TURLOCK – USER FEE STUDY & COST ALLOCATION CLEARSOURCE PROPOSAL | B-7
SECTION B
METHODOLOGY
ClearSource will prepare the administrative record for pursuing implementation of revised fees.
This focuses on the draft and final reports of cost of service findings, including assumptions, critical data, and discussion of expected impacts. Analytical detail will be included, as well as executive summary and infographics useful in public presentation and legislative processes. We will deliver the editable analytical models used to develop fees, including the detailed working comprehensive fee schedule and its streamlined, user-friendly publishable version. ClearSource will also provide presentation/summary materials for communicating proposals and assistance with both the staff report and public hearing noticing. ClearSource will provide a training session and appropriate documentation for the City’s future maintenance of comprehensive fee schedule.
Citywide Consolidated Fee Schedule; Microsoft Excel-based and editable analytical models to calculate cost of service based fees; comprehensive report identifying detailed full costs of service (direct and indirect), current and recommended cost recovery, revenue impacts of recommended fees, and comparison of fees to other cities; report in digital file and any requested bound paper copies; training for City staff in future management of fees and deliverable models
Throughout the study and at its concluding stages, ClearSource will facilitate a meaningful level of interaction between consultants, City personnel, and City Councilmembers or other City Commission(s) to ensure applicable and sustainable outcomes and wide understanding of impacts. ClearSource does not impose limits on number of engagements within our defined work plan and to usher study outcomes to successful implementation.
Meetings with City project management team; meetings with individual direct service departments with fees under review, meeting with any applicable stakeholders; meetings with City Council and/or other City commission or committee); public hearing(s)
(This section continues on the following page.)
TURLOCK – USER FEE STUDY & COST ALLOCATION CLEARSOURCE PROPOSAL | B-8
SECTION B
METHODOLOGY
The Scope of Work described
by the City in its Request for Proposals represents
tasks to be performed and completed by the
ClearSource team and which are delivered by the
previously detailed ClearSource Work Plan.
ClearSource absolutely commits to do the heavy
lifting in this project, and we do not reverse
delegate to City staff. That said, these types of
projects are collaborative efforts. ClearSource
identifies the following key ways in which City staff
are involved in the completion of the project:
Provide institutional knowledge and expertise
and requested background documents, such as
financial data, staffing information, fee schedules,
and relevant policies. ClearSource asks City staff
only for reports already in existence for other
City purposes and readily available to share.
Provide an overview of current fee schedules,
fee collection practices, system capabilities for
managing fee amounts and structures, and data
tracking systems. ClearSource accomplishes this
with staff in meeting format, and does not ask
staff to create responses outside efficiently
schedule meeting time.
Respond to consultant questionnaires or
interviews to develop staff time profiles. Again,
ClearSource achieves this in conscientiously
scheduled meeting format without subsequent
“homework” for participating staff.
Attend meetings to provide direction based on
consultant-generated analysis, findings, and
recommendations.
Notice public meetings.
Prepare agenda items for proposed fees and
other outcomes brought forward for legislative
and public review.
The following list provides an estimate of time that
may be invested by City staff during the project,
depending on role:
City’s Project Manager: 20 to 40 hours, varying
by degree to which this individual attends all
engagement with participating departments and
divisions with consultants.
Departmental/divisional key contacts: 2 to 8
hours, varying by complexity of fees managed or
indirect service provided.
Selected direct service personnel
representatives: 30 minutes to 2 hours.
The ClearSource team does not require involved City
staff to possess and skillset outside of their job
responsibilities with the City. We view City staff as
experts in what they do, while we bring expertise in
cost of service analysis, nexus analysis, and the fee,
rate, and other cost recovery mechanisms under
review in this project.
During this project, the City
will provide ClearSource readily available documents
and data sets already tracked and exportable from its
existing systems. (ClearSource will not require the
City to manipulate or parse data sets from their
original form; our efforts to work with data sets in
the forms delivered by the City is built into our
presumed labor effort and consulting fee.)
In a typical user and regulatory fee study, the
following general information will be requested of the
City:
Actual and budgeted revenue and expenditure
detail by fund, organization, and object across
multiple fiscal years.
Budgeted personnel costs by fund and
organization.
To be determined during study orientation based
on need and availability: specific data sets
tracked which might describe activity workload,
such as service volumes and time.
To be determined during fee design based on
need: documentation of any specific formalized
practices and policies associated with fee
application and collection.
Additionally,
ClearSource independently will access the City’s
publicly available documents, such as budget
documents, annual financial reports, relevant
TURLOCK – USER FEE STUDY & COST ALLOCATION CLEARSOURCE PROPOSAL | B-9
SECTION B
METHODOLOGY
planning documents, existing fee schedules, existing
fee/cost recovery policies, organizational information, and other available material.
ClearSource will also tap external/industry data sets
as needed and conduct comparative fee research
relevant to the City of Turlock. Finally, ClearSource
will use our experience in the immediate region and
with comparable communities across California to fill
gaps, springboard conversations with City staff, and
generally ensure that overwhelming burdens are
not placed on City personnel to accomplish a
successful and meaningful study.
Our three-person project team expects to spend
over 255 hours fully delivering the City’s scope of
services and ushering the findings of the study to
successful enactment. Exhibit 5 on Page G-2 lists a
breakdown of our team’s hours by consultant
position and study element following the previously
described Work Plans.
While we have emphasized the collaborative roles of
ClearSource and City staff in the successful
completion of this study, we also commit to ensuring
that:
ClearSource performs all heavy data analysis for
this project and does not reverse delegate to
City staff.
ClearSource works within existing data systems
used by the City and does not ask City staff to
create customized responses.
ClearSource reframes and redesigns questions
we ask of City staff or intended approaches to
solutions in order to fit the capabilities and
availability of participating departments.
ClearSource devises engagement with City
personnel to fit the needs and interests of
individual participants.
ClearSource communicates regularly with the
City’s designated project manager to ensure the
study is progressing along the expected timeline
TURLOCK – USER FEE STUDY & COST ALLOCATION CLEARSOURCE PROPOSAL | D-1
SECTION D
TIMELINE
ClearSource forecasts to deliver final draft reporting for the project 150 days from commencement. These reporting documents will enable final presentation, any final edits based on legislative review, and any necessary additional public procedure or stakeholder engagement thereafter along the City’s timeline and legislative priorities.
Exhibit 3 illustrates a timeline for consulting task completion, delivery of reports, and subsequent approval procedures. As a sample timeline, if efforts begin in May 2025, all reports will be ready by the end of September 2025. Outcomes can then follow a thoughtful pace of legislative review and approval and inform the City’s budget development process for the following fiscal year. The City may choose to align fee schedule implementation with its next fiscal year or implement approved outcomes mid-year. Approved user fees can become effective 60 days following a successful public hearing before the City Council.
