City’s dedication to enhancing infrastructure, supporting public safety, and strengthening the workforce. 112
Item A.
7 | Page
• Snell Street Reconstruction Progress: The City’s engineering team has made substantial progress advancing the design phase of the Snell Street (Phase 1) reconstruction, positioning the project for implementation when funding becomes available. This project remains a top infrastructure priority and is critical to improving circulation, safety, and long-term roadway reliability within the City. Staff continue to actively pursue grant opportunities and identify sustainable funding sources to advance the project toward construction.
• Rotary Park Pickleball Court: The addition of a new pickleball court at Rotary Park has provided a valuable recreational amenity, supporting healthy lifestyles and community engagement.
• Support for Public Safety: The City allocated resources to support recruitment efforts within the police department, bringing the department to full authorized staffing levels, with nine sworn officers in service and one recruit enrolled in the academy. This achievement not only strengthens public safety but also reflects the City’s commitment to maintaining a highly qualified workforce. The City also completed the Police Department facility needs assessment, outlining the need for a replacement Police Department facility.
• Labor Negotiations and Workforce Investment: The City has successfully concluded productive negotiations with all employee associations, including the Sonora Police Officers Association (SPOA), the Sonora Employees Association (SEA), the Sonora Firefighters Association (SFFA), the Sonora Confidential Employees Association (SCEA), and the Sonora Management Employees Association (SMEA). With these agreements finalized, the City now has multi-year labor contracts in place with all bargaining groups, providing stability and cost predictability for the next three years. These negotiations focused on maintaining competitive wages, addressing recruitment and retention challenges, and supporting the workforce that delivers essential public services. To fund these commitments responsibly, the City allocated unassigned Measure Y revenues from FY2023/24 into a dedicated Labor Reserve Fund. The reserve is designed to cover the additional labor costs associated with the new agreements for approximately eight years, with a goal of extending the horizon to ten years through future budget allocations. By prefunding these obligations, the City protects future Measure Y revenues for infrastructure and other community priorities while reinforcing its commitment to fiscal responsibility and long-term planning. (Council Priorities #51, 56, 60) Challenges and Resource Demands
While the accomplishments of the first half of the year are noteworthy, the City continues to face substantial resource demands that will require careful planning and prioritization. Key unfunded infrastructure needs include:
113
Item A.
8 | Page
Road Maintenance: The City of Sonora faces a significant and growing challenge in maintaining its approximately 30 miles of roadway, which are essential to mobility, public safety, and economic activity. As pavement conditions decline, repair costs increase, and deferred maintenance often turns manageable resurfacing projects into far more expensive full reconstructions. While proactive maintenance extends roadway life and reduces long-term costs, available funding remains insufficient to address system-wide needs.

The City receives approximately $290,000 annually in gas tax revenue, its primary dedicated source for road maintenance. This revenue is expected to decline over time as fuel efficiency improves and electric vehicle use increases. By comparison, reconstructing just one mile of roadway costs more than $1 million, excluding drainage improvements, striping, and ADA compliance.

At current funding levels, it would take approximately 100 years of gas tax revenue alone to fully reconstruct the City’s roadway network.

In July 2024, the City completed a pavement condition assessment through its IWorq asset management system to estimate the Remaining Service Life of each roadway segment. While this provides a useful planning baseline, continued aging and field conditions suggest some estimates may be optimistic. Given these constraints, the City must continue pursuing state and federal grant funding while strategically prioritizing limited resources to preserve roadways before they deteriorate into full reconstruction needs.
• Sidewalk Repairs: Sidewalk maintenance and repair are essential to the City’s infrastructure strategy, supporting mobility, public safety, and accessibility. Aging infrastructure, tree root intrusion, soil movement, and normal wear have created uneven surfaces and trip hazards, and portions of the network do not meet current ADA standards. Barriers such as elevation changes and utility obstructions further limit accessibility. Deferred maintenance increases injury risk and potential legal exposure.

Addressing these deficiencies in a prioritized and strategic manner is necessary to improve safety, enhance accessibility, and reduce long-term liability.

City of Sonora
Pavement Condition Assessment
Remaining
Service Life
(RSL) in Years
City
Roadways
(Miles)
0 Years 1.22
2 Years 0.07
4 Years 5.70
6 Years 16.47
8 Years 3.23
10 Years 3.06
20 Years 0.32
Total Road Miles 30.07
114
Item A.
9 | Page
• Main Drain Restoration: The City of Sonora’s Main Drain system, located in the heart of the community, is a critical piece of infrastructure that manages stormwater runoff and protects public and private property from flooding. The system requires substantial restoration, with total repair costs estimated at more than $10 million. Failure to address these deficiencies could result in infrastructure failure, localized flooding, environmental damage, and increased liability exposure.

In 2023, the City commissioned the Main Drain Field Inspection and Condition Report to assess the system’s condition, capacity constraints, and structural vulnerabilities. The study confirmed significant deterioration, with several segments estimated to have less than two years of remaining service life. Delayed action increases the likelihood of emergency repairs and substantially higher long-term costs.

Given the scope and expense of the required improvements, the City has developed a phased restoration strategy to address the most critical needs in a fiscally responsible manner. However, the magnitude of the project exceeds available local resources, and securing state and federal grant funding will be essential to advancing this critical infrastructure investment.
• Building Maintenance: The City of Sonora faces ongoing challenges in maintaining and strategically managing its aging facilities. Years of limited resources and competing priorities have resulted in deferred maintenance across the City’s thirteen buildings, restrooms, cemeteries, and parks, creating a growing backlog of needed repairs and upgrades. In addition, several City-owned properties are currently vacant or underutilized.

While these assets have potential value, they also present liability exposure, ongoing maintenance costs, and inefficiencies in resource allocation. As part of a long-term facilities strategy, the City Council should evaluate options for these properties, including the sale of surplus buildings to generate funding for higher-priority infrastructure needs.

One of the most pressing facility concerns is the Police Department building, which no longer meets the operational, security, or space requirements of modern law enforcement. The facility is undersized, lacks critical security features, and contains outdated systems that limit efficiency and service delivery. Given the significant cost of constructing a replacement facility, leveraging proceeds from surplus property sales should be considered as part of a comprehensive funding strategy.

Addressing these needs will require a balanced approach that prioritizes critical infrastructure improvements while maintaining fiscal sustainability.

Planning for Financial Stability
The total budget for FY25/26 is $18.8 million, which included several budgeted transfers out of the General Fund and into specific reserve funds. Reserve funds are designated funds where unspent resources are saved to ensure financial stability and flexibility for a city. These funds act as a safeguard, allowing the City to address unforeseen expenses, economic downturns, or 115
Item A.
10 | Page
specific future needs without disrupting essential services or increasing taxes. By establishing reserves, the City is proactively planning for long-term sustainability. The reserves include:

Mid-Year Budget
Salaries and benefits comprise approximately 64% of General Fund expenditures and 47% of the City’s total operating budget. General Fund expenditures for the first half of the fiscal year are trending slightly below projected levels, with salaries and benefits currently at approximately

47.4% of budget. Higher personnel costs are anticipated in the second half of the year due to the implementation of newly negotiated Memorandums of Understanding and the start of planned capital projects in the third quarter. City staff continue to exercise disciplined expenditure management, with overall first-half spending at approximately 39% of the adopted budget.

Despite a slowing economy, revenue performance has remained stronger than originally projected. Total sales tax revenues are at 53.5% of budget through mid-year and are currently

6.8% above the prior year. Based on this performance, staff recommend a revenue increase of $75,000 in Bradley-Burns Sales Tax and $75,000 in Measure Y revenues. Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenues are being adjusted to reflect the collection of previously unpaid balances, clearing all past-due amounts. Public Benefit Fees from cannabis dispensaries remain consistent with budgeted projections.

The relative strength in local revenues reflects several stabilizing factors within Sonora’s economy. As a regional service and retail hub for surrounding foothill communities, the City benefits from consistent consumer draw beyond its resident population. Essential retail sectors such as grocery, dining, and general services have remained stable, supporting sales tax performance. Continued tourism activity, public safety stability, and ongoing infrastructure investment also contribute to sustained economic activity. While broader economic risks remain, these local characteristics position the City to potentially outperform more conservative revenue projections if current trends continue.

