City Council - Regular Meeting

So welcome to our welcome to our city pan City Council West Patterson Financing Authority and Patterson Public Financing Authority meeting on Tuesday, 05/19/2026. Reporting from closed session. Your city council is returning from closed session and are providing the following reports. Direction has been provided to staff. Your council will now adjourn from closed session.

Public Meeting Guidelines. City of Paterson City Council meetings are conducted in person City Hall Council Chambers. As a courtesy and technology permitting, members of the public may continue to participate virtually. However, the city cannot guarantee the public's access to teleconferencing technology will be uninterrupted and technical difficulties may be occur from time to time. The meeting will be televised and available for public viewing on Comcast Channel seven on Wednesday, Friday and Saturday, and members of the public may watch it on Internet or Venmo available on the city's website.

Before we start, those in the audience who wish you, please stand and bow your heads for the invocation. Sorry, I wrote a little something here. Bear with me. Heavenly Father, grant us wisdom, understanding and open hearts as we work together. Help us communicate with respect, listen with patience and stay focused on the greater good.

Guide our decisions with integrity and purpose and strengthen our ability to work with unity towards positive solutions for everyone we serve. Amen. Can we please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Are there any statement conflicts from the council members?

None. None. Okay.

Now we'll be moving to Section 4.1, special recognition to Melissa Hernandez. This certificate of special recognition proudly presented to Hernandez in sincere appreciation of your outstanding dedication, commitment and valuable contributions to our community. Your selfless acts of kindness, love, generosity and hard work have made a lasting and meaningful impact. Throughout your efforts of assisting Love Patterson, managing little libraries, distributing books throughout the community and creating blessing boxes for those in need, you have inspired many and made true difference. Presented with gratitude and recognition for exemplary community service and contributions for the residents of Patterson, California presented this May 2026.

On behalf of Mayor Clausell and the council, we grant you the Certificate of Special Recognition. Thank you. Thank you.

Hi. I'm from here. I grew up here. I grew up as a poor little

bookworm. So working on Little Free Libraries, it makes my heart happy. Thank you.

Thank you. Any members of the audience who wishes to address the council on a matter not listed on the agenda may do so by raising your hand and stepping to the podium. If you're joining the meeting through Zoom, please use the raise hand feature. If you're calling by phone, please press 9. And when the Mayor Pro Temp announces the item, Council will take no action other than referring the item to staff for study and analysis and may place the item for future agenda.

In order that all interested parties have an opportunity to speak, any person addressing the council will be limited to a maximum of three minutes unless the Mayor grants the longer period of time. Please state your name and the city for the record.

My name is Dennis Boor. I looked at the agenda, and there's no closed session. You're and if you have a closed session, you have to say what the subject matter is on an agenda.

Yes.

The agenda was posted for a closed session that started at five

Hi. Cheryl Lex, City of Paterson. I was wondering if we could please have an update on the Centennial Park. I don't know exactly who to address that to. It's been a little while since we've heard anything about the status. I'd like to see that move forward, if we could. Phase I, are they going to break ground soon? Is there anything?

Yes. Right now, as far as the Centennial Park update that we can provide you is we broke it up in phases. So there is a Phase one. And design is just, I would say, about now, it's nearly 100% complete, maybe a 95% complete. And the next process after this is to put the project out to bid for to do the construction of that Phase one. Tonight, there will be an item that is going to discuss certain bonding capacity that we have fundings and that project is one of those to be selected to be funded through that avenue if that's what counsel so chooses to do.

Good. Okay. Well, I was wondering about that. It had been a little while and I drive past it every day and I was wondering what was going on. And then the second thing, I want to thank our police chief, his deputies, the Stanislaus County Sheriff's Department, Fire Department and EMS for the response that was given to our high school on May 6. It was amazingly awesome. We all sat with tremors and biting nails wondering what was going on, and we appreciate what you all do so much. So thank you very much. And that's all. Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor Pro Tem, Council and members of the public. My name is Danielle Morgart from the Office of Assemblyman Juan Alenise here to provide a legislative update. As you may know, it's been a very busy time in Sacramento for the Assemblyman, but recently, five of Assemblyman Alanis' bills did pass appropriations, which are AB fifteen sixty eight, which would update the sex offender registration list AB fifteen seventy two, which is our CIF bill AB sixteen twelve, which is the narcotics incineration bill AB seventeen twenty eight, the common course numbering for our community colleges in our state and AB2282, which would bring a temporary hospital to Del Parto. As always, if you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to reach out to our office. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Is there anybody else who would do a public comment? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, is anybody online?

And we do have a couple of comments. Candace, you can go ahead and unmute yourself.

Hi. Candace, Wairrock, City of Paterson. Sorry I'm not there in person. I had back to back, flag football and softball games tonight, coaching and, team mom. So I am not there in person, but I am watching on Zoom. And I cannot be the only person who is very curious as to why our mayor deactivated all of his social media accounts, and now this is the second meeting in a row that he's not there. So I'm not sure if there's any kind of update that the city manager's office could give the community. I am just curious if this is gonna be continue as a trend. But if there's some kind of update, I would like to hear that, please.

Hi, Candace. At this point, I'm not at liberty to at least discuss the full aspect of where the mayor has absence, why his absence is not here in the near future if he's going to be attending on a regular basis. But I can, I guess, ask the legal counsel to provide further discussion?

My understanding is that he is absent tonight because of a work commitment that he from his employment, so he couldn't make it.

Madam Clumpers, anybody else online?

We do have another one. Alisa, you can go ahead and unmute yourself.

Hi, good evening. My name is Alisa and I'm a resident of Patterson. Nearly a month ago, this chamber was filled with community members demanding action after the ice shooting of Carlos Ivan Mendoza Hernandez. Many people attended in person, called in, shared their fears, concerns and demands for the city to strengthen protections in our community. At the end of that meeting, some council members acknowledged those concerns and said conversations were happening behind the scenes.

But since that council meeting and a protest I organized on April 25 in downtown, there has been, no public update, no agenda item, and I haven't seen discussion of strengthening our sanctuary protections under the California Values Act. No ordinance preventing ICE activity on city property and no clear communication about what actions, if any, have been taken. I know the Modesto focus did report on the protest and reached out for comment, but said all members of council did not respond. I was unable to attend the last meeting because I had just gotten out of the hospital, but I reviewed both last meeting's agenda and tonight's agenda and again saw nothing addressing these concerns or the demands made by this community. Meanwhile, the situation has only become more alarming.

We have now learned that while detained in California City, Carlos was allegedly denied adequate medical care after being shot multiple times. According to public updates and people in direct contact with the family, he developed an infection, was not consistently receiving prescribed pain medication and was being given food he physically could not eat because of his severe injuries to his mouth and teeth. What is especially disturbing is that after these conditions were publicly exposed online, his wounds were reportedly cleaned, photographs and x rays taken, antibiotics provided and his care suddenly improved. We also recently learned that additional bullet fragments were discovered beyond the number ICE initially claimed. The family is still trying to determine exactly how many times Carlos was shot.

Those bullets entered our community during peak commuter traffic near a freeway entrance. Regardless of where anyone stands politically, stray bullets put the entire public at risk. If public pressure on social media can create immediate change, then why has there been so little visible action from local leadership? And Carlos is not the only person impacted. Other Patterson residents are currently in ICE detention, including at least one U.

S. Citizen reportedly being ignored despite attorney efforts. This community deserves more, than vague reassurances. So tonight, I'm asking this counsel again, will you publicly support stronger sanctuary protections? Will you support transparency around cooperation with ICE? Will you advocate for the residents of this community who are being harmed? And have any of you contacted the Attorney General, the governor's office, or the detention facility itself regarding these concerns? People are watching, families are suffering, and continued silence sends a message too. Thank you.

We do have one last written comment, Mayor Pro Tem from Siobhan Alves, and she is just requesting an update on the Las Palmas mural that was approved when City Manager Irwin was in office for $10,000 I mean $10,000 if somebody can reach out to her with an update.

Thank you. We'll reach out to her and give her some updates.

And there are no other comments made over time.

Seeing no further comments, we'll be closing public comments now and moving on to Item six. Consent calendar. All items are approved by single action. Any item may be removed from the consent calendar for a separate discussion upon request from a member of the public, staff or council members. Consent calendar 6.1 to 6.8 are open for consideration and approval. Are there any items to be pulled for discussion from any of our council members?

None.

Seeing none, are there any items to be pulled for discussion by staff or members of the public?

Mayor Pertham, we do have Candace online. Candace, you can go ahead and unmute yourself.

Hi. I'd like to pull a consent calendar item 6.8. I just have a few questions about it.

6.8?

Do I ask the questions now or do we need No, to

Item 6.8 will be pulled from the consent calendar for further discussion. Do we have any additional items to pull from consent calendar? Does any other member from the public have any other thing to pull? Seeing no additional items to be pulled from consent calendar, do I have a motion to approve consent calendar 6.1 to 6.8 the 6.7 with the exception of 6.8? Do we have a motion?

I'll motion.

Do I have a second?

I'll second.

The motion has been seconded. So we would be voting Council Member Mora.

Aye.

Council Member Romero. Aye. Council Member Hernandez.

Aye.

And your Mayor Pro Temp votes aye. Section 6.1 to 6.7 has been passed with a four-zero vote and one absent. Okay, now do you want to please let her know what's your concerns. Candace?

Okay. Hi. I just have a couple of quick concerns. One, I think that this type of action might be something that deserves a little bit more explanation. And upon further review of the agenda packet, which was, like, a billion pages this week, by the way, I finally found some of the answers to my questions, but I do have a couple more. So someone can interrupt me and correct me if I'm wrong. But from what I read, it looks as if as a city, we've made a a large payment of, like, over $200,000 using the general fund instead of a specific fund that we could have been using for low income housing. Is that correct? Am I understanding that part correct?

Can you address that, Fernando?

That's correct, Candace. The payment that was made out should have been through a different fund, and it was not done that way. So now we're just trying to correct that.

Okay. So how did that happen? Like, how did we use the wrong account? Because that's kind of, like, $200,000. I mean, that would buy me a new playground in North Park. So it's kind of a lot of money. So, how did that happen is the first question.

I'm pulling up the agenda item right now. The how Okay.

I didn't see I didn't see I tried to go through it. Again, it it was kind of a lot to go through this week, but I tried to go through it to see if any of if I could answer any of the questions myself. So these are the questions that I, have for it because I feel like there should have been a ton of checks and balances. Like, who authorized the that initial payment? And then, like, wouldn't the council have had to approve that? I assume it was a council way before our time because I did see the date, and I think it was, like, 2008 or something. So does that mean that it went through all the proper channels and multiple people missed that it was coming from the wrong account? Because if that's kind of nerve wracking if we're making those kind of mistakes.

The item on that one was specifically the MOU there's an approved memorandum of understanding that allowed the self help for affordable housing to be reimbursed, a certain amount of money. And that is spelled out in the approved council approved memorandum of understandings that allows self help to be reimbursed a certain amount of money for the amount of units that they're doing for affordable housing. The money that was taken and utilized was taken from the wrong fund, and we have identified that it was taken from the wrong fund, and it's just now we're correcting that item to make sure that the funds now that we have that because we do collect funds for all that items, all the affordable housing that those funds are still available to be used and are still in the account. That's where the money is at.

Okay. So were there any, like, legal legal avenues that were, I don't know, explored prior to you guys deciding to try to switch it now? Like, did we make sure that we crossed our t's and dotted our i's and we're not gonna get in trouble from anyone for doing it this way after the fact, this many years after the fact? Because it's it seems weird, especially maybe the way it was worded on the consent calendar. It seems like the city is taking money and saying, like, oh, we're gonna actually move into this account instead, which I understand what it was after I dug deeper, but the consent calendar listing did seem really odd.

And then upon further review, I saw what it was for, and that part kinda makes sense. But did we did we cross our t's and dot our i's legally and through the state and all the what is it called, the affordable housing people?

Yes. I believe we have we did take our time and look through all the aspects of first the approved memorandum of understanding that allows for that fund or the self help to be paid out. And then also, it includes the other entities on how basically how that money gets used and when does that money get paid out for and then figuring out through what funds it should be at and how we now we reimbursed that fund back. We did work with legal very closely to make sure that all these items were being produced where they needed to be.

Okay. Was it an audit that discovered this? Or like how was it discovered?

The way it was discovered is there's another entity here that is a third party that is under the Memorandum of Understanding. It's called Northeastern Territories. They're also in under that memorandum of understanding, they're also that's the net that you'll see on the staff report. They're also a major stakeholder that has provided the initial funding of a lot of this money that Self Help initially got. And they provided all the land that Self Help is doing all the affordable housing, net provided all that free of charge.

I believe back in 2006 when this originated back on the development that now they're seeking their portion of some reimbursements, not full, but some reimbursements that the other developers are paying because the way it works is, net provided a lump sum that benefited self help. Now all the other developers that are building in the area, they have a responsibility to pay into what Northeastern Territories provided self help to provide. Northeastern Territories is not fully funding everything on the affordable housing. All the developers and homebuilders in the villages of Patterson have a portion that they have to pay. As we're pulling building permits, each development that is going there's a certain amount of money that gets collected for the affordable housing.

And that's where now we're we're we're in that account that we're getting, now we're correcting it out or where it needs to be.