1 | Study Orientationn/a n/a2 | Financial & Organizational Inputsn/a n/a3 | Cost Allocation Modeln/a n/a4 | Reporting & Deliverable ToolsTraining TBD n/a5 | Review & Engagement+0-30 Days n/a1 | Study Orientationn/a n/a2 | Financial & Labor Time Inputsn/a n/a3 | Labor Time Valuationn/a n/a4 | Fee Designn/a n/a5 | Cost of Service Analysisn/a n/a6 | Cost Recovery & Impact AnalysisPolicy w/ Fees With Fees7 | Reporting, Admin. Record, & ToolsTraining TBD n/a8 | Review, Engagement, & Approval+ 30-60 Days + 60 DaysData Development, Analysis, and Reporting Tasks Event (Actual timing and agenda to be determined. No limits on number.)Timing at City's Discretion Draft and Final Deliverable Reports, Comprehensive Fee Schedule, and Other Deliverables
TURLOCK – USER FEE STUDY & COST ALLOCATION CLEARSOURCE PROPOSAL | G-1
SECTION G
FEE PROPOSAL
ClearSource has developed the
work plan and schedule described earlier and
designed to deliver a successful Comprehensive
User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan to the City
of Turlock. To complete that project, ClearSource
proposes a total maximum cost for this contract at
$49,920.
This maximum consulting
fee is distributed to each element of the overall
project as summarized in Exhibit 4.
ClearSource commits to
finish the project as described in our work plan
without change orders. This is our standard practice.
We do not request contract amendments for
additional meetings, extra analytical scenarios, or
any extended work to aid City staff or Council
consideration. These are normal occurrences in
these types of studies and part of the standard effort
required to usher study findings to successful
conclusion. Our proposed price is set to accomplish
the work thoroughly without upward risk to the City.
The maximum
consulting fee presented here is based on the
ClearSource team’s experience with other similarly
scoped and scaled California cities in past studies:
careful review of the City of Turlock’s existing
potential fee categories for study, service provisions, organizational structure, and apparent financial
performance, noting the breadth of City services that
will fall under review in this effort. Our proposal
ensures that all user/regulatory fees eligible for the
prescribed methodologies can be analyzed without
shortcuts or explanations for non-analysis and that
the process is carried through to successful
implementation of feasible outcomes.
Exhibit 5 on the following page illustrates the detail
behind our presented maximum price for the
Comprehensive User Fee Study and Cost Allocation
Plan. This includes our estimated consultant labor
time paired with hourly billing rates by task described in the ClearSource work plans.
The proposed
consulting fee presented is based on assumed time
to complete the scope of services paired with hourly
billing rates for ClearSource consultants. The
schedule of hourly billing rates for all positions
contemplated in this project is as follows:
Rates fixed for the contracted scope of services
described herein and subject to change after
December 31, 2025, for any added services:
- Project Manager: $195 per hour
- Principal Consultant: $195 per hour
- Senior Consultant: $195 per hour
ClearSource does not bill
clients for ordinary direct expenses, such as travel
and document production. All costs incurred by
ClearSource to complete the City’s project as
currently scoped are embedded in our professional
rates. The City’s project does not contemplate and
include extraordinary expenses such as mailing or
polling as part of the consultant’s required
deliverables; therefore, no cost above the billed time
of our professionals is proposed in our consulting
fee.
Should the City seek an amendment to the contract
to add consulting services it did not contemplate in
its original scope of services as of this submittal date, ClearSource will estimate an additional consulting fee
using the professional rates listed above.
As emphasized earlier, ClearSource will not request
contract amendments to compensation to handle
normal fluctuations in the scope of services already
defined, such as unplanned meetings, scenarios, or
Cost Allocation Plan 64 12,480$ Comprehensive User Fee Study 192 37,440$
TURLOCK – USER FEE STUDY & COST ALLOCATION CLEARSOURCE PROPOSAL | G-2
SECTION G
FEE PROPOSAL
elongated review processes. An example of a
situation when “added services” would apply is
adding an internal service fund rate study to the
project.
ClearSource will issue monthly progress reports to
the City. Accompanying monthly invoices will be
based on progress recorded to the project following
the major tasks described in the work plan. We will
not invoice for tasks not yet completed, and we will
not submit a final invoice for the study until work is
completed. Total invoices issued over the course the
study will not exceed the maximum price presented
here.
1 | Study Orientation 1 2 0 3 585$ 2 | Financial & Organizational Inputs 0 10 6 16 3,120$ 3 | Cost Allocation Model 1 16 8 25 4,875$ 4 | Reporting & Deliverable Tools 2 8 2 12 2,340$ 5 | Review & Engagement 1 6 1 8 1,560$ 1 | Study Orientation 4 0 4 8 1,560$ 2 | Financial & Labor Time Inputs 10 0 12 22 4,290$ 3 | Labor Time Valuation 6 0 8 14 2,730$ 4 | Fee Design 10 2 6 18 3,510$ 5 | Cost of Service Analysis 24 6 30 60 11,700$ 6 | Cost Recovery & Impact Analysis 14 2 20 36 7,020$ 7 | Reporting, Admin. Record, & Tools 6 2 8 16 3,120$ 8 | Review, Engagement, & Approval 12 0 6 18 3,510$
City Council Staff Report
May 27, 2025
From: Adrienne Werner, Development Services Director
Prepared by: Jennifer Figueroa, Housing Program Manager Agendized by: Susan E. Borrego, Interim City Manager
1. ACTION RECOMMENDED:
Resolution: Approving the three-year agreement with Stanislaus County to continue participating as a member of the Stanislaus HOME Consortium for the HOME Investment Partnership (HOME) Program and authorizing the City Manager or designee to execute all related and necessary documents.
2. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE:
In order to be eligible for HOME funding, the City is required to enter into an agreement with the Stanislaus County HOME Consortium to be designated as a subrecipient of HOME funds. The Stanislaus HOME Consortium Three-Year Agreement authorizes the participation of the City of Turlock in the Stanislaus HOME Consortium for fiscal years 2026- 2027, 2027-2028, and 2028-2029 and must be submitted to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) one-year in advance of the new period.