Collectively, the recommended adjustments reflect a net revenue increase of $323,500 and expenditure adjustments of $21,049, including $300,000 in additional reserve contributions, resulting in a projected net increase of approximately $300,000 to the General Fund. The City 116
Item A.
11 | Page
remains committed to funding ongoing operations with recurring revenues, thereby maintaining structural balance in the General Fund. With the noted budget adjustments and six months of data available, the City is on budget for the second half of the year.

FY25/26 Recommended Budget Adjustments
The recommended budget adjustments for the mid-year update appear on page 25.

GENERAL FUND – KEY REVENUE ANALYSIS
The following discussion provides a status of significant General Fund revenue sources as of the first half of FY25/26, ending December 31, 2025. Staff monitors each revenue source closely and may recommend certain revenue adjustments based on revenue actuals or State and Federal budget actions.
117
Item A.
12 | Page
Measure Y
Fiscal Year 2025/26 marks the third full year of Measure Y revenues for the City, which has emerged as the largest single revenue source for the General Fund. Measure Y is projected to generate $4.2 million representing 29% of the City’s budgeted General Fund revenues for the fiscal year. Under Measure Y, the City’s General Fund receives 1% of taxable sales, equating to 1 cent for every $1 of retail sales occurring within the City limits of Sonora.

Analysis – Measure Y sales tax receipts for the first half of FY25/26 are 2.7% higher than budgeted and 3.5% higher compared to the same period last year. Measure Y revenues continue to benefit from a resilient local economy and the steady performance of major big-box retailers, which remain a significant contributor to overall sales tax generation.

Given the current trends, sales tax estimates for the second half of FY25/26 have been revised upward by $75,000, or 1.8%. Staff remain committed to maintaining fiscal flexibility and will provide updated projections as new data becomes available.

FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
First Half Actual Revenues $ - $ - $ 2,273,214 $ 2,098,915 $ 2,172,577 Fiscal Year Total Actual Revenues $ - $ 600,163 $ 4,723,683 $ 4,287,435 Fiscal Year Budgeted Revenues $ 4,121,700
% of Total 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 49.0% 52.7%
MEASURE Y - 1% Sales Tax
$-
$500,000
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
$2,500,000
$3,000,000
$3,500,000
$4,000,000
$4,500,000
$5,000,000
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
Mid Year Measure Y Sales Tax Revenues
5 Years
118
Item A.
13 | Page
Bradley Burns Sales Tax
Bradley Burns Local Sales and Use tax is the second largest revenue source for the City’s General Fund, accounting for 23% of budgeted General Fund revenues for FY25/26, a projected $3,206,900. Of the 1% Bradley-Burns local sales tax, the City receives 87% and Tuolumne County receives 13%.

Analysis – First half sales tax receipts are trending 4.6% higher than the original budget estimate and higher than those in the same period last fiscal year. The increase is primarily attributed to a State of California processing delay that occurred last fiscal year and a resilient local economy. Staff will continue to monitor sales tax receipts and meet with the City’s sales tax consultant to analyze trends. For the second half of FY25/26 sales tax estimates have increased requiring a budget adjustment in the amount of $75,000, or 2.3%.

FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
First Half Actual Revenues $ 1,752,041 $ 1,662,290 $ 1,769,196 $ 1,576,555 $ 1,751,394 Fiscal Year Total Actual Revenues $ 3,496,261 $ 3,450,446 $ 3,597,709 $ 3,383,381 Fiscal Year Budgeted Revenues $ 3,206,900
% of Total 50.1% 48.2% 49.2% 46.6% 54.6%

SALES TAX
$-
$500,000
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
$2,500,000
$3,000,000
$3,500,000
$4,000,000
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
Mid Year Sales Tax Revenues
5 Years
119
Item A.
14 | Page
Property Tax
Property tax is the third largest revenue source for the City’s General Fund, accounting for 11% of budgeted General Fund revenues in FY25/26. Property tax is levied by the Tuolumne County Assessor’s Office at 1% of a property’s assessed value, of which the City receives approximately 12.6 cents per dollar paid on property located within the municipal limits of Sonora.

Analysis – Property tax distributions are primarily received in the second and fourth quarters; however, the chart below illustrates first-half receipts over the past four years compared to the current fiscal year. Mid-year receipts are trending consistent with prior years. For FY25/26, property tax revenue was budgeted with a projected growth of 5% over the prior year’s actuals, reflecting anticipated increases in property values driven by real estate transactions.

FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
First Half Actual Revenues $ 386,390 $ 396,616 $ 586,572 $ 595,607 $ 624,314 Fiscal Year Total Actual Revenues $ 913,849 $ 971,890 $ 1,389,748 $ 1,505,542 Fiscal Year Budgeted Revenues $ 1,581,100
% of Total 42.3% 40.8% 42.2% 39.6% 39.5%

PROPERTY TAX
$-
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
$1,000,000
$1,200,000
$1,400,000
$1,600,000
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
Mid Year Property Tax Revenues
Five Year Comparison
120
Item A.
15 | Page
Franchise Fees
Franchise fees are payments made to the City for the privilege of operating utility services within the City of Sonora’s public rights-of-way. These agreements allow private service providers to use City infrastructure and property to deliver essential services to the community. The City currently receives franchise fee revenues from Comcast (cable television services), PG&E (electric services), and Cal-Waste (solid waste collection services effective after November 1, 2025). In FY 2025/26, franchise fees accounted for approximately 1.1% of total budgeted General Fund revenues.

Analysis – Franchise fee revenues are not received evenly throughout the fiscal year, as payments are typically remitted on varying schedules depending on the provider. As a result, second-quarter receipts are not necessarily indicative of full-year performance.

The franchise fee rate has recently increased, and the City anticipates higher revenues during the second half of the fiscal year. Any franchise fee revenues received in excess of General Fund budgeted amounts will be deposited into a newly established Solid Waste Fund. These funds will be appropriated by the City Council through the annual budget process to support services and Council priorities.

FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
First Half Actual Revenues $ 44,303 $ 48,393 $ 66,465 $ 49,082 $ 53,418 Fiscal Year Total Actual Revenues $ 149,478 $ 155,854 $ 170,797 $ 169,355 Fiscal Year Budgeted Revenues $ 165,000
% of Total 29.6% 31.1% 38.9% 29.0% 32.4%

FRANCHISE FEES
$-
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
$140,000
$160,000
$180,000
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
Mid Year Franchise Fees Revenues
Five Year Comparison
121
Item A.
16 | Page
Business License
The City requires all businesses located within Sonora, or those that operate within Sonora, to obtain a business license. The amount of business license paid by each business is based on the type of business and designated zone the business is in, or operating in, and the number of business employees. These activities account for approximately 1% of annual General Fund operating revenues. Approximately 1,100 annual renewals and associated payments are processed each year and are due in January.

Analysis – Business license revenue is trending slightly below the prior year, reflecting softer activity among smaller local businesses. Staff will continue to monitor this revenue source throughout the second half of the fiscal year.

FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
First Half Actual Revenues $ 48,078 $ 49,146 $ 58,406 $ 58,780 $ 52,205 Fiscal Year Total Actual Revenues $ 120,719 $ 130,638 $ 132,741 $ 131,486 Fiscal Year Budgeted Revenues $ 130,000
% of Total 39.8% 37.6% 44.0% 44.7% 40.2%
Business License Revenues
$-
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
$140,000
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
Mid Year Business License Revenues
Five Year Comparison
122
Item A.
17 | Page
Transient Occupancy Tax
The City levies a 12% Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) on the seven (7) hotels and motels and the approximately thirty (30) other transient rentals within the municipal limits of Sonora. This tax helps to fund City services provided to transitory visitors to Sonora and is shared with Visit Tuolumne County, the official Tuolumne County tourism bureau. Of these funds, the Visitors Bureau will receive up to $150,000 annually. TOT revenues for FY25/26 are approximately 4.1% of General Fund revenues.

