Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-12 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
property management company, generally referred to as “mom and pop” landlords, or small, independent landlords. CAA reports that the majority of these small, independent landlords are not CAA members due to the time and cost to join, even though the actual benefits of joining may outweigh the costs when they run into issues. CAA also finds that most landlords who call the helpline are these small, independent owners. CAA encourages them to attend training and to utilize services as members.
CAA supports the spirit and intent of all local, State, and Federal fair housing laws for all residents without regard to color, race, religion, sex, marital status, mental or physical disability, age, familial status, sexual orientation, or national origin. When signing up to become a member of the California Apartment Association, new members agree to abide by the following provisions of their Code of Ethics and Code of Equal Housing Opportunity. The Code of Equal Housing Opportunity reads as follows:
• We agree that in the rental, lease, sale, purchase, or exchange of real property, owners and their employees have the responsibility to offer housing accommodations to all persons on an equal basis; • We agree to set and implement fair and reasonable rental housing rules and guidelines and will provide equal and consistent services throughout our resident’s tenancy; • We agree that we have no right or responsibility to volunteer information regarding the racial, creed, or ethnic composition of any neighborhood, and we do not engage in any behavior or action that would result in steering; and
• We agree not to print, display, or circulate any statement or advertisement that indicates any preference, limitations, or discrimination in the rental or sale of housing.
CAA provides members with tenant screening services, application forms, and other types of landlord tenant forms, which if used by CAA members provide legal procedures for processing rental applications and resolving tenant issues. Further, should landlords stay within these guidelines, they will likely avoid committing housing violations. CAA offers a landlord helpline where landlords can call and speak to an attorney about their responsibilities. Lastly, all members receive a fair housing flyer to post on-site at their properties which states that it is illegal to discriminate based on the protected classes. When CAA receives complaints about potential fair housing violations, the association provides tenants with information on their rights and then refers them to the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing to file a claim. The Executive Director of CAA’s Central Valley branch stated that her experience has been that most tenant complaints are about non-CAA members. The director said that these non-CAA members are independent landlords with little training and are unaware of the laws. For this reason, CAA makes additional efforts to reach these smaller operations throughout outreach events and the landlord helpline.
Considering there is a large proportion of property owners who are not CAA members, Turlock and other Stanislaus County jurisdictions that contract with Project Sentinel can collaborate on outreach, education, and training to small, independent landlords about fair housing topics and regulations. Respondents to a Housing Element survey conducted by Stanislaus County identified landlord-tenant counseling and education/information on tenant rights as the two services needed most in their communities.7 Although recent declines in the population of Turlock and other Stanislaus County communities may relieve the shortage of affordable housing in the short-term, Stanislaus County and its communities are projected to grow over the next 40 years, which means that the shortage of affordable housing can be expected to continue. Landlords have little incentive to rent units to applicants with vouchers, disabilities, 7 Stanislaus County Draft 2023-2031 Housing Element, 2023. Available:
https://www.stancounty.com/planning/pl/pdf/draft-2023-2031-housing-element.pdf
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-13
households with children, or other protected groups when they can find tenants able to afford to market rents. Programs that prioritize housing development for persons with disabilities, families with children, and those most at risk of homelessness, may be particularly effective.
D.2 Segregation and Integration
Patterns of segregation within a community can be a result of public or private actions, whether intentional or unintentional, that affect where different racial and ethnic groups and individuals in other protected classes live. Racial and ethnic characteristics are probably the most common and well-known basis for housing discrimination, but segregation may also be based on disability, familial status, and the level and source of household income. This section explores patterns and trends of segregation based on race and ethnicity, disability, familial status, and income level in the City of Turlock and the surrounding region.
These groups are not mutually exclusive, and there may be considerable overlap across each protected class.
Historically throughout the U.S., including in California and Stanislaus County, restrictive and exclusionary zoning practices have contributed to racial and economic segregation.
After the Civil War, John W. Mitchell, a wealthy land speculator, bought 100,000 acres where Turlock is now located, that were used for large herds of cattle and sheep as well as growing wheat. By the early part of the 20th century, Turlock had become the heart of a major agricultural area, which stands true today.
Japanese immigrants from rural farming and fishing areas arrived in California to fill a labor shortage created by the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, which prohibited Chinese immigration to the U.S. California lawmakers soon passed racist ordinances targeting issei (first-generation) farmers: the California Alien Land Law of 1913 barred Asian immigrants from owning agricultural land or signing leases longer than three years. Newly arrived Japanese had few employment opportunities, but they were able to find jobs as agricultural workers. See Chart D-5 for a more detailed timeline of segregation’s history in relation to fair housing practices.
Due to resentment toward Chinese and Japanese immigrants, especially from jobless White residents, many of whom had moved to California from the Dust Bowl, a series of severe dust storms swept across the midwest states of Oklahoma, Arkansas, Kansas, and Texas during the 1930s, growers began recruiting Blacks from the south. Blacks continued to move to the area after Japanese residents were moved into internment camps. Turlock was the site of one of several temporary detention camps established during the first phase of the mass incarceration of 97,785 Californians of Japanese ancestry during World War II. The so-called Turlock Assembly Center was located at the Stanislaus County Fairgrounds from April 30 to Aug. 12, 1942.8 At the height of its population, 3,692 people lived in barracks constructed on the fairgrounds.9 The Stanislaus County Fairgrounds is now located in central Turlock, in Tract 38.04 where it and surrounding tracts are deemed racially integrated, as shown on Map D-1. Due to a boom in population attributed to the expansion of State Route 99 in the 1970s, Turlock grew west to meet the freeway’s north-south path. This area is also where most of the city’s low-medium segregation tracts are located, as well as the City’s only High Segregation and Poverty tract (see discussion in Section D.3 and Map D-1 below). 8 California Historical Landmarks in Stanislaus County, Temporary Detention Camps for Japanese Americans – Turlock Assembly Center. Available: https://noehill.com/stanislaus/cal0934.asp 9 Turlock Journal, 2009. Turlock Japanese American assembly center to be memorialized. Available:
https://www.turlockjournal.com/news/local/turlock-japanese-american-assembly-center-to-be-memorialized/
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-14 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
Chart D-5: Timeline of Segregation Policies in the United States
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
WTAYLOR
RD
ETAYLOR RD
W MONTEVISTAAVE E MONTEVISTAAVE
WTUOLUMNE RD ETUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EASTAVE
W E LINWOOD AVE LINWOOD AVE
SWALNUT RD
S LANDERAVE
SOUTHAVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
NWALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVEAVE
N BERKELEYAVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTAAVE
NORTHAVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
STEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Census
Tract:
36.10 Census
Tract:
36.12 Census
Tract:
36.09 Census
Tract:
36.11 Census
Tract:
36.08 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
38.04 Turlock Neighborhood
Segregation
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
SB 535 Disadvantaged Community
Racially Integrated
Low-Medium Segregation
HighWhite Segregation
No Data Applicable to
2021 Census Tract Boundary
MERCED COUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-1 Turlock Neighborhood Segregation.mxd Map Date:
9/20/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-1
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
Source: CalEPA, 2022; HCD, 2022; City ofTurlock, 2021;
Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-16 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
During World War II, many Black and White agricultural workers moved to California’s urban areas to fill jobs in the defense industry and other employment sectors. Additionally in this same timeframe the federal government initiated the Bracero program to attract workers from Mexico to help address a shortage of farmworkers. After the program ended in 1964, Mexican farmworkers continued to come to the Central Valley for agricultural work. Non-Hispanic Whites remain the largest racial group in Turlock and Stanislaus County, but Hispanics are now the second largest ethnic group comprising about 48 percent of the countywide population.
In addition to these ethnic groups, the southern part of Turlock has been known historically as “Little Urmia” because of the immigration of Assyrians in the early 20th century. Early Assyrian settlers began to arrive in the United States during the last part of the 19th century and came mainly from northwestern Iran (Urmia region) as early as 1910 but the migration increased due to the genocide committed against them before, during and after World War I by the Turks, Kurds, and Moslem Persians. By 1915, when the total population of Turlock was about 1,500, there were ten Assyrian families living in Turlock. By 1921, the Assyrian community had grown to become known as “little Urmia.” According to the 2020 US Census, 5.8 percent of Turlock residents reported that they had Assyrian ancestry, most located in southern Turlock in racially integrated Tract 37.
Historic segregation patterns in Turlock may be a factor that continues to affect the disparate characteristics of neighborhoods. Map D-1 shows neighborhood segregation in Turlock. The most racially integrated areas of Turlock today include Tract 38.04, where former internment camps were located, and Tract 37, where Assyrian settlers immigrated and settled. By contrast, Tract 39.05 in Turlock is classified as high White segregation, which can be traced back to the early immigration of White residents in central, east Turlock.
Turlock has one census tract that meets the criteria for designation as High Segregation and Poverty tract, Tract 38.02. As discussed in Section D.3 Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty and Affluence, the population of this tract is predominantly Hispanic and has seen a decrease in non-Hispanic White residents that reflects Turlock’s overall demographic changes.
Additionally, the most racially integrated areas of Turlock today are Census tracts designated by the State as Disadvantaged Communities (DACs), or low-income areas disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other hazards that can lead to negative health effects. According to City Housing Division staff, these areas are more integrated compared to other areas in Turlock due to the affordability, age of housing units, and mix of uses. As buildings age and initial construction costs are paid off, they may become less desirable due to wear and tear, which can contribute to lower prices, allowing all races opportunity to access housing. Additionally, City staff noted homeowners in these integrated areas may rent out their housing units or rooms at a lower price than market-rate, thus making housing more affordable in these areas compared to others. Lastly, integrated areas in Turlock are composed of a mix of residential, industrial, and commercial uses, making these areas less desirable than single-family neighborhood, thus allowing them to be more affordable for all races.
Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs) census tracts are located along the very eastern edge of the city (Tract 39.05), while one RCAA is located outside the city to the east (Tract 36.08).
The RCAA tract in Turlock is 71.6 percent White (Hispanic or Latino) and has 79.6 percent of units occupied by owners, and 98.2 percent of homes are single family dwellings (the highest percent in all Turlock tracts). Further detail about these RCAA is included in Section D.3 Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty and Affluence.
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-17
CHANGE IN PATTERNS OVER TIME
Turlock’s racial and ethnic patterns of segregation need to be understood in the context of changing regional and local demographics. As shown in Table D-1, the population of Turlock increased by 2.7 percent between 2010 and 2020. Non-Hispanic White residents are still the largest population but have decreased by 12.8 percent and is only slightly larger than the Hispanic or Latino residents of any race, which grew by
15.4 percent between 2010 and 2020. The City’s non-Hispanic or Latino Asian and non-Hispanic or Latino Black populations each increased by around a third. The non-Hispanic or Latino Other Race or Multiple Races population had the largest increase, increasing by two-thirds. The non-Hispanic or Latino American Indian/Alaska Native and non-Hispanic or Latino Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander populations changed marginally, increasing by 0.25 percent and decreasing by 2.1 percent, respectively. These patterns directionally resemble the County’s diversity, which saw increases in non-Hispanic or Latino Black, nonHispanic or Latino Asian, and non-Hispanic or Latino Other Race or Multiple Races populations and Hispanic or Latino populations; a decrease in non-Hispanic or Latino White population; and marginal changes in non-Hispanic or Latino American Indian/Alaska Native and non-Hispanic or Latino Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander populations.10 However, the City saw greater change in magnitude among each racial and ethnic group. This growth in the Hispanic, non-Hispanic or Latino Black, and non-Hispanic or Latino Other Race or Multiple Races population could be reflecting the trend in the movement of Black and Latino households from the Bay Area to San Joaquin and Stanislaus Counties in search of more affordable housing.11
Despite the diversity of the County, the population is unevenly distributed geographically by race/ethnicity.
In Turlock, Salida, and Modesto, between 36 to 49 percent of the population is non-Hispanic White. The three CCDs with the highest concentrations of non-Hispanic White people are Hughson, Oakdale, and Waterford, which are adjacent to each other in the eastern end of the county. Westport, Newman, and Patterson, adjacent to one another in the western part of the county, have the lowest non-Hispanic White population percentages, and are adjacent to each other on the western side of the county.
In the Turlock (including Ceres), Salida, and Modesto CCDs, in the center of the county, the White population ranges from 36.60 percent to 48.90 in the Turlock subdivision. In 2020, Stanislaus County had the highest percent of non-Hispanic White residents among the eight counties in the greater San Joaquin Valley region and Merced County, just south of Stanislaus County, had the lowest percent among the eight counties in the greater San Joaquin Valley region.
The State approved legislation in 2021 that requires counties to establish a program to redact racial covenants that barred Black, Chinese, Japanese and other racial or ethnic groups from owning or occupying homes in certain areas of the county. Although such restrictions have been illegal and unenforceable for more than half a century, they remain in many property documents as a review of covenants in Modesto showed. Government Code Section 12956.2 requires counties to identify and redact such covenants that remain in records. Stanislaus County is hiring a vendor to meet this requirement, but has published a form 10 California Department of Finance, Table P-2D, County Population by Total Hispanic and Non-Hispanic Race (2010-2060). https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/projections/ 11 Terner Center for Housing Innovation. 2018. “Disparity in Departure: Who Leaves the Bay Area and Where Do They Go?” https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/Disparity_in_Departure.pdf
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-18 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
that allows property owners and other parties to undertake the process for individual properties in the meantime.
12, 13
Table D-1 displays the population dynamics within census tracts by race and ethnicity between 2010 and 2020. Change in non-Hispanic or Latino American Indian/Alaska Native populations and non-Hispanic or Latino Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander populations within census tracts did not have a predominant trend and are quite mixed. Non-Hispanic or Latino Asian populations increased within all but two tracts, with the highest increase (252.6 percent) in Tract 39.08, a Low Resource area by California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) measures. Non-Hispanic or Latino Black populations increased within all but two tracts, with a larger decline in Tract 39.05, a tract considered to be High Resource and a Racially Concentrated Area of Affluence. The largest increase of Non-Hispanic or Latino Black residents within tracts were Tracts 36.03 and 38.03, both Moderate Resource areas designated as Disadvantaged Communities. Non-Hispanic or Latino Other Race or Multiple Races increased within every tract. The largest increases (between 134.4 and 137.2 percent) were in Tracts 39.04 and 39.05, both of which are High Resource. By contrast, Non-Hispanic or Latino White populations consistently decreased within each tract between 6.3 and 19.4 percent, with the exception of Tract 38.05, which saw no change. The Hispanic or Latino population of any race increased within all tracts between 2010 and 2020, except for Tract 36.08 and a small decrease in Tract 38.02. All tracts in Turlock saw population increases except for Tract 36.08 at a 19.3 percent decrease and Tract 38.02’s small decrease of 2.3 percent. Information on TCAC resource areas is explained further in Section D.4 Disparities in Access to Opportunity. 12 The Modesto Bee, 2023. “Stanislaus County to search for records revealing white-only neighborhoods and racism.” Available: https://www.modbee.com/news/local/article273097685.html 13 Stanislaus County, 2022. “Stanislaus County Clerk-Recorder’s Office Restrictive Covenant Modification Program Implementation Plan”. Available: https://www.stancounty.com/clerkrecorder/pdf/restrictive-modificationprogram.pdf
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-19
Table D-1: Population Change by Race/Ethnicity within Turlock Census Tracts, 2010-2020 American Indian/Alaska Native
(NH)
Asian (NH) Black (NH) Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
(NH)
Other Race, Multiple Races (NH) White (NH) Hispanic or Latino (any race) Total Tract 2010 2020 Percent
change
2010 2020 Percent
change
2010 2020 Percent
change
2010 2020 Percent
change
2010 2020 Percent
change
2010 2020 Percent
change
2010 2020 Percent
change
2010 2020 Percent
change
36.03 13 13 0.0% 30 21 -30% 4 9 125.0% 1 3 200.0% 70 135 92.9% 2,188 2,050 -6.3% 1,646 1,781 8.2% 3,952 4,012 1.5%
36.04 in 2010,
36.08 in 2020)
48 27 -43.8% 234 328 40.2% 31 34 9.7% 6 7 16.7% 181 353 95.0% 5,274 3,883 -26.4% 2,318 1,898 -18.1% 8,092 6,530 -19.3%
36.09 (Part of
2010 Tract
36.05)
34 13
23.5%
647 372
25.8%
158 50
-1.3%
46 15
-21.7%
327 199
23.9%
4,744 2,026
-10.5%
2,051 1,018
37.5%
8,007 3,693
6.4%
36.10 (Part of
2010 Tract
36.05. See 36.09
for 2010 data)
- 29 - 442 - 106 - 21 - 206 - 2,219 - 1,803 - 4,826
36.11 (Part of
2010 Tract
36.06)
41 16
-12.2%
1,262 636
40.0%
183 76
35.0%
41 11
-7.3%
376 193
62.8%
6,019 2,140
-8.8%
2,916 1,100
12.8%
10,838 4,172
5.9%
36.12 (Part of
2010 Tract
36.06. See 36.11
for 2010 data)
- 20 - 1,131 - 171 - 27 - 419 - 3,347 - 2,188 - 7,303
37 33 35 6.1% 242 253 4.5% 37 64 73.0% 24 39 62.5% 119 138 16.0% 1,862 1,664 -10.6% 2,476 2,803 13.2% 4,796 4,996 4.2%
38.02 30 33 10.0% 96 158 64.6% 66 97 47.0% 8 6 -25.0% 79 127 60.8% 1,223 1,069 -12.6% 4,358 4,234 -2.8% 5,860 5,724 -2.3%
38.03 7 6 -14.3% 243 197 -18.9% 22 50 127.3% 21 10 -52.4% 58 69 19.0% 723 630 -12.9% 1,930 2,083 7.9% 3,004 3,045 1.4%
38.04 50 54 8.0% 215 210 -0.02% 85 114 34.1% 27 22 -18.5% 147 205 39.5% 2,577 2,076 -19.4% 3,349 4,145 23.8% 6,450 6,826 5.8%
38.05 14 10 -28.6% 218 441 102.3% 31 51 64.5% 19 20 5.3% 85 164 92.9% 1,194 1,194 0.0% 1,106 1,207 9.1% 2,667 3,087 15.7%
39.04 19 13 -31.6% 55 124 125.4% 44 61 38.6% 20 22 10.0% 94 223 137.2% 2,384 2,099 -12.0% 1,758 2,190 24.6% 4,374 4,732 8.2%
39.05 18 22 22.2% 53 60 13.2% 24 13 -45.8% 4 6 50.0% 93 218 134.4% 3,065 2,688 -12.3% 614 933 52.0% 3,871 3,940 17.8%
39.06 28 34 21.4% 124 251 102.4% 162 197 17.8% 28 15 -46.4% 151 249 64.9% 2,339 1,895 -19.0% 2,048 2,488 21.5% 4,880 5,129 5.1%
39.07 21 34 61.9% 251 307 22.3% 91 122 34.1% 15 7 -53.3% 224 362 61.6% 5,658 4,999 -11.6% 1,200 1,735 44.6% 7,460 7,566 1.4%
39.08 7 10 42.9% 57 201 252.6% 39 80 105.1% 3 14 366.7% 95 145 52.6% 1,133 955 -15.7% 892 1,044 17.0% 2,226 2,449 10.0%
39.09 34 29 -14.7% 164 269 64.0% 88 125 42.0% 27 39 44.4% 223 370 65.9% 3,573 3,414 -9.0% 1,691 2,379 40.7% 5,980 6,625 10.8% Total 397 398 0.25% 3,891 5,401 38.8% 1,065 1,420 33.3% 290 284 -2.1% 2,322 3,775 62.6% 43,956 38,348 -12.8% 30,353 35,029 15.4% 82,457 84,655 2.7% I. NH refers to non-Hispanic or Latino.