Under federal regulations, a participating consortium in the HOME program must have formal agreements between the lead agency and its subrecipients. In the Stanislaus County HOME Consortium, Stanislaus County will serve as the HUD-designated lead agency, also known as the Participating Jurisdiction (PJ). The City of Turlock has joined with the cities of Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson, Riverbank, Waterford and the unincorporated areas of Stanislaus County to form this Consortium. This agreement represents the continuation of that collaborative partnership for the period of July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2029 and establishes administrative policies and procedures, performance standards, and guideline for funding specific programs and projects.
As the lead entity for the Consortium, Stanislaus County is not distributing automatic allocations to member cities. Each city will be required to apply for funding in the respective categories in the County’s Annual Action Plan. This agreement does not commit the City of Turlock to any action aside from being a part of the Consortium and retaining the option to apply for funding, should it choose to do so.
3. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
HUD awards the Stanislaus HOME Consortium funds to carry out activities to benefit low- and moderate-income persons or households. This agreement provides the vehicle to obtain funding for proposed activities, should the City choose to do so.
4. FISCAL IMPACT / BUDGET AMENDMENT:
Proposed Fiscal Year 2026-2027, 2027-2028, and 2028-2029 HOME activities will be funded with Stanislaus County HOME Consortium funds.
Agenda Staff Report
5/27/2025
5. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval.
6. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Recommend approval.
7. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
The environmental review is done programmatically as part of the Annual Action Plan. In addition, each project funded with HOME funds is subject to a separate, project-specific NEPA environmental review, which must be completed before funds can be committed.
8. ALTERNATIVES:
1. Council may choose not to approve the agreement. This option is not recommended as it would result in Turlock no longer having the option to receive HOME funds. This agreement does not commit the City of Turlock to any action aside from being a part of the Consortium and retaining the option to apply for funding, should the City choose to do so.
9. ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution for Consortium 3-year agreement
2. 2026-2028 Consortium Three Year Agreement Final DRAFT
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TURLOCK
IN THE MATTER OF APPROVING THE THREE- }
YEAR AGREEMENT WITH STANISLAUS } RESOLUTION NO. 2025-
COUNTY TO CONTINUE PARTICIPATING AS A }
MEMBER OF THE STANISLAUS HOME }
CONSORTIUM FOR THE HOME INVESTMENT }
PARTERSHIP (HOME) PROGRAM AND }
AUTHRIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR }
DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE ALL RELATED AND }
NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. }
}
WHEREAS, the County of Stanislaus (“County”), a political subdivision of the State of California, and the City of Turlock (“City”), a municipal corporation, desire to participate in the HOME Investment Partnership (“HOME”) Program administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”); and WHEREAS, said program will promote the public health, safety, and welfare by providing grant funds to be used by the City and County to improve housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income households; and WHEREAS, HUD requires that the parties enter into a Consortium Agreement for participation in the HOME Program for the period of time from July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2029 to define their rights and obligations as a participant in the Program; and WHEREAS, the proposed Consortium Agreement is consistent with the General Plan and with the City and County policies encouraging cooperation between agencies on issues of regional significance such as affordable housing; and WHEREAS, the City and County will enter into a Subrecipient Agreement which establishes administrative policies and procedures, performance standards, and guidelines for funding specific programs and projects; and WHEREAS, entering into this agreement does not commit the City of Turlock to any action aside from being a part of the Consortium and retaining the option to apply for funding, should the City choose to do so; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Turlock does hereby adopt a resolution approving the three-year agreement with Stanislaus County to continue participating as a member of the Stanislaus HOME Consortium for the HOME Investment Partnership (HOME) Program and authorizing the City Manager or designee to execute all related and necessary paperwork.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Turlock this 27th day of May, 2025, by the following vote:
Resolution No. 2025-
AYES:
NOES:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
__________________________
Nichole Fiez, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of Stanislaus,
State of California
1 2251\02\3984873.1
STANISLAUS
HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT Three Year Agreement
October 1, 2026 to September 30, 2029
This Stanislaus HOME Investment Partnerships Program Consortium Agreement (“Agreement”) is between the Cities of Turlock, Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson, Riverbank, and Waterford, each a municipal corporation of the State of California (individually a “City” and collectively, “Cities”) and Stanislaus County through its Department of Planning and Community Development (the “County”). The Cities and the County are collectively referred to herein as the “Consortium,” or the “Stanislaus HOME Consortium,” or the “Parties”; and individually, “Consortium Member” or “Party”.
WHEREAS, the Parties agree that it is desirable and in the interests of their citizens to secure approval by the federal government to be considered as a consortium under the federal HOME Program operated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) as authorized under the HOME Investment Partnerships Act, Title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act of I990, as amended (hereafter collectively referred to as the “Act,”); and,’
WHEREAS, Title II of the Act creates the HOME Investment Partnerships Program (hereinafter “HOME” or “HOME Program”) that provides funds to states and local governments for acquisition, rehabilitation, and new construction of affordable housing, and tenant-based rental assistance; and,
WHEREAS, the Act provides that units of local government that are geographically contiguous may form a consortium for the purpose of receiving an allocation to participate in the HOME “Program” to be funded by HUD; and,
WHEREAS, the individual municipalities may not separately qualify to receive HOME funds, but by cooperating in a consortium they may as a group become eligible participants as a single participating jurisdiction in the HOME Program; and, WHEREAS, the consortium of geographically contiguous local governments has notified HUD of their intention to participate in the HOME Program; and, WHEREAS, this Agreement constitutes an intergovernmental agreement under California law which meets the criteria pursuant to 24 CFR Part 92.101, and the Consortium Members are authorized to enter into and adopt this Agreement by their respective legislative bodies; and, WHEREAS, the Parties wish to enter into this Agreement to authorize the County to act in a representative capacity for the Cities for the purposes of ensuring that the Consortium’s HOME Program is carried out in compliance with the requirements of 24 CFR Part 92 and 24 CFR
92.101(a)(2)(ii); and,
2 2251\02\3984873.1
WHEREAS, under 24 CFR 92.101, the Consortium’s qualification as a unit of general local government generally continues for a period of three successive federal fiscal years. As required by applicable regulations, to align the Community Development Block Grant (hereinafter “CDBG”) and HOME qualification cycles, the Parties agree that the term of this agreement shall for a period of three (3) years, from October 1, 2026 to September 30, 2029 (Federal Fiscal Years (“FY”) 2026-2028).
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereby enter into the following Agreement for the purpose of receiving an allocation from the HOME Program.
1. Consortium. This Consortium shall be known as the “Stanislaus HOME Consortium”. The Consortium Members agree to cooperate to undertake or to assist in undertaking housing assistance activities for the HOME Program, and affirmatively support and enforce fair housing laws and regulations.