Okay. Is this because of the net being kinda like the third party that's involved, is this like, mess up by us gonna impact our future relationship with them? Like, are there gonna be opportunities for us to maybe not get reimbursed in the future because we kinda screwed the pooch on this? Or what does that relationship look like going forward?

Not at all. No. We we worked with the Northeastern territories very carefully through all this process on how to make sure that they're being made whole for all the development fees that the developers are paying and then that fair share that they're getting back out of the affordable housing that they provided self help with the land and initial payment back. And I don't know if that was back in 2006 or when it was when it initially originated in.

Okay. Alright. I appreciate it. Thank you for clarifying. Sure. And maybe just next time for future reference, it's something of this nature because I see $200,000, and I think, like, that's kind of a a big lot a lot of money for someone to have made some kind of mistake. So I just wanna make sure that we're, you know, being careful and that maybe that $200,000 because now it's basically gonna go back into the general fund if it could be used for something that's extremely necessary, like public safety or something of that regard. Thank you.

Color Candice, are you comfortable moving forward at this time now from Item 6.8? Or do you wish to put this place in the future agenda for future analysis?

I am comfortable moving forward with the understanding that we will maybe word these a little better on the consent calendar in the future. But yes, thank you.

Thank you, Candace. So do I have motion to approve Consent Calendar 6.8?

I'll motion.

Do I have a second?

I'll second.

Okay. The motion has been second and we'll be conducting a roll call. Council Member Mora? Aye. Council Member Romero? Aye. Council Member Hernandez?

Aye.

And your Mayor Pro Tem votes aye. The motion to approve consent calendar 6.8 passes with a four-zero with one absent. Moving on to seven, presentations and action items. 7.1, finance, accept the City of Paterson twenty twenty four-twenty five financial audit report twenty twenty four-twenty five Single Audit Report twenty twenty four-twenty five Transportation Development Act Funds Financial Audit Report twenty twenty four-twenty five Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program Financial Audit Report Our Finance Director Williams.

Good evening, Mayor Pro Tem, Members of Council, members of the public. I am happy today to be bringing forward to you the fiscal year twenty twenty four-twenty twenty five financial audit. Tonight, we're going to be receiving a presentation going over the twenty four-twenty five financial statements. I'm happy to report that all of our audited financial statements received an unmodified opinion.

We're going to

be going over the Citi's annual comprehensive financial report, then we will break to the West Patterson Public Financing Authority so that we can accept their financial statements. And then we will break to the Patterson Public Financing Authority so we can accept their financial statements. These items are informational only, and the only counsel action will be to accept them. Now I'd like to introduce Andrew Roth, who is the engagement partner from the accounting firm The Poon Group, who conducted our audit.

Good evening, City Council. We're here to present the final statements for the various audits we've performed for the fiscal year ended 06/30/2025. So we're going go through a few items, kind of scope of the work we performed, some required communications for those charged with governments, that would be the city council in this instance, the audit responsibilities, our approach to audit, an overview of the financial statements, some financial indicators and key pension and OPEB information, then the audit results. So scope of work. We are engaged to perform the financial audits for the city's annual comprehensive financial report, that's the ACFR, the PPFA, financial statements, the Patterson Public Financing Authority, West Patterson Public Finance, or WPFA, WPPA.

The single audit, which is gonna be the federal funding under uniform guidance. And then compliance examination reports, related to the Transportation Development Act as well as the abandoned vehicle abatement, AVA program compliance. We also performed agreed upon procedures, on the GAN limit, appropriation limit for fiscal year end twenty five-twenty six. And, we also provide other non audit services, which is the assistance in preparation of the financial statements. So here's some required communications under, the Codified Auditing Standards two sixty.

So some significant accounting policies. If you want to kind of get a really good understanding of the different policies, that were used to kind of account for the finances and put together the financial statements. We will want to look at note one to the financial statements. In note one to the financial statements, you will note that the city implemented GASB 101 compensated absences. This is probably the biggest there was another, GASB, but that was not significant.

So this year, the significant estimates were fair value of investments. Estimates are required to prepare the financial statements based on future liabilities and future, assets and estimates on those. So those include fair value on investments, depreciation on capital assets, compensated absences, related to the new, requirements of GASB 101 and the pension and OPEB liabilities. So kind of go through some sensitive disclosures. So the summary of significant accounting policies, the lease receivable, is number three.

Thirteen and fourteen would be pension and OPEB, always significant and sensitive to disclosures. 16, other required disclosures is going to be any deficit fund balances or, any expenditures over appropriations. 19 is going to be the restatements of beginning balances. This specifically relates to the implementation of GASB 101, composite absences. And then note 20 is going to be commitments and contingencies.

So this is going to be any kind of like construction commitments or any legal contingencies required to be disclosed in the financial statements. We also want to communicate that there were no corrected or uncorrected misstatements reported during the year during our audit. Also that management informed us, and to our knowledge, there was no consultations with other accounts regarding auditing and other matters. We also encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management, and we did not have any disagreements with management in terms of accounting treatments nor audit procedures performed. So audit responsibilities.

So during the audit process, they're responsibilities of both management and the auditors. We're going to go through some of those right now. Management is responsible for the preparation of the financial statements, to present those financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in The United States Of America adopt sound accounting policies management is responsible to establish and maintain internal controls or financial reporting and compliance to provide evidence supporting the amounts disclosures in the financial statements and to prevent and detect fraud. We, as the auditors, we are responsible to perform the audit, to ensure the audit is performed in conformity with auditing standards generally accepted in The United States Of America and standards applicable to financial rights contained in government auditing standards. We are also responsible to communicate with Joe's charge with governance.

This is part of that communication. We are responsible for assessing the audit risk of internal controls or financial reporting and compliance and then to determine the fairness of the presentation of the financial statements related to note disclosures. And at the end, we're responsible to render opinions on those financial statements. So our approach to audit. We have a four phased approach to audit.

So our detailed planning, this is kind of where we get an understanding of the city, and we work with the city to go through the different processes, say, human resources, procurement, also utility billing. And then we'll go through and perform some internal controls over the systems. That's going be phase two, which is done at an interim time frame, typically before June 30, year end. And then we'll have the validation and testing of account balances that's performed after year end that kind of validates that year end balances and the activity performed during the year. At the end, we will review the financial statements and issue our audit opinions in Phase four.

So overview of the financial statements is going to be kind of a high level overview. So we'll note that, the net position of the governmental activities increased about $19,700,000 to end at $221,800,000 which included, some transfers from fiduciary, capital asset additions and donated infrastructure, and then also some federal grant funding as well. Deferred inflows outflows of resources. This deferred inflows and outflows of resources typically are usually mainly pension. There are some deferred inflows of resources that's related to leases, but you're mainly going to see pension and OPEB related items.

These did not change significantly. The deferred outflows of resources decreased $205,000 and the deferred inflows decreased 6 and $47,000 For liabilities, there was no, there was an increase in the, drawdowns, I believe, on the water fund for, on the Enterprise Funds for, State Revolving Fund, but there was no new debt that was taken on during the year. So the liabilities did not change significantly. It was about $98,000,000 for the current year. You'll note the net investment in capital assets did increase to $71,000,000 from the prior year.

So net investment in capital assets is going be your capital assets related net of any like community depreciation, over time as well as, any related debt. So you'll note that this does increase, and you do want those, the net investment to increase, especially on enterprise funds because that's where your for future services to be priority. You want to build that up. Restricted net position. This can mean any kind of net position that is restricted, due to law, on any side of city council or, like, ordinances that are required, but anything by law grants and so so forth.

You'll note that the restricted amounts did increase about 10,000,000 in the current year. Unrestricted. So this is gonna be everything else. You'll note that the unrestricted net position, did increase about $5,100,000 from the prior year for government activities. And so you're going to note in the governmental funds change in net position, charges for services changed slightly.

It ended at about $11,300,000 The operating grants and contributions increased about $3,000,000 and this was federal funding, potentially like one time, I think, some part of the funding in there. So that's going to be the operating grants increase. Capital grants and contributions, that did increase about $4,400,000 So that was a deferred and donated infrastructure I noted and some other capital grants. So you'll note the program revenues. So program revenues going to be those revenues are typically relatable to specific expenses.

So, like, you're able to compare the expenses to the program revenues, and then you're able to come up with your net cost of services from there. And that's like really those have a specific relation because anytime you have a grant, you spend money on it. That's kind of how you have that's how they relate in charges for services. And those program revenues, I think as opposed to general revenues, you do have an ability to increase those through either changes in, say, fees or going out and applying for more grants. So, that is a and you will see a slide later that kind of goes into the amount of, net cost of services versus the general revenue just to see how much from year to year it changed.

So you'll note that those are related. So net cost of services, you'll note that did decrease, to $11,500,000 You will wanna note that in the governmental activities, and the business type activities at the statement of a at a statement of activities level, that does include all of your OPEB and pension items that aren't, like, one for one. We're gonna go in the general fund in a little bit, and you'll see that. And that's like dollar in, dollar up. But there are like changes in assumptions, at the pension level that do change these expenses.

So but overall, cost of services did decrease $6,200,000 in the current year. General revenues, slight increase to $31,400,000 And transfers, so know that transfers were at $1,100,000 so a slight decrease. So overall change in net position, increase of $21,000,000 in the current year. So business type activities. You'll note there was an increase in assets $9,300,000 to about $90,000,000 So this was also going to be some donated infrastructure as well as some other items that did increase those assets.

Also note that those deferred inflows and outflows did change slightly, kind of similar to the government activities. So you ended with $2,700,000 for the deferred outflows and $2,600,000 for the deferred inflows. And then your liabilities, you'll note, did increase to 34,300,000 So there was that drawdown The main part was the drawdown on the SRF loan. So but besides that, it didn't change as much. You'll note that there was a slight decrease in the net investment in capital assets.

You'll note that also related partially to that drawdown because it is net debt, so it would have gone down. And that's offset by any donated infrastructure additions to capital assets. Also, you'll note the restricted net position did increase to $7,800,000 And then your unrestricted went from a negative balance. Now you have a positive unrestricted of $898,000 So overall, total net position in business type activities is 55,000,000 So business type activities, you're going to note charges for services, did increase about $2,000,000 And this increase is related to, I believe, there was new rates some new rates on as of January 2025 that did help towards this. There was also capital grants and contributions, which was part of ARPA funding as well as some other items.

So the program revenues, you'll note for the business type activities did increase about $5,200,000 to 24,800,000 That's offset by your expenses, which slightly increased to $19,200,000 So the net cost of services, this is it was 5,500,000 Then the general revenues, you're going to note, was $3,300,000 So I think mainly this is an increase in investment income during the year, was the largest portion of that general revenues. Then transfers, which is the difference, which is an outflow of $1,100,000 in those business type activities. All right. So the general fund. So the general fund's fund balance, the assets you'll note increased 36 it increased $1,300,000 to $36,200,000 slight increase in liabilities to $12,200,000 about a $1,900,000,000 increase.

Further outflows of resources, the general fund is going to be related to leases, or if there's any available revenue in there, but usually leases. So we're going go into the fund balance. So non spendable fund balance is going be any prepaid items or inventories. Is going be non spendable, and that did increase slightly to $300,000 The restricted fund balances, which I talked about before, which are items that are either by law or grant restrictions, increased slightly to 737,000 The committed fund balance did increase to $12,100,000 This can include a stabilization of reserve, which we'll talk about in a future slide. And then you'll note there was a decrease in the assigned fund balance of 3.3 about of $4,000,000, and the the main part of this decrease is actually related to, there was an assigned fund balance in the prior year for a fund deficit in CFD 2,003 dash 1, which was, which was moved over through a transfer from the general fund in the current year.

And so that went away. So now that so now your unassigned fund balance, which is kind of your rainy day fund And we consider your rainy day fund plus your committed rainy day fund to be your available fund balance. We'll talk about that in a second. But that's going to be if there's any kind of hardships, how much kind of leeway you guys have on, decreased funding in certain areas to perform at the same level of public services. So you'll note that did increase $1,400,000 to $6,600,000 All right.

So you'll note that revenues did increase to $2,800,000, in the general fund. Part of that was going to be your investment income and some other items. You'll note the expenditures were pretty steady. So you'll note there was an increase to your overall revenue over expenditures, and the general fund was, $2,700,000 And then you're going to note the change in the other findings of source of new uses. So this has two factors.

In the prior year, there was a I believe there was a prior year $2,900,000 like an inception of finance purchase agreement that was included in that. And then this year, there was a transfer out, so that's why you see that large swing there. But overall change in fund balance in the general fund year over year was, $1,100,000 But your unassigned fund balance did actually go up. I'll get into those financial indicators and key pension and OPEB information. So the available fund balance, to annual expenditures.

So you'll note this is kind of your rainy day reserve fund. The GFOA, the Government Finance Officers Association, says that 20% is a good rate, so that's about three months. And you guys are at 61%, 61.6%. That was an increase from the prior year. So you're going to add your committed for contingencies, that kind of rainy day reserve that's included in the fund that's determined by counsel with those unassigned fund balances, which is $18,700,000 And then you'll look at those annual expenditures in the general fund to kind of get an idea of how long you guys would be able to last without any revenues just with the reserve fund.