Analysis – TOT revenues peaked in FY23/24 and have moderated as economic activity has softened. During the year, the City received previously outstanding TOT payments, bringing all accounts current. As a result, staff recommends increasing the budget by $125,000. Staff will continue to monitor revenues throughout the second half of the fiscal year to ensure projections remain aligned with actual performance.

FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
First Half Actual Revenues $ 277,274 $ 294,437 $ 341,671 $ 298,276 $ 262,038 Fiscal Year Total Actual Revenues $ 559,545 $ 598,065 $ 702,269 $ 497,753 Fiscal Year Budgeted Revenues $ 586,000
% of Total 49.6% 49.2% 48.7% 59.9% 44.7%
Transient Occupancy Tax
$-
$100,000
$200,000
$300,000
$400,000
$500,000
$600,000
$700,000
$800,000
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
Mid Year Transient Occupancy Tax Revenues
Five Year Comparison
123
Item A.
18 | Page
Charges for Services
City service revenues consist primarily of services provided by City Departments, including zoning and subdivision fees, Police and Fire Department services, street sweeping, debris removal and banner installation fees. A fee study was implemented on November 1, 2024, updating user fees to reflect 2024 cost-of-service calculations. The adopted fees do not incorporate inflationary or operational cost changes occurring after that analysis.

Analysis – Charges for Services have trended slightly below projections during the first half of the fiscal year, reflecting broader economic softness. A budget adjustment of ($9,000) is recommended to align projected revenues with year-to-date actuals for the remainder of the fiscal year.

FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
First Half Actual Revenues $ 39,381 $ 50,969 $ 48,679 $ 54,152 $ 54,983 Fiscal Year Total Actual Revenues $ 87,195 $ 105,166 $ 97,038 $ 107,591 Fiscal Year Budgeted Revenues $ 110,800
% of Total 45.2% 48.5% 50.2% 50.3% 49.6%
Charges for Services
$-
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
Mid Year Charges for Services Revenues
Five Year Comparison
124
Item A.
19 | Page
Licenses and Permits
Licenses and permits consist mainly of Building permits and encroachment permits which are collected by the City to offset administrative costs associated with overseeing the proper permitting aspects of development and City activities. These revenues were budgeted to be approximately 1% of General Fund revenues.

Analysis – First half licenses and permit revenue are lower than anticipated due to less building department activity than the prior year. Staff recommend a decrease in budgeted revenues by ($20,000) to reflect the actual revenues going forward.

FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
First Half Actual Revenues $ 58,744 $ 61,101 $ 65,239 $ 75,511 $ 60,409 Fiscal Year Total Actual Revenues $ 133,963 $ 140,850 $ 153,479 $ 170,835 Fiscal Year Budgeted Revenues $ 167,100
% of Total 43.9% 43.4% 42.5% 44.2% 36.2%
License and Permits
$-
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
$140,000
$160,000
$180,000
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
Mid Year License and Permits Revenues
Five Year Comparison
125
Item A.
20 | Page
Cannabis Dispensary Revenues
This program was created after voters approved Proposition 64, entitled the ‘Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use Marijuana Act’ (AUMA), legalizing the adult use and possession of cannabis by persons 21 years of age and older. On January 16, 2018, the Sonora City Council adopted Ordinance No. 848 to regulate the operation of commercial cannabis businesses within the City of Sonora. Currently the City has two operating dispensaries, with the current ordinance allowing up to three dispensaries. This revenue source was budgeted to be approximately 4.6% of General Fund revenues and is now the fourth largest revenue source for the City, with only Measure Y, Bradley Burns Local Sales Tax and Property Tax contributing more.

Analysis – First half revenues are similar to the prior year. The City also receives sales tax on recreational cannabis sales. Staff will continue to monitor public benefit fee revenues in the second half of the year.

FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
First Half Actual Revenues $ 241,064 $ 294,437 $ 341,671 $ 336,965 $ 335,766 Fiscal Year Total Actual Revenues $ 499,977 $ 635,347 $ 710,000 $ 672,431 Fiscal Year Budgeted Revenues $ 660,000
% of Total 48.2% 46.3% 48.1% 50.1% 50.9%
Cannabis Revenues
$-
$100,000
$200,000
$300,000
$400,000
$500,000
$600,000
$700,000
$800,000
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
Mid Year Cannabis Revenues
Five Year Comparison
126
Item A.
21 | Page
GENERAL FUND – KEY EXPENDITURE ANALYSIS
The following discussion provides a summary and status update of significant General Fund expenditures for the first half of FY 2025/26, for the period ending December 31, 2025.

The General Fund is the City’s primary operating fund and supports core municipal services, including administration, public safety, public works, community development, and general government operations. Expenditures within the General Fund generally fall into several major categories.

Salaries and Benefits represent the largest share of General Fund expenditures and include compensation for full-time employees, elected officials, volunteer stipends, temporary and relief employees, overtime, and all associated payroll-related costs. Payroll-related costs include employer-paid taxes and employee benefits such as health insurance and CalPERS retirement contributions.

Operating Expenditures include routine departmental expenses, including office supplies, postage, printing, memberships, training, small equipment, maintenance supplies, and other administrative support expenses. Utilities and Facility Costs consist of expenses required to operate and maintain City facilities and infrastructure, including electricity, water, propane, telecommunications, internet services, and facility maintenance-related expenditures.

Contractual and Professional Services encompass agreements for outside services that support City operations and supplement in-house expertise. These include professional services such as engineering, the City Attorney, planning and consulting services, auditing, and other technical services. This category also includes contracts for business software systems, technology support services, and facility or equipment leases.

Capital Improvement Expenditures include investments in infrastructure, facilities, equipment, and other long-term assets that provide multi-year benefits to the City. These expenditures support the maintenance, rehabilitation, and improvement of public assets and infrastructure.

Examples of capital improvement projects include roadway construction and road rehabilitation projects, pavement restoration, street striping, sidewalk repair and replacement, parking lot rehabilitation and restoration, facility renovations, major equipment and vehicle purchases, and technology system upgrades. These projects help preserve public infrastructure, enhance safety, and maintain service levels for the community.

Capital Improvement expenditures do not typically occur evenly throughout the fiscal year.

Project costs are often dependent on bid timing, construction schedules, weather conditions, procurement timelines, grant requirements, and City Council authorization. As a result, expenditures may be concentrated in specific quarters rather than evenly distributed across the fiscal year.

The analysis that follows highlights expenditure trends within these categories, compares yearto-date spending to the adopted budget, and identifies any variances or notable items affecting the City’s fiscal position at mid-year.
127
Item A.
22 | Page
Salaries and Benefits
Salaries and Benefits comprise approximately 64% of the General Fund budget, totaling $8.8 million. This category includes compensation for full-time employees, elected officials, volunteer stipends, temporary and relief staff, overtime costs, and all associated payroll-related expenses.

Payroll-related expenses include employer-paid taxes and employee benefits such as health insurance and CalPERS retirement contributions.

Under typical circumstances, expenditures for Salaries and Benefits would be expected to be below 50% of the annual budget at the end of the second quarter. Personnel costs tend to increase over the course of the fiscal year due to factors such as step increases, negotiated adjustments, overtime variability, and benefit cost fluctuations.

Analysis – First half results for salaries and benefits are trending in line with periods in prior years, at approximately 47% of budgeted totals.

FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
First Half Actual Expenditures $ 3,223,593 $ 3,359,836 $ 3,314,850 $ 3,631,348 $ 4,189,225 Fiscal Year Total Actual Expenditures $ 6,635,823 $ 6,704,725 $ 7,489,225 $ 7,687,351 Fiscal Year Budgeted Expenditures $ 8,835,100
% of Total 48.6% 50.1% 44.3% 47.2% 47.4%
Salaries and Benefits
$-
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$7,000,000
$8,000,000
$9,000,000
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
Mid Year Salaries and Benefits Expenditures
Five Year Comparison
128
Item A.
23 | Page
Operating Expenditures
Operating expenditures consist of all General Fund costs to provide services, including supplies, materials, utilities, contracted services and are budgeted at $4.36 million for the fiscal year. The categories of supplies, materials and non-capital equipment, the most controllable expenditure category, is approximately 40% expended, as several projects were anticipated for the latter half of the fiscal year.