II. Percent change for tracts with boundary changes was calculated by combining the 2020 values of the singular 2010 tract, subtracting the combined values from the 2010 value, and dividing by the 2010 value.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau Decennial Census, Table P-9 Hispanic or Latino, and not Hispanic or Latino by Race (2010-2020)
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-20 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
Persons with disabilities may face discriminatory housing practices based on their disability, including the lack of accessible dwellings and refusal by housing providers to offer reasonable accommodations. Data shows that from a housing perspective, there are several different housing needs of disabled persons. For those disabled with a developmental or mental disability, one of the most significant problems is securing affordable housing that meets their specialized needs. Housing needs can range from institutional care facilities to facilities that support partial or full independence (such as group care homes). Supportive services such as daily living skills and employment assistance need to be integrated into the housing situation also. A disabled person with a mobility limitation requires housing that is physically accessible.
During the last planning period, the City of Turlock approved two requests for deviations from development standards for reasonable accommodations through building permits when the improvements require a building permit. Exceeding the allowable hardscaped area of a front yard is one example of a development standard that was allowed to be deviated from to accommodate an accessible ramp in the front yard of a home. No requests for reasonable accommodation have been denied in Turlock during the last planning period.
Housing staff at the City details Turlock city staff provides resources such as brochures and web materials to those in need. City staff also makes an effort to go to older adults and people with disabilities who cannot come to City Hall for information. City staff also mentioned Legacy Health Endowment, a nonprofit foundation serving in Stanislaus and Merced Counties, that is dedicated to improving residents’ health by funding and supporting healthcare services and wellness education.14 It makes its resources directly available to the community through patient-centered programs, such as affordable generic medicine via its $2 Medication Program, nursing scholarships, mental health initiatives, and online grant applications and resources. Staff noted that Legacy Health Endowment are actively involved within the Turlock community and have found older adults and people with disabilities greatly benefit from their services.
According to 2021 ACS five-year estimates, 7,576 persons (10.5 percent of the non-institutionalized population) in Turlock had a disability. This proportion is slightly lower than Stanislaus County (12.2 percent) and Modesto (13.7 percent). The most common disabilities in the city are ambulatory (28.0 percent of people with disabilities), independent living difficulty (21.6 percent) and hearing difficulty (12.4 percent).
As shown in Map D-2, the northern and eastern portions of the city fewer than ten percent of the population has disabilities while in the rest of Turlock, at least 10 to 20 percent of residents are disabled. There is one Turlock census tract, Tract 39.08 in the center of Turlock, in which persons with disabilities exceed 20 percent of the total tract’s population, which is the threshold HCD typically uses as an indicator of overconcentration. Further, group homes and licensed adult residential care facilities are located throughout the city, with concentrations in the northern and southern portions of Turlock as shown in Map D-3. There are 17 licensed residential care facilities within Turlock: two adult day programs and 15 adult residential facilities. There is a cluster of facilities in southern Turlock comprised of four separate structures operating as the Paulson Community for developmentally disabled ambulatory adults, intentionally designed to create a welcoming, neighborhood–like atmosphere. Other residential care facilities are found in central Turlock near the Emanuel Medical Center. People with disabilities have many different housing needs, depending on their age, level of income, current tenure status, cultural background, and health status. People with disabilities may need assistance with personal and financial affairs, networks 14 Legacy Health Endowment, 2025. About LHE. Available: https://legacyhealthendowment.org/about-lhe/
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-21
of care to provide services and daily assistance, and, possibly, architectural services to design features to allow those with disabilities to live independently. During the consultation process conducted as part of the HOME-ARP Allocation Plan, the Turlock/Stanislaus HOME Consortium in 2022, service providers reported that individual with disabilities may find affordable housing in smaller cities or rural areas, but these areas are frequently not accessible for a person’s disability (e.g., wheelchair inaccessible) or are far from needed medical care, healthy food, or transportation.15
FAMILIAL STATUS
Familial status, and particularly discrimination against families with children, may be another basis for discriminatory housing practices. Such discrimination can limit the choices of where families can live and lead to geographic concentrations within a community. Statistically, female-headed households with children are more likely to be targets of discrimination than other families with households because of their lower income or source of income. Within Turlock, as indicated in Table D-2, most children under 18 years live in married-couple households. About 23 percent of children live in female-headed households with no spouse present compared with 10 percent of children live in male householder, no spouse present households. Female-headed households represented about 10.3 percent of owner-occupied households and
19.3 percent of renter-occupied households. Female-headed households are as common in Turlock as they are in Stanislaus County, as the County has 22 percent female-headed households and 68 percent marriedcouple households. For female-headed households in Turlock, City staff shared they typically have two to three children and are a predominant group seeking housing assistance, though specific age demographics weren't collected. In Modesto, the other urban center in the County, households with children under 18 are
24.9 percent female-headed households and 65.4 percent married-couple households.
Housing Division staff directs female-headed households to resources from a couple of local organizations such as Healthy Alternatives to Violent Environments (HAVEN), United Samaritans, local churches, and school districts. HAVEN has a collaborative relationship with the City of Turlock to secure office space to bring services closer to home for residents living in the southern portion of Stanislaus County.16 HAVEN offers supportive services for survivors of domestic violence,sexual assault, and human trafficking. HAVEN provides an emergency shelter for survivors and children, with food, clothing, and a place to sleep, as well as case management/crisis intervention services, and support groups. United Samaritans Foundation offers emergency food boxes and mobile lunch programs for those in need. Turlock Gospel Mission Day Center offers clothing and hygiene supplies, while the Turlock Unified School District operates a Family Resource Center (FRC) where families can receive resources, programs, and services based on the needs and interests of our diverse families. Support at the FRC is specialized to support foster youth, students experiencing homelessness, and refugees/newcomers. City staff is versed in resources available in Turlock and can point special needs groups to a direction that suits their needs.
Household type Number Percent
Married couple 12,588 66%
Male Householder, No Spouse Present 1,920 10%
Female Householder, No Spouse Present 4,353 23%
15 Turlock/Stanislaus County HOME Consortium, pp. 9-10. 16 HAVEN, 2025. Turlock Office. Available: https://www.havenstan.org/turlock-office Table D-2: Children Under 18 Years in Turlock Households, 2022
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-22 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
Total 18,978 100.0%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 ACS Five-Year Estimates (Table S0901)
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
WTAYLOR
RD
ETAYLOR RD
W MONTEVISTAAVE E MONTEVISTAAVE
WTUOLUMNE RD ETUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EASTAVE
W E LINWOOD AVE LINWOOD AVE
SWALNUT RD
S LANDERAVE
SOUTHAVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
NWALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVEAVE
N BERKELEYAVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTAAVE
NORTHAVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
STEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Census
Tract:
36.10 Census
Tract:
36.12 Census
Tract:
36.09 Census
Tract:
36.11 Census
Tract:
36.08 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
38.04 Persons with Disabilities
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Percent of Population with a Disability
(ACS, 2017-2021) - Tract
< 10%
10% - 20%
20% - 30%
MERCED COUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-2 Persons with Disabilities.mxd Map Date:
9/20/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-2
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
Source: HCD, 2022;American Community Survey (ACS) (2017-2021); City ofTurlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
N Colorado Ave
West Main St
S Washington Rd
N Soderquist Rd
Geer Rd
Fosberg Rd
N Tully Rd
NBerkeley Ave
State Blvd
E Monte Vista Ave
E Tuolumne Rd
E Main St
Ninth St
S Lander Ave
Roberts Rd
N Quincy Rd
S Tegner Rd
N Walnut Rd
W Tuolumne Rd
Montana Ave
Andre Ln
1525W
MonteVista
S Quincy Rd
E Minnesota Ave
S Golden State Blvd
Brier Rd
N Johnson Rd
W Christoffersen Pkwy
Pedras Rd
El Capitan Dr
E Hawkeye Ave
W Linwood Ave
Dels Ln
Fulkerth Rd
N Olive Ave
S Kilroy Rd
North Ave
E Taylor Rd
East Ave
F St
W Taylor Rd
S Soderquist Rd
N Washington Rd
A St
Fullerton Dr
Hedstrom Rd
Mountain View Rd
Georgetown Ave
S oJ hnson Rd
South Ave
W Springer Dr
E Canal Dr
Marshall St
N Denair Ave
E Glenwood Ave
N Berkeley Ave
Grant Ave
Park St
W Monte Vista Ave
Golf Rd
E Linwood Ave
W Glenwood Ave
Spengler Wy
S Walnut Rd
Countryside Dr
Harding Rd
Simmons Rd
E Zeering Rd
S Tully Rd
Dianne Dr
Ruble Rd
N
Tegner Rd
Fransil Ln
!(
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
AÎ
Census
Tract:
36.12 Census
Tract:
36.11 Census
Tract:
36.10 Census
Tract:
36.09 Census
Tract:
36.08 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.04 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
37 Tot Lot
Crane
Park
Summerfaire
Park
Donnelly
Park
Atch
Pedretti
Park
Markley
Park
Four
Seasons
Park
Turlock
Sports
Complex
Ferreira
Ranch Park
Montana
Park
Soderquist
Ballpark
Broadway
Park
Columbia
Park
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Source: California Department of Social Services, 2025; City of Turlock, 2024; Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
City Limit
County
Freeway
Major Road
Railroad
MERCED
COUNTY
!( Adult Day Program
!( Adult Residential
Map D-3
Residential Care Facilities
inTurlock
Census Tracts
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-25
Map D-4 and Map D-5 show the percentage of children in each census tract that live in different types of family households and indicate there are some patterns of geographic concentration in Turlock based on familial status. For instance, Map D-4 shows a lower comparative share of children living in female-headed households outside of the city’s center and a higher concentration of female-headed households living in census tracts north and west of downtown (where more than 20 percent of households are femalehouseholds). Map D-5 shows a higher concentration of married-couple households having children in the northeast portions of Turlock, in Tracts 36.11, 36.09, and 36.08, while, married-couples with less percent of children and located in southern Turlock around tract 38.02. Higher concentrations of female-headed households living north and west of downtown is likely linked to housing affordability and proximity to resources, according to Housing Division staff. In tracts more removed from the center of the city, particularly those in east Turlock, 80 to 100 percent of households are married-couple households while 20 percent or less of households are female-headed. Childcare facilities are located throughout the city and are not drawn to a specific locational direction in Turlock as shown on Map D-6. However, there is a concentration of child care centers and day care centers in census tract 39.04, which is within close proximity to tract 39.06 that has the highest percentage of female-headed households. In Turlock, about
35.7 percent of female-headed households with children were under the poverty line, while only 13.1 percent of households without children were. This demonstrates that female-headed households with children are more likely to have greater housing needs and face difficulties in finding affordable housing due to their financial vulnerability. Affordable housing is not evenly distributed throughout Turlock and female-headed households are concentrated in lower resource areas. Greater access to affordable housing in areas outside the center of the city would aid in the integration of female-headed households. Outside of Turlock and Modesto, female-headed households are better integrated, but they are also less common, indicating that this may be a greater issue in the County’s urban centers.
INCOME LEVEL
Geographic concentration by income, including concentration of poverty, is another type of segregation that may exist within a jurisdiction. The concentration of low- or moderate-income (LMI) individuals provides one method to gauge the extent of such segregation. HUD defines an LMI area as a census tract or block group where over 51 percent of the population is LMI – based on the HUD income definition of up to 80 percent area median income (AMI). Map D-7 provides the distribution of LMI block groups across Turlock; the central area of the City along South Golden State Boulevard, south of Fulkerth Road, and north of West Linwood Avenue is an LMI area, as well as the southeastern portions of the City, extending to the City limits and Merced County boundary. Higher concentrations of LMI households are located near central areas of Turlock due to older, more affordable housing located near services and transit in these areas, according to City staff.
Poverty rates and the concentration of poverty over time can provide an insight into the economic wellbeing of households and individuals in the region and in Turlock. As of 2020, both Turlock (15 percent) and Stanislaus County (13.5 percent) had a higher overall rate of poverty than the State (12.6 percent). Further, as shown on Table D-3, no race or ethnicity is significantly impacted more than another, as all races/ethnicities hover around 11 to 15 percent poverty rate. Overall, the rate of poverty for most ethnic groups is lower in Turlock than the County, though Hispanic/Latino and Two or More Races experience slightly higher rates of poverty. As shown in Map D-8, areas with higher percentage of poverty are located in central Turlock and west of Golden State Road, with one census Tract 39.08 exceeding 30 percent of population below poverty line. In 2020, between renter-occupied units and owner-occupied units, 19.6 percent of people below the poverty line owned where they lived, while 80.4 percent of people below the poverty line rented. Knowing which groups locally and regionally face the greatest economic challenges can inform targeted programs for financial literacy training and other fair housing programs.
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
WTAYLOR
RD
ETAYLOR RD
W MONTEVISTA AVE E MONTEVISTA AVE
WTUOLUMNE RD ETUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W E LINWOOD AVE LINWOOD AVE
SWALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
SOUTH AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
NWALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
NORTH AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
STEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Census
Tract:
36.10 Census
Tract:
36.12 Census
Tract:
36.09 Census
Tract:
36.11 Census
Tract:
36.08 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
38.04 Percent of Children in
Female Headed
Households
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
SB 535 Disadvantaged Community
Less than 20%
20% - 40%
40% - 60%
MERCED C OUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-3 Percent of Children in Female Headed Households.mxd Map Date:
9/20/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-4
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
Source: CalEPA, 2022; HCD, 2022; City of Turlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
WTAYLOR
RD
ETAYLOR RD
W MONTEVISTA AVE E MONTEVISTA AVE
WTUOLUMNE RD ETUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W E LINWOOD AVE LINWOOD AVE
SWALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
SOUTH AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
NWALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
NORTH AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
STEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Census
Tract:
36.10 Census
Tract:
36.12 Census
Tract:
36.09 Census
Tract:
36.11 Census
Tract:
36.08 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
38.04 Percent of Children in
Married-Couple
Households
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
20% - 40%
40% - 60%
60% - 80%
80% - 100%
MERCED C OUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-4 Percent of Children in Married-Couple Households.mxd Map Date:
9/20/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-5
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
Source: HCD, 2022;
City ofTurlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
N Colorado Ave
West Main St
S Washington Rd
N Soderquist Rd
Geer Rd
Fosberg Rd
N Tully Rd
NBerkeley Ave
State Blvd
E Monte Vista Ave
E Tuolumne Rd
E Main St
Ninth St
S Lander Ave
Roberts Rd
N Quincy Rd
S Tegner Rd
N Walnut Rd
W Tuolumne Rd
Montana Ave
Andre Ln
1525W
MonteVista
S Quincy Rd
E Minnesota Ave
S Golden State Blvd
Brier Rd
N Johnson Rd
W Christoffersen Pkwy
Pedras Rd
El Capitan Dr
E Hawkeye Ave
W Linwood Ave
Dels Ln
Fulkerth Rd
N Olive Ave
S Kilroy Rd
North Ave
E Taylor Rd
East Ave
F St
W Taylor Rd
S Soderquist Rd
N Washington Rd
A St
Fullerton Dr
Hedstrom Rd
Mountain View Rd
Georgetown Ave
S oJ hnson Rd
South Ave
W Springer Dr
E Canal Dr
Marshall St
N Denair Ave
E Glenwood Ave
N Berkeley Ave
Grant Ave
Park St
W Monte Vista Ave
Golf Rd
E Linwood Ave
W Glenwood Ave
Spengler Wy
S Walnut Rd
Countryside Dr
Harding Rd
Simmons Rd
E Zeering Rd
S Tully Rd
Dianne Dr
Ruble Rd
N
Tegner Rd
Fransil Ln
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
AÎ
Census
Tract:
36.12 Census
Tract:
36.11 Census
Tract:
36.10 Census
Tract:
36.09 Census
Tract:
36.08 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.04 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
37 Tot Lot
Crane
Park
Summerfaire
Park
Donnelly
Park
Atch
Pedretti
Park
Markley
Park
Four
Seasons
Park
Ferreira
Ranch Park
Montana
Park
Soderquist
Ballpark
Broadway
Park
Columbia
Park
Turlock
Sports
Complex
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Source: California Department of Social Services, 2025; City of Turlock, 2024; Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
City Limit
County
Freeway
Major Road
Railroad
MERCED
COUNTY
!( Day Care Center
!( Infant Center
!( Single Licensed Child Care Center
Map D-6
Childcare Facilities
inTurlock
Census Tracts
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
WTAYLOR
RD
ETAYLOR RD
W MONTEVISTA AVE E MONTEVISTA AVE
WTUOLUMNE RD ETUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W E LINWOOD AVE LINWOOD AVE
SWALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
SOUTH AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
NWALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
NORTH AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
STEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Low- to Moderate-Income
Population, Block Group
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Low to Moderate
Income Population (HUD)
Block Groups with 51% or greater
Low to Moderate Income Population
MERCED C OUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-5 Low- to Moderate-Income Population, Block Group.mxd Map Date:
9/20/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-7
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
Source: HUD, 2020; City of Turlock, 2021;
Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
WTAYLOR
RD
ETAYLOR RD
W MONTEVISTA AVE E MONTEVISTA AVE
WTUOLUMNE RD ETUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W E LINWOOD AVE LINWOOD AVE
SWALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
SOUTH AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
NWALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
NORTH AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
STEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Census
Tract:
36.10 Census
Tract:
36.12 Census
Tract:
36.09 Census
Tract:
36.11 Census
Tract:
36.08 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
38.04 Poverty Status (2019)
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Percent of Population whose income in
the past 12 months is below poverty
level (2017-2021)
< 10%
10% - 20%
20% - 30%
30% - 40%
MERCED C OUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-6 Poverty Status (2021), Turlock.mxd Map Date:
9/20/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-8
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
Source:American Community Survey (ACS) (2017-2021);
City ofTurlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-31
Race/Ethnicity Turlock County State
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 11.3% 11.2% 8.8%
Black alone 15.5% 19.3% 19.6%
American Indian and Alaska Native alone 13.9% 17.2% 18.4% Asian alone 14.6% 17.5% 10.0%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 8.4% 12.1% 12.2% Some other race alone 12.8% 12.8% 17.3%
Two or more races 13.8% 11.6% 11.7%
Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 15.3% 11.6% 16.2% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 ACS 5-year estimates subject table (S1701) Income largely determines a household’s ability to purchase or rent housing. While higher-income households have more discretionary income to spend on housing, lower- and moderate-income households are limited in the range of housing they can afford. In Turlock, most lower-income households (those making less than 80 percent of AMI) are renters, while the majority of households making above 80 percent of AMI are homeowners. Multi-family residential is heavily concentrated in tracts along North and South Golden State Boulevard, while tracts located in the northeast portion of the City are majority single-family homes.
Considering the disproportionate racial/ethnic share of renters in Turlock (see Table B-27 in the Appendix B:
Housing Needs Assessment) and that majority of the people below the poverty line are renters, neighborhood stabilization and homeownership strategies are pivotal in alleviating these patterns to further fair housing within Turlock. Further, expanding the areas where multifamily residential is permitted can also alleviate the concentration of poverty and low-income areas in Turlock.
HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHERS
Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs) allow very low-income families to choose and lease or purchase safe, decent, and affordable privately-owned housing, where the choice of housing is put in the hands of the individual family. In Turlock, as seen in Map D-9, there is a concentration of Housing Choice Vouchers relative to low to moderate income population along South Golden State Road in Downtown and Geer Road. In total, there are three tracts in Turlock where 15 to 30 percent of renter occupied units use the HCVs; two of the tracts (39.08 and 39.04) overlap with block groups with 51 percent or greater of the population with low to moderate incomes, but otherwise there is little overlap between the location of HCVs and areas with lower incomes. City staff noted Stanislaus Regional Housing Authority issues over 3,000 vouchers, with rent limits based on HUD's Benefit Payment Standards. Recipients choose units based on family size, affordability, and proximity to services. City staff noted affordability was the primary concern for voucher recipients when selecting housing, rather than proximity to work. The tracts with over 15 percent of renter occupied housing units using HCVs are largely in areas determined by the Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) as Moderate Resource and High Resource; one tract, Tract 39.08, is located near Downtown within close proximity to shops, services, transit, and jobs. In Stanislaus County, Modesto is the other city with concentrations of HCV users, particularly in southwest and north Modesto. During the consultation process the Turlock/Stanislaus HOME Consortium conducted in 2022, service providers reported that potential renters find the application process daunting. Moreover, because of the shortage of affordable rental housing in Turlock and the County as a whole, landlords are able to discriminate based on voucher usage, along with other factors including protected class status.17 17 Turlock/Stanislaus County HOME Consortium, pp. 9-10.
Table D-3: Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months by Race/Ethnicity, 2020
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
W TAYLOR
RD
E TAYLOR RD
W MONTE VISTAAVE E MONTE VISTAAVE
W TUOLUMNE RD E TUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W LINWOOD AVE E LINWOOD AVE
S WALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
SOUTH AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
N WALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
NORTH AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
S TEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Census
Tract:
36.04 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
36.06 Census
Tract:
38.04 Census
Tract:
36.05 Housing Choice Vouchers
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
HCV Public Percent
0.0%
0.1% - 5%
5% - 15%
15% - 30%
MERCED COUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-7 Housing Vouchers (2019), Turlock.mxd Map Date:
9/20/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-9
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
Source: HCD, 2022; City of Turlock, 2021;
Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-33
Subsidized and Income Restricted Housing
There are technically two housing authorities in Stanislaus County; the Stanislaus Regional Housing Authority (SHRA) administers the programs of Riverbank Housing Authority. The Stanislaus Regional Housing Authority (SRHA,) a nonprofit, public corporation, is committed to addressing the unmet housing needs of residents and communities in the county. The Authority is governed by a citizen’s commission appointed by the County Board of Supervisors. In addition to the HUD subsidized units, Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC), general funds, and state housing funds are also used to develop affordable units; however, Stanislaus County’s recent housing production using LIHTC, is low compared to the rest of the state.
Together, SHRA and Riverbank Housing Authority provide access to 6,335 subsidized housing units that include 736 public housing units, 1,060 project-based Section 8 units, and 4,460 housing choice vouchers (as of when the Stanislaus County 2020-2025 AI was published). Since 2008, HUD has recognized SHRA as “high performing” because it scores a cumulative 90 out of 100 points for a variety of inspection points (physical condition, financial condition, and management). A challenge many housing authorities face, SHRA has long waiting lists for its units with a waiting time of ten years for public housing and only occasional openings for housing choice voucher applications.
Between 2016-2018, only 55 low-income housing units were created in the County compared to 18,803 in the rest of the State. Modesto’s HUD-funded affordable housing stock comprised more than 70 percent of the affordable housing in the County. As of 2018, 4.6 percent of Turlock’s housing stock qualified as affordable units (1,202 units or 19.1 percent of all affordable units in the County).18 As of 2018, Stanislaus County had 6,302 affordable units (3.5 percent of housing stock). In summary, Turlock and Modesto are where subsidized housing is concentrated within the County, with an even greater concentration existing within Modesto.
There are subsidized housing options located throughout Turlock that are income restricted and accept HCVs:
• Avena Bella Apartments. Avena Bella Phase 1 introduced 28 income restricted units, while Phase 2 provides 61 income restricted units. Avena Bella is located on the southern edge of Turlock. • Cherry Tree Village. Cherry Tree Village is an income restricted apartment complex with 104 units, located in the northern part of Turlock.
• Crane Terrace Apartments. Crane Terrace is a senior restricted complex with 44 income restricted units, located in the western part of Turlock.
• Denair Manor. Denair Manor is a senior restricted complex with income restrictions located in central Turlock.
• Parkwood Apartments. Parkwood has 178 income restricted units and is located the northern part of Turlock.
18 2018 HUD Picture of Subsidized Housing data; DP04, Selected Housing Characteristics, ACS 5-year estimates (2013- 2017)
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-34 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
• Turlock Silvercrest. Silvercrest is a senior restricted complex with 78 income restricted units, located in the southern part of Turlock.
• Lake Park Apartments/Villas ats Parkside. Lake Park has 103 income restricted units in central Turlock.
Map D-10 shows the subsidized housing options located throughout Turlock that are income restricted and accept HCVs. Most are located in central Turlock such as Villa at Parkside, Denair Manor, Crane Terrace Apartments and Silvercrest Residence, with close proximity to Downtown and access to transit. The southern most subsidized housing option is Avena Bella Apartments, located on the southern edge of Turlock adjacent to Highway 99. Notably, there are no subsidized housing options in northeastern Turlock, where the census tracts are High and Highest Resource.
Buildout of the inventory would increase the share of LMI households in Highest and High Resource tracts in Turlock and decrease that share of LMI households in Moderate Resource tracts, thereby improving the overall balance of income segments in different areas throughout the residential part of the city. Further, the development of ADUs/JADUs and affordable housing on properties owned by religious institutions through the congregational overlay (Program 1-F) would create additional housing opportunities for LMI households in High and Highest Resource areas beyond as further discussed and shown in Table D-8. These strategies would further contribute to a better balance of housing types within the community, would increase affordable housing and access to opportunity for lower and moderate income households in High and Highest Resource tracts in Turlock.
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
W TAYLOR
RD
E TAYLOR RD
W MONTE VISTA AVE E MONTE VISTA AVE
W TUOLUMNE RD E TUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W LINWOOD AVE E LINWOOD AVE
S WALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
N WALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
S TEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Avena Bella
Apartments
(500West Linwood
Avenue)
CherryTreeVillage
(139W Minnesota Ave)
CraneTerrace
Apartments
(1318 E Canal Dr)
Denair Manor
(550Wayside
Dr)
Parkwood Apartments
(3800 Crowell Rd)
Turlock Silvercrest
(865 Lander Ave)
Villas at
Parkside
(381W Hawkeye Ave)
Location of Publicly
Subsidized Housing
inTurlock
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Low to Moderate
Income Population (HUD)
Block Groups with 51% or greater
Low to Moderate Income Population
MERCED COUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\Map D-8 Location of Publicly Subsidized Housing in Turlock.mxd Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-10
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
Source: HUD, 2020; City of Turlock, 2021;
Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
!( Subsidized Housing Developments
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-36 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
D.3 Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty
and Affluence
HUD defines racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAPs) as census tracts where 50 percent or more of the population is non-White and more than 40 percent of the households have incomes below the poverty line or is three or more times the average tract poverty rate for the metropolitan/micropolitan area, whichever threshold is lower. There are five R/ECAPs in the central part of Stanislaus County, where Turlock, Modesto, and Ceres, the three most populous cities in the county are located. None of these R/ECAPS are in Turlock but one census tract (Tract 38.02) in Turlock does meet the Tax Credit Allocation Committee/HCD criteria as a High Segregation and Poverty (HSP) tract (Map D11). The California Tax Credit Allocation Committee and HCD (TCAC/HCD) established a Fair Housing Task Force that created an alternate set of criteria that it considered more appropriate for evaluating access to opportunity than the HUD R/ECAP criteria. Because using absolute thresholds could result in comparisons among very different areas of the state (e.g. rural farming communities and dense, urbanized neighborhoods in coastal cities), the TCAC/HCD approach scores census tracts relative to other tracts in the same region. The methodology filters areas meeting standards for both racial segregation (overrepresentation of people of color relative to the entire county) and poverty (30 percent of the population living below the poverty line) and rates them according to scores based on nine economic, educational and environmental indicators. The higher composite scores mean more access to resources that offer residents a better chance at economic advancement, positive educational outcomes, and better physical and mental health. 19
As discussed above, Turlock has only one census tract that meets the criteria for designation as High Segregation and Poverty compared with four in Modesto and one in Ceres. In Turlock, Tract 38.02 - the High Segregation and Poverty tract is bordered on the west by SR-99, intersected by the railroad, and includes three unincorporated county islands. The population of this tract is predominantly Hispanic (73.9 percent according to the 2020 decennial Census). Since 1990, Tract 38.02 has seen an increase in Hispanic or Latino residents and a decrease in non-Hispanic White residents that reflects Turlock’s overall demographic changes.
From 2010 to 2020, the percentage of households living below the poverty line increased more in Tract
38.02 than it did citywide (1.8 in the HSP tract compared 0.5 citywide). As of 2020, the average income in the HSP census tract was $41,580 while in Turlock as a whole it was $78,930, almost 90 percent higher. 19 Office of The State Treasurer (STO), California Fair Housing Task Force, 2020. Methodology for the 2020 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map. Available: https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity/2020-tcac-hcdmethodology.pdf
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
WTAYLOR
RD
ETAYLOR RD
W MONTEVISTA AVE E MONTEVISTA AVE
WTUOLUMNE RD ETUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W E LINWOOD AVE LINWOOD AVE
SWALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
SOUTH AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
NWALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
NORTH AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
STEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Census
Tract:
36.04 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
39.05 0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Racially Concentrated Areas
of Affluence (RCAA)
High Segregation & Poverty
MERCED C OUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-8 Segregation and Income.mxd Map Date:
9/20/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-11
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
S
R/ECAP and RCAA Locations
egregation and Income,
Source: HCD, 2021 & 2023;
City ofTurlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-38 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
Residents of Tract 38.02 are more likely to be renters than elsewhere in Turlock. Although the proportion of renter-occupied housing in Turlock only increased by 2.1 percent between 2000 and 2010, the percentage of renter occupied housing in the Tract 38.02 increased 12.9 percent, with 70.2 percent of residents in renter occupied housing in 2020.
Tract 38.02 is designated as Disadvantaged Community (DAC) under SB535, indicating it has a high share of lower income residents disproportionately impacted by pollution and adverse health outcomes.
Calenviroscreen data, developed by the State to help characterize conditions in DACS throughout California, indicates that Tract 38.02 ranks in the 95th percentile for pollution exposure and the 94th percentile for rate of poverty statewide. Given its proximity to SR-99, exposure to fine particulate matter (92nd percentile) and diesel particulate matter (0th percentile) in the tract also ranks among the highest in California, although it should be noted that there are a total of 8 DACs in Turlock and Tract 38.02 is not substantially more impacted by pollution than other DACs, nor is the rate of poverty more acute. Existing land use in Tract 38.02 is predominantly residential, with a mix of single-family and multifamily homes in both the incorporated and unincorporated parts of the tract. Other notable land uses include Wakefield Elementary School, Montana Park, three churches and various heavy commercial/industrial uses adjacent to the freeway in the western part of the tract. Current zoning generally matches existing land use, with areas in the northern incorporated park of the tract zoned for High Density Residential uses and areas in the southern incorporated park of the tract zoned for Low Density Residential uses, with areas adjacent to the freeway zoned Industrial. Census data does not indicate a preponderance of substandard housing in the area, although the City received several applications for rehabilitation grants from property owners between 2014 and 2023, suggesting there is some need for rehabilitation of homes in the area. Program 3-E in the Action Plan identifies a series of projects to improve infrastructure, amenities and quality of life in Turlock’s disadvantaged communities, including Tract 38.02. These projects include construction of the Columbia Pool, support buildings and restrooms, to serve neighborhoods in southwest Turlock, and re-pavement and rehabilitation of various street segments and installation of ADA-compliant ramps and resurfacing and restriping of the multi-purpose court at Columbia Park.
Tract 38.02 and other centrally located tracts typically contain older housing stock that was constructed prior to the 1980s. Unlike Turlock's newer subdivisions, these areas do not have assessment districts that providing funding for roadway construction and maintenance. Therefore, to improve roadway conditions in older residential neighborhoods without assessment districts Turlock and Stanislaus voters have passed two ballot measures that provide ongoing sources of funding for improvements. With the approval of Measure A, a three-quarter cent transactions and use (sales) tax, the Turlock City Council has committed 55 percent of this new revenue to its Roads Program. For the last two fiscal years, the City has allocated $36.2 million to its Roads Program from Measure A dollars alone. With the additional assistance of a $29.5 million-dollar bond issuance and the County Measure L program, within fiscal year 2024-2025 the City has budgeted $48.4 million in expenditures for the Roads Program with 89 percent going toward construction.
The City’s financial forecast for the Roads Program projects this trend of allocation of resources to continue for the next three to five fiscal years.
This area is mostly zoned as high density residential within City limits, with some low-density residential housing located sparingly throughout the county island. Within the county island, low density residential development is the predominant land use, with a significant number of vacant and or underutilized parcels.
In this area, the development of the Workforce Hosing Overlay would allow housing development at up to 35 du/ac on major corridors like Lander Avenue. Turlock planned for the development and financing of this area by relying on the subdivision process and creating the Montana-West Master Plan Area.
As noted above, Tract 38.02 contains three unincorporated county islands. Stanislaus County is working to address infrastructure needs within unincorporated developed neighborhoods of the County, including
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-39
County Islands in the Turlock sphere of influence. In recent years the County has tried to guide infrastructure improvements and support the annexation of unincorporated pocket areas to surrounding cities. This includes prioritizing residential neighborhoods with public health and safety needs with installation of sewer mainlines, and potable water systems. In May 2021, the Board of Supervisors approved its priorities for use of $107 million in American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) funding allocated to Stanislaus County. To date of the $107 million, $55.8 million has been assigned to Community Infrastructure – Urban Pockets/County Communities. ARPA funds provide a unique opportunity for Stanislaus County to make substantial progress strategically on the infrastructure needs in its urban pockets and County communities. Additionally, separate from the Housing Element process, the City of Turlock has applied for REAP funding to prepare a master plan for the future annexation of seven unincorporated County islands and associated public infrastructure improvements, including the three islands within Tract
38.02. The master plan will identify infrastructure funding and financing strategies.
While there are no census tracts in Turlock that meet the criteria established by the federal HUD, 12 of 17 tracts in Turlock have been classified as DACs under Senate Bill (SB) 535, one of which also meets the TCAC/HCD criteria for areas of High Segregation and Poverty (HSP). To characterize fair housing conditions in Turlock, DAC tracts were compared non-DAC tracts on the basis of a range of quality of life indicators, including the quality and condition of parks and sidewalks; safe routes to school programs; active transportation improvements; community amenities; and healthy food sales points. Indicators include both quantitative and qualitative factors based on assessments by City staff. The results are summarized in Table D-3b and the location of DAC Census tracts is shown on Map D-11b.
Overall, Turlock provides 2.4 acres of parks per 1,000 residents. The ratio in DACs is slightly lower at 2.2 acres per thousand residents and slightly higher than the citywide average in non-DAC tracts, at 2.4 acres per thousand residents. However, DAC residents tend to have better access to parks than non-DAC residents. A higher share of homes in DACs are within a 10-minute walk of a park than in non-DAC tracts, and DAC tracts 6099003802 (the HSP tract) and 6099003904 have the highest share of land within a 10- minute walk of a park in the city, at 30 percent and 50 percent respectively. By contrast only 24.6 acres of the 2,917 acres in non-DAC tracts is within a 10-minute walk of a park. Park amenities provided in DAC and non-DAC tracts are comparable, and the City has programmed upgrades to Columbia Park facilities and construction of the Columbia Pool, support buildings and restrooms - located in 6099003802 (the HSP tract) - into the CIP. The City has also recently
N Co ol rado Ave
West Main St
S Washington Rd
N Soderquist Rd
Geer Rd
Fosberg Rd
N Tully Rd
NBerkeley Ave
State Blvd
E Monte Vista Ave
E Tuolumne Rd
E Main St
Ninth St
S Lander Ave
Roberts Rd
N Quincy Rd
S Tegner Rd
N Walnut Rd
W Tuolumne Rd
Montana Ave Andre Ln
1525 W Monte Vista
S Quincy Rd
E Minnesota Ave
S Golden State Blvd
Brier Rd
N Johnson Rd
W Christoffersen Pkwy
Pedras Rd
El Capitan Dr
E Hawkeye Ave
W Linwood Ave
Dels Ln
Fulkerth Rd
N Olive Ave
S Kilroy Rd
North Ave
E Taylor Rd
East Ave
F St
W Taylor Rd
S Soderquist Rd
N Wash ni gton Rd
A St
Full erton Dr
Hedstrom Rd
Mountain View Rd
Georgetown Ave
S Johnson Rd
South Ave
W Springer Dr
E Canal Dr
Marshall St
N Denair Ave
E Glenwood Ave
N Berkeley Ave
Grant Ave
Park St
W Monte Vista Ave
Golf Rd
E Linwood Ave
W Glenwood Ave
Spengler Wy
S Walnut Rd
Countryside Dr
Harding Rd
Simmons Rd
E Zeering Rd
S Tully Rd
Dianne Dr
Ruble Rd
N
Tegner Rd
Fransil Ln
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
AÎ
6099003603
6099003608
6099003609 6099003610
6099003612 6099003611
6099003700
6099003802
6099003803
6099003804
06099003805
6099003904
6099003905
6099003906
6099003907
6099003908
6099003909
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Source: AFFH 2.0, 2021; SB 535, 2022; ACS 5 Year Estimate 2018-2022; City of Turlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2021
City Limit
County
Freeway
Major Road
Road
Railroad
MERCED
COUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\AFFH Analys Map Date:
12/4/2025
Advantaged Census Tracts
Disadvantaged Census Tracts
Map D-11b
Housing Element
Census Tracts
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-41
Table D-3b Neighborhood Indicators
Census
Tracts
Quantitative Data Qualitative Data
Populat
ion
(2023)
Park
Acres/R
esident
(acre/1
000
resident
)
Area
within a
10-
minute
walk of a
communit
y center
(acres)
Healthy
food
sales
points
(numbe
r)
Childca
re
facilities
(numbe
r)
Average
Percent
LMI
Park Amenities Par
k
Con
ditio
ns
Sidewalk Conditions Safe Routes to Schools
projects (physical
and/or programmatic)
Capital
Improvem
ent
Projects
6099003603 4,04
5 4.8 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0%
Atch
Pedretti
Park
Baseball field
Concession
stand
Covered area
Picnic area
Playground
Softball fields
Volleyball
courts
Physical
Conditions:
Good.
Combination of
properties zoned
commercial or
industrial.
Properties are
located within 2
specific plans.
The Westside
Industrial Specific
Plan (WISP)
adopted in 2006
and the
Northwest
Triangle Specific
Plan (NWTSP)
adopted in 1995.
The developed
commercial
areas, located
mostly in the
north part of the
census tract and
within the
NWTSP, have
sidewalks that
Roselawn High -
N/A, not included
in report
There are
seven
planned
and
upcoming
capital
projects.