So that is good. You're going in you're about triple what the kind of best practice is minimum best practice minimum. All right. So here we're going to get into some net pension sensitivity analysis, which we have present each year, although it hasn't really changed in a few years. So, it's going to really tell you if there was a change in the kind of long term, interest rate, the return rate, that it would if it went down, the liability would go up. And if it went up, the liability would go down. Seems like every morning when you look at it, it's always going down. We haven't seen it I haven't seen it go up since I've been working in the field. So, just as an understanding. But these are determined by CalPERS, so, the city doesn't have as much say in this.

But you will note, that you did have an increase, in the current year of your funding ratio, so that's going be the percentage share of your, fiduciary net position, which is the amount you have to pay off all future benefits in perpetuity as opposed to your total pension liability, which is the amount of expected liabilities to be paid off in perpetuity. That did increase, so it is going in the correct correction. So you'll note the same item with your, net OPEB liabilities. So it would decrease increase and decrease. You will note that OPEB liabilities will the discount rate on the OPEB liabilities is more it fluctuates a bit more than the CalPERS because the OPEB is really just your plan.

So that really can depend on certain factors. But as of right now, doesn't have as much of a swing if there were a 1% change. But as of right now, do have a 13.1% funded ratio, which is good. So audit results for the city. Audit results was an unmodified opinion by opinion unit on all opinion units.

It states the financial statements are fairly presented in all material specs in conformity with GAAP. Significant accounting policies have been consistently applied, estimates are reasonable, and disclosures are properly reflected in the financial statements. We also noted that both the TDA and ABA programs were in compliance. In the single audit, we had unmodified opinions issued on all major programs. So the city complied all material specs with the types of compliance requirements that could have direct and material effect. We also performed procedures performed without exception on the GAN limit. That just means you guys did the calculation right. That's really what we do is just make sure that it was rolled forward properly. That is okay. Other results for the city audit.

As stated before, there was no disagreements with management, and there was no material weaknesses or significant efficiency identified in control control or financial reporting during our audit. No accounting issues and no inappropriate activities were noted. All right, I'll stop there.

Thank you very much for the presentation. Very intensive. We will have an exam at the end of the day, let's see how much we paid attention. But quick question on given the last year this, we had a good jump on general funds impact. What were some of the issues why we had a spike from last year to this year, the 2024 to 2025?

On the general fund, think the main spike on the general fund was the other financing sources and uses. So in the current year, there was a transfer out, I believe, $7,000,000 to for that fund deficit in thousand and three-one, public safety and fire protection, public, special revenue fund because it had a fund deficit and was just growing, so it was to move it over. And then so you have that. And then last year, you had so that's a decrease in your other financing sources and uses. But last year, you had an increase of, like, $3,000,000 in your other because of, when you record a finance purchase agreement, you got to record both that capital outlay as an expenditure as well as the inception.

It's kind of like it just grosses things up. So then you have that $3,000,000 more over here and then the $7,000,000 over here. So it kind of like created like a $10,000,000 offset, which I think the $3,000,000 is a little misleading, but there was the transfer out that was a one time transfer, so it's not going to happen it's not going be happening in the future. It was kind of a one time true up, I believe, from my understanding.

Thank you. Is there any other member who has any questions, comments or concerns on this action item?

None. None. None.

Is there any member in the chamber who has any public comments, questions or concerns? No? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, do we have anybody online?

Just as a reminder, if you're joining us on Zoom and wish to make a comment, please use the raise hand feature. If you're calling in by phone, you may press 9. And we have no comments on Mayor Proton.

Okay. Seeing no additional persons online who wish to provide a public comment on 09:07, we will close this public comment. We're moving forward. Now do we have a motion to approve Action Item 7.1 to accept the City Paterson twenty twenty four-twenty twenty five Financial Audit Report twenty twenty four-twenty twenty five, a single audit report, a twenty twenty four-twenty five Transportation Development and AgFund's Financial Audit Report twenty twenty four-twenty five Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program Financial Audit Report. Do I have a motion?

I'll motion.

Do I have a second?

I'll second.

Okay. The motion has been seconded. Mayor Council Member Mora? Council Member Romero? Aye. Council Member Hernandez?

Aye.

And your mayor pro temp votes aye. The vote passes with a four o with one absent. We will now adjourn to West Patterson Financial Authority. We will call this meeting to order. Madam Clerk, could we do roll call?

Member Mora? Here. Member Romero? Here. Member Hernandez? Present. Member Broque?

Present.

And Chair Clausell is excused.

All right, 7.2, finance, except the West Patterson Financing Authority twenty twenty four-twenty five Financial Audit Report. Finance Director Williams.

Thank you very much. I would like to defer back to Andrew Roth to continue his presentation.

All right. Let's continue with the presentation. All right. So our opinion on the West Patterson Public Financing Authority or WPFA. The opinion, unmodified opinion, as before, the finance states the finance agreements are presented on material specs. Accounting policies have been consistently applied. Estimates are reasonable. Disclosures are properly reflected in the finance team. Also, discriminates with management. No material weaknesses and or significant efficiencies identified in internal control of financial reporting. No accounting issues and no inappropriate activities were noted. Back to you.

Is there any members of the Board who have any question, concerns or comments from this action item?

None.

Seeing no apparent, is there anybody on the public who will provide any public comments? Seeing none, is anybody on line, Madam Clerk?

No comments on line, Mayor. Okay.

Seeing none, any additional do I have a motion seeing no additional persons who wish to provide a comment, we will close public comment now. Seeing no additional persons who wish to provide public comment on Item 7.2, we will close and then we'll proceed. Do I have a motion to accept West Patterson's Financing Authority audit report twenty twenty four-twenty twenty five financial audit report?

No motion.

Do I have a second? The motion has been seconded. Will this represent a roll call from West Patterson Finance and Authority Board? Council Member Mora? Aye. Council Member Romero? Aye. Council Member Hernandez?

Aye.

And your Mayor Pro Temp votes aye. This motion passes with a four-zero and one absent. Now, we will adjourn to the Patterson Public Financing Authority. Madam Clerk, could we have roll call?

Member Mora?

Here.

Member Romero? Present. Member Hernandez? Present. Member Roque?

Present.

And Chair Clausellas excused.

And we got 7.3, finance. Accept the Patterson Public Financing Authority twenty twenty four-twenty five Financial Auto Report. Staff, Director Williams.

Thank you again. Once again, I will defer to Andrew to finish his presentation.

Great. So once again, opinion on the report, unmodified opinion. States financial statements are fairly presented in all material specs. Accounting policies have been consistently applied. Estimates are reasonable. Disclosures are properly reflected in the financial statements. Also that there is no disagreements with management. No material weaknesses and or significant efficiencies identified in internal control or financial reporting. No accounting issues and also no inappropriate activities were noted during our audit. Thank you.

Thank you very much for that information again. Now is there any members of the Board who have any questions, comments or concerns on this item?

None. Seeing

no apparent concerns or comments from the Board and with them from the Chair, we will now open segment three for public comments. Seeing none, are there any members of the online, Madam Clerk, who provide us public comment?

No comments online, Mayor Pro Tem.

Well, moving forward now there's no action. We'll be moving forward with do I have a motion to approve consent calendar 7.3? Do I accept public financing authority twenty twenty four dash twenty five financial audit report.

All motion.

I'll second.

Okay. The motion has been seconded. This requires a roll call. Council Member Mora? Aye. Council member Romero?

Aye.

Council member Hernandez?

Aye.

And your chair votes aye. This motion to accept the West Patterson Financing Authority twenty twenty four dash -twenty '5 Financial Audit Report with a four-zero vote and one absent. The PFA Board motion accepts Patterson Public Financing Authority '20 four-twenty five Financial Audit Report. We'll adjourn back to regular City Council meeting now. We have 7.4.

We have engineering services. Review of projects are qualified to receive funding through the special tax revenue refunding bonds Series 2023. Request direction from City Council on prioritization on eligible projects. Our Director, Service Rodriguez.

Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem and Council. Tonight, staff will be reviewing the special tax revenue bonds from series twenty twenty three and their proposed projects to utilize these funds. I will now hand this over to finance director Williams who will discuss the specifics on this bond and authorized facilities.

Thank you, Director Rodriguez. Good evening again.

There we go. So,

just a little bit of introduction and background. In August 2023, the Patterson Public Financing Authority issued about $67,000,000 in tax exempt bonds secured by CFD 2,000 and one-one special taxes. The majority of those funds went to refinance bonds that were issued in 2013, but 5,000,000 of new money was pulled out for the project, the Patterson Safety Center. Because these are tax exempt bonds, there are some special three year spending safe harbor rules put in place by the IRS. And because of some delays in the Public Safety Center project, staff was worried that we weren't going to be able to spend all of that $5,000,000 within the three year allotted period.

So we've there was a team that got together and worked to put a list of eligible projects that have the best chance of meeting the pretty expedited timeline. As of the date of publishing the staff report, there was about $5,544,304 available in that project fund. So for the bond proceeds, they are authorized facilities that are governed by CFD 2,000 and one-one, and they are listed below. Each category has additional stipulations on them on what they can be used for. And more detail was provided as an attachment to the staff report for this item.

But because these infrastructure items were governed by a CFD that was created in 2001, The majority of these items have been completed and we can no longer spend money on them. So staff really focused on the main category of community facilities here to really focus on our projects. Again, because of the expedited timeline, the following list of projects are being presented to you for priority decision making because they have the best chance of being able to utilize the funds by that deadline. So now I'd like to hand it back over the presentation back over to Director Rodriguez.

Thank you, Director Williams, for reviewing that criteria on the authorized facilities. So there are 10 proposed projects that I will be presenting tonight for council consideration. Those include demo and land acquisition where where the old Sheriff's Building was along Del Porto, the sports park parking lot, land acquisition along Las Palmas, the water quality water quality control facility collections modular, mobile lifts in closing the fleet shop, and this would be at the corporation yard and would be a fleet shop expansion, land acquisition along B Street, modular additions at the community center, Centennial Park, and land acquisition and modulars along 1st and modular along 1st Street. Again, as director Williams mentioned, these projects have all been vetted vetted against the authorized facilities criteria for these funds and are shovel ready or near shovel ready. The intention is to have the funding encumbered, prior to August, September of this year to meet the IRS safe harbor rules.

The first project I will

be discussing, is for the demolition of the two city owned buildings fronting Del Porto and the acquisition of a neighboring parcel. So why action is needed? Vacant buildings create a public safety concern. The two buildings owned by the city are unsafe to occupy in their current conditions. Going on to current conditions, the their hazardous materials have been identified.

Continued deterioration does increase liability. This does create a future opportunity. We can prepare the site for future civic public use and does create flexibility for future city plans. The second project I will be discussing tonight is the sports park parking lot. As you can see, from the image on the right, this project would pave the dirt areas between the existing paved parking lot and Ward Avenue.

So why action is needed? There is a lack of parking spaces at the sports at the sports complex. These proposed improvements would add additional parking spaces. Benefits, adequate on-site parking reduces illegal parking and unsafe pedestrian crossings while maintaining clear access for emergency vehicles. This project would be advertised as design build to meet the timelines for the funding.

The third project I will

be discussing is the land acquisition along Las Palmas. So why action is needed? City hall and existing facilities are nearing operational capacity. Continuous city growth has increased space needs for staff and services. This does present a current opportunity. We will be acquiring a centrally located property. The property owners have indicated a willingness to sell. There are benefits with this acquisition. There's, strategic property acquisition. It's in an established area of the community.

The site supports future civic, community service, administration, or public facing uses. Again, as the city continues to grow, adequate facilities are needed for city staff. This acquisition will help in this effort. The fourth project for consideration is the water quality control facility collections modular. This modular would house the collections division at our water quality control facility.

This modular is currently being used by the contractor as a part of the phase three expansion and as a part of their contract. So why action is needed? Again, we are nearing capacity at city facilities. We do have upcoming service expansions we are expecting. We need office, break space, and support areas for staff.

This is this does present a current opportunity. It's already in place and operational. We are currently paying leasing cost, associated with the phase three expansion that was again built into their bid for the project. But with that, we could reduce some ongoing cost and provide credit associated with the lease costs and that contract. The benefits would be an immediate space for staff.

We could avoid delays from new construction or procurement, and it is cost effective. The fifth project for consideration is for mobile lifts for our street maintenance division. The picture to the right illustrates what they entail. So why this action is needed? So we have fixed lifts currently occupy the shop space.

It reduced we have a reduced number of vehicle services at one time, and it impacts workflow and productivity. So with these pro proposed improvements, the mobile lifts allow for flexible use. They can be moved and stored when not in use. And it supports a wider range of vehicles and equipment just because of that mobility. The benefits, it will increase service capacity, improve efficiency without expansion, and is very cost effective.

The sixth project for consideration, is to enclose the fleet shop. So currently, there's an area of covered open space, and this project would enclose that area for fleet division use. So this would happen at our corporation yard, and it would be a part of the fleet shop expansion. Why action is needed? We are outgrowing our current shop capacity.

We have repair delays and operational bottlenecks because of that capacity. Current impacts, delays affect emergency response equipment because we do have that limited space, and we'd have to defer preventative maintenance. It can increase long term costs and equipment downtime. For future opportunities, this will improve workflow and safety and create a more efficient, organized, and reliable fleet operation. The seventh project, for consideration tonight is land acquisition along B Street.