Analysis – First half results are trending under budget as some projects have been planned in the second half of the year or will be moved to FY26/27. Utilities are trending slightly above budget, at 52% of budget. There are miscellaneous adjustments, increases and decreases, as needed, for the balance of the year, as detailed on page 25.

FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
First Half Actual Expenditures $ 904,941 $ 1,155,468 $ 1,695,863 $ 1,611,072 $ 1,739,480 Fiscal Year Total Actual Expenditures $ 2,123,844 $ 2,455,448 $ 3,604,583 $ 3,475,128 Fiscal Year Budgeted Expenditures $ 4,360,715
% of Total 42.6% 47.1% 47.0% 46.4% 39.9%
Operating Expenditures
$-
$500,000
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
$2,500,000
$3,000,000
$3,500,000
$4,000,000
$4,500,000
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
Mid Year Operating Expenditures
Five Year Comparison
129
Item A.
24 | Page
Capital Improvements
Capital improvements refer to long-term investments in the physical infrastructure and assets of a city. These projects are designed to enhance the quality of life for residents, support economic growth, and ensure the sustainability of essential services. Capital improvements typically include upgrades, repairs, or new construction of facilities such as roads, bridges, parks, and public buildings. These investments are often funded through a combination of local revenues, state and federal grants, and special funding sources.

Analysis – First-half capital improvement expenditures totaled $1,247 - primarily related to preliminary design work for the Lyons Street and Church–Stewart Street parking lot projects.

The majority of capital improvement expenditures are anticipated to occur in the second half of the fiscal year as projects move from design into construction. Related budget adjustments are detailed on page 25.

FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
First Half Actual Expenditures $ 280,894 $ 99,085 $ 309,379 $ 622,183 $ 1,247 Fiscal Year Total Actual Expenditures $ 498,032 $ 138,163 $ 570,916 $ 676,949 Fiscal Year Budgeted Expenditures $ 2,004,851
% of Total 56.4% 71.7% 54.2% 91.9% 0.1%
Capital Improvements
$-
$500,000
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
$2,500,000
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26
Mid Year Capital Expenditures
Five Year Comparison
130
Item A.
25 | Page
FY25/26 RECOMMENDED FIRST HALF BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
Summary of Recommended Budget Adjustments
• Revenues:
• 1. Sales Tax Budget Increase of $75,000 for Bradley Burns and $75,000 for Measure Y: This reflects stronger-than-anticipated sales tax revenues received during the first half of the fiscal year. Staff will continue to monitor collections throughout the second half of the year. • 2. Transient Occupancy Tax Increase of $125,000: This results from the receipt of past-due Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) payments collected in February 2026. • 3. Services and building permits reduced by ($29,000): Revenue activity across multiple categories is lower than original projections.
• 4. Insurance Claim Settlement Proceeds increase by $77,500: The City received a reimbursement for a vehicle accident. The City will be replacing the vehicle with the proceeds in the 2nd half of the year.
• Expenditures:
• 5. Salaries and Benefits ($394,750): This action recognizes expenditure savings attributable to position vacancies and timing of hires during the first half of the fiscal year. • 6. Misc. Operating Expenditures $20,250: This action recognizes additional expenditures for statutory public notice requirements and printing costs are higher than originally budgeted.

FUND - DEPARTMENT - ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION BUDGET CHANGE
Revenues:

1. 001 - 4000 - 40215 - Sales Tax Measure Y $ 75,000
001 - 4000 - 40210 - Sales Tax Measure Bradley Burns $ 75,000

2. 001 - 4000 - 40220 - Transient Occupancy Tax $ 125,000

3. 001 - XXXX - 41550 - Services Revenues $ (9,000)
001 - 2000 - 41250 - Building Permits $ (20,000)

4. 001 - 4000 - 48310 - Insurance Recoveries $ 77,500
TOTAL NET CHANGE TO REVENUES $ 323,500
Expenditures:

5. 001 - XXXX - 50110 - Salaries and Wages $ (394,750)

6. 001 - XXXX - 5XXXX - Miscellaneous Supplies $ 20,250

7. 001 - 1100 - 54010 - Legal Services $ 50,000

8. 001 - XXXX - 55030 - Vehicle Lease $ 125,000

9. 001 - 4900 - 54020 - Settlements - Legal $ 25,000

10. 001 - 2200 - 53250 - City Fee Update $ (10,000)
001 - 4000 - 53080 - Special Studies - Bldg Assessment + Sunrise Hill Planning $ (195,000)

11. 001 - 2200 - 53010 - Mobil Lidar Inspections $ 86,000

12. 001 - 3900 - 55130 - Church St. - Stewart St. Parking Lot Project $ 355,000 001 - 3900 - 50130 - Lyons Street Parking Lot Project $ 175,000 001 - 3900 - 55120 - Road Reconstruction $ (401,451)
001 - 2200 - 55100 - Sidewalk Repair and Maintenance $ (55,000) 001 - 7000 - 55080 - Elk Drive Maintenance $ (90,000)

13. 001 - 7000 - 55120 - Washington-Mono Striping Project $ 31,000

14. 001 - 4900 59999 - Capital Improvement Reserve $ 150,000

15. 001 - 4900 - 59999 - CEPPT (CalPERS Prefunding Trust) $ 150,000 TOTAL NET CHANGE TO EXPENDITURES $ 21,049
NET CHANGE TO FY25/26 General Fund Budget $ (302,451)
131
Item A.
26 | Page
• 7. Legal Services $50,000: This amendment increases appropriations to cover unanticipated professional service costs related to employee negotiations and a higher-than-expected number of Public Records Act (PRA) requests.
• 8. Vehicle Lease $125,000: This action increases appropriations to address a budgetary oversight in the original adoption and to fund the acquisition of a necessary replacement vehicle. • 9. Settlements Legal $25,000: This amendment increases appropriations to cover legal settlement expenses incurred during the first half of the fiscal year that exceeded original budget estimates. • 10. Special Studies and City Fee Update ($205,000): The City does not have the capacity to complete these projects during the current fiscal year. They may be reintroduced in a future budget, if priorities and resources allow.
• 11. Mobile Lidar $86,000: This amendment reflects a change in funding source, as the project will no longer receive anticipated grant funding and will instead be fully funded by the General Fund. • 12. This amendment of ($16,451) reallocates funding to complete the Church Street–Stewart Street and Lyons Street–Stewart Street parking lot projects. Funding will be sourced from previously budgeted Street and Sidewalk Repair appropriations, along with cost savings realized from the Elk Drive Project, which was completed under budget.
• 13. This reflects $31,000 additional funding needed to complete the FY25/26 Striping Project. • 14. General Plan Reserve $150,000: This amendment sets aside additional funding to prepare for the City’s required General Plan Update in the coming years, allowing the City to plan proactively and avoid future budget impacts.
• 15. CalPERS Pension Prefunding Trust (CEPPT) $150,000: This budget adjustment increases contributions to the CalPERS Employer Prefunding Trust as part of the City’s strategy to manage the anticipated peak in unfunded pension liability payments and smooth future rate volatility. 132
Item A.
27 | Page

FINANCIAL SUMMARIES, PROJECTIONS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS
General Fund
The following table is the Schedule of General Fund Operating Revenues vs. Operating Expenditures for the first half of FY25/26, which includes comparison information from the prior year’s first half.