2. Lead Agency. The County shall be designated as “Lead Agency” of the Consortium to act in a representative capacity for all Consortium Members for the purposes of administering the HOME Program. The County will assume overall responsibility for ensuring that the Consortium’s HOME Program activities are carried out in compliance with HOME rules, including requirements relating to the Consolidated Plan (described in Section 6, below). No Consortium Member may obstruct the implementation of the Consortium’s approved Consolidated Plan.
3. Designated Representatives.
a. Each Consortium Member (i.e., the governing body or its designee) shall designate one individual from its staff to serve on the ad hoc Technical Committee and the ad hoc Ranking Panel (each, a “Designated Representative”). An alternate may be designated to serve if the Designated Representative is unable to attend. Each Designated Representative shall act on behalf of and in an advisory capacity to its respective jurisdiction. In lieu of staff, each Consortium Member may select one (1) member of the public with experience and knowledge relating to affordable housing development and/or operations to serve on the ad hoc Ranking Panel (“Public Representatives”).
b. An ad hoc Technical Committee consisting of one (1) Designated Representative from the County and one (1) Designated Representative from each participating City will meet from time to time to review, aid in development, and provide recommendations on policies, procedures, and documentation required by HUD for the implementation and administration of the HOME Program. The Technical Committee will facilitate distribution of information to residents within the respective jurisdictions of the HOME Consortium concerning community housing needs and the opportunity to participate in the development of programs and priorities.
c. An ad hoc Ranking Panel consisting of (1) Designated Representative from the County and one (1) Designated Representative from each participating City will meet from time to time to review, evaluate, and rank proposals for designation of Community Housing Development Organizations (“CHDO”) and projects proposing to be funded with HOME funds.
3 2251\02\3984873.1
The Panel shall convene as determined necessary by the County. Panel rankings will be used by the County in making recommendations for allocation and awarding of funding.
4. Three Year Qualification Period.
a. This Agreement is for funding HOME Program activities for the 2026-2028 FY (October 1, 2026, to September 30, 2029) or until the HOME program funds for the three-year qualification period are closed out pursuant to 24 CFR 92.507, whichever is later. In accordance with 24 CFR 91.402, all units of general government that are Consortium Members must be on the same program year that starts on each July 1st for CDBG, HOME, and Emergency Solutions Grants (“ESG”) programs.
b. Although the current qualification period for the Consortium is three (3) years, members have an obligation to abide by HOME requirements throughout the period of affordability for funded projects.
5. Program Year. The Program Year for the start date for the Consortium is the commencement of the 2026 FY of the Consortium Members, which begins on July 1, 2026, and ends June 30, 2029.
6. Consolidated Plan. The County, on behalf of this Consortium, shall submit to HUD a single, unified “Consolidated Plan,” which describes the Consortium’s strategy for addressing housing, homeless and supportive housing needs, and Citizen Participation Plan. The County, on behalf of the Consortium shall also submit to HUD “Annual Action Plans” (described in 24 CFR 91.220), Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Reports (“CAPERs”) and other reports, as required by HUD. Per regulation, all Consortium plans and reports shall contain goals and accomplishments for the Consortium.
7. Allocation of Funds.
a. The Consortium Members shall be notified by the County in writing within 30 days of the County receiving official correspondence from HUD of the availability of HOME Program funds for the Consortium. These funds shall be allocated to individual Consortium Members and will be required to be committed to an approved project within six (6) months from July 1 of each year unless such deadline is extended by the County. An approved project shall be a project included within a HUD-certified Annual Action Plan approved by the County. Funds will be considered committed if they are under a fully executed agreement that has been reviewed by and determined adequate by the County, and the environmental determination for the project has been certified by the County. All proposed projects will be submitted to the County for the upcoming fiscal year by January 1 of each year. A City shall not proceed to commit funds without the County’s approval of the project and completion of the environmental review. If funds are not committed within the deadline established by the County, then the funds shall revert back to the County for use in an eligible HUD program as determined by the County. b. If a Consortium Member opts not to accept its annual pro rata share of available HOME Program funds, it must provide written notification to the County. The allocation
4 2251\02\3984873.1
will be redistributed among all remaining HOME Consortium Members per their pro rata share. A Consortium Member that returns its allocation remains a member of the Consortium. c. When a shared consultant/service provider is hired on behalf of the Consortium, the costs will be shared on a pro-rata basis. This share will be calculated based on the annual Consortium Members’ collective annual HOME allocation. Consortium Member’s pro-rata annual HOME allocation will be reduced by each Consortium Member’s cost share. The decision to hire shared consultants/service providers shall be at the sole discretion of the County.
8. Program Income.
a. Program income must be deposited in the County’s HOME Investment Trust Fund local account unless the County permits the subrecipient to retain the program income for additional HOME projects pursuant to the written agreement required by 24 CFR 92.503 and 504.
b. The County shall be responsible for tracking and determining the use of any program income it receives in accordance with applicable laws and regulations (See 24 CFR
92.503(a)).
9. Matching Funds. Each Consortium Member will be responsible for providing its pro-rata share of matching non-federal funds not previously used each time it makes a draw against its allocation of federal funds from the HOME Program (See 24 CFR 92.218).
10. Non-Appropriation. In the event funds are not appropriated to the HOME program, HUD guidance shall be followed. If grant closeout is required, the County will be responsible for grant close-out, and each City shall cooperate in the effort. The Consortium Members will be responsible for maintaining compliance on previous HOME-funded units.
11. County’s Responsibilities. Each City hereby authorizes the County to act on its behalf in any way required to comply with this Agreement and applicable laws and regulations.
The County shall have final responsibility for selecting the program activities and projects to be included in each annual grant request and project grant request and for filing the Annual Action Plan with HUD on an annual basis. The County agrees to:
a. Prepare the Consortium’s Five-Year Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plans.
b. Prepare the Consortium’s CAPER.
c. Prepare applications, Request for Proposals, and contract templates for CHDOs. Publish Public Notices on CHDO funds.
d. Monitor Consortium Members and CHDOs and prepare monitoring tools.
The County has the right and responsibility to monitor and assure compliance with all HOME requirements during the project implementation and the affordability period.