So why is this action needed? So the corporation yard is nearing capacity. Again, as the city continues to grow, we have increased staffing, equipment, and storage needs, and this will support future operations. The benefits of this, so you can see on the picture on the right. This is, where our current corporation yard one is, and so we do have a rare opportunity to expand.

This would be a cost effective expansion due to location and will support, future building staff and long term growth. The eighth project, I will be discussing is for the recreational operation operational facility. So why action is needed? Recreation staff is currently in three separate trailers that lacks restrooms and running water, and it creates a fragmented workspace. With this proposed solution, it would be a modular recreation operations facility.

It would consolidate staff into one location. It would include restrooms, meeting space, and training space. The benefits we could see improved efficiency, communication, and teamwork, would provide basic amenities, and would have would allow faster and more cost effective it would be faster and more cost effective than a permanent building. The ninth project before you tonight, is for phase one for Centennial Park. As you can see from the pictures to the right, this project will include a parking lot off of 9th Street and will create four dedicated pickleball courts.

So this would be four dedicated pickleball courts. There's two dual use courts here where you can get eight pickleball courts or two tennis courts and two dedicated tennis courts. And this is the parking lot off of 9th Street. So why action why action is needed? The park is a long term priority.

Full build out is not currently financially feasible. With these phase one improvements, we can get them done now. Again, those phase one improvements include pickleball and tennis courts, parking lot and related improvements. This creates future opportunities and that it establishes the foundation for the larger park. Future phases of the park includes playgrounds, landscaping, community center, and an amphitheater.

The final project before you tonight, is for consideration is the land acquisition and modular along 1st Street. So why action is needed? Properly their property currently houses, the police services operations. The city has invested modular facilities on the site. Ownership could provide long term operational stability.

The benefits we could see, acquisition preserves the city's investment in this modular building, avoids future uncertainty associated with the leased property. And for the future opportunities, the site can continue to serve public safety needs with a when a permanent station or until a permanent station is developed. The property could later support city administration or annex functions and provides long term flexibility for future municipal operations. So this slide summarizes all projects and anticipated costs. The acquisition projects are to be determined at this time.

As you can see, the cost for the project the cost for the projects exceed the current funding we have available. And so we do have some cost up here. We are looking at, 2,800,000 for the Demo Land acquisition, about 1,000,000 for the sports park. The the modular would be about 280,000. Mobile lifts, 120,000 to enclose the fleet shop, 350,000.

Again, all those acquisitions are TBD as it's a part of the negotiation process at this time. The recreational operation facility, we would be asking for $1,000,000, but it would there would be some additional funding required from, additional impact fees as stated below. Centennial Park Phase one, we're looking at $3,800,000 a $3,800,000 So for the proposed project total, it's about 9.3. But again, that doesn't include any of those acquisition costs above, and the bond funding is 5.5. So there is a deficit between the funding available and all of our proposed projects.

So staff is here tonight, to request direction from counsel on the priority of the projects. Again, as director Williams had mentioned, there is a timely use of funds component associated with this, so we do wanna try to have these fundings encumbered or used by August of September of this year. So for the proposed direction we're looking tonight, provide feedback and direction regarding priority projects for available bond funds. For next step, next steps, staff will proceed with implementation planning for the council selected projects, and staff will return as needed with project specific agreements and or procurement items. That concludes our presentation.

And if there's any questions, I'd be happy to answer them.

Do any of us have any Board Council members, Board members have any questions, comments or concerns on this item?

I have one. Just to confirm, you said this bond was pulled for the Public Safety Center? Correct. That's correct. Okay. And then actually one more. We're not proposing to utilize the funds and then add more general funds because it looks like it's a $9,000,000 list. So we're just looking at the priorities to use the actual bond funds.

Yes, that is correct.

Just had a comment. I discussed this with the city manager and assistant city manager today, and there are a few of these projects that can be discussed for so that we can pull from the general funds, correct? Okay. That's all I have.

I do have a question. Going back onto the bonds and proceeds under authorized facilities, so all these projects that you had, I think you mentioned they were all pretty much for community facilities, correct? Now, do we have any other ones that we could use? Like for me, one of my priorities is some infrastructure and economic development, because we don't have any infrastructure or economic development, there's no way we're to be able to grow. Given this list, is there any of them any other ones that could be shovel ready to include in our list?

So under community facilities directly from the eligible facilities list from CFD 2,000 and one-one is the acquisition, construction and equipping of a city hall, police facility, community center, including an aquatic center, gymnasium and senior center and a corporation yard in additions to the existing city sports park. So we are extremely restricted by the eligible use of funds governing which CFD 2,000 and one-one governs.

Okay. All right. And then another question, I think we discussed this before, moving forward, whatever we decide, one of the things I would focus is, we want to make sure we kind of where we start kind of finish, because I know previous councils, they work hard for all these four years. And all of a sudden, we have new administration, we come back with new ideas and all of a sudden, all the hard work that was done for four years, it just gone down the drain. Is there any projects that were there, they are shovel ready that could impact our community now, right?

Is there any of them that we could actually finish from beginning to end? I would just say to invest $3,000,000 on demoing the facility next door and we just have a big empty dirt rubble, just fenced off. I don't agree, but I would like to have something we could start and we could finish completely, not just have different projects started and not done, completed. So I don't know, do we have any projects that we could fully be completed?

I would say there's a number of projects on those lists that we could have fully completed. Like I did mention, the sports park parking lot, we would be advertising as a design build so that we could get that contract awarded. I do I do think we could we could get that RFP pushed out and awarded by September of this year. In terms of the land acquisitions, I believe they're all in process. At some point, I'm not at liberty to further discuss that.

The mobile lifts would be very impactful to our fleet division. I know that give them much needed flexibility and additional capacity, as well as enclosing that fleet shop. Right now, it's just like a big open open area. I think it's designated for, a washdown area. So we could enclose that and increase their capacity and make them more efficient. I I I think any of these projects on the list, we we all met internally across all departments to ensure that they were a shovel ready or near shovel ready as we can have them. Centennial Park Phase 1 as the City Manager mentioned, we're 95% to 100%, we're reviewing the plans now. I anticipate having those we could have those plans ready now to bid in June.

I mean, I do like that shovel ready, but here's the other thing that really concerns me is, sometimes we need to identify what our needs are versus our wants. We want to make sure we get something completed that we could actually benefit on any type of infrastructure, public safety, because those are pretty much needs. I know we want parks, we want all that, we do need them. But I would like to for me, just my opinion, one quote, is just to focus on things that we really need for our city to grow. But that was it. Does any other members have any questions, comments or concerns?

So, was just curious on the Centennial Park with Phase one, if that were to go through, what is the timeline on Phase two?

So phase two at this time, we're still, we've really been focusing on phase one. So the phase two is still in design. One of our of our biggest things we needed to work out was just the storm drain of that site. So our phase two plans are a little rougher at about 50%, but we'll that will really be driven by funding available to get that project constructed. We are looking at a number of grants to get to look up for additional funding.

Okay. I do believe it would be nice to do a park, either the sports park parking lot or the Centennial Park. We hear every council meeting that there needs to be more things for kids and, community members wanting to see movement on the park. So I do believe that it would be nice to get some movement on one of those parks, and to Carlos' Point, actually finish either the sports park or Centennial Park sooner rather than later.

I have a comment, for that. So with Centennial Park Phase I, how was it determined to put pickleball courts and tennis courts? Like, how was that determined? Was there someone that surveyed the community to see if that's what they wanted?

So Sorry.

Because it's really close to the high school and the middle school. So that's, like, one of my concerns. Like, who decided that?

So we have, kind of our Centennial Park working group. So we do have Melton Design Group as our consultant on. They have a very vast experience all across California doing a bunch of pickleball courts. We do we did confirm. We do have some staff members who play pickleball pretty regularly. We did have the recreation department reach out to some pickleball associations to to understand, okay, what what would be the best setup for us and what could potentially what like a pickleball tournament could come in or just to open up those different opportunities to us. So it was a collaborative effort across all departments with our consultant.

And so the schools were not like the proximity, like it's the school. So the kids and the youth and the parents weren't there wasn't a survey that went out for that?

We did a number of surveys when we initially did. I think it was Prop 84 grant. When we when we surveyed our community. That was the Centennial Park also came up as a part of our strategic plan to to complete to complete that park, and as you mentioned, to provide additional facilities for recreation, and so that was in keeping with that. The parking lot along 9th Street, will also help, with the theater building, and so I know that's something that the school was looking for too is some additional parking.

Okay. So I think, like, well, my decisions are made after, like, calculations, the costs, which projects, you know, we've already spent funds on, also the priority for each project, and then which projects have been like basically been waiting for the longest to so that we can take action on. And also, being creative about some of these, to see where we can change and use the general fund for some of these projects. For, like, the recreation operation facility, I know that one of the land acquisitions, we could potentially, you know, have recreation staff there. So they're just getting creative a little bit is my take.

So but thank you so much for all of your work. So

it looks like you're asking us for direction on our priorities. Correct?

Correct.

So as we've discussed, I'll just mention that the land acquisition is a high priority for me being, as you mentioned, we're already in this. We already started this process. So that means we can use this or we can pull out of the general fund, which I'm not a fan of. So I would advocate for the land acquisitions. You guys are busting out of the seams. We need the space. It's a good time. It's a good opportunity. And then also giving the staff what they need to be more efficient. So, anything we can provide to them to enclose the shop, the mobile lifts, to make their lives a little bit easier, that's what I'm gonna advocate for.

So I think that's

it. Okay. Yeah.

I think the WQCF collections modular is, on the lowest for me. That one is just we can I believe we can still wait on that because we still have a year and a half, I believe, Fernando had mentioned earlier on leasing And as we sit in it more, I think it the price goes down for us to purchase it? Maybe they'll potentially even give it to us, hopefully. So that one's very low. But land acquisition is on my, priority list. And the enclosed fleet shop down on Baldwin, I believe. Correct? Baldwin? Okay.

Yes.

Enclosed fleet shop. Yeah. I think that's where I'm at with that. That's all

I have.

And for me, it would be Centennial Park. The mobile lifts, the modular, all the smaller stuff would be a priority to me. The land acquisition to me, I think, yes, we're getting there, but that's still a little bit farther away. And one of the things that I would like to see is something that we can show the community something for them, not just them see a $5,000,000 bond and then nothing for them.

And as for me, I don't have a definitive answer. I would really have to sit down and break it down and see which projects could we finish from beginning to end and have no surprises to put additional funding from the general fund. That means those are just my comments for now. Now moving forward, are there any other members in the public, present in the chambers who wish to comment on this item 7.4? Please state your name and for the record.

I understand you're updating your fees. And one of the fees developers have is for recreation. And there's a Quimby Act that says you have a limit on that, and that's where park improvements should be placed if you're expanding for future development. So I would think that parks should be part of that fee that goes with the Quimby Act fee construction.

Thank you very much for that information. There any other member in the public wishes to comment I mean online who wish to comment on Section 7.4? Madam Clerk?

Just as a reminder, if you're joining us on Zoom and wish to make a comment, please use the raise hand feature. If you're calling in by phone, you may press 9. We do have a couple of comments. Yolanda, you can go ahead and unmute yourself.

Hi, everybody. Wow. Those are all really great projects, so that's gonna be hard. I don't envy you at all. But my 2¢ is the Centennial Park, as a community member, I'm definitely did not see surveys come out. When I was the commissioner for Parks and Rec in City Of Tracy, we did multiple, the the company that we had did multiple community

forums,

and they were very interactive. So we went out to the public. We definitely hit the youth groups. We hit different community organizations that are active in the group in the community. So I feel like just coming up with four pickleball courts, and Greg's gonna kill me on that, maybe it can only be two tennis court and then then tennis courts and maybe basketball. I just don't feel like this community I feel like there should be more options, I guess, is the word. And then my question for the recreation modular, would that be replacing the three separate ones they have now, or would it be, in addition to?

I believe it would be replacing them.

Would there be any, I guess, pricing or, ideas on looking into the modulars that are there now, just moving them to the empty lot area for a youth center?

I would need to follow-up on the logistics of that. But that that could be an option we could look at.

Those those would be my 2¢. I just feel like, we overlook our youth a lot. The senior center is not able to be used during the days of, mommy and me classes or, you know, preschool gymnastics, things like that. And and then, obviously, during days off of school, there's no use center for these kids to do anything. So I just feel like they get overlooked. And the way our community is growing, we need to have something for them. Thank you.

Thank you, Yolanda, for your comments.

We do have another comment. Candace, you can go ahead and unmute yourself.

Hello. Candace Wyrock again. I kind of want to remind everyone that when we kicked the sheriff's office out of downtown because their facility was, like, basically unusable in the condition that it was in, and we moved them to 1st Street, we told them that it was extremely temporary, and I feel like they've been there now for how long? Three years? So I do think that some priorities as as someone that is passionate about parks and recreation, like, yes, all of the things that are related to parks and recreation sound like a dream, but my kids don't go to parks and participate in recreation if we have a gang problem in Paterson.