FY24/25
Actual
FY24/25
Mid-Year
FY24/25
% YTD
FY25/26
Adopted
Budget
FY25/26
Mid-Year
FY25/26
% YTD
Revenues
Sales and Use Tax 3,383,381 1,576,555 46.6% 3,206,900 1,751,394 54.6% Measure Y 4,287,435 2,098,915 49.0% 4,121,700 2,172,577 52.7% Property Tax 1,505,542 595,607 39.6% 1,581,100 624,314 39.5% VLF Backfill Property Tax - - 0.0% - - 0.0%
Franchise Fees 169,355 49,082 29.0% 165,000 53,418 32.4% Business Licenses 131,486 58,780 44.7% 130,000 52,205 40.2% Transient Occupancy Tax 497,753 298,276 59.9% 586,000 262,038 44.7% Licenses and Permits 170,835 75,511 44.2% 167,100 60,409 36.2% Cannabis Public Benefit Fees 672,431 336,965 50.1% 660,000 335,766 50.9% Intergovernmental 129,235 39,091 30.2% 89,140 - 0.0%
Charges for Services 107,591 54,152 50.3% 110,800 54,983 49.6% Fines and Forfeitures 25,825 16,283 63.1% 31,700 13,725 43.3% Rental Income 51,040 31,937 62.6% 34,100 - 0.0%
Interest 189,181 87,766 46.4% 275,000 116,009 42.2%
Other Sources 168,087 39,976 23.8% 196,800 28,688 14.6% Total Revenues 11,489,177 5,358,896 46.6% 11,355,340 5,525,525 48.7% Transfers In
Tranfers In 3,222,480 1,816,041 56.4% 3,007,800 1,527,800 50.8% Total Transfers 3,222,480 1,816,041 56.4% 3,007,800 1,527,800 50.8% Total Revenues 14,711,657 7,174,937 48.8% 14,363,140 7,053,325 49.1% Expenditures
Salaries and Benefits 7,687,351 3,631,348 47.2% 8,835,100 4,189,225 47.4% Services, Supplies and Materials 3,093,872 1,418,654 45.9% 3,969,215 1,536,060 38.7% Utilities 381,256 192,418 50.5% 391,500 203,420 52.0%
Capital Improvements 676,949 621,155 91.8% 2,004,851 1,247 0.1% Total Expenditures 11,839,428 5,863,575 49.5% 15,200,666 5,929,952 39.0% Transfers Out
Transfers Out:

Self Insured Dental 23,219 10,629 45.8% 33,000 12,884 39.0% CalPERS Prefunding Trust 300,000 150,000 50.0% 150,000 150,000 100.0% Fleet Replacement Reserve 75,000 75,000 100.0% 100,000 100,000 100.0% Labor Reserve 4,015,000 4,015,000 100.0% 150,000 150,000 100.0% Capital Improvement Reserve 215,000 215,000 100.0% 250,000 250,000 100.0% Risk Mitigation Reserve 250,000 250,000 100.0% - - 0.0% General Plan Reserve 300,000 300,000 100.0% - - 0.0%
Compensated Absences Reserve 142,354 - 0.0% - - 0.0%
Total Transfers 5,320,573 5,015,629 94.3% 683,000 662,884 97.1% Total Expenditures 17,160,001 10,879,204 63.4% 15,883,666 6,592,836 41.5% 133
Item A.
28 | Page
The groups of financial summaries on the following pages present data by governmental fund type: For purposes of this first half report, we have focused on the Measure I Special Revenue Fund. The fund information starts with a beginning fund balance, adds current year revenues, and subtracts current year expenditures, resulting in an ending fund balance. Adopted budget amounts are provided as a basis for comparison of actuals to date.

Special Revenue Fund: Measure I
Special Revenue Funds account for the proceeds derived from specific revenue sources that are legally restricted or assigned to special purposes. The City’s Special Revenue Funds include the Measure I Fund which is the focus of the information provided in this first half report. The Measure I Fund was established as a result of a 2004 voter approved ½% increase to sales tax within the City limits. With approval of the ballot measure, the sales tax increase took effect January 1, 2005. The purpose of the initiative was to improve city services for residents, businesses, and visitors to the City of Sonora. Measure I revenues for the first half are trending at approximately 52% of total budgeted revenues and across the three Departments, including Police, Fire and Public Works Departments, expenditures are programmed to be 50% of budget. Nearly all Measure I funds collected are now fully expended on ongoing fixed costs.

Police % Fire % Public Works %
Beginning Fund Balance @ July 1, 2025 898,423 307,756 241,357 Budgeted Revenues 1,279,800 530,500 321,100
Actual Revenues - First Half 668,021 52.2% 276,906 52.2% 167,465 52.2% Budgeted Expenditures 1,420,000 600,000 330,000
Actual Expenditures - First Half 710,000 50.0% 300,000 50.0% 165,000 50.0% Ending Fund Balance @ December 31, 2025 856,444 284,662 243,822 Measure I
134
Item A.
29 | Page
Measure I: Police Department
The Police Department receives 60% of Measure I revenue for the support of the Sonora Police Department for personnel, updating safety equipment and supplies, providing educational funding, replacing expired vehicles, and expanding facilities. FY25/26 first half results are trending consistent with the same period in prior years as illustrated in the chart below. There are no budget recommendations at this time.

FY21/22 FY22/23 FY23/24 FY24/25 FY25/26
First Half Actual Revenues 681,859 704,141 675,215 651,526 668,021 Fiscal Year Total Actual Revenues 1,411,325 1,410,102 1,321,500 1,450,300 Fiscal Year Total Budgeted Revenues 1,279,800
First Half - Percent of Total 48.3% 49.9% 51.1% 44.9% 52.2% First Half Actual Expenditures 650,000 650,000 750,000 740,000 710,000 Fiscal Year Total Actual Expenditures 1,300,000 1,300,000 1,500,000 1,480,000 Fiscal Year Total Budgeted Expenditures 1,420,000
First Half - Percent of Total 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% Police Measure I
Revenues
Expenditures
135
Item A.
30 | Page
Measure I: Fire Department
The Fire Department receives 25% of the Measure I revenue for the support of the Sonora Fire Department for personnel, updating equipment and supplies, and providing educational funding.

FY25/26 first half revenues are trending consistent with the same period in prior years as illustrated in the chart below. There are no budget recommendations at this time.

FY21/22 FY22/23 FY23/24 FY24/25 FY25/26
First Half Actual Revenues 284,007 292,890 281,340 270,124 276,906 Fiscal Year Total Actual Revenues 587,825 586,244 550,625 602,200 Fiscal Year Total Budgeted Revenues 530,500
First Half - Percent of Total 48.3% 50.0% 51.1% 44.9% 52.2% First Half Actual Expenditures 250,000 275,000 300,000 312,500 300,000 Fiscal Year Total Actual Expenditures 500,000 550,000 600,000 625,000 Fiscal Year Total Budgeted Expenditures 600,000
First Half - Percent of Total 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% Fire Measure I
Expenditures
Revenues
136
Item A.
31 | Page
Measure I: Public Works
The Public Works Department receives 15% of the Measure I generated revenue for the purpose of personnel, equipment and facility enhancements and infrastructure improvements. FY25/26 first half revenues are trending consistent with the same period in prior years as illustrated in the chart below.

There are no budget recommendations at this time.

FY21/22 FY22/23 FY23/24 FY24/25 FY25/26
First Half Actual Revenues 170,742 178,081 168,804 163,077 167,465 Fiscal Year Total Actual Revenues 353,654 358,320 330,375 360,000 Fiscal Year Total Budgeted Revenues 321,100
First Half - Percent of Total 48.3% 49.7% 51.1% 45.3% 52.2% First Half Actual Expenditures 157,500 162,500 180,000 180,000 165,000 Fiscal Year Total Actual Expenditures 315,000 325,000 669,400 360,000 Fiscal Year Total Budgeted Expenditures 330,000
First Half - Percent of Total 50.0% 50.0% 26.9% 50.0% 50.0% Public Works Measure I
Expenditures
Revenues
137
Item A.
32 | Page