5 2251\02\3984873.1
e. Coordinate/chair Consortium meetings, and prepare, maintain, and disseminate, agendas, minutes, and records.
f. Coordinate/chair public hearings and publish notices. g. Process agenda items (i.e., plans, intergovernmental agreements, contracts) through the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors.
h. Submit Requests for Release of Funds documents to HUD on behalf of Consortium Members. Transmit Authority to Use Grant Funds documents from HUD to Consortium Members.
i. Process project setups, revisions, and completion reports. j. Process reimbursement requests from County funds and process drawdowns from HUD.
k. Prepare Consortium financial reports and reconcile with HUD’s financial data.
l. Calculate annual Consortium allocation.
m. Coordinate reallocation of funds when necessary.
n. Provide technical assistance to Consortium Members as needed. o. Facilitate audits and/or monitoring with HUD and State Auditor General. p. Maintain all applicable Stanislaus HOME Consortium application, implementation, and financial files for HOME and CHDO activities. In addition, the County will maintain all files associated with monitoring and reporting to HUD. The County will maintain these administrative and programmatic files according to the current applicable State and Federal record retention schedule and regulations.
q. Procure and contract with shared consultant/services. r. Maintain a Programmatic Agreement with the State Historic Preservation Office (“SHPO”) for Section 106 reviews per 24 CFR Part 58, contingent upon SHPO approval. s. Perform market study to determine annual HOME homeownership value limits and submit to HUD for approval.
t. In accordance with the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), complete all required environmental reviews, with input and assistance from the Consortium member with land use authority for the project, and serve as the “Certifying Officer” with respect to environmental matters on all Consortium-funded projects. However, no funds may be committed to a HOME activity or project before the completion of the environmental review and
6 2251\02\3984873.1
approval of the request for release of funds and related certification, except as authorized by 24 CFR part 58. (24 CFR 92.352).
u. The County shall receive and allocate administrative funds as set forth in applicable HOME regulations.
12. City Responsibilities. The Cities agree to:
a. Develop criteria for project selection and guidelines for implementation within HUD statutes and regulations.
b. Complete required reports for project set-up and completion; and execute all required Deeds of Trust.
c. Review and submit reimbursement requests for its sub-recipients. d. Track payments for each project and submit reimbursement requests to the County for payment.
e. Provide information and data for the Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plans, CAPERs, and other reports as required by HUD by the date and in the format specified by the County.
f. Support the objectives of the Consortium’s Citizen Participation Plan and the Consolidated Plan.
g. Provide general project oversight for projects within the City’s jurisdiction. h. Appoint Designated Representatives to attend and participate in the work of the Technical Committee meetings and Ranking Panels.
i. Participate in Consortium training sessions for subrecipients, as necessary. j. Assist the County in conducting appropriate environmental reviews for all projects in accordance with 24 CFR part 58.
k. Assist the County in completing appropriate environmental clearance documents for all projects, including CHDO projects, administered by the Consortium Member.
City agrees to assist the County by securing all information and documentation relating to projects within their respective jurisdictions under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), if required, including paying for consulting services and technical evaluations, and providing the same to the County for final review and approval.
l.
m. Publish notices when appropriate. Consortium Members will submit any Request for Release of Funds documents to the County for review and forwarding to HUD.
7 2251\02\3984873.1
n. Submit all financial reimbursement requests, revisions, and completion reports to the County using the County’s approved forms. Each Consortium Member is responsible for requiring that each of its subrecipients follow the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the project-specific agreements and the procedures and time involved for processing activity reimbursement approvals, draws, and payments. Each Consortium Member shall request drawdowns of funds from the County for all activities within its jurisdiction with proper documentation including proof of payment and updated match log. Each Consortium Member shall process and submit reimbursement requests in a timely manner and facilitate the reimbursement process by providing complete and accurate information. o. Report, retain, account for, and expend, program income generated in their jurisdictions per federal regulations and as permitted by the County. p. Maintain all applicable application, implementation, financial, and program files. The Consortium Member will maintain these administrative and programmatic files according to the current applicable State and Federal record retention schedule and regulations.
No records shall be destroyed by a Consortium Member without obtaining prior written authorization from the County.
q. Monitor rental properties in respective jurisdictions at the specified intervals throughout the period of affordability and submit monitoring reports to the County. r. Carry out activities in compliance with HUD rules and regulations and the requirements of the HOME Program including the provisions of 24 CFR 92.504(c)(2). s. Notify the County of their willingness to participate in a Programmatic Agreement with SHPO for the Stanislaus HOME Consortium. t. Act in good faith and with due diligence in performance of City obligations and responsibilities under this Agreement and under all applicable Allocation Agreements, Subrecipient Agreements, and Grant Agreements (collectively, “Program Agreements”). Each City further agrees that it shall fully cooperate with the County in all things required by applicable law and appropriate to comply with the provisions of any Grant Agreement received by the County pursuant to the Act and its regulations.
13. Compliance with Applicable Laws.
a. The Parties acknowledge and agree that some existing programs may need to be modified if they are to be carried out with HOME funds, but the Consortium’s activities do not impact CDBG-funded programs.
b. Each Consortium Member agrees to affirmatively further fair housing as required by 24 CFR Part 91.425(a)(1)(i) and agrees to participate in any HUD-required analysis of fair housing or assessment of fair housing. The Parties agree to comply with all applicable state and federal laws, rules, and regulations regarding equal opportunity, equal access, non- discrimination, and affirmative action.
8 2251\02\3984873.1
c. The Consortium shall comply with applicable California open meeting (when applicable), public records, ethics laws and all other applicable laws and regulations. d. The environmental effects of activities carried out with HOME funds must be assessed in accordance with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321) and the related authorities listed in HUD’s implementing regulations at 24 CFR parts 50 and 58. The applicability of the provisions of 24 CFR part 50 or part 58 is based on the HOME project (new construction, rehabilitation, acquisition) or activity (tenant-based rental assistance) as a whole, not on the type of the cost paid with HOME funds. The County is the responsible entity for the environmental review and each City agrees to assist the County by securing all information and documentation relating to projects within their respective jurisdictions under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), if required, including paying for consulting services and technical evaluations, and providing the same to the County for final review and approval. e. Each Consortium Member must adopt and follow affirmative marketing procedures and a minority outreach program as required by 24 CFR 92.351. f. Consortium Members shall comply with applicable conflict of interest provisions, including 24 CFR Part 85 and those contained in 24 CFR 92.356. g. The County, as Lead Agency, shall monitor Program activities so that the Consortium’s HOME Program is carried out in compliance with HUD rules and regulations and the requirements of the HOME Program. These requirements include a Consolidated Plan in accordance with HUD regulations 24 CFR Parts 91 and 92 and the requirements of 24 CFR 92.350 and all related regulations and notices required by HUD for administration. As Lead Agency, the County shall be responsible for the administration of the Consortium HOME funds. As such, the County has been designated the participating jurisdiction by HUD in the HOME Program. h. The requirements of 2 CFR part 200 apply to this Agreement, except for the following provisions: 200.306, 200.307, 200.308 (not applicable to participating jurisdictions), 200.311 (except as provided in 92.257), 200.312, 200.329, 200.333, and 200.334. The provisions of 2 CFR 200.305 apply as modified by 92.502(c). If there is a conflict between definitions in 2 CFR part 200 and 24 CFR part 92, the definitions in 24 CFR part 92 shall govern. i. The requirements of 24 CFR 92.252 shall apply to affordable housing/rental units.