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-42 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
are in good
condition most
having been
constructed
within the last
20-years and
located in the
regional shopping
area of Monte
Vista Crossing.
Some
commercial areas
within the WISP
have been
developed for
quite some time
with sidewalks in
good condition. The General
Plan, Specific
Plans, and
Turlock
Municipal Code
require new
development to
install frontage
improvements
that include
sidewalks.
6099003609 3,17
7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.6%
Physical
Conditions:
Good. Located
in the northeast
quadrant of the
city with a
combination of
residential and
N/A
There is
one
upcoming
capital
project.
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-43
commercial
zoning and
properties. The
area is mostly
built out but
does have a large
undeveloped
commercial
property.
Residential
development has
occurred over
the last 30 years
with commercial
development,
along Geer Road,
having occurred
in the last 20
years. Installation
of frontage
improvements
including
sidewalks
occurred upon
development of
the parcels.
Future
development of
development
properties in the
area will be
required to
install frontage
improvements
including
sidewalks.
6099003610 5,36
6 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.0 49.5%
Four Seasons
Park
Barbeques
Physical
Conditions:
Good. Located
Turlock Junior
Physical: Installing
bike lanes and an
There is
one
upcoming
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-44 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
Covered area
Open space
Picnic areas
Playground
Walking paths
in the northwest
quadrant of the
city with a
combination of
residential and
commercial
zoning and
properties. The
area is mostly
built out.
Commercial and
residential
projects have
been entitled for
the respective
undeveloped
properties in the
census tract.
Existing
residential
development
began in the late
1990s with
commercial and
residential
projects entitled
within the last 12
months. Sidewalk
improvements
are a
requirement for
the development
of the vacant
properties.
Future
development of
undeveloped
properties will
require frontage
improvements
all-weather paved
path, a mid-block
crossing point, and
widening or
buffering the bike
lane. Increasing
the number of
speed limit signs
and active speed
feedback signage.
Programmatic:
Speed survey and
increase
enforcement and
education.
capital
project.
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-45
including
sidewalks.
6099003700 4,93
3 0.1 0.0 1.0 1.0 54.6%
Tot Lot
Basketball
court
Playground
Open space
Physical
Conditions:
Fair/Good.
Located in the
southwest
quadrant of the
city and within
the Westside
Industrial Specific
Plan (WISP) with
a combination of
commercial and
industrial zoning
and properties. A
large portion of
the southern
portion of the
census tract is
located out of
the City limits
and within
Stanislaus County
jurisdiction. The
WISP was
adopted in 2006.
Industrial
development has
continued for the
last 40+ years.
Some
development
occurred prior
to the property
annexing in to
the City. Recent
development has
included sidewalk
Cunningham
Elementary
Physical: Widening
walkways,
installing ADA
ramps, sidewalk
improvements,
road and broken
signal repair.
Providing bike
lanes, warning
signage, and
optimizing signals.
There are
31 planned
and
upcoming
capital
projects.
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-46 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
improvements or
installation.
Future
development of
undeveloped
properties will
require frontage
improvements
including
sidewalks.
609900380 24,92
9 1.5 148.3 5.0 1.0 62.1%
Columbia
Park
Barbeques
Basketball
court
Covered area
Horseshoes
Open space
Picnic areas
Playgrounds
Pool
Restrooms
Soccer goals
Splash park
Tennis court
Walking paths
Montana
Park (First
phase
completed)
Open space
Walking paths
Physical
Conditions:
Poor/Fair.
Located in the
southwest
quadrant of the
city with a mix of
residential,
commercial and
light industrial
zoning and
properties. A
portion of the
properties in the
census tract are
located in a
county island and
are within
Stanislaus County
jurisdiction.
Funding from
REAP 2.0 will
prepare a master
plan for the
county islands
that will identify
infrastructure
needs. Some
development
Wakefield
Elementary
Physical:
Formalizing a
loading zone,
installing a speed
sign and pavement
markings.
Complete streets
design with high
visibility markings.
Road repair.
Programmatic:
Outreach about
the loading zone,
education, and
right on red
restriction during
school hours.
There are
14 planned
and
upcoming
capital
projects.
City of Turlock
– Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
D-47
occurred prior
to the property
annexing in to
the City. Recent
development has
included sidewalk
improvements or
installation.
Recent
residential
development has
installed
sidewalks in
areas the
previously had
none. Beginning
in 2023 the
Roads Program
has identified and
repaired several
roads within the
census tract.
Future
development of
properties will
require frontage
improvements
including
sidewalks.
6099003803 3,41
4 0.0 17.0 1.0 0.0 0.0%
Physical
Conditions:
Poor/Fair.
Located in the
southeast
quadrant of the
city with a mix of
residential,
commercial and
light industrial
N/A
There are
14 planned
and
upcoming
capital
projects.
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-48 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
zoning and
properties. A
portion of the
properties in the
census tract are
located in a
county island and
are within
Stanislaus County
jurisdiction.
Funding from
REAP 2.0 will
prepare a master
plan for the
county islands
that will identify
infrastructure needs. The
developed
industrially zoned
properties have
no sidewalks or
sidewalks in poor
condition with
little opportunity
to install new
sidewalks.
Residential
development in
the census tract
began in the
mid/late 1980s
and continues
with a residential
subdivision
currently in
construction.
The Roads
Program has
identified several
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-49
roads within the
census tract for
repair. Future
development of
properties will
require frontage
improvements
including
sidewalks.
6099003804 6,61
8 3.2 169.9 2.0 2.0 65.0%
Broadway
Park
Barbeques
Basketball
court
Covered area
Picnic areas
Playground
Restrooms
Splash park
Walking paths
Soderquist
Ballpark
Baseball field
Concession
stand
Open space
Summerfaire
Park
Barbeques
Basketball
court
Covered areas
Open space
Picnic areas
Playground
Walking paths
Physical
Conditions:
Good. Located
in the northwest
quadrant of the
city with a
combination of
residential,
commercial , and
public/semipublic zoning and
properties. The
area is mostly
built out with a
few undeveloped
commercial
properties.
Approximately
80 acres in the
census tract are
the Turlock
Cemetery &
Memorial Park
and 11 acres
owned by
Turlock School
District (Osborn
Elementary
School). Main
Osborn TwoWay Immersion
Academy
Physical: Widening
sidewalk, installing
bike lanes and bike
lane stripe, and
curb realignment.
Programmatic:
Increasing
education and
enforcement.
There are
11 planned
and
upcoming
capital
projects.
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-50 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
Street
improvements
were completed
within the last 10
years including
sidewalk repair.
Future
development of
undeveloped
properties will
require frontage
improvements
including
sidewalks.
6099003805 3,19
0 0.9 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0
Swanson
Centennial
Park
Barbeques
Covered areas
Dog park
Open space
Picnic areas
Playground
Walking paths
Physical
Conditions:
Good. Located
in the northwest
quadrant of the
city with a
combination of
residential,
commercial
zoning and
properties. The
residential areas
are built out;
however several
commercial
properties are
undeveloped
Located within
the NWTSP and
the City's
regional
commercial
center,
development in
N/A
There are
two
planned
and
upcoming
capital
projects.
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-51
the area began in
the early 2000's.
Sidewalks were
installed with
residential and
commercial
projects as they
developed The
most recent
residential
subdivision was
completed in
2016. The
remaining
undeveloped
commercial
properties are
zoned for
commercial use
and would be
infill projects
requiring the
installation
and/or repair of
sidewalks. Future
development of
undeveloped
properties will
require frontage
improvements
including
sidewalks.
6099003904 4,51
8 2.5 225.1 2.0 2.0 55.0%
Central Park
Benches
Monument
Denair Park
Open space
Physical
Conditions:
Fair/Good.
Located in the
northeast
There are
10 planned
and
upcoming
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-52 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
Picnic area
Playground
Walking paths
GAR Park
Monument
Picnic areas
Quaile Rand
Norton Park
Barbeques
Dog park
Open space
Playground
Picnic areas
Restrooms
quadrant of the
city the census
tract is
developed with
single-family and
some multifamily
development.
This is the older
part of town and
residential
projects would
be infill in nature.
Future
development of
undeveloped
properties will
require frontage improvements
including
sidewalks.
capital
projects.
6099003906 5,32
1 0.0 41.6 3.0 1.0 68.3%
Physical
Conditions:
Fair/Good.
Located in the
northeast
quadrant of the
city the census
tract has a mix of
single-family and
multifamily
development.
Approximately
25 parcels in this
census tract are
located within a
County Island
and under
Dutcher Middle
Physical: Installing
sidewalk, bike lane
symbols and
signage, green
lanes for visibility,
refreshing
markings, buffered
bike lane, and
widening an
existing bike lane.
Filling in sidewalk
gaps and providing
a paved path.
Programmatic:
Education about
drop-off loop,
There is
no
planned
and
upcoming
capital
projects.
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-53
Stanislaus County
jurisdiction for
development.
The county island
is part of the
master plan
project funded
under REAP 2.0
that will look at
the infrastructure
in the county
island for future
annexation and
development.
Future
development of
undeveloped
properties will
require frontage
improvements
including
sidewalks.
rescheduling
street sweeping,
speed
enforcement, and
designated route
for cycling and
walk access.
Crowell
Elementary
Physical: Installing
signage, curb
extensions and
ramps, high
visibility
crosswalks, and a
pedestrian beacon;
moving and raising
crosswalks, and
staff parking lot
adjustments.
Programmatic:
Coordinating with
nearby church for
parents to use as
drop-off and pickup parking,
increase education
about crosswalks,
increasing
enforcement.
6099003908 3,04
1 12.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 72.3%
Donnelly
Park
Barbeques
Basketball
court
Covered areas
Lake
Physical
Conditions:
Good. Located
in the northwest
quadrant of the
city the census
tract is
N/A
There are
five
planned
and
upcoming
capital
projects.
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-54 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
Open space
Picnic areas
Playground
Restrooms
Skate park
developed with
residential and
commercial
zoning and
properties.
Residential
development is a
mix of single-
family and
multifamily. Any
future residential
development
would be infill in
nature. Future
development of
undeveloped
properties will
require frontage
improvements
including
sidewalks.
6099003909 5,91
3 0.8 0.0 3.0 1.0 38.6%
Rotary
International
Park
Barbeques
Basketball
court
Covered areas
Open space
Picnic areas
Playground
Walking paths
Physical
Conditions:
Good. Located
in the northwest
quadrant of the
city the census
tract is
developed with
residential and
commercial
zoning and
properties.
Residential
development is a
mix of single-
family and
Brown
Elementary
Physical: Repairing
and installing
sidewalk,
refreshing
markings, and
trimming trees.
Programmatic:
Increase education
to drivers, provide
a student valet
program, assist
students crossing
bus loop,
enforcement
There are
five
planned
and
upcoming
capital
projects.
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-55
multifamily.
There are few
vacant residential
properties in the
census tract. Any
residential
project would be
infill in nature
and require the
installation
and/or repair of
sidewalks. .
action, adding a
crossing guard,
rescheduling trash
pick-up times.
Disadvanta
ged
Average
54,
465 2.2 50.2 1.7 0.8 44.3% N/A N/A N/A
6099003608 6,30
0 0.6 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0%
Bristol Park
Basketball
court
Open space
Playground
Walking paths
Physical
Conditions:
The properties
located in this
census tract are
not located
within the City
limits and are
under the
jurisdiction of
Stanislaus
County. Any
development in
this area would
be referred to
the City for
comment.
N/A
There is
no
planned
and
upcoming
capital
projects.
6099003611 4,51
0 3.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%
Christofferso
n Park/Basin
Barbeques
Covered area
Open space
Physical
Conditions:
Good. Located
in the northeast
Earl Elementary
Physical: Installing
drainage to
prevent pooling, a
roundabout or
There is
one
planned
and
upcoming
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-56 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
Picnic areas
Playground
Walking paths
Dale Pinkney
Park
Covered area
Picnic area
Playground
Open space
Walking paths
quadrant of the
City the
properties are
zoned residential
and developed
with single-family
homes.
Approximately
13 acres are
owned by
Turlock Joint
Union School
District and 14
acres by the City
of Turlock and
developed with
Denis Earl
Elementary
School and a city
park.
Development of
residential
properties began
in the 1990s and
includes
properties in the
Northeast
Turlock
Masterplan
adopted in 2004.
The census tract
is built out.
traffic circle for
intersection
control, a natural
desire path, and
bike lanes. Adding
green color at
conflict/merge
points, removing
free right turns,
buffering bike
lanes, and creating
a wider bike lane.
capital
projects.
6099003612 7,98
7 7.5 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0%
BMX Bike
Park/Walnut
Basin
BMX bike park
Open space
Soccer fields
Brad Bates Park
Basketball court
Open space
Physical
Conditions:
Good. Located
in the northwest
quadrant of the
City the
properties are
Medeiros
Elementary
Physical: Adding a
bike lane stripe,
crosswalks, and a
midblock
crosswalk.
There are
five
planned
and
upcoming
capital
projects.
City of Turlock
– Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
D-57
Picnic areas
Playground
Walking paths
Curt Andre
Park
Barbeques
Covered area
Open space
Picnic areas
Playground
Volleyball courts
Walking paths
Ferreia Ranch
Park
Barbeques
Basketball court
Covered areas
Open space
Picnic areas
Playground
Walking paths
Regional Sports
Complex
Ampitheater
Baseball field
Playground
Picnic area
Restrooms
Soccer fields
Softball fields
Traditions Park
Open space
zoned residential
and developed
with single-family
homes. Pitman
High School and
Turlock Regional
Park encompass
approximately 70
acres
respectively.
Development of
residential
properties began
in the 1990s and
includes
properties
located in the
Turlock Masterplan
adopted in 2001.
The census tract
is built out.
Programmatic:
Providing a
crossing guard.
Pitman High -
N/A, not included
in the report
Walnut
Elementary
Education
Center
Physical: Increasing
storage in the turn
lane, adding a red
curb and bike
lanes, removing
right turns, and
decreasing
pedestrian
crossing distance.
Programmatic:
Providing a
crossing guard.
6099003905 4,42
2 1.8 24.6 1.0 1.0 0.0%
Crane Park
Basketball
court
Barbeques
Horseshoes
Open space
Playground
Picnic areas
Restrooms
Tennis courts
Walking paths
Physical
Conditions:
Good. Located
in the northeast
quadrant of the
City the
properties are
zoned residential
and developed
with single-family
homes. While
there are some
vacant properties
they are infill in
Julien
Elementary
Physical: Installing a
speed sign, high-
visibility sidewalk,
and bike
boulevard.
Formalizing an
official pick-up
drop-off area,
trimming shrubs,
repaving the
street, and
sidewalk widening.
There are
four
planned
and
upcoming
capital
projects.
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-58 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
nature and not
suitable or zoned
for large
residential
projects. Any
development of
vacant properties
would require
the installation of
sidewalks.
Programmatic:
Increasing
enforcement and
providing a
crossing guard.
Turlock High -
N/A
6099003907 7,43
8 0.9 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0%
Markley Park
Basketball
court
Barbeques
Covered area
Open space
Playground
Picnic areas
Physical
Conditions:
Good. Located
in the northeast
quadrant of the
City the
properties are
zoned residential
and developed
with single-family
homes. Newly
constructed
subdivisions,
Fairbanks Ranch
and Les
Chateaux are
complete or near
completion.
While there are
some vacant
residential
properties they
are infill in nature
and would
require
installation of
N/A
There are
two
planned
and
upcoming
capital
projects.
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-59
sidewalks upon
development.
Advantage
d Average
30,
657 2.8 4.9 1.0 1.6 0.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A
City of
Turlock
Average
85,1
22 2.4 36.9 1.5 1.1 31.3%
N/A N/A N/A N/A
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-60 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
constructed Montana Park in this tract, and is actively pursuing funding to expand amenities. Based on an assessment Public Works staff, conditions are good in all facilities throughout the city and there are no significant disparities between DACs and non-DAC tracts.
Nevertheless, there are three tracts in the city that do not contain a park facility; all are DACs. Tract 6099003803 is located in an industrial area with some active agricultural uses and associated low density housing. The entirety of the area is within the West Side Industrial Specific Plan Area, where employment uses are envisioned over the long term. Tracts 6099003609 and 6099003906 are centrally located within Turlock, adjacent to the major commercial corridors of North Golden State Boulevard and Geer Road.
Commercial properties along both corridors are within opportunity aeras, where new housing is envisioned over the planning period with rezoning to Commercial-Residential Mixed Use. There is little vacant land within these tracts for new parks; however, there may be opportunities to integrate privately owned publicly accessible open space and recreational facilities as underutilized commercial sites are redeveloped.
Accordingly, through Program 3-E in the Action Plan, the City will identify a program of potential incentives to encourage the development of privately owned publicly accessible open space and recreational facilities in centrally-located areas underserved by City park facilities.
Most DACs in Turlock are centrally-located within the city in densely developed areas along major commercial thoroughfares. Accordingly, proximity to grocery stores and other healthy food retail sales points is typically better in DACs than in non-DAC tracts. In fact, tract 6099003802 (the HSP tract) has five healthy food retailers, the highest number in the city. On average, DACs have 1.7 supermarkets and corner stores selling fresh meat and produce, whereas the more suburban non-DAC tracts have only 1 health food retailer per tract on average and most non-DAC tracts have none. Access to healthy foods is not merely a question of proximity though; affordability is also a factor. Pursuant to SB 1383, the City has adopted requirements (Turlock Municipal Code 6-3-125) for commercial edible food generators to arrange to have the maximum amount of their edible food, that would otherwise be disposed, be recovered for human consumption, which will help address food insecurity and expand access to healthy food for low income residents. Additionally, through Program 3-E the City will identify strategies to increase access to healthy food for DAC residents in Turlock and incorporate them into the Environmental Justice Element of the General Plan, anticipated for completion in 2026.
Based on an assessment by Public Works staff, sidewalk conditions throughout the city are generally good.
In general, non-DAC tracts are contain relatively newer developed subdivisions and accordingly, conditions in those areas are better than in older parts of town where DACs are located. There are three DAC tracts where conditions are rated as fair/good (including tract 6099003802, the HSP tract) and two DAC tracts where conditions are rated poor/fair. The City has received REAP 2.0 funding to support development of a Master Plan that will identify zoning and infrastructure improvements in several of the DACs with less than Good sidewalk conditions, and the City's Roads Program has identified several roads within these census tracts for repair. Additionally, in December 2025, the City Council approved a new Sidewalk Repair Assistance Program to help property owners repair damaged or unsafe sidewalks more affordably and efficiently, with the goal of improving neighborhood safety, accessibility, and walkability.
Sidewalk conditions can directly affect mobility, safety, access to transit, and access to schools and services— especially for seniors, people with disabilities, children, and those in historically underserved areas where infrastructure has lagged. The City will cover 55 percent of eligible sidewalk repair costs up to $1,250 for typical property owners. For income-qualified property owners, the City increases this to up to 85 percent of costs, capped at $2,500—directly benefiting low-income households. This tiered assistance reduces financial barriers for disadvantaged residents who may otherwise delay critical repairs due to cost. The program also includes expanded support to simplify encroachment permitting and administrative steps, helping residents navigate the process more quickly and with fewer hurdles. Through Program 3-I in the
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-61
Action Plan, the City will implement the Sidewalk Repair Assistance Program to improve infrastructure in underserved areas, reduce financial barriers for low-income households, and promote equitable access to opportunity.