DEPARTMENT UPDATES
138
Item A.
33 | Page

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Mid-Year Goals and Accomplishments
• Commitment to Professional and Responsive Customer Service: Delivering professional, courteous, and efficient service remains a core priority of the Community Development Department. Staff are committed to providing clear, timely, and solution-oriented assistance to every individual who visits, calls, or contacts the office electronically. Maintaining a welcoming and responsive environment is central to our daily operations and reflects the City’s broader commitment to high-quality public service. (Council Priorities #42, 43, 44) o Examples of projects and CDD efforts to support them:
 A propane distribution facility was fully approved and permitted.  Although not in the City, Staff worked closely with the developer of Dutch Bros and Take 5 to help create confidence in doing business locally. This included joint review and response to a traffic impact study, encroachment permit questions and prioritizing tax share discussions with the County.
 Staff worked closely with a local lodging establishment in the City to help facilitate additional rooms for the facility.
 Community Development staff regularly meet property owners and the Builder community on site for project review and discussion.
• Grant funded projects Include: (Council Priorities #1, 5, 10, 16, 25) o The Public Works storage building, which will house fire apparatus, community decorations and equipment, was completed in December 2025. This project was completed within the State delivery period and within budget. o The construction of a new Pickleball Court at Woods Creek Park was completed in November 2025. The City delivered this project with funds from Proposition 84, within the delivery window and budget.
• Support Economic Development: In partnership with a consultant, local businesses, Visit Tuolumne County and engaged stakeholders are developing an inventory of vacant properties; business incentive program(s), evaluating ordinance modifications that support business growth (including "use locals first" ordinance), establishing a way-finding strategy for directing motorists to Parking and identify ways to support business growth and development. (Council Priorities #3, 21, 44, 100, 110, 111)
o This goal is dependent on the adoption of the Economic Development Plan. The Plan is in draft form and expected to be reviewed by City Council in March. • Code Enforcement: City addresses citizen inquiries and complaints. Code enforcement helps reinforce the importance of adhering to the rules that community members live by. It is a direct service that helps citizens feel heard and demonstrates the City’s responsiveness to issues received. Code enforcement services center around protecting life and improving safety within the community through education, outreach and at times through administrative citations or fines. (Council Priorities #6, 12, 15, 45)
o Current cases total - 24
 Total cases opened in last 180 days - 17
 Total Cases closed in last 180 days- 14
139
Item A.
34 | Page
o Assisted fire with 18 cases related to defensible space (vegetation management): 4 closed in last 180 days.
o Assisted with Shopping Cart program with assistance from public works. o Assist building with inspections, stop work orders and getting property owners and/or contractors into communication with the building department to bring their properties into compliance.
o Assisted PD with vehicle abatement by identifying and tagging vehicles found to be in violation of leaving vehicles on the public right-of-way more than 72-hours. Approximately 18 vehicles were identified and tagged.
• Encourage community vibrancy through Special Events, activities, parades, volunteer activities, markets, Expos: (Council Priorities #5, 14, 21, 107, 108) o Staff approved Special Event permits for: State Championship (Football) Parade, Sonora Christmas Parade, Christmas Town, Sidewalk Sale, Sun Poppy Markets, Community Art Expo, El Campo de Sonora, Mutts Bean Feed, Film Permits, and others. o The Planning Commission approved an art installation on the Tamara Polley building on South Washington Street.
o So-Beautiful Community Beautification project: The City served as a Stakeholder, and partner with Tuolumne Arts Council and Sonora Chamber, in developing and facilitating art within windows of vacant business store fronts.
• Sonora Farmers Market: Explored growing this popular event in the City. Implemented a pilot project to close Stewart Street to allow the market to expand. (Council Priority #2, 21) o City Council approved the closure of Stewart street from Linoberg to Theall to expand the market, allowing the team, led by Becky Howard (Market Manager), to expand the number of certified producers, artisans and food vendors to the Market, with a realized 50% growth in revenue generated.
o A second market manager was added to the Market to help with the detour, utilization of Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT), with approximately $7,000 in sales, and vendor/attendee support with a dedicated pop-up moved to a more visible location. • Vision Sonora and the Linoberg Concept Report: (Council Priority #14, 18) o Public Works enhanced the crosswalks at Linoberg & Stewart; Theall & Stewart; Shepherd & Theall to improve pedestrian safety near the market. Reconfigured the Stewart St. loading zone to support downtown deliveries while accommodating outdoor gathering space, and extended the red zone to consolidate business trash, removing waste and recycling totes from sidewalks.
o Partnered with the Blue Zones Project to install landscape planters at both ends of the Red Zone to enhance visual aesthetics.
o Executed agreements with Sonora Tap Room and Diamondback Grill for use of Linoberg, expanding outdoor dining and regular live music activity in the area. o No Smoking/Vaping signage was added to Linoberg.
• Gold Rush Trail, Phase I: Advanced planning for a multi-use path along Stockton Street from the Fairgrounds to the Downtown Plaza Shopping Center, with a connector through Woods Creek Park linking Bonanza and Snell Street. Anticipated deliverables include project design documents, environmental clearance, and community outreach with affected property owners and stakeholders. (Council Priorities #22, 25, 26)
o Notified adjoining property owners of project alignment, schedule, and funding. 140
Item A.
35 | Page
o Hosted a three-day community outreach event (November 13–15) to gather input on conceptual plans, including walking tours, student engagement, an open house, community meetings, and a pop-up event.
o Staff has attended Project Development Team (PDT) meetings with Caltrans. o Completed and presented 30% design documents as part of community outreach. o Environmental studies have been conducted and submitted to Caltrans for review. o Staff and the consultant sent notification letters to businesses and property owners along the Stockton Road corridor offering one-on-one in-person or virtual meetings. To date, approximately 10 meetings have been conducted with key stakeholders. • Shopping Cart Ordinance: City Council adopted the Shopping Cart Ordinance in February 2025, launched in July 2025, Code Enforcement took the lead on implementation. This was a joint effort between Code Enforcement, Public Works and Sonora Police Department. (Council Priorities #6, 14)
• Sidewalk Encroachment Ordinance: City Council adopted Ordinance 904 in June 2025 governing sidewalk use. Most businesses were already compliant. Staff worked with remaining businesses to ensure compliance. The Sidewalk Encroachment Permit supports beautification and commerce while preserving ADA access and pedestrian clearances. (Council Priorities #22, 26)
141
Item A.
36 | Page

POLICE DEPARTMENT
Mid-Year Goals and Accomplishments
• Enhance Employee Retention and Staff Development: All Police Officer positions have been filled, which includes one recruit attending the academy. We have 1 part-time Dispatcher-Records Specialist position to fill. The second corporal position was filled in January; all leadership/supervisory positions are filled. (Council Priority #80) • Ongoing - Police Facility Project: Consultants are currently assessing potential properties as a test fit. We expect to engage in legislative Affairs / Advocacy efforts before the end of the budget cycle. (Council Priority #80)
• Enhance and Expand Public Safety Surveillance and ALPR System: Partnered with the Tuolumne County Transportation Council and the Tuolumne County Sheriff’s Department on a Safe Streets For All Grant, which was recently awarded. We expect to add additional ALPRs to locations in the city to assist in suppressing crime. (Council Priority #73) • Enhance Information and Technology Security: Upgraded our IT infrastructure with redundant data backups, secondary firewalls, and data mirroring. We established a DOJ-compliant, secure connection with the District Attorney's office to enable more efficient "paperless" case processing, reducing operating costs by eliminating materials and staff time spent on copying, handling, and delivery of case files. Upgraded software to enhance crime and collision diagrams. In the coming months, we will add an additional backup server to further harden and protect our sensitive data. (Council Priorities #73, 76, 119)
• Sonora Police Department Security Camera Registration Program: The security camera registration program was rolled out at the transition of the new budget cycle. We are building a database of community partners who are willing to share surveillance files as needed. This program enhances investigative efforts and provides an efficient process for quickly identifying potential video evidence. (Council Priority #73)
• Implement Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Program: The OHV has been put into service, and we are training staff on the equipment. The OHV provides safe and expedient access to incidents on our hiking trails and other unimproved areas of the City. The OHV is also used for encampment management, further mitigating fire dangers and other health and safety risks associated with unsheltered living. (Council Priorities #14, 62, 73, 77) • School Resource Officer: In the coming months, we will explore opportunities to reintroduce a School Resource Officer (SRO) into local schools. An SRO program will enhance school safety and incident response, build trust and positive relationships, provide youth mentorship, strengthen school and community collaboration, and foster a safer, more supportive educational environment.