j. The requirements of 24 CFR 92.300 and 92.301 shall apply to allocations for housing programs to be owned, developed, or sponsored by community housing development organizations (CHDO programs).
k. The requirements of 40 CFR Subpart H-Other Requirements, are applicable to this Agreement, including:
68.200 Recordkeeping.
68.210 Availability of information to the public.
9 2251\02\3984873.1
68.215 Permit content and air permitting authority or designated agency requirements.
68.220 Audits
l. Each and every provision of law and clause required by law to be inserted in this Agreement shall be deemed to be inserted herein, and the Agreement shall be read and enforced as though it were included herein, and if through mistake or otherwise any such provision is not inserted, or is not correctly inserted, then upon the application of any Party, the Agreement shall forthwith be physically amended to make such insertion or correction.
14. Default and Remedial Action. Pursuant to 2 CFR 200, et seq., if a Consortium Member fails to comply with any term(s) outlined in this Agreement or the Program Agreements, the County may take corrective or remedial action against the Consortium Member in accordance with 24 CFR 92.551 and 24 CFR 92.552.
15. Claims and Indemnification.
a. To the fullest extent permitted by law, a Party (including its elected officials, officers, directors, agents, designated representatives, employees, contractors, subcontrators, agents, , and volunteers) whose act, omission, negligence, misconduct or other fault gives rise to any claim, loss, liability, cost, or expense, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys’ fees, court costs, penalties, claims for reimbursement and sanctions (hereinafter collectively referred to as “claims”), made by HUD or any third party shall defend and hold harmless the other Parties from and against any and all such claims. b. Each City agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the County, and its elected officials, officers, directors, agents, designated representatives, employees, contractors, subcontrators, agents, and volunteers (“Indemnified Parties”) from any all claims arising out of, or in any way related to any negligence or wrongful acts, breach or failure to comply with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, or failure to comply with applicable law. The obligations under this provision are independent of all other rights or obligations set forth herein. This indemnification provision shall survive the disbursement of the Award funds, as well as any termination of this Agreement.
16. Audit. Each City agrees to cooperate, at no cost to the County, in any audit of Program activities involving Program Funds received by that City, including not limited to preparing appropriate financial statements, including the schedule of expenditures of Federal awards in accordance with 24 CFR 200.510; promptly follow up and take corrective action on audit findings; comply with any corrective action plans issued in connection with the audit; and provide the auditor with access to personnel, accounts, books, records, supporting documentation, and other information as needed for the auditor to perform the audit required applicable regulations.
17. Reallocation of Funds. During administration of the HOME Program, the Consortium may determine that there are circumstances under which reallocation of certain Consortium Member(s) and/or CHDO(s) HOME Program Funds is necessary. Reallocation may be made by the County or as set forth in 92 CFR 450 et seq.
10 2251\02\3984873.1
18. Withdrawal/New Members.
a. Except as provided by law, Consortium Members are prohibited from withdrawing from the Consortium during the qualification period of this Agreement. b. New Members may be added to the Consortium upon consent of a simple majority of the Consortium Members. When a new Member is added, the Agreement will be amended accordingly, and the Parties agree to execute such further instruments as may be reasonably required to effect such amendment. The Agreement will be amended in the federal fiscal year before the year in which the new Member is to be added.
19. Departing Consortium Member. In the event a Consortium Member elects to no longer participate in the Consortium, such decision is effective only at the conclusion of the qualification period. The following duties and obligations will be required with respect to those Consortium funds controlled by the departing Consortium Member:
a. Planning and Reporting.
i. The departing Consortium Member shall use its own Citizen Participation Plan for all Consortium-funded projects committed after the date of separation. The departing Consortium Member shall maintain all appropriate reports as described in the Agreement, on all Consortium-funded projects for the entirety of each project’s respective affordability period.
ii. The departing Consortium Member shall remit these reports to the County upon request.
b. Monitoring.
i. The departing Consortium Member shall maintain separate records for all Consortium-funded projects in accordance with the applicable Consortium policy and shall provide these reports to the County upon request.
ii. The departing Consortium Member shall monitor its subrecipient and CHDO agreements related to projects funded by the departing Consortium Member in accordance with the applicable HUD regulations for the entirety of each applicable affordability period.
c. Meetings.
i. The departing Consortium Member may participate in Consortium meetings in a non-voting capacity until all Consortium funds held by the departing Consortium Member as of the date of separation have been expended. d. Unencumbered/unexpended funds.
11 2251\02\3984873.1
i. Consortium HOME funds allocated prior to the date of separation, shall not be commingled with any other HOME funds in any one project. ii. All funds allocated to the departing Consortium Member by the Consortium must be encumbered before encumbering funds granted to the departing Consortium Member directly by HUD.
iii. If departing Consortium Member encumbers the bulk of Consortium funds, but funds remain, the departing Consortium Member shall return the funds to the Consortium.
iv. The departing Consortium Member shall return to the Consortium any Consortium funds allocated to the departing Consortium Member that have not been expended by the expenditure and encumbrance timelines specified in this Agreement. v. The departing Consortium Member shall name the County as Lead Agency and beneficiary on documents (e.g., deeds of trust, liens) associated with any Consortium- funded projects that the departing Consortium Member enters into and shall modify all documents necessary to meet this requirement.
e. Program Income.
i. The departing Consortium Member shall remit to the County all program income received attributable to Consortium-funded projects. (See 24 CFR 92.503(a)). ii. The County, as Lead Agency, shall be responsible for using any program income it receives in accordance with applicable statutes and regulations and shall reallocate such funds according to the Consortium Reallocation Policy. f. Match.
i. The departing Consortium Member shall retain any match credits held by the departing Consortium Member as of the date of separation, to be used in accordance with statute and HUD regulations and guidelines.
ii. The departing Consortium Member shall apply match credits to Consortium-funded projects first; when those projects have the full required match amount, then the departing Consortium Member may apply the credits to the departing Consortium Member’s funded projects.