The City has adopted and is implementing an Active Transportation Plan, which identifies a range of physical and programmatic improvements to strengthen safe routes to schools throughout Turlock. As detailed in Table D-3b, physical improvements include installation of new and widened sidewalks, bike lanes and boulevards, high-visibility crosswalks and markings, curb extensions and ramps, traffic calming features, improved signage and signals, roadway repairs, and safer school access configurations such as loading zones and drop-off areas. Programmatic efforts involve outreach and enforcement measures, including speed surveys, increased traffic enforcement, crossing guards, coordinated pick-up and drop-off management, operational adjustments (such as street sweeping or trash schedules), and partnerships to improve driver behavior and pedestrian safety around schools. Proposed improvements are tailored to the specific needs of schools and planned proportionately throughout the city.
Public works staff also identified the number of ongoing and planned capital improvement projects throughout the city by census tract, as summarized in Table D-3b. These include roadway and utility infrastructure projects in the current CIP. There are a total of 115 CIP projects, the vast majority of which (103) are located in DACs, including 11 in tract 6099003802 (the HSP tract). The need is generally greater in DACs than non-DAC tracts given the relative age of existing infrastructure. CIP projects are planned proportionately throughout the city based on need.
Overall, the analysis indicates that there are disparities between DACs and non-DACs in terms of park acreage, park conditions, and sidewalk conditions. Programs 3-E and 3-I have been added to the Action Plan to help address these disparities. Additionally, Program 3-E includes measures to help lower income residents access affordable healthy foods.
RACIALLY/ETHNICALLY CONCENTRATED AREAS OF AFFLUENCE
HCD provides a standard definition for Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs) as a “census tract where 1) 80 percent or more of the population is White, and 2) the median household income is $125,000 or greater (slightly more than double the national median household income in 2016).”20 The Stanislaus Council of Governments and some other Councils of Governments (COGs) use a more flexible definition, which is an area where the percentage of non-Hispanic White residents is more than 1.25 times the average in the COG region and the median income is at least 1.5 times higher than the COG AMI.
Map D-11 shows the locations of RCAAs under this definition; within Turlock, two RCAAs are located along the very eastern edge of the city and one RCAA located outside the city to the east. The RCAA tract in Turlock is 71.6 percent White (Hispanic or Latino), has a median income of $92,500, has 79.6 percent of units occupied by owners, and 98.2 percent of homes are single family dwellings (the highest percent in all Turlock tracts). To the east of Turlock, in the unincorporated community of Denair, the population is 64.6 percent White (Hispanic or Latino and non-Hispanic or Latino), with a median income of $93,060, has 100 percent of units occupied by owners, and 94.1 percent of homes are single family dwellings. Also within the 20 Office of The State Treasurer (STO), California Fair Housing Task Force, 2020. Methodology for the 2020 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map. Available: https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity/2020-tcac-hcdmethodology.pdf
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-62 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
region, are several census tracts identified as RCAAs surrounding the city of Oakdale, northeast of Turlock, which is in the Modesto MSA.
The existing concentrations of poverty and affluence may have been created and sustained by zoning practices in Turlock. Table D-4 shows the percentage of multi-family housing in the HSP tract opposed to the highest resource tracts (Map D-12). Compared with Turlock’s overall percentage of structures with single units and the percentage within the census tract identified as High Segregation and Poverty, the highest and higher resource tracts have a greater percentage of single unit structures than multi-unit structures. Notably, only 3.3 percent of structures within the RCAA tract have two or more units while the percentage of structures in all of Turlock, while structures with two or more units is at 26.5 percent. By contrast, it is noteworthy that while the proportion of renter-occupied housing in Turlock increased by only
2.1 percent between 2000 and 2010, the percentage of renter occupied housing in the HSP census tract increased 12.9 percent, with 70.2 percent of the HSP residents in renter occupied housing in 2020. Proposed revisions to zoning regulations including the development of Congregational Overlay and incentives for deed restricting accessory dwelling units (ADUs) that increase opportunities for developing multi-unit and more affordable housing in the higher resource areas in the northern part of the city could lead to a more even distribution of population by income level.
TCAC Designation Tract 1 Unit Percentage of
1 Unit
2+ Units Percentage of 2+ Units
Highest Resource 36.05 4,716 80.9% 1,115 19.1%
Highest Resource 39.09 2,003 80.1% 499 19.9%
Higher Resource 36.06 3,192 84.7% 575 15.3%
Higher Resource (RCAA) 39.05 1,513 96.7% 52 3.3%
Higher Resource 39.07 2,375 82.4% 509 17.6%
High Segregation & Poverty
(R/ECAP)
38.02 1,316 75.2% 433 24.8%
City of Turlock All 18,664 73.5% 6,724 26.5%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2020 ACS Five-Year Estimates (Table A10032) Table D-4: Units In Structures by TCAC and Census Tract, 2020
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-63
D.4 Disparities in Access to Opportunity
The CTAC-HCD Task Force Opportunity Maps identify the census tracts with the highest and lowest resources within each region of California, which can be used to analyze disparities in access to opportunities in three categories (domains)--economic, environmental, and education. The maps use specific indicators in each domain to determine a score for each census tract. The highest resource tracts are the top 20 percent of census tracts with the highest index scores relative to the region and high resource tracts are the next 20 percent. The remaining tracts are then evenly divided into the low resource and moderate resource categories. Opportunity maps for each of three domains show how census tracts within each city, county, or region compare with one another. Table D-5 lists the indicators the State used to create the composite scores for each domain, which are further aggregated to create a composite index that determines each tract’s resource level.
A neighborhood’s score for each economic and educational indicator is determined by whether it falls above or below the median (50th percentile) tract or block group value within the city. Each indicator that falls above the median adds one point to the final score. Additional information about each of the nine indicators and their data sources is provided in the California Fair Housing Task Force, Methodology for Opportunity and High-Poverty & Segregated Area Mapping Tools, January 2024. The Methodology also provides the rationale for and research underlying each of the indicators used to create the composite scores.
Indicators Measure
Economic
Above 200 % Poverty
Adult Education
Employment
Median Home Value
Percent of population above 200 % of Federal poverty line Percent of adults with bachelor's degree or above
Percent of adults aged 20-64 employed in the civilian labor force or in armed forces
Value of owner-occupied units
Environmental Burden CalEnviroScreen 4.0 site-based pollution indicators Education
Math Proficiency
Reading Proficiency
High School Graduation Rates
Student Poverty Rate
Percent of 4th graders who meet or exceed math proficiency standards Percent of 4th graders who meet or exceed literacy standards Percent of high school cohort that graduated on time
Percent of students not receiving free or reduced-price lunch Source: California Fair Housing Task Force, Methodology for Opportunity and High-Poverty & Segregated Area Mapping Tools, January 2024
Table D-5: Opportunity Indicators and Measures for HCD/TCAC Opportunity Maps
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-64 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
REGIONAL CONTEXT
HUD has developed a mapping tool that cities can use to identify disparities in access to opportunity within a region. The tool uses census data to generate indicators for scoring census tracts. The higher the index score, the better an area’s access to opportunity. The following indicators are scored on a scale from zero to 100.
• Low Poverty — A measure of the degree of poverty in a neighborhood, at the Census tract level. • School Proficiency — School-level data on the performance of 4th grade students on state exams to describe which neighborhoods have high- and low-performing elementary schools. • Labor Market — Measure the relative intensity of labor market engagement and human capital in a neighborhood based on employment levels, labor force participation, and education attainment. • Low Transportation Cost — Estimates of transportation costs for a three-person, single-parent family with income at 50 percent of the median income for renters for the region. • Transit — Estimates of transportation trips taken by a three-person, single-parent family with income at 50 percent of the median income for renters for the region. • Jobs Proximity — Quantifies the accessibility of a given residential neighborhood as a function of its distance to all job locations within a region or other statistical area. Larger employment centers, like Turlock and Modesto in Stanislaus County, are more heavily weighted. • Environmental Health — Summarizes potential exposure to harmful toxins at a neighborhood level. The higher the index, the lower the exposure to toxins.
The Stanislaus County Fiscal Year 2020-2025 Regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI) explores the distribution of five of these types of opportunity: transportation, education, employment, access to low poverty neighborhoods, and access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods.
Chart D-6 and Chart D-7 below shows index scores based on the July 2020 HUD data release. In the Stanislaus County region and in Turlock, access to opportunity is generally highest for non-Hispanic Asian and Pacific Islander residents. Residents who identify as Hispanic or non-Hispanic Native American, on the other hand, have the lowest access to opportunity while non-Hispanic White as well as non-Hispanic Black people live in a wider variety of neighborhoods. The major exception to this is the relatively high labor market index scores of non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic Asian and Pacific Islander residents in Turlock outside the Modesto region. Similar patterns are evident for the total population and those that live below the poverty line, as shown in Chart D-7.
CONTEXT
According to the TCAC Opportunity Areas composite score as shown on Map D-12, there is high variation in resource categories in the City of Turlock, as areas identified as Highest, High, Moderate and Low Resource are located throughout Turlock. The Highest Resource areas in the city are in the northern part of the city, generally north of West Christoffersen Parkway and east of Geer Road, while Moderate Resource tracts are west of SR-99 and in the east, and the Low Resource areas in the center of Turlock east of SR-99, as well as southeast by the Merced County boundary. Modesto, the largest city in the region, has a similar distribution of opportunity areas, though includes more tracts that meet the definition of High Poverty and Segregated, while smaller cities including Patterson and Riverbank are more homogeneous with a more limited range of classifications, usually Low and Moderate Resource, among their census tracts.
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
WTAYLOR
RD
ETAYLOR RD
W MONTEVISTA AVE E MONTEVISTA AVE
WTUOLUMNE RD ETUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W E LINWOOD AVE LINWOOD AVE
SWALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
SOUTH AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
NWALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
NORTH AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
STEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Census
Tract:
36.09 Census
Tract:
36.11 Census
Tract:
36.08 Census Tract:
36.08 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
36.12 Census
Tract:
38.04 Census
Tract:
36.10 TCAC Opportunity Areas,
Composite Score
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
SB 535 Disadvantaged Community
Highest Resource
High Resource
Moderate Resource
Low Resource
MERCED C OUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-9 TCAC Opportunity Areas, Composite Score, Tu Map Date:
9/20/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-12
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
Source: CalEPA, 2022; HCD, 2024; City of Turlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-66 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
Economic Indicators
The Task Force methodology uses four indicators to measure economic opportunity: poverty, adult education rate, employment rate, and the median home value of owner-occupied units. Four tracts with less positive economic outcome are adjacent to one another and mostly located west of Golden State Boulevard, along with Tract 39.08 on Geer Road and North Golden State Boulevard (see Map D-13).
Overall, Turlock has slightly more tracts classified under less positive economic outcomes than those tracts classified as more positive economic outcomes. Tracts with more positive economic outcomes, scoring greater than 0.8, align with Highest and High Resource areas in the east and north of Turlock.
Touched upon in Chapter 2 of the Draft Housing Element in more depth, there are 31,746 persons in the labor force in the City of Turlock. The largest industry represented among Turlock workers is Health and Educational Services (27.7 percent) which is a greater share of the workforce represented in the industry compared to the county (21.4 percent). Compared to Stanislaus County, employees in the Construction industry account for significantly less of Turlock’s employment distribution (6.4 percent) than that of the county (8.9 percent). Further, the following four major employers provide the largest employment base for residents: Foster Farms Poultry, Turlock Unified School District, Emanuel Medical Center, and California State University Stanislaus, aligning with the two largest industries: Health & Educational Services and Manufacturing, Wholesale and Transportation. All four major employers have an employment base of at least 1,000 people, according to the Stanislaus County Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy 2023-2028. Additionally, Turlock is well-known for its agricultural setting, which has historically provided a basis for the city’s industry. Food processing is the primary industry, providing a large number of industrial and manufacturing jobs. Turlock also boasts an agri-business cluster, with several new emerging technical software and laboratories to bolster this cluster.
According to California Employment Development Department Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS), Turlock experienced an unemployment rate of 5.6 percent in 2024. While this rate is a 52.5 percent decrease from unemployment rates in 2011, it is a 16.7 percent increase from the 2020 unemployment rate (4.8 percent). However, this is still relatively lower than the 7.7 percent unemployment rate for Stanislaus County in 2024. The tract-level share of employed adults has been shown to be highly correlated with rates of upward economic mobility for low-income children. Adult unemployment is commonly considered to be an indicator of neighborhood disadvantage that affects not just the individuals who do not have jobs, but members of the entire community. Turlock’s non-White Hispanic and Latino identifying residents have the lowest Labor Market Index scores followed by non-Hispanic Native Americans, then non-Hispanic Black residents. This pattern extends to Stanislaus County, although the Labor Market Index scores are overall lower in the County than in Turlock (see Chart D-7). In terms of unemployment, Countywide, 70.7 percent of unemployed residents identify as White, with 53.7 percent of them identifying as Hispanic or Latino and 46.3 percent as non-Hispanic or Latino, which is proportional to the county’s demographics. In Turlock, 47.2 percent of the White non-Hispanic or Latino population is unemployed, which is comparable to Turlock as 48 percent of the population is White non-Hispanic.
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
WTAYLOR
RD
ETAYLOR RD
W MONTEVISTA AVE E MONTEVISTA AVE
WTUOLUMNE RD ETUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W E LINWOOD AVE LINWOOD AVE
SWALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
SOUTH AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
NWALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
NORTH AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
STEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Census
Tract:
36.04 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
36.06 Census
Tract:
38.04 Census
Tract:
36.05 TCAC Opportunity Areas,
Economic Score
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
MERCED C OUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-10 TCAC Opportunity Areas, Economic Score, Tu Map Date:
9/20/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-13
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
Source: CalEPA, 2022; HCD, 2023; City of Turlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
SB 535 Disadvantaged Community
< 0.2 (Less Positive Economic Outcomes)
> 0.2 – 0.4
> 0.4 – 0.6
> 0.6 – 0.8
> 0.8 (More Positive Economic Outcomes)
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-68 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
Source: HUD, AFFHT0006 Table 12, July 2020
Chart D-6: Opportunity Indices, Population Living Above the Poverty Level
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-69
Source: HUD, AFFHT0006 Table 12, July 2020
Chart D-7: Opportunity Indices, Population Living Below the Poverty Level
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-70 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
The Jobs Proximity Index, which measures the physical distance between place of residence and jobs, is similar among all the census tracts in Turlock. However, the data does show differences among race and ethnicities within each tract. Non-White Hispanic residents have the highest Jobs Proximity Index score followed by non-Hispanic Native American and -Hispanic Black residents, who comprise a significant proportion of the city’s non-White workers. This means they live close to where they work relative to the White population, as shown in Chart D-7. Turlock is 17 square miles, making access to work in various parts of it or other job centers such as Modesto possible by car. Commute patterns discussed in Chapter 2, Community Profile noted that 71.3 percent of workers in Turlock commute from outside the city, while 7,985 residents live and work in Turlock. Turlock residents can travel throughout Turlock with seven transit routes, where each route connects to the Turlock Transit Center, so residents can also reach Modesto, Ceres, and Keyes by a regional bus route that runs throughout the day.
One of the most pressing issues affecting the world today is the digital divide, a term referring to the gap between those who have access to the internet and related technology and those who do not. The gap impacts individual economic opportunities and outcomes and is most likely to affect lower-income households, people with disabilities, and woman. Map D-14 shows distribution of households with no computer or internet subscription in Turlock. Census tracts with the highest percentage of households with lack of internet access are found in south Turlock (census tract 38.02 and 38.03), as well as central Turlock (39.06). Tract 38.02 is the only tract in Turlock designated as a High Segregation and Poverty tract, while tract 39.06 has the highest concentration of female-headed households.The City is currently in the process of updating the most current economic development strategic plan and is expected to be completed in Fall 2025. The current plan provides detailed updates of demographic, retail and industrial market data to provide a firmer foundation for City economic development efforts going forward. The updated plan will expand on this data and develop a new strategy to update the City's economic development program.
In addition to the City’s efforts, there are significant, multi-year economic development programs and initiatives in Stanislaus County that are designed to influence the jobs landscape in the next ten years. The Stanislaus 2030 Investment Blueprint is a comprehensive, collaborative strategy among business, government, and civic stakeholders with the goal of creating more quality jobs and improving financial well-being. Its strategies include talent development, entrepreneurship and small business dynamism, and removal of non-skill barriers to jobs and training. Catering to the food and agricultural sectors of Stanislaus County and Turlock specifically, under Stanislaus 2030, the BioEconomy, Agriculture, & Manufacturing (BEAM Circular) is a key traded-sector initiative focused on the circular bioeconomy within food and agricultural systems. This initiative has received significant funding and is expected to create a large number of quality jobs in bioindustrial manufacturing and related fields.
There are several organizations working to improve access to economic opportunity in Turlock and the greater Modesto region. Opportunity Stanislaus assists communities with their workforce readiness process, introducing people to financial incentives and financing programs, and by helping them locate appropriate sites and buildings to meet their needs. The organization’s vision is to attract jobs that give more buying power to the workforce. Turlock works in collaboration with the Valley Sierra Small Business Development Center (SBDC), an arm of the Central California Small Business Development Center, whose mission is to help businesses start, grow, and succeed in the Modesto region. SBDC offers workshops, trainings, and classes for businesses, entrepreneurs, and individuals. It also acts as a resource center for new businesses with owners located in Stanislaus County and Tuolumne County, providing ongoing support to existing businesses. SBDC does not offer grants or loans itself but works closely with financial partners who offer a variety of loan programs, as well as other regional and community funding sources. In addition to support for small businesses, SBDC also provides workforce development services.
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-71
All together, these resources offer a variety of ways to access economic opportunity in Turlock likely influenced by variation among the area’s industries and workforce skills and experience. The tracts with lower economic opportunity are the tracts concentrated where there are also concentrations of femaleheaded households, people falling under the poverty line, and multi-family housing. These tracts are likely where low wage workers can afford to live. Access to jobs for groups facing socioeconomic challenges is high as indicated by the Jobs Proximity Index score, likely due to proximity to industries with need for lowwage workers. The Labor Market Index score is higher in Turlock than the County, influenced by Turlock being considered one of the County’s two urban centers with job centers and a university. Additionally, economic opportunity is supported by the presence of organizations discussed above working to improve workforce readiness and attract business development throughout the County.