If if the parks are unusable because of violence and things of that nature. So I feel like from my perspective, public safety is gonna top anything and everything else that comes, after it. I am a huge, huge advocate of, you know, things for our youth to do, and I love Yolanda's, perspective on almost everything that she ever talks about when it comes to parks and recreation because she does have a very unique perspective and some really amazing experience in that department. But I just always wanna go back to public safety related things. And, you know, on my normal bike route, there's now red air force ones on the the telephone line, and I had to completely change my bike route because of that.

So I just feel like we need to to to maybe focus our money in the public safety realm if if that's an option. And I understand that their facility being downtown in the heart of downtown allows them to get to all of town quicker. So I just I don't know. That's my $0 Sorry if I'm not making any sense, but.

Thank you, Candace, for your comments.

No other comments online, Mayor Pro Tem.

Okay. Do we if you could give your permission to come up here and speak, Cheryl?

Thank you, Cheryl. Jessica, thank you for your comments. I really appreciated that on the Centennial Park. I also agree with perhaps a basketball court would be nice in addition to the pickleball and everything else that was planned. And also in companionship with that, I do agree that our Sheriff's Department needs upgraded facilities. So thank you. That's all

I have.

Thank you, Cheryl. Going back, do we have any other member of the public who provide one other comment public comment? Seeing none, do we have any more online, Madam Clerk?

No, Mayorperson.

Okay. Seeing no additional persons who wish to provide public comment on Item 7.4, we will close public comment. Do I have a motion to approve consent calendar 7.4? This require do I have to read that?

Mayor Prochaim, I believe that this was

7.4.

7.4.

I'm sorry, consent calendar.

Item, okay, sorry. Do I have a motion to consent approve item 7.4? This will require motion.

All motion.

Do I have a second?

I'll second.

Okay. The motion has been seconded, and we will conduct a roll call. The motion has been seconded to require a roll call from the West Patterson financing authority. Council Member Mora? Aye. Council Member Romero?

Aye.

Council Member Hernandez? Aye. And your Mayor Pro Temp votes aye. The motion to accept West Patterson financing authority twenty twenty four-twenty twenty Mayor

Pro Tem?

Yes.

This was the engineering department.

Oh, the engineering department. Sorry.

They're looking for direction from council on their eligible projects.

So we will motion to have direction to prove the projects qualified to receive funding through special tax revenue funding bonds, series twenty twenty three request directions from the council. Do I have a motion? Is that correct?

I'll motion.

Okay. I'll second.

I'll second.

And thank you very much for correcting. So the motion has been second. We'll repeat. Council Member Mora.

Aye.

Council Member Romero. Aye. Council Member Hernandez.

Aye.

And Mayor Pro Tempo votes aye. This motion passes with a four-zero and one absent. Moving to Section eight, City Staff Report. April 1, authorized staff to prepare and release a request for proposal RFP for a feasibility study evaluating our potential transitioning from contract city attorney services and in house city attorneys model. Our staff reports, City Manager, Iola.

Thank you, Mayor Pro This staff report will be provided by our Programs Manager, Ferreira.

Thank you. Mayor Pro Tem and City Council, good evening. Tonight, we're before you to talk about our City Attorney Services. Currently, the City Attorney Services are provided through a contract with a private law firm. Counsel has expressed interest in evaluating that current format and whether bringing legal service in house may be feasible and beneficial for the city as opposed to the contract services we currently have.

With this direction, staff did an initial study, very preliminary study, on how comparable cities do their city attorney services. We looked at the structure of those legal services, staffing models and salary ranges for those comparable cities. As we did that very preliminary study, we found that a much more in-depth study probably needed to be done because, while staffing costs are usually the bulk of the costs that we would be looking at, there are other costs that needed to be taken into consideration. So those other additional costs that we would want to include in this study would be things like legal subscription, software needs, office setup, memberships. And while many cities do have in house legal councils, many still, even with the in house councils, do contract for specialized services.

So we want to look at if that was going to still be necessary if the decision was made to bring these services in house. So a really good look into that would be required. Because of the operational and long term financial implications of this study, staff believes a more formal analysis should be completed by an objective evaluation by a third party through an RFP process. What we would be looking at doing with this study would be to look at the financial impacts, organizational impacts, service delivery considerations, long term operational costs. And what we'd be looking for would be a thorough evaluation and then a roadmap of how we can move forward and options with how we can move forward if it be the desire of the City Council.

So tonight, we're requesting authorization to prepare and release a request for proposal for the feasibility study. After proposals are received, staff would return to City Council with a recommended consultant and contract for consideration. If approved, staff would include a budget item a budget line item of $75,000 for this study. With that, I'll take any questions.

Is there any members from the council who wish they have any question, comments or concerns regarding this item?

None. None.

Well, I do. I just wanted to say, I really appreciate moving forward just to get a third party analysis just to see where our studies are, just see if we're moving forward in the right direction. I believe we've been with them fourteen years and I don't know if they ever did this before. It's similar to an audit. Every X amount of years, I think we should consider of just looking into our financials to see if we're moving in right direction. And I just want to appreciate the staff, Fernando and the councils, for taking the time listening to this. So thank you very much. Is there anybody on? There we go.

Evening, mayor, city council members, Mayor Pro Tem. My name is Dennis Boor. I was a former city attorney for Redwood City, Pleasanton, San Mateo, and Brentwood. I am in support of the request for proposal to transition to an in house city attorney. I was the first in house city attorney in Brentwood.

So I know what it means for a to trans the transition between a contract. The city, before I got there in in Brentwood, was paying four times what my budget was for the first couple years I was there. And in the five years I was there, there was one litigation, one matter that I had to deal with, a word of $10,000. I can tell you that I when I had an internal management structure, you can go the city staff, I had an open door, would come in and consult with me. I've avoided so many conflicts, so many legal problems that it was it was the only they felt comfortable coming to me.

And you can have Citi staff come in. They're not afraid to consult with someone who's paying being paid $450 an hour when they're a fellow Citi employee. It's not even a close call. When you spend over $3,000,000 in the last two years on legal costs, it encourages disputes, delayed resolution, and escalating legal costs. When you have in the inherent conflict of interest, when the city council has a city contract attorney advising you when to do litigation, and they get the litigation, there's no encouragement to settle.

They go on, and the more bad advice they give you, the more money they make. As you can see in the last three years, that's an example that you can relate to. You can the collaboration between a city attorney that's in house and staff is is tremendous. I can tell you in Pleasanton, San Mateo, and Brentwood, it was huge. It doesn't matter that you have a contract city attorney who's not doesn't have an incentive to be here all the time.

That city attorney can be here. So given the significant amount of taxpayer amount that's been paid in legal fees recently, I think the magnitude of this issue is finally coming to a head here. So I don't I don't have any doubt that the in house city attorney is going to be the way you go. Thank you.

Thank you very much for your comment. Dennis, Is there anyone in the public who wish to provide another public comment? Seeing none, is there anyone online, Madam Clerk?

Just as a reminder, if you're joining us on Zoom and wish to make a comment, please use the raise hand feature. If you're calling in by phone, you may press 9. And we do have a comment. Candace, you can go ahead and unmute yourself.

Okay. Honestly, the other stuff that I talked about earlier, you can disregard all that because this is, like, the most important topic of the night. I have been really frustrated with our city attorneys since our last, mayor was in office. I butted heads with them a few times over that situation. And, you know, recently, here I am butting heads with them again.

And mainly because, one, the city attorney tried to gaslight me in a city council meeting and then refused to apologize after the fact, which is fine. But I'm making it personal, and truthfully, it's not personal. Everything that Dennis said is accurate. If our city attorney is incentivized to go into litigation and to get sued and to lose because every billable hour she gets paid more and her office gets paid more, it's not in the city's best interest. So I'm, you know, sad to hear how much it's gonna cost to do an external audit, but I think it absolutely needs to happen.

I think the if if we were going into litigation and we were getting good legal advice, then we'd be coming out of these these, lawsuits ahead. We'd be winning these lawsuits, and I can name at least a couple where we did not win. So that personally, to me, shows me that we are making bad legal decisions. I I do have a question. I don't think you guys actually stated this, but who's going to be the one at the city that's responsible for writing the RFP?

And who's gonna lead the study on the city side? Like, who is gonna be responsible for this? Because it needs to be someone that's gonna be relatively neutral. And truthfully, the city attorney should have zero input on this at all. Like, they they shouldn't be allowed to influence this investigation at all.

Hi, Candace. The city manager's office will be handling this. So it'll be mainly myself and the program manager who provided the staff report.

Okay. And what is this is the community's involvement? I understand, like, you know, I don't get to come do this with you. But, like, will any of that be public information that you guys will provide in the city council meeting, or is it just something that's given in house to, like, city council?

No. As the during the staff report, when we go out for an RFP and we get all the selected proposals, we will be coming back to council to provide all those consultants that have proposed on the RFP and then move forward with an

individual. I heard that part. I meant like is that happening in a closed session or is that something that's Oh, public knowledge?

No. That will be on an open setting,

UNIDENTIFIED

regular council

So we will get the same information that the city council will get?

Yes.

Okay. Yeah. I I think the amount of money that we have spent, we should have made this decision five years ago. Obviously, we didn't have the right people in place in our city council five years ago to decide that. So I'm hoping that we have the right people in place now to to make that decision and move forward as a community because I think, honestly, you guys could have avoided a lot of HR issues recently. I know for sure probably stuff with the with the the firefighters union. If there was an in house attorney that disgruntled firefighters could have gone and had a conversation conversation with, and the in house attorney could have said, nope. You don't have a case. Or, yes. You have a case.

Or, no. This is not okay. Then, yes, this is this is okay. I think we could have saved the city so much money if we had made this decision a long time ago, so I'd like to encourage you guys to make the right decision going forward. And I'm done, sorry. Thank you.

Is there any other member online, Madam Clerk?

No other comments, Mayor Pertham.

Okay. I've seen no additional persons online, we will be closing public comment on Item 8.1. Do I have a motion to authorize staff to prepare and release a request for proposal for a feasibility study evaluating the potential transition from contract city attorney services to in house city attorney's models.

I'll motion.

Do I have a second?

I'll second.

The motion has been seconded and this will require a roll call from your Maurier Pro Tem. Council Member Mora?

Aye.

Council Member Romero? Aye. Council Member Hernandez? Aye. And Yruma Pro Tem votes aye. The motion with a four-zero vote one sorry, the motion authorizes to staff to prepare and release the request for a proposal for the feasibility study evaluating the potential transition from contract city attorney services and in house attorney model passes with a four-zero vote and one absent. Moving on to Section 8.2, adopt resolution number twenty twenty six-twenty

twenty six.

That's right. Okay. So we're going to be changing 8.3 now instead of eight point two first. Moving to item 8.3, we adopt Resolution No. Twenty twenty six-thirty, approving the adoption of the general plan amendment to adopt twenty twenty three-two thousand thirty one housing element of the general plan. Our staff report, our community member, Director Stice, Brian Stice.

Good evening, Mayor Pro Tem, members of the City Council. I'm delighted to be here tonight to present to the city, the city's 2023 to 2031 updated housing element for the city of Paterson. This concludes or this is the culmination rather of extensive lengthy process that is the result of initial a lot of initial research of census data, housing characteristics, constraints and opportunities, trends, state law, a lot of state law, and public outreach presentations to the City Planning Commission, solicitation from the public for their comments on our draft housing element, which was put out at the end of last year. And finally, now the project has gone before the Planning Commission and then of course is here before you this evening. The housing element process is extremely important for all cities in California.

The housing element is one of seven required elements that the state requires each city to have as a part of their general plan. And in recent years, the state has taken increasingly critical control and action to insert themselves in a more aggressive and meaningful manner to ensure that cities are complying with existing state laws as well as the recently enacted state laws. Housing is a statewide concern. The lack of housing is a statewide concern and the recent legislation that we have seen and that we are subject to clearly represents that. I don't want to underestimate or diminish the process that we have been involved in as we've prepared this housing element.

It's a substantial very substantial process and document. There's a lot of research, a lot of analysis and a lot of reacting to primarily state law. As time has gone by over the last several years, cities around California have lost a lot of housing control. Cities have lost the ability to regulate themselves as much as they used to be able to. And the housing element law is an area where we see that in more ways than probably any other area.

I

think the two key facts that the city is faced with when we consider the housing element tonight for potential action is that without a compliant housing element, the city lacks the ability to qualify for state funds, critical funds for infrastructure and the various programs that the state makes funding for. And worse than that, without a compliant housing element, the city is at risk of facing severe consequences by the state, mainly in the form of steep fines that could incur monthly and could increase upon initial fines levied by the state. The good news is that we reached a level of tentative compliance with our housing element as determined by the State Department of Housing and Community Development, HCD, you'll hear that term throughout this evening's presentations. And that was a major milestone for us to achieve, I believe it was back in December. And that was contingent upon that tentative compliance was contingent upon the city conducting a series of rezonings of properties to establish more high density residential districts that are critically important to the State of California.

Additionally, the state required us to increase the level of density that the high density category requires. Joel and our housing element consultant, Kylie Pope, will be going into some of those details. We as a result of those requirements to conduct rezonings, we have identified sites for those rezones. Those will be the second agenda item for these two topics that would follow this agenda item for the housing element. So with that, it's a significant step that we're at this evening.