20. General Provisions.
a. This Agreement may be amended by the County and such amendments shall be effective upon notice to the other Consortium Members. b. Headings or captions to the provisions of this Agreement are solely for the convenience of the Parties, are not part of this Agreement, and shall not be used to interpret or
12 2251\02\3984873.1
determine the validity of this Agreement. Any ambiguity in this Agreement shall not be construed against the drafter, but rather the terms and provisions hereof shall be given a reasonable interpretation as if all Parties had in fact drafted this Agreement. c. Any notice, communication, amendment, addition, or deletion, to this Agreement, including change of address of any Party during the term of this Agreement, which any Consortium Member shall be required or may desire to make shall be in writing and may be personally served or, alternatively, sent by prepaid first class mail to the respective Parties as set forth in Attachment 1 to this Agreement.
d. This Agreement shall be deemed to be made under, and shall be governed by and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of California. Any action brought to enforce the terms or provisions of this Agreement shall have venue in the County of Stanislaus, State of California.
e. Each Consortium Member has authorized the undersigned person signing as officers on behalf of the local agency, to enter into this Agreement on behalf of said local agency and to bind the same to this Agreement, and further that said local agency has authority to enter into this Agreement and that there are no restrictions or prohibitions contained in any article of incorporation or bylaws against entering into this Agreement. f. The Chief Executive Officer of the County and the City Manager of each City must sign this Agreement. This Agreement must include as attachments the authorizing resolutions from the governing body of each Consortium Member stating that the party signing the Agreement has the authority to sign the Agreement.
g. Counterparts and Electronic Signatures. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which will be deemed to be an original copy of this Agreement, and all of which, when taken together, will be deemed to constitute one and the same agreement. The facsimile, email or other electronically delivered signatures of the Parties shall be deemed to constitute original signatures, and facsimile or electronic copies hereof shall be deemed to constitute duplicate originals.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement on the day and year first hereinabove written.
[SIGNATURES BEGIN ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE]
13 2251\02\3984873.1
STANISLAUS COUNTY:
By _____________________________ ________________________ Jody Hayes Dated
Chief Executive Officer
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
Angela Freitas, Director
Planning and Community Development Department
By ____________________________
Angela Freitas
Director
OPINION OF LEAD AGENCY COUNSEL
The undersigned has reviewed this Agreement and has concluded that the terms and provisions of the Agreement are fully authorized under state and local law and that the Agreement provides full legal authority for the Consortium to undertake or assist in undertaking housing assistance activities for the HOME Program.
Stanislaus County Counsel
Thomas E. Boze
By ____________________________
Thomas E. Boze
County Counsel
14 2251\02\3984873.1
CITY OF CERES:
By ___________________________ ________________________ Javier Lopez Dated
Mayor
ATTEST:
By ___________________________
Fallon Martin
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
By ____________________________
Doug Dunford
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By ___________________________
Nubia Goldstein
City Attorney
15 2251\02\3984873.1
CITY OF HUGHSON:
By ___________________________ ________________________ George Carr Dated
Mayor
ATTEST:
By ___________________________
Ashton Gose
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
By ____________________________
Dominique Romo
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By ____________________________
Andy Pinasco
City Attorney
16 2251\02\3984873.1
CITY OF NEWMAN:
By ___________________________ ________________________ Casey Graham Dated
Mayor
ATTEST:
By ___________________________
Mike Maier
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
By ____________________________
Michael E. Holland
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By ____________________________
Nubia Goldstein
City Attorney
17 2251\02\3984873.1
CITY OF OAKDALE:
By ___________________________ ________________________ Cherilyn Bairos Dated
Mayor
ATTEST:
By ___________________________
Patrick Mondragon
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
By ____________________________
Jerry Ramar
Interim City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By ____________________________
Tom Hallinan
City Attorney
18 2251\02\3984873.1
CITY OF PATTERSON:
By ___________________________ ________________________ Micheal Clauzel Dated
Mayor
ATTEST:
By ___________________________
Aracely Alegre
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
By ____________________________
Fernando Ulloa
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By ____________________________
Nubia Goldstein
City Attorney
19 2251\02\3984873.1
CITY OF RIVERBANK:
By ___________________________ ________________________ Rachel Hernandez Dated
Mayor
ATTEST:
By ___________________________
Gabriela Hernandez
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
By ____________________________
Marisela Garcia
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By ___________________________
Tom Hallinan
City Attorney
20 2251\02\3984873.1
CITY OF TURLOCK:
By ___________________________ ________________________ Amy Bublak Dated
Mayor
ATTEST:
By ___________________________
Nicole Fiez
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
By ____________________________
Sue Borrego
Interim City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By ___________________________
George A. Petrulakis
City Attorney
21 2251\02\3984873.1
CITY OF WATERFORD:
By ___________________________ ________________________ Charlie Goeken Dated
Mayor
ATTEST:
By ___________________________
Patricia Krause
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
By ____________________________
Michael G. Pitcock
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By ___________________________
Corbett Browning
City Attorney
22 2251\02\3984873.1
Attachment 1
Consortium Member Notice Information
Stanislaus County
Department of Planning and Community Development
1010 10th Street, Suite 3400
Modesto, CA 95354
City of Ceres
Department of Planning and Building
2720 Second Street
Ceres, CA 95307
City of Hughson
Department of Community Development
P.O. Box 9
Hughson, CA 95326
City of Newman
Department of Community Development
P.O. Box 787
Newman, CA 95360
City of Oakdale
Department of Community Development
455 S. Fifth Street
Oakdale, CA 95361
City of Patterson
Department of Community Development
P.O. Box667
Patterson, CA 95363
City of Riverbank
Department of Economic Development and Housing
6707 3rd Street
Riverbank, CA 95367
City of Turlock
Housing Program Services Division
156 S. Broadway, Ste. 140
Turlock, CA 95380-5456
City of Waterford
City Manager’s Office
P.O. Box 199
Waterford, CA 95386
City Council Staff Report
May 27, 2025
From: Anthony Sims, Economic Development/Communications Director Prepared by: Nichole Fiez, City Clerk
Agendized by: Susan E. Borrego, Interim City Manager
1. ACTION RECOMMENDED:
Resolution Authorizing the Interim City Manager to Execute All Documents Necessary in the form approved by the City Attorney to Complete the Sale of Surplus Property Located at 140 South First Street (APN 061-016-031)
2. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE:
The City of Turlock owns a parcel of real property located at 140 South First Street, APN 061-016-031(“Property”). The property has been determined to be surplus to the City’s needs and is not required for any current or future municipal use. On March 11 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-042 declaring the property as surplus in accordance with Government Code Section 54221.
In compliance with the Surplus Land Act, the City submitted the required documentation to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). On April 18, 2025, HCD issued a letter confirming that the Property qualifies as Exempt Surplus Land and is therefore exempt from the Act’s notification and offering requirements. This determination allows the City to move forward with the sale process without additional compliance steps under the Surplus Land Act.