Grant opportunities to open in summer 2026. (Council Priority #75a) • Complete Officer Wellness Center: Our Employee Wellness Center is partially operational and equipped with state-of-the-art exercise equipment. Wellness centers have been shown to reduce absenteeism and injuries while boosting morale, leading to more proactive policing practices. (Council Priority #77)
142
Item A.
37 | Page

FIRE DEPARTMENT
Mid-Year Goals and Accomplishments
• Fire Chief Recruitment: The Fire Chief recruitment process has been completed, and the position has been successfully filled. The new Fire Chief has been hired and on boarded, ensuring continuity of leadership and advancing the department’s goals related to strategic planning, operational readiness, fire prevention, mutual aid coordination, and staff development. (Council Priorities #59, 60).
• Fire Intern Recruitment: Recruitment for Fire Intern positions has been ongoing; however, the department has experienced challenges attracting new applicants. This difficulty is largely due to a competitive regional labor market and the success of the Fire Intern Program, as current interns have been hired into paid firefighter positions. Currently, two Fire Intern positions are filled, and two positions remain vacant. During FY 2025/26, the Fire Department will continue focused recruitment efforts to fill the remaining vacancies as part of its broader strategy to strengthen staffing levels, support succession planning, and invest in workforce development. The Fire Intern Program remains a critical pathway for developing trained, mission-aligned future firefighters. (Council Priority #67). • Defensible Space Inspection Program: The Defensible Space Inspection Program has been expanded to encompass the entire City, resulting in approximately a 10 percent increase in inspections conducted annually. This expansion strengthens the City’s wildfire risk reduction efforts and enhances overall public safety and community resilience. As staffing levels allow, additional inspections will be added and prioritized. The Fire Department will continue to focus on increasing the number of defensible space inspections to help residents identify and mitigate fire hazards around homes and structures, including overgrown vegetation, flammable landscaping, and improper storage of combustible materials. (Council Priorities #62, 63).
• Community Outreach Enhancement: Efforts to enhance community outreach are actively moving forward. The Fire Department has increased engagement by participating in Fire wise meetings and attending community functions, while continuing outreach efforts with local schools and other community events. These activities are focused on strengthening public engagement, building trust, and improving fire and life safety awareness throughout the City of Sonora. Ongoing outreach remains a cornerstone of modern fire service and ensures residents are informed, prepared, and empowered. (Council Priorities #120, 121). • Standards of Coverage and Emergency Response Capabilities: This goal has not yet been initiated; however, it remains a priority and will be continuously worked on as the Fire Department evaluates resources, staffing, and operational demands. Efforts to improve and enhance standards of coverage and emergency response capabilities will focus on ensuring the timely, effective, and consistent deployment of personnel, equipment, and apparatus throughout all areas of the City. This ongoing objective is intended to better meet community needs and adapt to evolving public safety demands. (Council Priorities #62, 67). 143
Item A.
38 | Page

ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Mid-Year Goals and Accomplishments
• SS4A Grant Secured: $450,000 in federal funds secured to conduct citywide transportation infrastructure safety assessment. Local Match $112,500. (Council Priority #25, 63) • Snell Street: Continued preliminary engineering and start environmental clearance process for the Snell Street Phase 1 reconstruction and storm drainage improvement project. Working to identify funding to complete the project. (Council Priorities #25, 26) • City Parking Lot Improvement Project: Continued progress on the 2026 Parking Lot Improvements Project for the Lyons Street–Stewart Street and Church Street–Stewart Street parking facilities. Initial design and preparatory phases are nearing completion, with construction anticipated to begin in the second half of the fiscal year. The mid-year budget includes modifications to fully fund these parking lot improvements. (Council Priorities #26, 112) • City Striping Project: Completing design and pre-construction coordination for striping improvements on Washington Street and Mono Road as part of the Citywide Striping Project.

Construction is expected to begin in the third quarter to improve lane delineation and overall traffic safety. (Council Priority #26)
• Infrastructure Grant Development and Funding Strategy: Continued grant application efforts for the Sonora Main Drain project, ATP Cycle 8, and actively pursued additional state, federal, and regional funding opportunities to support roadway and other critical infrastructure improvements. (Council Priority #25)
• General Engineering Support and Project Oversight: Provided general engineering support and project oversight for multiple City initiatives, including construction oversight of the Public Works maintenance building improvements and the Rotary Park pickleball court, ensuring projects were delivered in accordance with design specifications and City standards. Completed and closed out the Transportation Project. Also determined the extents of the City of Sonora right-of-way at various locations to support planning and project coordination. Provided project oversight for the Gold Rush Trail, Phase I. (Council Priorities #25, 27, 52, 64) • Addressed flooding: Storm drainage issue at numerous locations throughout the City including:
o Elk Drive Storm-Drain Pipe Replacement (Council Priority #64) • Solid Waste Franchise: Successfully managed the transition of the City’s solid waste franchise through issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP), evaluation and selection of a new service provider, and coordination of the required Proposition 218 noticing and public hearing process.

Staff also worked closely with CalRecycle to ensure compliance with State solid waste and recycling mandates, including SB 1383 requirements. (Council Priorities #14, 25, 48) • Lyons Road and Hope Lane: Evaluated safety improvements at the Lyons Road and Hope Street intersection, analyzing crosswalk installation options and identifying additional striping enhancements to improve pedestrian visibility and overall traffic safety. (Council Priority #26) • TCTC Strategic Planning: Participated in the Tuolumne County Transportation Council strategic planning session to advance City transportation priorities and regional coordination efforts. (Council Priorities #24, 26)
144
Item A.
39 | Page

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Mid-Year Goals and Accomplishments
• Public Works Supervisor Recruitment: A qualified internal candidate was promoted to Public Works Supervisor, and the vacancy created by this advancement has since been filled, restoring the department to full staffing capacity. (Council Priorities #59, 60) • Ongoing: Seasonal street marking improvements and install thermo-plastic stop bars, crosswalks, etc. (Council Priority #26)
• Annual Street Sign Replacements: Ongoing process of Street Sign Replacement Project. (Council Priorities #11, 26, 112)
• Annual Creek Maintenance: Creek clearing has begun and will continue the Vegetation Removal Project to clear vegetation along additional City streets. (Council Priorities #1, 4, 10, 14)
• Annual Pothole and Crack Sealing Project: Ongoing pothole repairs, continuing with annual potholing and street repairs. (Council Priority #26) • Holiday Season Preparations and Support: Completed the annual installation and postseason removal of Santa’s House, including construction of the deck and ramp, as well as seasonal installation and removal of Christmas lights, decorations, and banners in support of the winter holiday season and the City’s Christmas Parade. (Council Priorities #5, 21, 101, 108)
• Beautification Program: Completed seasonal pressure washing sidewalks and trash cans, this will start again in the spring. (Council Priorities #26, 101) • Vehicle Replacement: Over the past two fiscal years, the City has replaced two aging vehicles through its fleet replacement program, strengthening operational reliability and reducing long-term maintenance risk. Within the next 24 months, the City will need to plan for replacement of an additional dump truck and the Public Works bucket truck to maintain service capacity and support ongoing infrastructure operations. Timely replacement of these vehicles also allows the City to strategically manage procurement and lifecycle planning in light of evolving State of California zero-emission vehicle requirements for government fleets. (Council Priorities #26, 27, 30)
• Continuing Hot Patch Work: Will continue with hot asphalt patchwork in the second half of the fiscal year. (Council Priority #26)
• Facility Repair and Rehabilitation: Replaced deteriorating storm gutter infrastructure and rebuilt the deck at the City’s Opera Hall as part of ongoing maintenance efforts to preserve City facilities and support safe public access. (Council Priority #21, 26) • Energy Efficiency Upgrades: Continued the replacement of fluorescent lighting with energy-efficient LED fixtures in City facilities, including City Hall, to improve lighting quality, reduce energy consumption, and lower long-term maintenance costs. (Council Priority #40) • Storm Drain Maintenance: Continued proactive cleaning and debris removal from the City’s storm drain system to maintain functionality and enhance stormwater management. (Council Priority #64)
145
Item A.
40 | Page

ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENT
Mid-Year Goals and Accomplishments
• City Administrator Appointment: The City successfully completed the leadership transition through the promotion of the Assistant City Administrator to the position of City Administrator.