We are in the eyes of the state, us and about 15 other cities. The state is expecting us to reach compliance, achieve compliance and to pass our housing element. And we have prepared a document that we believe meets that. It's been blessed by the state. And with that, we have a high level of confidence that following action by the council that it would finally be certified by the state of California.

So with that, I'll get out of the way. I will turn this over now to Joel Andrews, our City Planner for a more specific presentation on the staff report. And then after him will be Kylie Pope, who will explain some of the key components of the actual housing element itself. So with that, Joel, it's all yours.

Thank you and good evening, Mayor Pro Tem and members of the council. I'm going to turn it over to Kylie Pope from EMC for the bulk of the presentation, but I want to frame this a little. So the general plan is the guiding document for all the city growth within the city and it has several elements related to land use, development, public safety, parks, there's a range of things. One of the elements is the housing element and that one functions different than any other element that's in the general plan. The state requires that this one be updated every eight years and specifically it's in reaction to a lot of legislation from the state.

There are laws that we are reacting to within this document and there's also a number of housing units that are handed filtered through to us from the state that we need to respond to. And so for the most part, this document is responding to actions by the state. There are things that the state has said. You need to react to these things. And so what we're providing tonight is the approach that we're recommending. So with that, I'd like to turn things over to Kylie Pope from EMC, who is the consultant for this project.

Thanks, Joel. Again, I'm Kylie Pope, a senior planner with EMC Planning Group. Good evening, mayor pro tem and council. Next slide. So before you see agenda that we'll go over tonight, I'll briefly just give you an overview of the housing element and why it's required.

I know Brian will kind of touch on this a bit. I'll make it very brief. Then I'll just discuss Patterson's regional housing needs allocation known as RINA and how the city has identified adequate capacity to meet those housing needs. And from there, I'll highlight key implementation programs, community engagement efforts, collaboration with HCD, environmental review completed, and next steps. Next slide.

So as Brian explained, the housing element is one of many state mandated elements of the general plan. It serves as the city's plan for accommodating existing and projected housing needs across all income levels. The housing elements required to be updated every year, or I'm sorry, every eight years and reviewed by HCD for compliance with state housing element law. And as Joel explained, this plan, it is quite reactionary to ever changing state laws. It's important to emphasize that the city doesn't build housing directly, rather the housing element establishes the policies, the programs, and the site inventory to facilitate and accommodate housing development by the private market.

The housing element identifies where housing can be developed. It removes regulatory barriers where needed through implementation programs, and it establishes those programs to support housing production. So in essence, you should think of this document as both a compliance document required by the state and also an implementation strategy. Next slide. So in recent years, the consequences for not having a compliant housing element have increased substantially, as Brian was saying.

Noncompliance can expose jurisdictions to referral to the attorney general, court action, significant fines, and even reduce local control over land use decisions. Conversely, maintaining compliance does preserve local control, and it does position the city to remain eligible and competitive for important funding opportunities. So that's a key reason why adoption of a compliant housing element so important. Next slide. So this update is occurring in the context of California's broader housing crisis.

The states identified need for approximately two and a half million homes statewide. Through the RHNA process, the state allocated the housing need to each region, which for Patterson would be the Stanislaus Council of Governments region, and Stanclog assigned Patterson a six cycle arena of 3,716 units. That allocation is the planning target that the city must accommodate through this housing element over the twenty twenty three, two thousand and thirty one planning period. Now, again, this doesn't mean the city is required to build 3,716 housing units, but it does mean the city must demonstrate that it has adequate capacity for those units, and that would be through the site inventory, and then also programs to facilitate development of those units. Next slide.

So the city's RINA, or regional housing needs allocation, is divided into four income categories, very low, low, moderate, and above moderate income households. And just for your knowledge, these income categories are based on the area median income, which for as of April 2025 for Stanislaus County, the area median income for a household of four was 98,500. So very low income category would be less than or equal to 50% of the area median income. Low would be 50 to 80% of the area median income. Moderate would be 80 to 120% of the area median income, and the above moderate would be greater than 120 of the area median income.

Now state law requires the city to plan for housing across all of these income levels, not just the market rate housing, which is considered the above moderate income level. And this is important because the housing element must affirmatively address housing needs for lower income housing. This is really where the state hits very hard in the implementation programs that are within the housing element. So you'll see a lot of those programs addressing the needs of lower income households and making sure that actions are there to facilitate development of such housing. And again, in this allocation forms the foundation for the site inventory as well as the implementation programs.

Next slide. So in addition to the city's six cycle arena of 3,716 units, Patterson actually carries forward an unaccommodated lower income need of a 196 units from the prior planning cycle. So for background, during the fifth cycle planning period, the city was assigned 1,044 lower income units but did not have sufficient capacity to accommodate all of those units. And what that means is when they developed the housing element site inventory, in that analysis they weren't able to identify sufficient sites to accommodate those lower income units. So that resulted in a shortfall of four ninety six lower income units.

The city took steps during the fifth cycle to address that shortfall, which included rezoning 13 acres at Weber Avenue and 1st Street to high density residential back in 2020, and this accommodated approximately 300 units or roughly 60% of that needed capacity. So while that effort reduced the shortfall, it didn't eliminate it entirely. It left a remaining unaccommodated need of 196 lower income units. And you can see in the table there, those 196 units are comprised of both very low income and low income, 98 units under each of those income categories. Now state law requires the city address this shortfall in addition to its current six cycle arena.

State law class classifies these units as an unaccommodated housing need, which is why they're added to the city's current arena and carried forward as an adjusted arena, as shown on the slide. So at this point, it should be considered that the city's arena is a total of 3,912 units. That adjusted arena is now the benchmark that the housing element has to address, It's also the basis for the six cycle site inventory and the rezoning actions associated with program 1.11, which we'll get into later this evening as the next item. Next slide. So in total, the city's site inventory in the housing element has identified capacity for a total of 5,264 units, which exceeds the adjusted arena of 3,912 units.

This includes development opportunity in the Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch South development areas, as well as vacant and underutilized infill sites, projected accessory dwelling units, and accredited pipeline projects. Pipeline projects include those projects that were approved and permitted or entitled on or after 06/30/2023, which is the start of this planning period. So after accounting for pipeline projects, the city maintains a 47% RENA buffer, which is important for compliance with no net loss law and helps account for any uncertainty and whether all sites develop as projected under the housing element. So a little bit about no net loss law. Essentially, requires that a jurisdictions housing element ensure a sufficient capacity of adequate housing development sites throughout the entire planning period to meet the jurisdictions unmet RENA needs for each income category.

So the state, HCD, generally recommends that jurisdictions maintain surplus capacity, particularly for lower income housing. So that's usually the income level that's most difficult to develop for. And this slide just shows that the housing element responds to that expectation. It demonstrates that Patterson's not relying on a bare minimum approach, but instead has planned conservatively to maintain compliance throughout the planning period. Next slide.

So in addition to identifying sites, state law requires the housing element include programs to implement the plan. As Brian mentioned earlier, many of the programs come as a result of identifying governmental constraints to developing housing. And so several programs are particularly important, many on the screen before you, but these are not all of the programs. These are just specific ones that I've called out. And the two bolded programs in the left column, Program 1.11 and Program 1.12, we'll get into in the next item tonight.

But just very briefly, I'll give you a rundown of each of those. So program 1.11 includes land use and zoning amendments specifically designed to address state law requirements related to the city's fifth cycle and accommodated housing need or shortfall sites. So as we previously discussed, because the city is carrying forward a 196 unit lower income shortfall into the six cycle planning period, the state requires the city to take additional actions to ensure sufficient sites are available at appropriate densities. And based on the metropolitan status of Patterson and being a suburban jurisdiction, what the state has identified it as as an appropriate density for high density affordable units is a minimum of $20 units per acre, as well as requiring that development standards are supportive of lower income housing. So program 1.11 implements those requirements through targeted rezoning actions and related development standard amendments for identified shortfall sites.

Program 1.12 also addresses state law requirements related to prior identified sites under state housing law. Basically requires that jurisdictions adopt by right approval provisions for certain housing developments, proposed on sites that were identified in a previous housing element that did not develop but are being included in the current planning period site inventory. Another key program is program 1.1, which removes barriers to multifamily development. The provisions of this program include modest amendments to density to meet that minimum requirement of 20 dwelling units per acre for high density housing, as well as height standards and parking reductions to support housing feasibility. Collectively, these programs are moving the city beyond compliance and establish a framework to facilitate housing production that's consistent with state law.

Next slide. So public participation has been an important component of this process. The city conducted a joint city council and planning commission meeting in November 2024 to introduce the housing element as well as to discuss the public review draft. Outreach also included a dedicated project web page that has been continuously updated over the last year and a half of this planning process. Housing element materials were posted on the city's website and sent out via mail and email blasts.

Stakeholder surveys were distributed as well as property owner interest forms. And all of these efforts helped inform the housing element and policies and programs within the element. Next slide. The city worked extensively with HCD throughout this update process, and that collaboration will continue to ensure that the city obtains a certified housing element. The initial draft was submitted in February 2025, followed by HCD comments, revisions, and a resubmittal.

On 12/02/2025, HCD issued a statutory compliance letter confirming the housing element satisfies state requirements of state housing law. However, compliance is contingent upon required rezonings and implementation of by right provisions, which Brian alluded to at the beginning of this presentation. More recently, the city did receive a notice of violation letter from HCD dated 03/24/2026. Staff reviewed that letter carefully. And importantly, the city must adopt the housing element and complete the necessary rezonings and establish associated development provisions, which, again, we'll discuss later this evening in order to come into compliance with state housing law.

The council's decision to adopt the housing element this evening is therefore a necessary step alongside those implementing actions to address issues raised by HCD and move the city into a state of compliance with state housing law. Next slide. As for environmental review, the city evaluated the proposed housing element under CEQA, and staff determined adoption of the housing element is exempt from CEQA pursuant to the common sense exemption. Next slide. As for next steps, should the council motion to adopt the housing element, staff will submit the adopted housing element to HCD for formal certification.

Staff will then work on implementing the programs in the housing element, which includes identified zoning code amendments. And as previously expressed, tonight is an important milestone to ensure compliance with state housing law and is a part of a much broader implementation process. I'll just reiterate that in March, HCD issued the city a notice of violation, stating the city's currently in violation of state housing law due to its failure to adopt a substantially compliant housing element. In order to be found in compliance, the city must adopt the housing element and the required rezoning and associated development standards, which again, we'll discuss later on the next agenda item. And so accordingly, the council's decision tonight will directly impact whether the city is able to move into compliance with state housing law.

Next slide. As for the recommendation, it's recommended for council to motion to adopt resolution twenty twenty six-thirty, adopting a general plan amendment to adopt the twenty twenty three-two thousand and thirty one housing element. Next slide. So that concludes my presentation. I'm happy to take any questions.

Is there any member of the council who has any question, comments or concern on this item?

None.

Seeing none, is there anybody on public who has any questions, comments and concerns on this item 8.3?

Mayor Pro Tem, members of the City Council, John Anderson, JV Anderson, Land Use Planning, 139 South Stockton Avenue, Ripon, California. Here tonight representing DelParta Healthcare District, Karen Fries is in the audience as well. We have presented concerns to you. It should have a copy of our letter the district's letter to the city relative to this item as well as the next item that you're going to be considering. This is a very, very exhaustive process that staff is going through with these housing elements.

Welcome to the State Of California and dealing with trying to meet housing needs and it's not a fun exercise. My firm is currently working and actually received certification finally from the State Of California for the City of Waterford. And as of tonight, the City of Riverbanks Planning Commission has approved that housing element and ultimately go to City Council and off to the state for certification. It's a very frustrating process, very long, very elaborate and something that is in my opinion taken a housing lot of policy decisions right out of our hands locally and putting them in the state's hands. I fear that the next seventh and eighth cycle is going to make it extremely difficult for most cities, all cities in the State of California to actually do exactly what the state is asking them to try to accomplish.

In any event, we're appreciative of staff's efforts, we're concerned as to how this housing element, if it's adopted currently as stated, how it may impact adversely impact Del Pollo Healthcare District's medical campus application that we have formally filed with the city. We received verbal commitments at the planning commission level relative to the fact that what's been presented within this housing element would not necessarily be in conflict with our plan, Del Pardo Healthcare District's master plan as it relates to the healthcare center that we intend to build. So we're thankful for that. But we again, we still want to make sure that we're not going to have a project that's going to be in conflict with what is being suggested here. One of the sites, Site Number 10 is a site that is part of our master plan.

The number of units that are anticipated or discussed as part of the housing element exceeds what we're suggesting. What we're suggesting is consistent with the density range, but not certainly the density expected as the housing element is presented. It's obvious that you've got surplus built into the plan, which is awesome and allows the city at the city's discretion to adjust where those units might land within the city. Again, the city's responsibility is just to designate those sites, not to build them. So we're thankful for that.

So I want to make sure that our letter and our concerns are expressed as part of this discussion. And I think that's really all we have at this point. Thank you so much. Any questions of me?

No, I did have I had that particular question earlier before our council meeting, but Joe was able to elaborate on that section that we were requiring those two ninety units, But he did explain how this was going to move forward. Right, Joel, if you could elaborate.