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
W TAYLOR
RD
E TAYLOR RD
W MONTE VISTA AVE E MONTE VISTA AVE
W TUOLUMNE RD E TUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W LINWOOD AVE E LINWOOD AVE
S WALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
SOUTH AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
N WALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
NORTH AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
S TEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Census
Tract:
36.10 Census
Tract:
36.12 Census
Tract:
36.09 Census
Tract:
36.11 Census
Tract:
36.08 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
38.04 Lack of Internet Access
inTurlock
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Households with No Computer or
Internet Subscription
21% - 25%
16% - 20%
11% - 15%
6% - 10%
2% - 5%
MERCED COUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\Map D-14 Lack of Internet Access in Turlock.mxd Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-14
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; City of Turlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2023
SB 535 Disadvantaged Community
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-73
Educational Indicators
There are 25 school districts in Stanislaus County, two of which serve Turlock: the Turlock Unified School District (TUSD) or Chatom Union School District (CUSD). Most of Turlock is in the Turlock Unified School District (TUSD). TUSD provides public elementary, middle, high school, in addition to an adult school and a charter school. TUSD elementary school facilities includes Brown Elementary School, Crowell Elementary School, Cunningham Elementary School, Earl Elementary School, Julien Elementary School, Medeiros Elementary School, Osborn Two-Way Immersion Academy, Wakefield Elementary School, and Walnut Elementary Education Center. TUSD middle school facilities include Dutcher Middle School and Turlock Junior High School, while TUSD high school facilities include Pitman High School, Turlock High School, and Roselawn High School. In terms of geographic availability, schools are spread throughout the city. However, there are more TUSD facilities in central Turlock, near Downtown, due to the school district main office and E Cademy Charter At Crane School being located there. CUSD has three facilities, two of which, Crowell Elementary and Crowell pre-school on Clayton Road in the unincorporated area, serve the western parts of tracts 37.00 and 38.02 between West Main Street and Harding Road. Crowell also serves the more sparsely populated unincorporated area to the west. About 85 percent of the Crowell students are economically disadvantaged, meaning their families are below the poverty line, and 76 percent are minority.
Crowell’s math and reading scores compare poorly with the Turlock Unified School District (15 percent in math and 28 percent in reading compared with 31 and 40 percent in the TUSD).
TUSD assigns students to schools based on their geographic attendance zones, known as “home residence” schools. If families would like to attend a different school within the district, they must submit an intradistrict transfer (referred to as a “school of choice” application). However, selection is not guaranteed, as approval is required before enrollment at a non-home school. There are about seven private schools in Turlock. For new master planned area, like the Morgan Ranch Master Plan Area, a new elementary school will be developed and operated by the Turlock Unified School District, as stated in the Morgan Ranch Master Plan. Elementary school design guidelines state the school will be located central to the Morgan Ranch community and to the existing neighborhoods to the north.
Table D-6 summarizes test score results from the 2021-2022 Smarter Balanced assessments of math and English Language Arts (ELA), which forms part of the State’s California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP). The proportion of students who meet or exceed standards in ELA or math in Turlock is higher than in Stanislaus County, but lower than in the State. When comparing test results between the two high schools in Turlock, Turlock High School had 23.4 percent of its students meet or exceed the standard for overall achievement and John H. Pitman High had 29.9 percent of its students meet or exceed the standard for overall achievement. Turlock High School serves the south and southeastern part of Turlock while John H. Pitman High School serves the more western and northern part of the city.
Source: California Department of Education, CAASPP, Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments, 2021-2022 Table D-6: CAASP Scores
District/Region Percent Met or Exceeded Standard
English Language Arts Mathematics
State of California 47.1% 33.4%
Stanislaus County 37.7% 23.1%
Turlock Unified 40.4% 25.3%
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-74 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
Students of color in Turlock received lower test scores in both math and English than non-Hispanic White students. While non-Hispanic White students received scores (53.0 percent in English and 38.0 percent in math) that are greater than the State and County averages (see Table D-6), students of color received higher scores than the County averages but lower than the State (43.9 percent in English and 30.1 percent in math).
In terms of the County, students of color are doing better in Turlock but there is still an educational gap within the city between White and non-White students. Notably, Black (29.7 percent in English and 13.3 percent in math) and Hispanic (32.6 percent in English and 17.2 percent in math) students received the lowest scores while other races/ethnicities scored closer to the average in the city. Barriers to educational opportunity for students of color might relate to housing choice because census tracts with lower educational opportunity scores also have higher shares of the Hispanic and Black populations of the city.
Other barriers that are probably contributing to the gap include language, economic factors, and the lack of educational resources between White students and students of color in Turlock.
As Turlock experiences lower levels of educational opportunity compared to the State, both TUSD and CUSD are proactively taking steps to improve scholastic performance for local students and expand on campus support services through a variety of specialized efforts. CUSD provides instructional support programs that include homework support and academic intervention including math and reading and after-school childcare program that provides supervision, homework support, and recreational activities.
Further, TUSD operates a Family Resource Center that provides resources, programs, and services to diverse Turlock families, that include school readiness programs for students in need, parent workshops, food distribution drives, and mobile health clinics. Although there are some areas in the City with lower educational opportunity scores, overall Turlock scores higher than the County and its students of color fare better than students on average in the County. Programs provided by CUSD and TUSD can continue to improve the educational opportunity of students in Turlock. Huntington Learning Center of Turlock is an education partner with local schools in Turlock and neighboring communities, located in Downtown Turlock. From individualized to high-dosage tutoring, certified teachers provide support to educators and school districts to help accelerate learning for students through Huntington's accredited programs and datadriven approach to learning. Valley First Tutoring also offers tutoring services in Turlock that could help improve educational outcomes, located along North Golden State Boulevard.
The TCAC Opportunity Areas education score, which quantifies access to educational opportunity, is provided in Map D-15. Eight of Turlock’s fifteen tracts, including the area served by the Chatom District, have the second lowest range of education scores, four have outcomes ranging from .50 to .75, and three fall into the “more positive education outcome” category with outcomes above .75. The two most northern census tracts with the best education outcome scores are in the area served by Pitman High School, while none of the tracts with the best education outcome scores are in Turlock High School’s boundary. Although there may be a slight difference in the two school boundaries’ outcomes, the High Segregation and Poverty tract (tract 38.02) and the Racially Ethnically Area of Affluence tract (tract 39.05) are both located in the lower-performing Turlock High School boundary. Although there are some areas in the city with lower educational opportunity scores, overall Turlock scores higher than the County and its students of color fare better than students on average in the County.
In terms of upper education and vocational opportunities, TUSD also operates the Turlock Adult School that offers a Career Technical Education (CTE) program. The CTE program integrates core academic knowledge with technical and occupational knowledge in order to provide students a pathway to careers and/or post-secondary education in Turlock. Courses include: Associate Child Development Certification, Basic Auto Repair, Certified Nursing Assistant, Code Academy, Digital Skills Boot Camp, Forklift Safety Certification, Microsoft Office Specialist, Professional Truck Driving, QuickBooks Essentials, and Welding, Combination.
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
WTAYLOR
RD
ETAYLOR RD
W MONTEVISTA AVE E MONTEVISTA AVE
WTUOLUMNE RD ETUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W E LINWOOD AVE LINWOOD AVE
SWALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
SOUTH AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
NWALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
NORTH AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
STEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Census
Tract:
36.04 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
36.06 Census
Tract:
38.04 Census
Tract:
36.05 TCAC Opportunity Areas,
Education Score
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
MERCED C OUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-11 TCAC Opportunity Areas, Education Score, Tu Map Date:
9/20/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-15
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
Source: HCD, 2023; City of Turlock, 2021;
Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
< .25 (Less Positive Education Outcomes)
0.25 - 0.50
0.50 - 0.75
> .75 (More Positive Education Outcomes)
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-76 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
Environmental Indicators
The environmental opportunity score in the TCAC Opportunity Map is based on CalEnviroScreen 4.0 pollution indicators and values, as shown on Map D-16. CalEnviroScreen is a mapping tool that helps to identify communities disproportionately burdened by multiple pollution sources and with population characteristics making them more sensitive to pollution. The tool uses data of four major types of indicators:
exposure (e.g., air quality, lead risk, etc.), environmental effects (e.g., hazardous waste facilities, solid waste sites, etc.), socioeconomic factors (e.g., poverty, unemployment, etc.), and sensitive populations (health conditions that are sensitive to pollution, such as asthma and cardiovascular disease). This data is combined into a single score for each census tract and compared to all other tracts in the state through ranking, with a high-ranked score indicating high pollution burden and high levels of population characteristics that can increase people’s sensitivity to pollution’s effects. The tracts in the highest 25% of scores are then designated as “disadvantaged communities” (DACs). This designation is part of complying with SB 535 (De Leon, 2012), which requires funds from the State’s Cap and Trade Program to be used for programs to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, with a portion of the funds to projects that provide a benefit to disadvantaged communities (DACs) as identified by the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). Assembly Bill 1550 (Gomez, Chapter 369, Statutes of 2016) established the currently applicable minimum funding levels:
• At least 25 percent of funds must be allocated toward DACs, • At least 5 percent must be allocated toward projects within low-income communities or benefiting low-income households, and
• At least 5 percent must be allocated toward projects within and benefiting low-income communities, or low-income households, that are outside of a CalEPA-defined DAC but within ½ mile of a disadvantaged community.21
In Turlock, these DACs are in the southwestern part of the City, including Downtown and tracts south and west of Golden State Boulevard (Turlock’s DACs are Tracts 36.03, 37, 38.02, 38.03, 38.04, 38.05, 39.04, 39.08, and can be seen in Map D-1). The area’s proximity to industrial land uses and SR-99 freeway, the volume of truck traffic on local roads serving auto-service businesses, the presence of hazardous materials facilities and solid waste sites, and drinking water quality contribute to the tracts’ high scores. Leaking underground storage tanks can threaten groundwater quality, and Map D-17 shows that Turlock has a high concentration of these sites Downtown and south of Golden State Boulevard.22 The risk of childhood lead exposure from older homes with lead-based paint follows the same spatial pattern, concentrated in Downtown and south of Golden Gate Boulevard. Map D-18 shows that hazardous waste generators and facilities are more dispersed throughout the city, with the eastern part of the city as an exception. As detailed in Table C-16 in the Constraints Analysis, many hazardous sites within Sixth Cycle Housing Element Opportunity Areas are concentrated along Geer Road, a north-south arterial in the middle of the City, Golden State Boulevard, and Downtown, where these roads intersect. Solid waste sites and facilities, by contrast, are concentrated in the southwestern corner of the City in Tracts 38.02 and 37 (Map D-19). Turlock has historically relied on 21 CalEPA, California Climate Investments to Benefit Disadvantaged Communities https://calepa.ca.gov/envjustice/ghginvest/ and
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/1c21c53da8de48f1b946f3402fbae55c/page/SB-535-DisadvantagedCommunities/ 22 Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Groundwater Threats. https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicator/groundwater-threats
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-77
groundwater from the Turlock Groundwater Subbasin.23 In 2023, it began introducing surface water purchased from the Stanislaus Regional Water Authority and obtained from the Tuolumne River through a Surface Water Integration Project to provide a more resilient water supply. Arsenic and 1,2,3- trichloropropane exceeded the maximum contaminant level (MCL), the highest level of contaminant allowed in drinking water, in Turlock’s water supply in 2024.24 When these compounds are consumed in high concentrations, there is an increased risk of cancer. Nitrate levels also approached the MCL, which can pose health risks to infants and pregnant individuals. The City’s Municipal Services Department is closely monitoring contaminant levels. Being surrounded by farmland, agricultural pesticide exposure is high throughout the city, with the highest scores at the perimeter and in Downtown – Tracts 39.06 and 39.08 in the center of the city have no agricultural pesticide data available. Exposure to particulate matter (PM) is also present throughout the city, with high scores for PM 2.5 exposure in all tracts except Tracts 36.03 and
36.04, and high diesel PM exposure in tracts bordering the freeway (Tracts 38.02, 38.04, and 38.05).
Environmental opportunity considers pollution in an environment, but also amenities in an environment, such as tree canopy coverage and access to parks, community facilities, healthy foods. Tree canopy coverage throughout Turlock is lower than the State average, with slightly higher tree canopy coverage just east of Downtown.25 Parks are present throughout the city, but there is a lower concentration in Downtown and none in the southwestern corner of the city. Relatively large parks are concentrated in the northern section of Turlock. Residential areas in the southern corners and center of the City are not within 10-minute walking access to a park (see Map D-21). Map D-21 also shows cultural and recreational facilities, community centers, and public libraries, which are concentrated on both sides of Golden State Boulevard near Downtown. Data on access to healthy food retailers has limitations, as it requires a threshold of employees or sales to be classified as healthy and may undercount places such as meat and fish markets, ethnic food markets, and other places that could sell healthy foods.26 According to the Modified Retail Food Index, access to healthy food retailers is higher than the state average in Tracts 38.03, 38.04, 36.07, and
39.05, and below the state average in Tract 38.02, and no healthy retailer data in all other tracts.27 The Turlock Farmers’ Market is in Tract 39.04.
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)’s Environmental Health Index metric summarizes potential exposure to harmful toxins at a neighborhood level. In contrast with CalEnviroScreen’s scoring value pattern, the higher the index, the lower the exposure to toxins. For the population above the poverty level in the City, all races and ethnicities scored between 19 and 20 for the Environmental Health Index (see Chart D-6). Asian or Pacific Islander residents scored the highest (20.9) and Hispanic residents the lowest, although not by much (19.4). Among those under the poverty level, a similar trend was inferred, Asian or Pacific Islander residents scoring the highest (19.8) and Hispanic residents the lowest with a similarly slim delta (18.5). The City’s population both above and below the 23 City of Turlock. Surface Water Integration Project. https://ci.turlock.ca.us/srwa/ 24 City of Turlock. July 1, 2025. 2024 Water Quality Report. https://www.cityofturlock.org/_pdf/files/CCR_2024.pdf 25 Public Health Institute. California Healthy Places Index 3.0. https://map.healthyplacesindex.org/?redirect=false 26 California Department of Public Health. Healthy Communities Data and Indicators Project – Retail Food Environment.
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/OHE/CDPH%20Document%20Library/HCI/Food%20Security%20and%20N utrition/HCI_%20ModifiedFoodRetailEnvironment_Narrative_2022_2023-11-08.pdf 27 California Department of Public Health. Modified Retail Food Environment Index 2022. https://www.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/ed14abbe27e54abcae74577799b06fc7
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-78 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
poverty line scored lower than the County, indicating the City has a higher exposure to toxins than the County average.
This spatial pattern of environmental pollutant burden and lack of environmental amenities correlates with the areas of lowest resources and one area of highest segregation and poverty within Turlock. Map D-# visualizes access to environmental opportunity in Turlock based on the TCAC indicators from CalEnviroScreen 4.0. Using TCAC indicators, all Turlock census tracts west of Golden State Boulevard are ranked as having the least positive outcomes. Tracts 36.03, 37.00, 38.02, 38.03. and 38.04 have the lowest potential for positive outcomes (less than 25 percent) and 38.05, which is closer to the more affluent areas in the northern part of the city, scores slightly higher (25 to 50 percent). Tracts with the more positive environmental outcomes are located in north and east Turlock, Tracts 36.06 and 39.07, which also align with Highest Resource areas and High White Segregation areas. The City’s Pipeline Projects (see Table 3-2 in Chapter 3) are in Tracts 36.04, 36.05, 36.06, 38.02, 38.03, 38.04, and 39.04, which are predominantly in tracts scoring the lowest and higher potential for positive outcomes. Nearly all of the Pipeline Projects are for Moderate or Above Moderate Income units (370 and 906, respectively, out of 1,282 total units) and are located across all Resource levels and all levels of positive environmental outcomes. Tract 38.02, the only High Segregation and Poverty Tract in Turlock, is in the 98th overall percentile for pollution burdens and vulnerabilities relative to the rest of the State. As DACs exist within Turlock, the City of Turlock is required by SB 1000 to adopt an environmental justice element. By developing an environmental justice element, the City can decrease pollution exposure, increase community assets and improve overall health by addressing unique or compounded health risks in disadvantaged communities.28 A draft of the environmental justice element will be available in Spring of 2026. The City is already implementing and planning place-based community improvements to improve the quality of life in DACs and low-income neighborhoods – see Program 3-E in Chapter 4, Housing Action Plan. The City should investigate the potential for funding projects that could benefit lower-income residents in Tract 38.02 and other DACs. 28 Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation. June 2020. General Plan Guidelines. Ch. 4.8: Environmental Justice Element. thttps://lci.ca.gov/docs/20200706-GPG_Chapter_4_EJ.pdf
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
WTAYLOR
RD
ETAYLOR RD
W MONTEVISTA AVE E MONTEVISTA AVE
WTUOLUMNE RD ETUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W E LINWOOD AVE LINWOOD AVE
SWALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
SOUTH AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
NWALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
NORTH AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
STEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Census
Tract:
36.04 Census
Tract:
36.06 Census
Tract:
36.05 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
38.04 TCAC Opportunity Areas,
Environmental Score
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
MERCED C OUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-12 TCAC Opportunity Areas, Environmental Scor Map Date:
9/20/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-16
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
Source: HCD, 2023; City of Turlock, 2021;
Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
< .25
(Less Positive Environmental Outcomes)
.25 - .50
.50 - .75
.75 - 1
(More Positive Environmental Outcomes)
N Co ol rado Ave
West Main St
S Washington Rd
N Soderquist Rd
Geer Rd
Fosberg Rd
N Tully Rd
NBerke el y Ave
N Gol den State Blvd
E Tuolumne Rd
E Main St
Ninth St
S Lander Ave
Roberts Rd
N Quincy Rd
S Tegner Rd
N Walnut Rd
W Tuolumne Rd
Montana Ave
Andre Ln
1525W MonteVista
S Quincy Rd
E Minnesota Ave
S Golden State Blvd
Brier Rd
N Johnson Rd
W Christoffersen Pkwy
Pedras Rd
El Capitan Dr
E Hawkeye Ave
W Linwood Ave
Dels Ln
Fulkerth Rd
N Olive Ave
S Kilroy Rd
North Ave
East Ave
F St
W Taylor Rd
S Soderquist Rd
N Wash ni gton Rd
A St
Full erton Dr
Hedstrom Rd
Mountain View Rd
Georgetown Ave
S oJ hnson Rd
South Ave
W Springer Dr
E Canal Dr
Marshall St
N Denair Ave
E Glenwood Ave
N Berkeley Ave
Grant Ave
Park St
W Monte Vista Ave
Golf Rd
E Linwood Ave
W Glenwood Ave
Spengler Wy
S Walnut Rd
Countryside Dr
Harding Rd
Simmons Rd
S Tully Rd
Dianne Dr
Ruble Rd
N
TegnerRd
Fransil Ln
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
AÎ
AÎ
Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
36.04 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census
Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
36.06 Census
Tract:
38.04 Census
Tract:
36.05 Source: CalEnviroScreen 4.0, 2022; City of Turlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2023
Statewide Ranking by CensusTract
GroundwaterThreat Percentile
Top 25%
50% - 75%
GroundwaterThreats Sites
City Limit
Study Area
County Limit
Freeway
Railroad
MERCED
COUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\EJ\Threat of Groundwater Contamination.mxd Note:This map shows data from
CalEnviroScreen, which uses 2010 Census
Tract geographies; boundaries/labels shown
may not align with other maps that use
more recent geographies.