This internal advancement ensures continuity of operations and preserves institutional knowledge during a critical period of organizational change. The appointment temporarily leaves the Assistant City Administrator position vacant, and the City Administrator is currently overseeing the responsibilities of the Administrative Services Director, including finance and risk management functions. This consolidated leadership structure maintains stability while the City evaluates long-term organizational needs and staffing priorities. (Council Priorities #59, 60)
• Succession Planning Continued: Began recruitment for a vacancy at City Hall following the City Clerk’s announced retirement. (Council Priority #59, 113) • Recruitment Process Improvements: Continued modernization and streamlining of recruitment processes. In process of implementing a centralized onboarding portal to streamline the onboarding process. The platform will provide 24/7 access to forms, policies, benefits, payroll, and other instructions. (Council Priorities #32, 51, 60, 75, 77) • Continued Transition fleet to new leased vehicles: In process, continue to retire/surplus older City vehicles and replace with more efficient vehicles. (Council Priorities #27, 30, 35) • Multi-Year Labor Agreements: Completed Negotiations with the City’s Firefighter Association on a new three year memorandum of understanding (MOU). (Council Priorities #51, 60, 69, 77)
• Continued:
o Updated Class Descriptions for positions in the new MOU’s. (Council Priorities #53, 60)
o Updating of several outdated City policies. (Council Priority #53) • Technology Modernization and Service Delivery Improvements: Continued implementation of new software solutions to enhance operational efficiency and improve public service delivery. This includes transitioning business license renewals to an online platform, allowing applicants to submit renewals and complete payments electronically, improving accessibility, processing speed, and customer convenience. (Council Priority #45) • Expanded and Sustained City Social Media Presence: Continued to strengthen its digital communications strategy by maintaining and expanding its social media presence. Through the ongoing partnership with Diamond Digital Marketing, the City ensured consistent, timely, and professional messaging across its platforms. This collaboration has enhanced community engagement, improved the distribution of public information, and increased transparency by providing residents with accessible updates on City programs, services, events, and emergency notifications. (Council Priorities #120, 124) 146
Item A.
41 | Page

CONCLUSION
The financial results for the first half of Fiscal Year 25/26 are based on the most current financial information and economic assumptions available.

The recommended budget adjustments, detailed on page 25, are intended to ensure the successful close of the current fiscal year while maintaining fiscal stability and initiating preparation for the FY 2026/27 budget cycle.

As the City moves into the second half of the fiscal year, it does so with disciplined financial management and a clear strategic direction. Recommended mid-year adjustments maintain structural balance within the General Fund, resulting in a projected net increase to fund balance while avoiding reliance on one-time revenues to support ongoing operating costs. This measured approach preserves flexibility amid moderating economic conditions and positions the City to respond thoughtfully to evolving revenue trends.

At the same time, the City continues to advance priority initiatives identified in the 2024 Strategic Plan. Recent accomplishments—including completion of the Rotary Park pickleball court and progress on key infrastructure improvements—demonstrate steady forward movement. Upcoming projects such as the Church Street–Stewart Street and Lyons Street–Stewart Street parking lot improvements and citywide striping will further enhance public safety and accessibility.

The City’s deliberate reserve strategy remains central to its long-term stability. By building and protecting reserves, including the Economic Uncertainty Reserve, Labor Reserve, and CalPERS Prefunding Trust, the City has strengthened its ability to manage economic variability while preparing for significant future obligations such as the General Plan Update and major infrastructure projects like Snell Street. Staff will continue actively pursuing sustainable funding sources and grant opportunities to advance these priority projects without compromising fiscal integrity.

Through prudent budgeting, strategic reserve planning, and continued alignment with adopted priorities, the City of Sonora remains well-positioned to sustain essential services, protect its financial foundation, and advance meaningful community investments in the year ahead. 147
Item A.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

C I T Y H A L L
CITY OF SONORA 94 N. WASHINGTON STREET, SONORA, CA 95370 P: (209) 532-4541

SERVICE, INNOVATION, INTEGRITY, COLLABORATION, RESPECT, LEADERSHIP DATE: March 2, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Tyler Summersett, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Consider Acceptance of a Grant Award from the Sonora Area Foundation (SAF), in the Amount of $59,107, to Complete the Playground Re-Surfacing at Woods Creek Park.

RECOMMENDATION:

Consider Acceptance of $59,107 in Grant Funding from the Sonora Area Foundation to Complete Playground ReSurfacing at Woods Creek Park.

BACKGROUND / ANALYSIS:

Woods Creek Park is centrally located within the City of Sonora and serves a broad and diverse group of users, including residents, visitors, youth sports participants, and families from throughout the region. As a regional hub for entertainment, shopping, and recreational activities, Sonora attracts visitors from surrounding foothill communities, and Woods Creek Park plays an important role in supporting the City’s park and open space amenities.

The park features a variety of recreational facilities, including a recently installed pickleball court, a playground, and a ball field, making it a multi-generational destination that supports both organized and informal physical activity. Its location along Woods Creek provides a scenic, natural setting that enhances the park’s appeal and offers opportunities for passive recreation.

Woods Creek Park is strategically positioned near downtown Sonora, surrounding residential neighborhoods, the Sonora Fairgrounds, and State Route 49, making it highly accessible to both residents and regional visitors. In addition, the City is currently advancing an Active Transportation Program (ATP)-funded walking trail project that will run adjacent to the park, further enhancing pedestrian connectivity and recreational opportunities.

Given its central location, regional accessibility, and existing recreational amenities, Woods Creek Park serves as a key community asset and gathering space within the City of Sonora. 148
Item B.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

C I T Y H A L L
CITY OF SONORA 94 N. WASHINGTON STREET, SONORA, CA 95370 P: (209) 532-4541

SERVICE, INNOVATION, INTEGRITY, COLLABORATION, RESPECT, LEADERSHIP DISCUSSION:

The existing surface for the Woods Creek is past its useful life. This has resulted in large areas that have peeled away, leaving the playground looking worn and tattered. The playground is a high-use destination for families and tots in the City. The City originally planned to address the state of the playground surfacing with Proposition 84 funds received from the State. Along with the playground, the City proposed to remove and replace the existing shade structure at the park, which covered picnic tables located. Additionally, a half-court basketball facility was envisioned. The existing shade structure was removed, and the basketball court was swapped out for a pickleball court. The bids to construct the pickleball court and flatwork to connect the new facility to existing amenities did not leave any budget to complete the playground surfacing.

The Sonora Area Foundation recently contacted the City to offer financial assistance to complete the remaining improvements at the park. As the City did not have dedicated funding available to address this need, the timing of this offer is particularly significant. The awarded amount aligns with the City’s cost estimate for the installation of new surfacing.

The City intends to utilize its on-call contractor, George Reed, to complete the project. The construction schedule will be weather-dependent; however, completion is anticipated between April and June 2026, as temperatures and dry conditions permit.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The City has been awarded a $59,107 grant from the Sonora Area Foundation for the purchase and installation of new playground equipment at Woods Creek Park. The quoted cost for the playground update is $58,960, not to exceed the total grant award amount. Grant funds will be used exclusively for eligible project costs in accordance with the Foundation’s terms and conditions.

No General Fund monies will be used for this project. The total project cost will not exceed the $59,107 grant award. Any unexpended funds remaining after project completion will be handled in accordance with the grant agreement, including return to the Sonora Area Foundation if required.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A- Sonora Area Foundation Award Letter(s)
Attachment B- Photos of Existing Conditions
CORE COUNCIL PRIORITIES:

Infrastructure and Engineering
149
Item B.
150
Item B.
151
Item B.
152
Item B.
153
Item B.
154
Item B.

Sonora City CouncilMarch 2, 2026

Sonora City Council
March 2, 2026