The City of Turlock bought the property at 140 S. First Street in 2007 for $600,000 using redevelopment funds. At the time, the area had old buildings, bars, and a high level of crime.
The city hoped to use the land for parking or transit projects. However, due to limited funds, the building was never improved and has remained empty. In 2024, the city looked into turning it into a job training center but found it was too small and too expensive to fix. Now, the city believes the best option is to sell the property so a business can use it and help improve downtown Turlock.
Theis Realty Group has listed the property for sale and has identified a list of interested buyers. This report seeks authorization for the Interim City Manager to negotiate a sale price with potential buyers, at no less than $205,000, and execute all documents to complete the sale.
3. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
1. The City received confirmation from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on April 18, 2025, deeming the property exempt from the Surplus Land
Agenda Staff Report
5/27/2025
Act’s notification and offering requirements. This determination allows the City to move forward with the disposition process without additional HCD compliance steps.
2. The proposed sale supports the City’s goal of revitalizing the downtown area through new private investment. Staff has determined that the proposed transaction reflects fair market value and is in the best interest of the City.
3. The property has been listed for sale by Theis Realty, which has identified a list of interested buyers. Staff recommends authorizing the Interim City Manager to negotiate and execute a sale agreement with one of the prospective buyers, at a price no less than $205,000.
4. FISCAL IMPACT / BUDGET AMENDMENT:
Under the current agreement with Theis Realty Group, the City will compensate the brokers as follows:
• Commission: A fee equal to 6% of the gross sale price of the property, with a minimum commission of $12,300.
• Broker Price Opinion (BPO): A flat fee of $250 for the preparation of a Residential Broker Price Opinion.
• Hourly Services (if applicable): Compensation of up to $150 per hour for any additional services rendered outside the scope of the standard agreement.
All associated costs related to this action will be funded by the sale of the property. In addition, the net proceeds will be deposited into the General Fund upon closing. If a sale is not reached, any associated costs will be funded by the General Fund.
5. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval.
6. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Recommend approval.
7. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
The property at 140 S. First Street involved the purchase of the property for parking or potential transit facilities and the action before Council consists of determining the property is “exempt surplus land”. Therefore, under Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines this action does not constitute a project as the action does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.
8. ALTERNATIVES:
If the property is not transferred, the City of Turlock would then have to continue as the
Agenda Staff Report
5/27/2025
property manager and investigate further City uses for the property. Such attempts have not meet with success during the time the City has owned the property, so this course is not recommended.
9. ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution
2. California Department of Housing and Community Development - Letter of Approval
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TURLOCK
WHEREAS, the City of Turlock is the owner of real property located at 140 South First Street, Turlock, California, APN 061-016-031 (“Property”); and WHEREAS,on March 11, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-042 declaring the Property as surplus in accordance with Government Code Section 54221; and WHEREAS,the Property qualifies as "Exempt Surplus Land" pursuant to Government Code Section 54221(f)(1)(B), as it is less than one-half acre and not contiguous to land owned by a state or local agency used for open-space or low- and moderate-income housing purposes; and
WHEREAS, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) issued a letter dated April 18, 2025, confirming the Property is exempt from the Surplus Land Act’s notification and offering requirements; and WHEREAS, the Property has been listed for sale by Theis Realty, which has identified a list of interested buyers; and
WHEREAS, staff has determined that the sale of the Property would support downtown revitalization efforts and serve the best interests of the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is in the public interest to authorize the Interim City Manager, or designee, to negotiate and execute all necessary documents to complete the sale of the Property, provided the sale price is not less than $205,000; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Turlock does hereby:
1. The City Council reaffirms the declaration that the Property is surplus and further declares that the Property qualifies as Exempt Surplus Land under Government Code Section 54221(f)(1)(B).
2. The City Council acknowledges receipt of the HCD exemption determination dated April 18, 2025.
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XXXIN THE MATTER AUTHORIZING THE
INTERIM CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
ALL DOCUMENTS NECESSARY IN A
FORM APPROVED BY THE CITY
ATTORNEY TO COMPLETE THE SALE OF
SURPLUS PROPERTY LOCATED AT 140
SOUTH FIRST STREET (APN 061-016-031)
Resolution No. 2025-XXX
3. The City Council hereby authorizes the Interim City Manager, or designee, to negotiate and execute in a form approved by the City Attorney a Purchase and Sale Agreement and any and all documents necessary to complete the sale of the Property, at a price not less than $205,000, and to take all other actions necessary to effectuate the transaction.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Turlock this 27th day of May, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES: ( )
NOES: ( )
NOT PARTICIPATING: ( )
ABSENT: ( )
ATTEST:
___________________________
Nichole Fiez, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of Stanislaus,
State of California
SLA0001603
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
April 18, 2025
Joseph Spangler, Communications Specialist
City of Turlock
156 S. Broadway, Suite 230
Turlock, CA 95380
SENT VIA EMAIL TO: [email protected]
Dear Joseph Spangler:
RE: HCD’s Review of the City of Turlock’s Resolution No. 2025-042 Declaring the Property Located at 140 S. First Street as “Exempt Surplus Land” Thank you for notifying the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) of the City of Turlock’s (City) determination of 140 S. First Street with APN: 061-016-031 (Property), as “exempt surplus land.” Your complete documentation was received on March 25, 2025.
HCD reviewed Resolution No. 2025-042 (Resolution) and supporting documentation pursuant to Section 400 of the Surplus Land Act Guidelines. As explained below, HCD finds that the Property qualifies as “exempt surplus land” under Government Code section 54221, subdivision (f)(1)(B).
Analysis
According to the Resolution and documentation provided, the Property is owned by the City and not adjacent to land owned by the state or local agency that is used for Low- and Moderate-income housing. The Resolution indicates that the Property is less than one-half acres, approximately 2,500 square feet, and no longer necessary for the City’s use.
Additionally, on March 24, 2025, the City confirmed that none of the characteristics found in Government Code section 54221, subdivision (f)(2), apply to the Property.
Joseph Spangler, Communications Specialist
SLA0001603
Conclusion
If the submitted documentation and assertions by the City are complete and accurate, HCD finds that the Property qualifies as “exempt surplus land” under Government Code section 54221, subdivision (f)(1)(B).
If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Gabriel Pena-Lora, Senior Housing Policy Specialist, at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Laur
a Nunn
Senior Manager, Housing Accountability Unit
Housing Policy Development
CC: Anthony Sims, Economic Development Director – Communications Officer