SB 535 Disadvantaged Community
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Threat of Groundwater
Contamination
Map D-17
N Co ol rado Ave
West Main St
S Washington Rd
N Soderquist Rd
Geer Rd
Fosberg Rd
N Tully Rd
NBerke el y Ave
N Gol den State Blvd
E Tuolumne Rd
E Main St
Ninth St
S Lander Ave
Roberts Rd
N Quincy Rd
S Tegner Rd
N Walnut Rd
W Tuolumne Rd
Montana Ave
Andre Ln
1525W MonteVista
S Quincy Rd
E Minnesota Ave
S Golden State Blvd
Brier Rd
N Johnson Rd
W Christoffersen Pkwy
Pedras Rd
El Capitan Dr
E Hawkeye Ave
W Linwood Ave
Dels Ln
Fulkerth Rd
N Olive Ave
S Kilroy Rd
North Ave
East Ave
F St
W Taylor Rd
S Soderquist Rd
N Wash ni gton Rd
A St
Full erton Dr
Hedstrom Rd
Mountain View Rd
Georgetown Ave
S oJ hnson Rd
South Ave
W Springer Dr
E Canal Dr
Marshall St
N Denair Ave
E Glenwood Ave
N Berkeley Ave
Grant Ave
Park St
W Monte Vista Ave
Golf Rd
E Linwood Ave
W Glenwood Ave
Spengler Wy
S Walnut Rd
Countryside Dr
Harding Rd
Simmons Rd
S Tully Rd
Dianne Dr
Ruble Rd
N
TegnerRd
Fransil Ln
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
AÎ
AÎ
Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
36.04 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census
Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
36.06 Census
Tract:
38.04 Census
Tract:
36.05 MERCED
COUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\EJ\Concentration of Hazardous Waste Generators and Facilities.mxd Source: CalEnviroScreen 4.0, 2022; City of Turlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2023
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Statewide Ranking by CensusTract
HazardousWaste Percentile
Top 25%
50% - 75%
Hazardous Waste Generator
City Limit
SB 535 Disadvantaged Community
Note:This map shows data from
CalEnviroScreen, which uses 2010 Census
Tract geographies; boundaries/labels shown
may not align with other maps that use
more recent geographies.
Study Area
County Limit
Freeway
Railroad
Concentration of
Hazardous Waste
Facilities
Map D-18
N Co ol rado Ave
West Main St
S Washington Rd
N Soderquist Rd
Geer Rd
Fosberg Rd
N Tully Rd
NBerke el y Ave
N Gol den State Blvd
E Tuolumne Rd
E Main St
Ninth St
S Lander Ave
Roberts Rd
N Quincy Rd
S Tegner Rd
N Walnut Rd
W Tuolumne Rd
Montana Ave
Andre Ln
1525W MonteVista
S Quincy Rd
E Minnesota Ave
S Golden State Blvd
Brier Rd
N Johnson Rd
W Christoffersen Pkwy
Pedras Rd
El Capitan Dr
E Hawkeye Ave
W Linwood Ave
Dels Ln
Fulkerth Rd
N Olive Ave
S Kilroy Rd
North Ave
East Ave
F St
W Taylor Rd
S Soderquist Rd
N Wash ni gton Rd
A St
Full erton Dr
Hedstrom Rd
Mountain View Rd
Georgetown Ave
S oJ hnson Rd
South Ave
W Springer Dr
E Canal Dr
Marshall St
N Denair Ave
E Glenwood Ave
N Berkeley Ave
Grant Ave
Park St
W Monte Vista Ave
Golf Rd
E Linwood Ave
W Glenwood Ave
Spengler Wy
S Walnut Rd
Countryside Dr
Harding Rd
Simmons Rd
S Tully Rd
Dianne Dr
Ruble Rd
N
TegnerRd
Fransil Ln
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
AÎ
AÎ
Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
36.04 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census
Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
36.06 Census
Tract:
38.04 Census
Tract:
36.05 Source: CalEnviroScreen 4.0, 2022; City of Turlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2023
Statewide Ranking by CensusTract
SolidWaste Percentile
Top 25%
50% - 75%
SolidWaste Site
City Limit
Study Area
County Limit
Freeway
Railroad
MERCED
COUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\EJ\Concentration of Solid Waste Sites and Facilities.mxd Note:This map shows data from
CalEnviroScreen, which uses 2010 Census
Tract geographies; boundaries/labels shown
may not align with other maps that use
more recent geographies.
SB 535 Disadvantaged Community
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Concentration of Solid
Waste Facilities
Map D-19
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ")L
") ^_
")
^_
")
N Co ol rado Ave
West Main St
S Washington Rd
N Soderquist Rd
Geer Rd
Fosberg Rd
N Tully Rd
NBerke el y Ave
N Gol den State Blvd
E Monte Vista Ave
E Tuolumne Rd
E Main St
Ninth St
S Lander Ave
Roberts Rd
N Quincy Rd
S Tegner Rd
N Walnut Rd
W Tuolumne Rd
Montana Ave
Andre Ln
1525W MonteVista
S Quincy Rd
E Minnesota Ave
S Golden State Blvd
Brier Rd
N Johnson Rd
W Christoffersen Pkwy
Pedras Rd
El Capitan Dr
E Hawkeye Ave
W Linwood Ave
Dels Ln
Fulkerth Rd
N Olive Ave
S Kilroy Rd
North Ave
E Taylor Rd
East Ave
F St
W Taylor Rd
S Soderquist Rd
N Wash ni gton Rd
A St
Full erton Dr
Hedstrom Rd
Mountain View Rd
Georgetown Ave
S oJ hnson Rd
South Ave
W Springer Dr
E Canal Dr
Marshall St
N Denair Ave
E Glenwood Ave
N Berkeley Ave
Grant Ave
Park St
W Monte Vista Ave
Lester Rd
Golf Rd
E Linwood Ave
W Glenwood Ave
Spengler Wy
S Walnut Rd
Countryside Dr
Harding Rd
Simmons Rd
E Zeering Rd
S Tully Rd
Dianne Dr
Ruble Rd
N
Tegner Rd
Fransil Ln
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
AÎ
Bristol
Park
Swanson
Centennial
Park
Regional
Sports Complex
Brad
Bates
Park
Curt
Andre
Park
BMX Bike
Park/Walnut
Basin
Traditions
Park
Ferreira
Ranch Park
Christoffersen
Park/Basin Dale
Pinkney
Park
North
Basin Park
Markley
Park
Four
Seasons
Park
Rotary
International
Park
Pedretti
Park
Stanislaus
County
Fairgrounds
Summerfaire
Park
Crane Park
Montana
Park
Tot Lot
Quaile
Rand Norton
Dog Park
Central
Park GAR Park
Broadway
Park
Denair
Park
Soderquist
Ballpark
Columbia
Park
Carnegie
Arts
Center
Rube
Boesch
Center
Turlock
Senior
Center
Donnelly
Park
Source: City of Turlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2023.
MERCED
COUNTY
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Existing Recreational Facilities
^_ Cultural/Recreational Facilities
") Community Centers
")L Public Library
Existing Parks
Pocket Park
Neighborhood Park
Community Park
Linear Park
Sports Complex
Stanislaus County Fairgrounds
Neighborhood School Park
Existing Detention Basin
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! 5 minute Walking Access
to a Park
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! 10 minute Walking Access
to a Park
Half Mile Service Radius
for School Parks
Existing Residential Land Uses
City Limit
Study Area
County
Freeway
Major Road
Road
Railroad
Existing and Proposed
Parks, Trails and
Community Facilities
Map D-20
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-84 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
Transportation
Turlock is the northern terminus of Route 165 that connects the City to State Route 152 and Interstate 5 to the south. Travelling by bicycle and foot can be easy due to flat topography but the heat during the summer can limit this mode. In Stanislaus County, many people drive rather than use public transportation, but there are many alternative options available to those who chose not to drive or are not able to drive, such as seniors or those with mobility disabilities throughout the County. Existing bus systems include the Stanislaus Regional Transit Authority, branded as the S, formed in 2021 from the merger of the Modesto Area Express (MAX) and Stanislaus Regional Transit (StanRT) systems serves the County with 27 bus routes travelling throughout it; the Ceres Area Transit (CAT) which serves Ceres and its surrounding unincorporated area; and Turlock Transit which provides transit serve with seven routes within the community. Services include fixed route and dial-a-ride paratransit service to eligible individuals in Turlock. The program offers rides within a specified zone for those 65 years of age and over, Medicare card holders, elementary school students, and ADA paratransit eligible people.
Turlock is connected to StanRT through fixed-route bus service, most prominently Route 15, which links Turlock to Modesto via Keyes and Ceres, providing access to the broader countywide network. Within Turlock, Turlock Transit operates local fixed routes that serve neighborhoods, shopping areas, and CSU Stanislaus, with transfer points at the Turlock Transit Center. From there, riders can connect to StanRTA regional routes, as well as services from Merced’s The Bus and other intercity providers, creating links throughout Stanislaus and neighboring counties. Other modes of public transit available to Turlock residents include regional rail service with connections to other public transit. Amtrak’s San Joaquins regional line serves Turlock and Denair with six daily trains between Bakersfield to the south and Oakland and Sacramento to the north. The Turlock-Denair station is located on North Santa Fe Avenue close to the northeast corner of the city. The Altamont Commuter Express (ACE) currently provides service to Stanislaus County between Stockton and San Jose with stops in several Bay Area employment centers. At present, ACE doesn’t provide direct service to Turlock but a new station on Golden State Boulevard has been funded by the State and is expected to open by 2029.30 The project is being funded with a $40 million grant that ACE Other services include Modesto Area Express (MAX), StaRT Commuter, and California Vanpool Authority (CalVans) all operate programs connecting Stanislaus County residents to transit but do not currently serve Turlock directly.
Turlock has taken proactive steps to improve access to walking and biking through its Active Transportation Plan, developed in partnership with StanCOG to enhance safety, boost non-motorized mobility, and support public health and equity. Local advocacy, including CSU Stanislaus students, helped secure over one million in federal Active Transportation Program grant funding for infrastructure improvements such as bike lanes, sidewalks, and crosswalk enhancements near schools and along key corridors. Community input, including from CSU Stanislaus students and local residents, was central to shaping these projects to make walking and biking safer and more accessible across the city. Transportation options, particularly those offered by Turlock Transit, are accessible and located throughout the city, as there are seven routes that traverse the city. Residents that live west of N Berkeley Avenue are limited in route options as the routes mostly are within the city center and south of Turlock. For the existing and proposed bicycle network improvements from the Active Transportation Plan, projects have been located 30 Turlock Journal, December 7, 2021 https://www.turlockjournal.com/news/government/ace-train-could-berunning-turlock-2025/; Railway Track and Structures (RT&S), December 29, 2023 https://www.rtands.com/passenger/stanislaus-county-receives-13-million-for-ace-expansion/
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-85
evenly throughout residential areas of the city, as shown on Map D-21. DACs are generally well served, although new infrastructure is also planned. The greatest lack of bicycle infrastructure is actually in RCAAs in the eastern portion of the city. Completed segments include Geer Road where multi-family development is projected to accommodate lower income RHNA, as well as Christoffersen Parkway, which provides access from Downtown to CSU Stanislaus.
MERCED COUNTY
STANISLAUS
COUNTY
AÎ
AÎ
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Source: City of Turlock Active Transportation Plan, 2015. Figure 6-3:
Long Term Bicycle Network Vision; Dyett & Bhatia, 2025
Class I Shared-use Path (exisitng)
Class I Shared-use Path (proposed)
Class II Bike Lane (exisitng)
Class II Bike Lane (proposed)
Class III Bike Route (exisitng)
Class III Bike Route (proposed)
Intersection Improvements
Parks
Schools
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County
County
Railroad
Existing and Proposed
Bicycle Network from
Turlock's Active
Transportation Plan
Map D-21
Completed
Scheduled for 2026
Completed
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-87
In the area south of South Golden State Boulevard, particularly near Golf Road, Paulson Road, and South First Street, the county is actively investing in improvements. This includes adding new traffic signals, upgrading intersections with widened lanes, and installing medians to improve safety and traffic flow. The transit hub project at Del’s Lane and Golden State Boulevard also includes a traffic signal, lighting, and a bike rack, reflecting efforts to better support pedestrians, cyclists, and transit riders. Closer to Colombia Park, much of the southern part of Turlock generally has had older pavement. Projects like the Golden State Boulevard rehabilitation (Main Street to 20th Century Boulevard) have been completed, including new sidewalks, curbs, gutters, and striping, so conditions are improving across that corridor. On the other hand, north of West Christoffersen Parkway, particularly around the CSU Stanislaus area, has benefitted from proactive enhancements. The city’s Active Transportation Plan calls for buffered bike lanes along Christoffersen Parkway, green pavement at key intersections, and better connectivity toward Tegner Road to facilitate safe cycling.
HUD’s Location Affordability Index uses data from the American Community Survey to evaluate transportation cost relative to housing costs. Index values range from zero to 100 and are reported by race.
In the County, the low transportation cost index is higher across all races/ethnicities in Turlock than in the County for those below and above poverty. This indicates transit allows low-income single parent households to afford transportation. Transit index scores across all races/ethnicities were higher in the County than Turlock likely because across the County (and heavily influenced by Modesto), there are more people with lower incomes taking transit than in Turlock. Overall, transit is affordable and used by people who need it in Turlock.
Another tool for comparing transit access is the Center for Neighborhood Technology’s Housing and Transportation Affordability Index, which provides a basis for measuring housing affordability by factoring in the cost of transportation. Turlock, Modesto, and Stanislaus County all rank about the same with housing accounting for 29 percent of expenses in both Turlock and the County and 28 percent in Modesto. Turlock and Stanislaus County score 4.3 for Job Access compared with 5.2 for Modesto, as shown on Map D-22.
Within the city of Turlock, areas with the highest combined cost of housing and transportation are located farthest from the center of the city suggesting that neighborhoods closer to the Downtown are more location efficient and affordable. Most of the tracts between West Christoffersen Parkway and Linwood Avenue and east of Highway 99, including the CSUS campus and the five census tracts where 20 to 40 percent of the population live below the poverty line (displayed on Map D-8 above) and have combined costs that comprise less than 50 percent of household expenses.
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
WTAYLOR
RD
ETAYLOR RD
W MONTEVISTA AVE E MONTEVISTA AVE
WTUOLUMNE RD ETUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W E LINWOOD AVE LINWOOD AVE
SWALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
SOUTH AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
NWALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
NORTH AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
STEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
TurlockTransit
Performance Score
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Overall transit score that looks
at connectivity, access to jobs,
< 1
1 - 2
2 - 4
4 - 5
5 - 6
6 - 7
7 - 9
9 No
MERCED C OUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-13 Turlock Transit Performance Score.mxd Map Date:
9/13/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-22
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
Source: Center for Neighborhood Technology, 2023
City ofTurlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-89
D.5 Disproportionate Housing Needs & Displacement
Risk
Disproportionate housing need refers to a condition in which there are significant disparities in the proportion of members of a protected class experiencing a category of housing need when compared to the proportion of members of any other relevant groups, or the total population experiencing that category of housing need in the applicable geographic area. This analysis evaluates disproportionate housing need in Turlock by assessing cost burden, overcrowding, and displacement risk within Turlock and compared to Stanislaus County and the Modesto region when applicable.
COST BURDEN
Cost burden, or overpayment, is defined as monthly shelter costs exceeding 30 percent of household income. Severe cost burden is defined as paying over 50 percent of household income for shelter costs.
Shelter cost is defined as the monthly owner costs (mortgages, deed of trust, contracts to purchase or similar debts on the property and taxes, insurance on the property, and utilities) or the gross rent (contract rent plus the estimated monthly cost of utilities). The Stanislaus Urban County & City of Turlock Consortium Consolidated Plan (FY 2020-2025) provides the most recent estimates of cost burden by tenure and income category. 31 Estimates use the HUD Area Median Family Income (HAMFI) to determine overpayment.
HAMFI is the median family income calculated by HUD for each jurisdiction to determine Fair Market Rents (FMRs) and income limits for HUD programs. HAMFI is not necessarily equivalent to other median income calculations due to a series of adjustments made by HUD.
The Consolidated Plan uses data from the 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), which estimates that 5,295 households in Turlock (21.0 percent) were cost burdened and an additional 4,465 households experienced severe cost burden (17.7 percent). This means that just under half of all Turlock households experience some level of cost burden. Of the 9,760 households experiencing some level of cost burden, 1,800 of them are considered moderate- or above-moderate-income and 7,960 are considered lower-income. Even though some higher-income households may be classified as “cost burdened,” it is clear that housing affordability is particularly pressing for lower-income households in Turlock. CHAS data from 2019 indicated that among severely cost-burdened households, the three most common household types in Turlock were small family (two- to four- person households) elderly nonfamily (unrelated individuals over the age of 62) , and other (could include unrelated individuals living together, or people living alone, who are under the age of 62). According to the Turlock/Stanislaus HOMEARP Allocation plan, housing costs have been increasing for years, but recent events, including the COVID19 pandemic and the end of the eviction moratorium, have exacerbated housing cost burden and housing instability for many lower-income households in Turlock.32 Available data show that cost burden for renters and owners in Turlock is more evenly distributed by race and ethnicity than by location. (See Maps D-23 and D-24 and Charts D-8 and D-9) Not surprisingly, there is a relatively high correlation between cost burden and income. Renters in Turlock are more likely to be 31 Stanislaus Urban County & City of Turlock Consolidated Plan Fiscal Year 2020-2025 https://www.stancounty.com/planning/cdbg/documents/consolidated/2020-2025-consolidated-plan-final.pdf 32 Turlock/Stanislaus County HOME Consortium, 2023. HOME-ARP Allocation Plan. Available:
ttps://ci.turlock.ca.us/_pdf/hppr.asp?id=36
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-90 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
cost burdened than owners--50.3 percent of all renters experience some level of cost burden while only 28.8 percent of owners do, due to the sharp increases in rent the past couple of years. Elsewhere in the County, the AFFH data viewer shows Modesto also has concentrations of cost burdened renters and homeowners and more renters are cost burdened than homeowners throughout the County, and especially in Modesto.
Notably between 60 and 80 percent of homeowners in the tract immediately west of Turlock are cost burdened.
White and Hispanic/Latino homeowners have similar rates of cost burden, Black homeowners have a higher level, and Asian households are less burdened. (The data for cost-burdened Asian Pacific Islander (API) households, who represent a very small percentage of the population, is statistically insignificant.) The census tract with the highest rate of burdened homeowners (Tract 38.02) is one of two tracts in Turlock where 30 to 40 percent of the population had reported incomes below the poverty line in 2019. Tract 38.02 is also the only one in Turlock that meets the threshold for High Segregation and Poverty and the highest level of overcrowding in the community. (See Maps D-11 and D-25) Despite rising housing costs, much of Stanislaus County remains relatively affordable and may be less prone to the cost burden pressures faced in the Bay Area region. Although housing costs are low relative to the Bay Area, the region has still seen an increase in the cost of housing. Home values in Turlock have increased by 124 percent since 2011, with the value of smaller units (1 and 2-bedrooms) seeing the steepest increase.
From 2014 to 2024, 1-bedroom homes increased in value by 215.8 percent during the period, from $89,689 to $283,246, while 2-bedroom homes increased in value by 159.51 percent during the period, from $137,119 to $355,830. This indicates a mismatch of supply and demand. At $428,929, the average home value in Turlock was well beyond reach for Moderate- and Lower-Income Households in 2021. Also, rents in Turlock and the county were generally stable between the 2012 and 2017 period, increasing by about 4 percent and 4.8 percent. However, between 2017 and 2022 rents spiked in Turlock—increasing by about
40.2 percent—while the county experienced a slightly lower rent increase at approximately 38 percent. This substantial rent increase over between 2017 and 2022 echoes cost of living increases that have occurred across California. While rents have risen in the past couple of years, rents have generally stayed the same throughout neighborhoods in Turlock.
In terms of foreclosures, City staff consulted a local broker to get a sense of pattern between neighborhoods.
In the past 12 months, there were a total of 20 properties in Turlock that had a Notice of Default or Notice of Trustee Sale recorded, where 15 were in the zip code 95380 and 5 were in the zip code 95382. When calculating cases per acres, the 95380 zip code has about 0.22 case per 100 acres, while the 95382 zip code has 0.122 case per 100 acres.