Yeah. So as was mentioned, the care districts proposal, they're showing fewer units than what was included in this document. We consider this to be a living document. So, things aren't going to develop exactly as shown in the plan. We're going to have to make changes as projects move forward and sites develop.

And so it wouldn't be the healthcare district's responsibility to react to this. The city would need to find additional spaces potentially to rezone. We understand that there are landowners who would like to move forward with that. There's more process than just switching that out. And so we're proposing that this continue tonight and then we sort that out in in future meetings.

And again, we're appreciative of that effort as well as long and obviously staffs working with us on this item.

You very much. Madam Clerk, is anybody online who wish to provide any public comment at this point?

Just as a reminder, if you're joining us on Zoom and wish to make a comment, please use the raise hand feature. If you're calling in by phone, you may press 9. We do not have any comments online. May I present?

Seeing no additional persons who wish to provide public comment on item 8.3, we will close public comment now. Do I have a motion to adopt Resolution twenty twenty six-thirty approving the adoption of the general plan amendment to adopt twenty twenty three-two 31 housing element on the general plan?

I'll motion.

The motion has been moved. Do I have a second?

I'll second.

The motion has been seconded. Council Member Mora? Aye. Council Member Romero? Aye. Council Member Hernandez?

Aye.

And Mayor Pro Temp votes aye. The motion to adopt Resolution twenty twenty six-thirty approving the adoption of general plan amendment to adopt twenty twenty three-two thousand thirty one housing element of the general plan passes with a four-zero vote and with one absent. We're moving back to Section 8.2. Adopt resolution number twenty twenty six-twenty nine, approving the adoption of general plan land use, commitments to implement the twenty twenty three-two thousand thirty one-six cycle housing element, approve the first readings and introduction of the ordinance number eight sixty five, reading by title only, waiving the further reading and ordinance of the City Council of the City of Paterson approving the zoning map commitments for specified sites consistent with housing elements program 1.1. Our staff report, our Development Director, Stice.

Again, City Planner, Joel Andrews will be preparing or presenting this staff report.

Thank you. Good evening again. So with the housing element, one of the key components of that in relation to, the city's approval with the state is certification. And so certification by, HCD, the state's Housing and Community Development Department requires that we have the housing element which you just adopted and also requires that there are some actions related to land use for rezoning some rezoning specific properties that are outlined in the housing element before they will certify the document. There are other programs and policies that are outlined in the housing element that will, take place over the cycle through 2031.

But, we're looking to have this one initiated tonight and would like to turn this over to Kylie Pope for the rest of the presentation.

Thanks, Joel.

Okay. I think we can go on to the agenda. That was a great intro. So tonight's presentation, I'll begin with the background and state law requirements that necessitate these actions. I'll then explain what the ordinance does, including the zoning amendments, the proposed zoning amendments, and development standards as well as proposed by right provisions.

And from there, I'll walk through the proposed amendments for the identified sites, environmental review, and next steps. Next slide. So as already stated, these actions implement housing element programs one point one one and one point one two. So I think it might be helpful at the outset to clarify two key terms used throughout this presentation. First, shortfall sites are sites required to be rezoned to address a shortfall in the inventory of sites, in this case, available to accommodate lower income housing.

In other words, these are sites the city must amend to ensure adequate capacity exists to address the city's lower income housing obligations, including that physical unaccommodated need. Secondly, we have the phrase or term prior identified sites, which are sites that were identified in a prior housing element for which the city must demonstrate continued suitability and availability in this cycle for residential development at appropriate densities. Now, some of these sites might not require rezoning, but they're still subject to development provisions required by state law, and we'll get into that a bit more later on. So these two categories are treated differently under the ordinance, but both are addressed through the actions before you tonight. So as discussed in the prior item, the city has an adjusted RINA of 3,912 units, which includes a 196 unit lower income carryover from the prior planning cycle.

HCD's 12/02/2025 determination that the city's housing element meets statutory requirements as Joel was stating is contingent upon completing the required rezonings and associated development provisions that are in the ordinance you're considering tonight. So together, the actions proposed under program one point one one and one point one two in the ordinance are necessary to come into compliance with state housing law. Next slide. So government code sections six five five eight three and six five five eight three point two require the city to ensure adequate sites are available at appropriate densities and where necessary, complete rezoning actions to address the shortfalls sites. Additionally, government code section six five five eight four dot o nine also requires the city to address the fifth cycle and accommodated housing need.

So these actions are necessary to satisfy conditions associated with HCD's compliance determination. And the key point that I'm trying to make here is that these are not discretionary policy choices, but rather they are actions required by state law. Next slide. So what does the ordinance do? It really does two things.

First, it amends land use and zoning designations for eight shortfall sites. Secondly, action 2A establishes development standards for certain shortfall sites that allow mixed uses. Action two b establishes buy write provisions for qualifying housing projects, which apply to both shortfall and prior identified sites. Now that structure is important because some sites are gonna receive only a rezoning. Some will receive rezoning plus development standards plus buy write provisions, and some will only receive buy write provisions.

And so we'll work that out on, I believe, this next slide. Okay. So this slide basically provides the road map for the ordinance that you have in the packet before you. So the columns show which sites are proposed to undergo rezoning, which are subject to additional development standards and those that are subject to buy right provisions. Now I have it separated by shortfall sites and prior identified sites.

So under shortfall sites, sites six all the way down through 14, those are your shortfall sites, and they're receiving rezoning and buyer right provisions. Now sites ten, twelve, thirteen, and fourteen are receiving all three rezoning, specific development standards being applied, as well as by a right provisions. Prior identified site five, the second from the bottom row, it does not require rezoning or specific development standards, but it is subject to buy right provisions, and I'll explain why. So Site 5 is already designated and zoned for high density residential use. So in the eyes of the state, it's already adequate to support high density affordable housing.

So there's no rezoning required. There's no development standard provisions that need to be added. But because it was identified in a prior planning cycle, it is subject to buy write provisions for qualifying housing projects, which I'll discuss at length in the next couple of slides. And essentially, what the state's, you know, requiring here by having these buy right provisions apply is they're saying, okay. It's already zoned appropriately.

It has appropriate development standards, meaning it meets the, you know, appropriate densities to facilitate affordable housing on the site, but it didn't develop over the last, you know, planning period or the last two planning periods. So we want to make it easier. So we're going to say that it's not subject to any conditional use permit, any discretionary review. It's going to be permitted by Wright. So that's essentially what's happening there.

Now Site 10, you'll notice it is both a shortfall site and it is a prior identified site. So it's getting all three provisions applied to the whole suite. It's being rezoned. It has extra development standards being applied, and it's subject to buy right provisions. Okay.

Next slide. So action one consists of the zoning map amendments for the eight shortfall sites. So that's what you see in the table before you. So you'll see the first four sites, six, seven, eight, and nine, are proposed to be redesignated from general commercial to high density residential. One site, Site 10, is being proposed to be amended from general commercial to downtown core.

And three sites are proposed to receive a mixed use overlay applied to existing commercial zoning. And collectively, these amendments make the identified sites available with land use permissions necessary to support lower income housing consistent with state law requirements. Next slide. So the following few slides are just showing via map form the proposed land use and zoning well, the existing and the proposed land use and zoning amendments. So for shortfall Site 6, you can see here it's being proposed to go from exist I'm sorry, general commercial to high density residential.

Next slide. Site 7 proposed to go from general commercial to high density residential. Next slide. Site 8 is doing the same, proposed to go from general commercial to high density residential. Next slide. Site 9, also going from general commercial, proposed for high density residential. Next slide. Site 10, that's your shortfall and prior identified site. It's proposed to go from general commercial to downtown core. Next slide.

And shortfall Site 12 is currently highway service commercial proposed to have a mixed use overlay applied. Next slide. Site 13, also highway service commercial proposed to have a mixed use overlay applied. Next slide. And Site 14, currently general commercial proposed to also have that mixed use overlay applied.

Next slide. Now, action 2A applies only to four shortfall sites that allow mixed use development. So in addition to rezoning, these sites are subject to additional development standards that are established by the ordinance in the packet. So those standards allow residential uses on up to 100% of the site. That doesn't mean they have to have 100%, it means if you get an application that comes in, then 100% residential is allowed, if that's what is proposed.

They require a minimum density of 20 dwelling units per acre. And they provided that these standards prevail over conflicting or less permissive provisions of the underlying zoning or overlay. And the reason for this is because each of these sites, twelve, thirteen, and 14, they have existing underlying zoning, which either does not allow residential uses or it has conflicting development standards. For instance, it might not have that minimum 20 dwelling units per acre requirement. So the ordinance is making sure that existing underlying zoning is not going to prohibit the development of high density affordable units on these sites.

And the same goes for site 10 with the downtown core because the development standards for downtown core, I

believe

are lower than the minimum 20 dwelling units per acre there. And so this ordinance establishes these requirements that apply only to these four sites, which is required by state law because in their eyes, without these requirements, there's no reason for, well, me put this a different way. The sites could develop without residential uses. They could develop with non residential uses without these provisions. And so the state's goal is to make sure that, you know, the high density affordable units can be developed on these sites.

Okay, next slide. So action 2B is establishing the buy rate provisions for both shortfall and prior identified sites. These provisions apply only to qualifying housing projects where at least 20% of the units are proposed to be affordable to lower income households, and they're subject to an affordability agreement. So for qualifying projects, residential development is permitted by right, meaning the city cannot require a conditional use permit or any other discretionary review for approval of the project. Projects will still remain subject to objective standards though.

And again, just a reminder, Site 10 is both identified as a shortfall site and prior identified site, which is why it's appearing in both categories in the table on that slide. And just a reminder that these actions, both action one, two a, and two b, they're all intended to satisfy state requirements. They're not discretionary choices the city is just making on these sites. Next slide. As for environmental review, the city evaluated these actions under CEQA, and staff determined the project is exempt under CEQA pursuant to the common sense exemption and further pursuant to public resources code section 21,080 dot 85.

I do want to point out that future development proposals on these sites would be subject to project excuse me, project specific review, including CEQA review where applicable. Next slide. So should the city council motion to adopt the ordinance, the item will proceed for second reading on June 2. Following adoption, the city will submit the adopted actions to HCD, the other resolutions. And just an another reminder that these actions are representing a key step toward completing housing element implementation and addressing state compliance requirements.

Not to be confused with just general state housing requirements, but requirement in order for HCD to find the city in a state of compliance to certify their housing element. Next slide. So based on the analysis presented and the recommendation of the Planning Commission, Tonight's recommendation is for counsel to motion to adopt resolution twenty twenty six-twenty nine, approving the adoption of general plan land use amendments to implement the housing element, And also to motion to approve ordinance eight eighty six reading by title only, waiving further reading and ordinance of the city council the city of Patterson approving the zoning map amendments for specified sites consistent with housing element program one point one one and one point one two. Next slide. That concludes my presentation.

I'll take any questions. And I I wanna point out one other thing. I noticed there was a discrepancy in the, in the agenda. And so the agenda there's a discrepancy, yeah, in the agenda and then the attached ordinance and the number of the ordinance. The agenda states ordinance number eight six five, but the attached ordinance actually says ordinance number eight eight six.

I'm sorry, we're just waiting on that ordinance.

The council could move forward with the motion and exclude the number because it's got to come back anyways. So the final number can be presented for second reading and adoption. So I don't think we have to worry about making sure that we get the right number today.

Okay. The ordinance, just leave it blank. Yeah. Okay. There any council members that have any questions, comments or concern on this item?

I have a question. So the change is permanent, right? It's not just like a intent temporary measure?

So there are, so the important part is that the city has so much land that's designated in this way. And so, that could be swapped. This is what's outlined in the housing element right now. And so these are that's what, staff is proposing. But, for instance, with the healthcare district, we're going to be need to look at other places to fill fulfill that. And so it's not a forever policy, but we will need to move things around to make sure that we have enough area to accommodate what the state is requiring.

And I'm sure you guys have, but was it were these parcels evaluated like, for new low density, or have they previously been counted towards lowering the have are these new parcels that were changing or density or have they been counted?

Two of the sites were identified in the previous housing element and those are the ones that, Kylie discussed that were listed separately on the table. One of those was rezoned. The other one was not. There are reasons behind that but, because of state law we need to do that at this time. The others are new with this housing element.

As far as the process goes, there are requirements that the state placed on us for what areas could be considered. And part of that is how much development is on there, currently? Are they able to be developed reasonably well? So if you have a lot of, single family homes or something on the property, it's harder to turn that into a, apartment project or a high density residential project, than something that's a vacant lot or has minimal development. It needed to be spread out through the city, so there are several areas that were considered.

And, we reached out to several landowners related to this change. And there are more than were required. These are the sites that were identified to move forward.

Anybody? Anyone else?

I just want to make sure that I understand that our hands are kind of tied and this is kind of a state element, but I do really want to make sure that Del Puerto Healthcare District does get the parcel that was rezoned from under them, you know, taken care of. And I do want to make sure that the city takes the role that it needs to and is there to help them out with that. And I just want to focus on that one because this is a really big, good project for this community, and I would hate to see it fail over a parcel that California told us to rezone.

Thank you. Yeah, we're committed to do that.

Okay. Seeing no apparent or additional concerns or comments from the council. And then from the Mayor Pro Tem, we will now open it for the public on Section 8.2.