OVERCROWDING
The U.S. Census deems housing overcrowded when there are more than 1.01 persons per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens) in an occupied housing unit and severely overcrowded when there are more than
1.5 persons per room. The Census reported that 1,317 out of 25,444 occupied housing units in Turlock were either overcrowded or severely overcrowded (5.2 percent), which is lower than the rate in Stanislaus County (7.1 percent) and slightly less than Modesto where 5.9 percent of all households were overcrowded.
In both Turlock and the County, renters are more likely to live in crowded housing. In Turlock, 0.6 percent of owners live in severely overcrowded housing and 2.7 percent of owners live in crowded housing, while
2.4 percent of renters live in severely crowded housing and 5.8 percent of renters live in overcrowded housing. In the County, 1.1 percent of owners live in severely overcrowded housing and 3.4 percent of owners live in overcrowded housing, while 2.3 percent of renters live in severely overcrowded housing and
7.9 percent of renters live in overcrowded housing.
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-91
Overall, the rate of overcrowding in Turlock is lower than Stanislaus County and the state. In Turlock as shown in Map D-25, there is one tract that experiences higher rates of overcrowding, Tract 38.02, which coincides with the City’s only High Segregation and Poverty tract, where 214 households or 10.4 percent of households are overcrowded. The rest of the city experiences less than 10 percent of overcrowding.
Although they represent a very small share of the total population, Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders are nearly three times more likely to experience overcrowding than other races and ethnicities in Turlock. Overcrowding can result when there are not enough adequately sized units within a community, or when high housing costs relative to income force too many individuals or families to share housing.
Overcrowding particularly affects lower-income households and can typically occur when there is an inadequate supply of affordable housing.
Source: HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Resources (2019 ACS 5-year estimates) Source: HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Resources (2019 ACS 5-year estimates) Chart D-8: Cost Burden for Renter Occupied Housing by Race/Ethnicity in Turlock Chart D-9: Cost Burden for Owner Occupied Housing by Race/Ethnicity in Turlock 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Other Race (NH)
Black or African American (NH)
Asian(NH)
American Indian or Alaska Native (NH)
API (NH)
Hispanic or Latino
White (NH)
Cost Burden for Owner Occupied Housing
not computed greater than 50% greater than 30% but less than or equal to 50% less than or equal to 30% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Other Race (NH)
Black or African American (NH)
Asian(NH)
American Indian or Alaska Native (NH)
API (NH)
Hispanic or Latino
White (NH)
Cost Burden for Renter Occupied Housing
not computed greater than 50% greater than 30% but less than or equal to 50% less than or equal to 30%
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
WTAYLOR
RD
ETAYLOR RD
W MONTEVISTA AVE E MONTEVISTA AVE
WTUOLUMNE RD ETUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W E LINWOOD AVE LINWOOD AVE
SWALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
SOUTH AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
NWALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
NORTH AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
STEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Census
Tract:
36.10 Census
Tract:
36.12 Census
Tract:
36.09 Census
Tract:
36.11 Census
Tract:
36.08 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
38.04 Renter Cost Burden (2019)
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
< 20%
20% - 40%
40% - 60%
60% - 80%
MERCED C OUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-14 Renter Cost Burden, 2019.mxd Map Date:
9/20/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-23
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
Source: HCD, 2022;
City ofTurlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
WTAYLOR
RD
ETAYLOR RD
W MONTEVISTA AVE E MONTEVISTA AVE
WTUOLUMNE RD ETUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W E LINWOOD AVE LINWOOD AVE
SWALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
SOUTH AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
NWALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
NORTH AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
STEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Census
Tract:
36.12 Census
Tract:
36.10 Census
Tract:
36.09 Census
Tract:
36.11 Census
Tract:
36.08 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
38.04 Homeowner Cost Burden
(2019)
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
< 20%
20% - 40%
40% - 60%
60% - 80%
MERCED C OUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-15 Homeowner Cost Burden, 2019.mxd Map Date:
9/20/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-24
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
Source: HCD, 2022;
City ofTurlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-94 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
DISPLACEMENT RISK
Lower-income people of color displaced from other sectors of the Bay Area, like San Francisco and Oakland, are increasingly moving to the Central Valley. Despite rising housing costs, much of Stanislaus County remains relatively affordable and may be less prone to the displacement pressures faced in the Bay Area region. Although housing costs are low relative to the Bay Area, the region has still seen an increase in the cost of housing. Home values in Turlock have increased by 124 percent since 2011, with the value of smaller units (1 and 2-bedrooms) seeing the steepest increase. From 2014 to 2024, 1-bedroom homes increased in value by 215.8 percent during the period, from $89,689 to $283,246, while 2-bedroom homes increased in value by 159.51 percent during the period, from $137,119 to $355,830. This indicates a mismatch of supply and demand. At $428,929, the average home value in Turlock was well beyond reach for Moderate- and Lower-Income Households in 2021. As housing costs increase, this gap may expand and subject lowerincome households to displacement pressures that have otherwise been absent or relatively low in the city.
Communities of color may be particularly impacted by this dynamic because they are disproportionately low-income. Beyond the broader housing and economic factors in Turlock and the surrounding Stanislaus County like the housing affordability crisis, cost burden, and regional growth, there are no local events that have specifically led to displacement.
Further, the condition of the housing stock, including the age of buildings and units that may be in substandard condition, is also an important consideration in a community’s housing needs. In Turlock, about 16 percent of the housing stock was constructed prior to 1960 and is over 65 years old. Just under 50 percent of the housing stock was constructed prior to 1980 and is over 40 years old. About 24 percent of the housing stock has been constructed since 2000, with only 4.4 percent constructed since 2010. Also, Maps B-1 and B-2 in Appendix B: Housing Needs Assessment display substandard housing conditions for owner and renter occupied households by tract. Owner-occupied households with most substandard housing issues are concentrated in Tract 39.04, which encompasses Downtown, historically the oldest neighborhood in Turlock, and some parts of Stanislaus County, while renter-occupied households with highest percent of substandard housing conditions are located in northern Turlock in Tract 36.10 west of Geer Road and south of Downtown east of Golden State Boulevard, and within the area home to California State University, Stanislaus. Renter occupied households that also face higher percentages of substandard housing include Tract 39.06 and Tract 38.03, which feature County islands, areas of unincorporated county land that are surrounded by incorporated Turlock on all sites. Overall, substandard conditions in Turlock are not overly concentrated in any single area or particularly high as a percentage of existing housing even in the tracts with the highest share.
Displacement due to environmental hazards is virtually nonexistent in the City. As discussed in Appendix C’s Constraints Analysis, the City is not located near active faults, and its flat terrain precludes the danger of landslides. Turlock’s topography and nature of urban and agricultural development make wildfire risk low. Turlock Fire Department’s Fire Prevention Bureau provides fire safety inspections, information on planned escape from a building, and safe barbecue practices but does not focus on wildfire.33 Stanislaus County’s Safety Element mentions defensible space in development standards, but information on defensible space inspections is lacking.34 The Turlock Irrigation District does create Wildfire Mitigation Plans, but acknowledges that much of its service area is not a high fire threat area, and where it has 33 Turlock Fire Department. https://www.cityofturlock.org/firedepartment/safetyfirepreparedness/ 34 Stanislaus County. 2016. Safety Element. https://www.stancounty.com/planning/pl/gp/current/gp-chapter5.pdf
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-95
previously activated fire response is outside of Turlock’s Sphere of Influence (SOI).35 Additionally, the SOI is not located in or near Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood maps for 100- or 500-year floods.36 However, localized flooding that spills over into curbs and sidewalks can occur during storms throughout the City due to the flat terrain and imperviousness in urban areas.37 The storm drain system can handle flooding, but the City also provides sandbag pickup.38,39 The Turlock Annex of the Stanislaus County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan highlights dam incidents as a priority hazard due to their catastrophic magnitude, although they are deemed unlikely.40 More information on dam incidents and environmental hazards can be found in Appendix C.
The University of California Urban Displacement Project (UDP) has used housing and demographic data from the US Census and real estate market data from Zillow to classify census tracts according to “displacement” typologies. The California Estimated Displacement Model (EDR) identifies varying levels of displacement risk for low-income renter households in all census tracts in California. Displacement risk means that in 2019 a census tract had characteristics which, according to the model, are strongly correlated with more low-income renter population loss than gain. In other words, the model estimates that more lowincome households left these neighborhoods than moved in. Because the model uses 2015-2019 data, the correlations between tract characteristics and low-income renter population loss are only based on this period. Tracts are assigned to one of the following categories:
• Low Data Quality: the tract has less than 500 total households or the census margins of error were greater than 15% of the estimate (shaded gray).
• Lower Displacement Risk: the model estimates that the loss of low-income households is less than the gain in low-income households. However, some of these areas may have small pockets of displacement within their boundaries.
• At Risk of Displacement: the model estimates there is potential displacement or risk of displacement of the given population in these tracts.
• Elevated Displacement: the model estimates there is a small amount of displacement (e.g., 10%) of the given population.
• High Displacement: the model estimates there is a relatively high amount of displacement (e.g., 20%) of the given population.
• Extreme Displacement: the model estimates there is an extreme level of displacement (e.g., greater than 20%) of the given population.
35 Turlock Irrigation District. 2023 Wildfire Mitigation Plan. https://www.tid.org/wpcontent/uploads/2023/12/Turlock-Irrigation-District-2023-Wildfire-Mitigation-Plan.pdf 36 California Department of Water Resources. Best Available Map. https://gis.bam.water.ca.gov/bam/ 37 Alyssa Aredas. January 5th, 2017. “Turlock braces for flooding as weekend storm approaches.” Turlock Journal. https://www.turlockjournal.com/news/local/turlock-braces-for-flooding-as-weekend-storm-approaches/ 38 City of Turlock. October 2013. Storm Water Master Plan. https://www.cityofturlock.org/_pdf/files/StormWater_MasterPlan.pdf 39 City of Turlock. Flooding. https://www.cityofturlock.org/neighborhoodissues/waterissues/flooding.asp 40 2022-2027 Stanislaus County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Annex H: City of Turlock. https://oes.stancounty.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/262/638809159028500000
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
WTAYLOR
RD
ETAYLOR RD
W MONTEVISTA AVE E MONTEVISTA AVE
WTUOLUMNE RD ETUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W E LINWOOD AVE LINWOOD AVE
SWALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
SOUTH AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
NWALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
NORTH AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
STEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Census
Tract:
36.09 Census
Tract:
36.11 Census
Tract:
36.08 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
36.12 Census
Tract:
38.04 Census
Tract:
36.10 Overcrowded Households
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Less than 5%
5% - 10%
10% - 15%
MERCED C OUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-16 Overcrowded Households, Turlock.mxd Map Date:
9/20/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-25
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
Source: HCD, 2020;
City ofTurlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
W CHRISTOFFERSEN PKWY
WTAYLOR
RD
ETAYLOR RD
W MONTEVISTA AVE E MONTEVISTA AVE
WTUOLUMNE RD ETUOLUMNE RD
FULKERTH RD
WEST MAIN ST EAST AVE
W E LINWOOD AVE LINWOOD AVE
SWALNUT RD
S LANDER AVE
SOUTH AVE
W CANAL DR
E CANAL DR
NWALNUT RD
GEER RD
N OLIVE AVE
N BERKELEY AVE
E OLIVE ST
MARSHALL ST
D ST
FIFTH ST
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S GOLDEN STATE BLVD
S QUINCY RD
S JOHNSON RD
N DAUBENBERGER RD
N ROSE ST
DELS LN
CROWELL RD
N COLORADO AVE
E MINNESOTA AVE
NORTH AVE
N SODERQUIST RD
S KILROY RD
STEGNER RD
FRANSIL LN
DIANNE DR
GOLF RD
HARDING RD
BRIER RD
Census
Tract:
36.06 Census
Tract:
36.05 Census
Tract:
36.04 Census
Tract:
37 Census
Tract:
38.02 Census
Tract:
36.03 Census
Tract:
39.08 Census
Tract:
38.03 Census
Tract:
39.04 Census Tract:
39.09 Census
Tract:
39.05 Census
Tract:
39.06 Census
Tract:
39.07 Census
Tract:
38.05 Census
Tract:
38.04 Gentrification and
DisplacementTypologies
0 ¼ ½ 1
Miles
Lower Displacement Risk
At Risk of Displacement
MERCED C OUNTY
J:\GISData\580_Turlock\GIS\Projects\HousingElement\AFFH\D-17 Gentrification and Displacement Typologies, T Map Date:
9/20/2024
Study Area Boundary
City Limit & County Island
County
Railroad
AÎ
AÎ Map D-26
STANI S LAUS
COUNTY
Source: California Urban Displacement Project, 2022;
City ofTurlock, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2024
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing
D-98 Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026
Based on the data, all of Turlock is considered to have some potential for displacement but three tracts in the central part of the city (Tracts 38.02, 39.06, and 39.08 are classified as “at risk” for displacement. All three tracts were among the five that had the highest percentage of residents with income below the poverty line in Turlock. One tract, Tract 38.02, identified as at risk of displacement is also identified as High Segregation and Poverty, while another tract, Tract 39.06, was identified as most percentage of overcrowded households, and most low to moderate income population. A similar pattern emerged in Modesto where three tracts in the center and southern portion of Turlock were identified as “Probable Displacement” by UDP, 2022 (see Map D-26). Much of the protection for displacement in Turlock comes from state law. All multifamily units in Turlock are protected by the State’s Tenant Protections Act of 2019 (AB 1482), which includes an annual rent cap and just-cause protections. The City does not have any additional local rent stabilization or just-cause eviction policies in place. Turlock has granted up to $1,000 to households impacted by temporary or permanent relocation from public funds, as noted in the City of Turlock Housing Element 2015-2023. Funding beyond $1,000 is disbursed as a low-interest loan. Specifically, this was applied to an instance when four families who were living in a four-plex on Lambert Way were affected by renovation work on the property. The amount of the grant is tied to the HUD requirements in the Uniform Relocation Act.
HOMELESSNESS
Preliminary numbers from the 2025 homeless count tallied 2,086 persons countywide including 241 in Turlock and 1,603 in Modesto.
It is important to
note volunteers for PIT count were more engaged than other years, which may have 41 The number of people experiencing homelessness in Turlock has increased slightly from 9.8 percent in 2024 to 11.55 percent in 2025; however, the share of people experiencing homelessness in Turlock has stayed relatively the same the past four years, though overall Stanislaus County PIT Count has increased. The Turlock homeless PIT count in 2025 tallied 241 individuals (11.55 percent), which was almost the same as the share counted in 203 (233 individuals, 11.14 percent).42 led to higher counts.
The results from the counts have ranged from a low of 1,857 in 2022 to a high of 2,957. Even though there has been some success in providing housing, according to the Stanislaus Community System of Care, which conducts the annual counts, the variation could also be affected by factors such as the number of volunteers participating and how well the count is organized. It should also be noted that the count includes those staying in emergency shelters, government-paid motel rooms, and transitional housing as well as those sleeping in cars, recreational vehicles, and tent encampments but does not account for people who are temporarily staying with friends or family or who are paying for their own motel rooms.
People of color are disproportionately represented among those who were counted. In 2023, Black and American Indian or Alaska Native account for 10.8 percent and 6.1 percent of homeless Stanislaus residents respectively but represent only 2.7 and 4.0 percent of the overall population. Most of the homeless population in Turlock and in the Stanislaus County Planning Area continues to be comprised of White and Hispanic persons—71 percent White and 37 percent Hispanic in the county in 2023.
State law (SB 2 (Cedillo)) requires all jurisdictions to have at least one zone (where residential uses are allowed) in which at least one year-round emergency shelter is permitted by right. Zoning codes must also allow low-barrier navigation centers (LBNCs). To meet the requirements of this legislation, Chapter 4 Housing Action Plan includes programs that will bring the City into compliance with SB 2 by amending its 41 Executive Summary, 2025 Stanislaus County Homeless Point-in-Time Count, /https://csocstan.com/wpcontent/uploads/2025/06/2025-Final-PIT-Report-English-.pdf 42 Executive Summary, 2023 Stanislaus County Homeless Point-in-Time Count, https://www.stancounty.com/newsfeed/pdf/executive-summary-english.pdf
City of Turlock – Housing Element Update 2023-31
Hearing Draft | August 6, 2026 D-99
zoning ordinance to allow LBNCs as a by-right use in all zones where mixed-use development is permitted and in all nonresidential zones where multifamily uses are permitted (Program 2-I). The Housing Action Plan will also amend the zoning ordinance to define single-room occupancy (SRO) units as a residential use and allow SRO development in new and renovated mixed-use buildings.
There are currently two homeless or transitional shelters in Turlock including Turlock Gospel Mission, who operate an 80-bed shelter in Turlock, and We Care Program, a 49-bed shelter that serves chronically homeless men over the age of 18. The City maintains a web page called Homelessness in Turlock that includes links to videos of meetings the City held to receive feedback on homelessness, a resource guide, and a list of service providers in the Turlock area including addresses, hours of operation and links to provider websites.44
Several programs serving people experiencing homelessness were supported in recent years through the City's Public Services grants utilizing Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding, including:
• The United Samaritans Foundation's Emergency Food Box assisted 331 low-to moderate-income individuals and homeless families by providing monthly food support, and its Senior Congregate Lunch Program served 33 elderly residents with nutritious meals and social engagement opportunities.
• Healthy Alternatives to Violent Environment (HAVEN) aided 11 domestic violence survivors with housing-related support.
• Project Sentinel provided housing counseling and tenant-landlord dispute resolution services to 13 low-income individuals.
United Samaritans Foundation is located on 220 South Broadway, about 0.2 miles away from the Turlock Hospel Misson Shelter and 0.1 miles away from We Care Turlock. People residing in either of the homeless or transitional shelters in Turlock would be able to access the emergency food box and monthly food support via walk if necessary. HAVEN Turlock Office is located slightly north of Downtown Turlock, where people experiencing homeless may access via walk or transit, while Project Sentinel is located in Modesto, accessible via transit from Downtown.
Turlock Gospel Mission Shelter and We Care Turlock are within Downtown Turlock that has access to other amenities and services that serve people experiencing homelessness, such as health care, transportation, retail, employment, and social services that people experiencing homeless can walk to from the shelters. Downtown Turlock has proximity to local transit lines, including Turlock Transit and Stanislaus Regional Transit Authority bus service. This area sits just south of the Turlock Town Center shopping center, which is home to grocery stores, pharmacies, banks, and medical offices, and is served by local bus routes, including service to Emanuel Medical Center, a full-service hospital in the city.
Additionally, the City of Turlock actively participates in regional initiatives to address homelessness through partnerships with the Stanislaus Community System of Care (CSOC) and the Stanislaus Homeless Alliance (SHA). The City of Turlock Care Team collaborates with the Stanislaus County Care Team to offer resources to individuals experiencing homelessness in our community.
Furthermore, the City is actively looking for opportunities to create new transitional and permanent supportive housing. In the Housing Action Plan, Program 2-J, Transitional Housing, and 2-P, Supportive Housing, plan to facilitate production of affordable housing by amending the zoning code to comply with State law regarding the treatment of transitional and supportive housing facilities. Further, Program 4-H, 44 City of Turlock, 2025. Homelessness in Turlock. Available:
https://www.turlock.ca.us/government/homelessnessinturlock/