Good evening. My name is Adrian Avila, and I have a friend of mine that actually owns one of these property sites. And a question that I have real quick is if it's rezoned, how is that going to affect your property tax?

That's a good question.

Is the question I want to make sure I understand the question correctly. You're asking if the property is rezoned, how does that affect the property tax? Yes. It's my understanding that it does not affect the property tax. What affects the property taxes when improvements are made on the property. So physical site improvements, structures or improvements So to the land

we have a dozen or so pieces of property that are being evaluated. What if an individual decides that they don't want to sell? Do we have eminent domain coming in?

This plan does not utilize eminent domain as any of the programs or measures for implementation. So an owner can sit on it and not do anything with their property. And so that's an important it's a good question. It's important to piggyback off of that question to remind or to just declare that this is a housing plan, not a development plan. So it's a guiding document that helps us culminate what our options are

We outlines have state mandates right now to okay? Correct. So you have a program that needs to be implemented and moving on by 2031. And the city itself is not going to be purchasing any of the lands. Is that correct?

That's not part of our plan. It's not part

of our It's not part of the initial plan?

Correct. That's not one of the programs.

And you have city doesn't have existing contractors or developers right now that are knocking on the doors of those properties?

Developers are Purchasers. Are active at all times looking for adequate properties to purchase. And the city does not really get involved in that. We react to what the private market brings to us to review as a result of a private So you

don't have, let's just say, contractors already that are just waiting for this rezoning so they can jump out there and begin a development?

There I'm not aware of it, if any are. I'm aware that there is some interest. But to what level that's playing out that'll be playing out over the next four or five years?

And if there were contractors that were available to work through the city for this development and a property owner were to contact the city, would you be allowed to give them that particular name?

Which name?

Let's just say an outside contractor.

Oh, sure.

Yeah. That's a housing builder. Okay.

Yeah. It would be public information to That's share the ownership information of a particular parcel.

So they could get a bid from that contractor through your contact with the city?

If the owner wanted to solicit a bid, that's absolutely correct.

All right. Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there any members in public or online who wish to provide a public comment on Item 8.2? Madam Clerk?

Just as a reminder, if you're joining us on Zoom and wish to make a comment, please use the raise hand feature. If you're calling in by phone, you may press 9. And we do not have any comments online here, Gautam.

Okay. Seeing no additional persons online or public to provide a public comment, we will now close the 8.2 public comments. Do I have a motion to adopt number 20 six-twenty nine, approving the adoption of the general plan land use amendments to implement the twenty twenty three-two thousand and thirty one six cycle housing element approved first reading and introduction of ordinance like reading by title only, waiving the further reading and ordinance of the City Council of the City of Paterson approving the zoning map amendments for the specified sites consistent with the housing elements program 1.1.

Mayor Pohlton, if I may, if we can have two separate motions and votes on the item. So the first one would be for the resolution, the second one would be for first reading and introduction of the ordinance.

Okay. Do I have a motion to first adopt Resolution twenty twenty six-twenty nine approving adoption of general plan?

I'll motion.

Do I have a second? I'll second. The motion has been seconded. Sorry. I'm I missed a second. Do we have a we do a vote now, right? Sorry. Council Member Mora? Aye. Council Member Romero? Aye. Council Member Hernandez? Aye. And Mayor Pro Temp votes aye. The motion passes with a four-zero to adopt a resolution number twenty twenty six-twenty nine approving the adoptions of the general plan land use of amendments to implementing the twenty twenty three-twenty three cycle.

So now we're going to move on to the second one, which is the amendment to implement the twenty twenty three-twenty twenty one six cycle housing element approving the first ratings and introduction of ordinance number blank reading to the title only, waiving the further reading and ordinance of the City Council of the City Paterson approving the zoning map amendments for special sites consistent with housing elements program 1.1. Do I have a motion? I'll motion. Do I have a second? The motion has been seconded.

We'll conduct a roll call vote. Council Member Mora? Aye. Council Member Romero? Aye. Council Member Hernandez?

Aye.

And your Mayor Pro Temp votes aye. The motion passes with a four-zero with one absent. We'll be moving on to Section 9.1, public hearing. Received report on vacancies and recruitment and retention efforts in the compliance with legal obligations for public hearing and vacancies in accordance with Assembly Bill 2,561 and Government Code Section 3,502.3. Our staff report, our Human Resources column.

Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. Good evening to you and to City Council, to our community members and to City staff. I am before you this evening to present our annual vacancies rate for the 2025 calendar year. The purpose of this public hearing is to provide transparency and information regarding workforce vacancies, their operational impacts, and the city's efforts to recruit and to retain qualified employees. This report is provided in accordance with Assembly Bill 2,561, codified at Government Code Section 3,502.3 as a part of the Myers Melius Brown and it applies to all local agencies including chartered cities and counties.

This bill became effective 01/01/2025 and was introduced to address the widespread job vacancies in local government and the negative impact that these vacancies have on the public sector, including public service levels and employee workload. Obligations under this law include tracking job vacancies, presenting information annually at a public hearing on the status of these vacancies including recruitment and retention efforts and identifying any policies, procedures and recruitment activities that may present challenges in the agency's hiring process and actions to alleviate such obstacles. There may be additional obligations if vacancy rates in specific bargaining groups exceed 20%. That bargaining group may request that additional information be presented at the public hearing. In accordance with Assembly Bill 2,561, employee bargaining groups are also permitted to make a presentation during the public hearing regarding vacancies, recruitment and retention concerns for their specific represented employees.

This first slide is an illustration of our vacancies reported by month. This slide reflects the city's vacancies created or filled each month. The city's overall vacancies from January to December range from eight to 12 vacancies per month. Based on our full time authorized and budgeted positions this equals a low vacancy rate of 4.9% and a high vacancy rate of 7.5% with an average vacancy rate of 5.8%. These numbers also include positions that were placed on hold for budget savings or reallocation.

This chart is our vacancy rates separated by bargaining groups as of year end 12/31/2025. As you can see from this chart as you can see from this chart, asked me which is our largest bargaining group, which has five vacancies or 5.9% of its 85 positions as of year end. PMMEA, our mid management bargaining association ended the year with two vacancies of its 33 budgeted positions for a 6.1% vacancy rate. IAFF, our fire union ended the year with one vacancy or a vacancy rate of 5.3% based on twenty nineteen budgeted position. As previously stated, if the vacancy rate for any of these bargaining unit reaches 20%, the city would be required to provide additional information.

This information will be specific to the bargaining unit and would include applicant information or ways to improve compensation or working conditions. As illustrated by this chart, all of our bargaining units were well below the 20% threshold. This slide is an illustration of our recruitment process, which starts when the vacancy is created either by voluntary or involuntary separation, promotion, transfer, retirement or if a new position is budgeted and approved and budgeted. The hiring department would submit an approved request to the human resources department at which time the human resources department would open the position by posting the job. Depending on the position there may be an examination process.

Applications are screened for minimum requirements and those eligible advance to the next phase of the selection process which is the interview panel. Candidates or the selected candidate is presented or offered a conditional job offer at which time the applicant proceeds through the background checks in DOJ processing. Once all that is completed, successfully completed and passed, the applicant is then placed in the job. This is our 2025 recruitment summary. During the year 2025, there were 21 vacancies filled.

The average number of calendar days to fill those vacancies was eighty five calendar days and those vacancies were filled two from an existing eligibility list, 15 from a new recruitment while four were filled from internal only promotional recruitments. As a requirement, we are required to present any obstacles. Fortunately for the city of Paterson, recently we haven't faced many recruitment issues or recruitment obstacles. Typically for us, our challenges are when positions are placed on hold due to budgetary constraints or hard to fill classifications. We're recruiting for these more challenging positions, we do direct sourcing to businesses and other agencies, targeted contact to applicants on LinkedIn and we ensure that our recruitment remains actively posted on various social media platforms and we will also advertise with specific job specific associations.

In addition, we may post the job posting at the public library, local colleges and local businesses and we will also encourage individuals currently in the field to share the posting on their social media networks. Although these positions may be more challenging to fill, we were still able to fill them within the initial recruitment period. This summarizes our retention summary for the reporting year and it shows that 20 vacancies were created throughout the year and this was across various departments citywide including administration, engineering, fire and public works. As you can see, 25% of these vacancies were from staffing growth or newly budgeted positions, 20% were from opportunities that were created internally from promotions or from transfers, 25% from involuntary separations or retirements and 30% from voluntary separations or turnover with an annual staffing turnover rate of 4%. That concludes my presentation.

This presentation is for informational purposes only and will be presented annually. If you have any questions, I'll gladly take those now.

Is there any council member who has any question, comments or concern regarding this section item 9.1?

No questions. Thank you.

None. I do. A quick question. How does the going back to that image where it has the timeline, how they create those what's called the job openings? I took an image.

Yes, our recruitment process.

Our recruitment process. Yes. Yes, the recruitment process, we got the vacancy created, recruitment request. Who creates that vacancy request? Where does it come from?

It comes from the hiring department.

Which is in this case would be?

It depends on whoever the hiring authority is, the department that's doing the hiring. They would create that request.

So departments each department will

hire? Correct.

If there's a department that has a need, they will provide that information over to HR to see and then for it to become a process into recruitment. Okay.

That'll Okay. Be enough. Thank you.

You're welcome.

Is there anybody on the public who wish to provide any further comment? Seeing no apparent or concerns additional concerns or comments from the council and no one from the public, is there anyone online who would like to provide any public comment?

We do have a comment online, Mayor Pro Tem. Cath Richey, you can go ahead and unmute yourself.

Hi, guys. I just had a question. It looks like we promote from within about 20% of the time. And I'm just wondering, you know, do we have, like, internal policies to train and to promote more from within, or, or do we typically try to just, go out and and hire? Because it feels like most folks that have worked for the city are pretty invested in our city. And so it it it just looks like a you know, from a from a corporate perspective, that seems super low.

As as reflected on the chart, those numbers are pretty close ranging between 2030% for all of our retention criteria, whether it's from newly budgeted positions, from internal promotions, or from, turnover or voluntary separations. They range from about 20 to 30%.

Yeah. So do we do we, as a as a city, do Okay.

On that slide, I didn't see, after, I guess, they're hired, if they were to transfer or to leave, is there any policy to do, exit interviews?

Yes. That is our process.

Okay. And is there routine employee surveys that go out, and that, are looked at and implemented?

Routine employee surveys that go out. There has been some surveys conducted, but we do not have a policy of routine employee surveys.

Okay. And once you do get a survey, what is the process after that? What happens with that information?

The information is reviewed by management, and depending on what the results are, then it's it's being conveyed to staff.

Okay. And how long does that process take?

It's no specific time.

Okay. Thank you.

You're welcome.

Is there any additional members online?

There are no other comments, ma'am. Okay.

No additional persons online who wish to provide a public comment on Item 9.1, We will now close the public hearing. Moving on to Item 10, we're almost there, City Council items. We appoint two members of the Planning Commission for the term of February 2026 through February 2028. Do I have a motion to appoint Ron West and Renita Alexander for the Planning Commission for the terms of February 2026 through February 2028.

I'll motion.

Do I have a second?

I'll second.

The motion has been seconded. We will provide a roll call. Council Member Mora. Aye. Council Member Romero. Aye. Council Member Hernandez?

Aye.

And Yruma Pro Tep votes aye. The motion passes with a four-zero with one absent. Moving to Section B, Council Member Hernandez. Homeless Alliance, do you have any?

Yes, we last meeting, we reviewed the annual action plan for Sanesis Irving County Sanesis Home consortium. And I noticed that the city of Paterson receives a 171,874 from the c CDBG and ESG allocations as well as, let's see, 96,382 for the home allocation project or investment partnership program for San Jose Home Consortium. So, I just wanted, a quick update on where these funds will be used or if we, the city council will be briefed in the future in regards to these allocations?

Fernando? Thank you very

Will we be briefed on the allocations from the 2026, 2027 CDBG and ESG allocations?

The CDBG ones?

It says 2026, 2027, City of Paterson, dollars 171,874. I can bring that up to you.

Yes. On this one, maybe I want to refer in I don't have that answer to you, but I wonder with our Finance Director, Williams, if that is something that is covered under during our budget process. If the CDBG and the amount of money that we have through and what we have typically is covered in the aspect of our budget approval, correct?

Correct. And so these items, I believe, were brought to counsel by Teresa in a consent item within the last couple of months, and they're going to be programmed as part of the fiscal year 'twenty seven

Okay, so we'll go ahead and get briefed later time. Thank you so much.

Absolutely. Thank you very much, Councilmember Hernandez. We have a Councilmember Romero.

Nothing to report.

Councilmember Mora.

Nothing to report.

And your Mayor Pro Tem, don't have nothing to report at this point from EDAC. We are moving finally to number 11, other matters.

None.

None here.

Mayor Brozheim, I do have one item, so the cleanup item. We did have one outstanding item for closed session to go back into closed session. My recommendation is with the consensus of the council to push that item to the next meeting. If the council feels

Yes. Comfortable

Okay. Thank you.

We have consensus to move for next closed session. Thank you. Well, I just want to say thank you. It was a long meeting. I don't know if you guys were trying to scare me, but it was good. Yeah. All right. Was worth. Thank you so much, though. Thank you. This meeting will now be adjourned.