[{"_1":2,"_122":-5,"_123":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,98,110],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6539352,"mediaKeyId","3654714-91dda3c35a7a3390685cae45617e9afe","parentId",3654714,"title","Council approves SB1 project list, subdivision improvement agreements and district assessments; multiple motions pass unanimously","audioSeconds",2011,"startMs",2918000,"endMs",4929000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3654714-91dda3c35a7a3390685cae45617e9afe&start=2918&end=4929","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3654714-91dda3c35a7a3390685cae45617e9afe/thumbnail_2918000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6539352/Manteca/San-Joaquin-County/California/Council-approves-SB1-project-list-subdivision-improvement-agreements-and-district-assessments-multiple-motions-pass-unanimously","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6539352-39340b41916d3a0d6ece0d32d3b35725/orig.mp4?Expires=1771137061&Signature=Xl3hgffF-d5NJGg59bNTdHMGQwBkiYpNlkMtM8j3OYlAJ4fK8Qo4acHhzvEdlWX0fhNO~FvSlYf4ZHHJs~5F~4IlRXFLepY5C52TXfoduYCUOfSXeVxnNFLtPQCjNlNhuWlqNUj7mD18ySu3-0F5kGAsE2hlXxUFsOPFeURxKIINClNiSLQZo~3zeNCHpzh5bNpLqib~JJu4FqismF2aR~mQbeT54Om9vYt4hKlZlRgJwOzCTHFbCPG3TtQ65OUM5XO6dFNmDMVx1k7xj2j-spP~I9NNDuwySutcaQjW7EF2hRKrJIz4M3eEZ-P5VbF731g1KULukOxpQmjnAVXXQQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Manteca City","date","2025-06-03T00:00:00Z","article","The Manteca City Council unanimously approved a slate of consent and hearing items during its June 3 regular meeting, including the city’s list of projects for Senate Bill 1 funding, amendments and final maps for the Kuiper/Delicato subdivisions, annual maintenance assessment district reports, and acceptance of the fiscal year 2023–24 annual comprehensive financial report.

Why it matters: The consent approvals move infrastructure projects and development entitlements forward and keep the city’s accounting and assessment work on schedule ahead of the new fiscal year.

Council voted 5–0 to adopt the resolution approving the city’s fiscal year 2025–26 capital improvement program projects eligible for SB1 funding and authorized the city manager or designee to submit the list to the California Transportation Commission. Assistant Engineer Alfredo Mendingo was available to answer questions during the meeting.

The council also unanimously approved Amendment No. 1 to the improvement agreement for Kuiper at Delicato, Unit No. 1 (track 4065), which spreads PFIP (public facilities infrastructure plan) reimbursable credits across Units 1 and 2 rather than limiting credits to Unit 1. The city manager and staff clarified that the improvement agreement amendment did not change the original conditions of approval for the project.

A related consent item approved the improvement agreement and final map for Kuiper and Delicato Unit No. 2 (track 4248) and authorized the city manager and mayor to execute the necessary documents.

On assessment districts, council adopted the annual reports for the city’s Special Maintenance Assessment District for fiscal year 2025–26, declared its intention to levy and collect assessments, and set a public hearing for June 17 on proposed levies for benefit and landscape maintenance districts.

In public hearings and major‑staff reports, the council received and accepted the city’s fiscal year 2023–24 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and the Manteca Financing Authority basic financial statements; the acceptance vote was 5–0. Interim Finance Director Matt Boring and outside auditors from Mays and Associates presented the audit results and noted an unmodified (clean) opinion, adjustments discussed in the notes, and outstanding single‑audit and internal control memorandum items to be delivered later.

Vote tallies and formal motions recorded at the meeting matched the actions above; each motion carried by a 5–0 roll call or voice vote. Councilmembers Breitenbucher, Lackey, Moriwet, Vice Mayor Halford and Mayor Singh voted in favor of the listed items.

Going forward: Several of the projects approved are subject to later permitting, bidding or funding steps. The council set additional hearings and execution steps where required, and staff will return with paperwork, maps, or more detailed budgets as the projects advance.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Manteca City - City Council Regular Meeting - Jun 03, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Manteca City Council unanimously approved a package of consent and hearing items on June 3 that advance road and subdivision projects, adopt assessment district reports, and accept the city's audited FY2023–24 financial statements.","taxTitle","Manteca, San Joaquin County, California","taxId",4536,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6539333,"County supervisors stage 175th anniversary 'roadshow' in Manteca, outline county projects including $250M Be Well campus",116,454000,570000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3654714-91dda3c35a7a3390685cae45617e9afe&start=454&end=570","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3654714-91dda3c35a7a3390685cae45617e9afe/thumbnail_454000.jpg","/articles/6539333/Manteca/San-Joaquin-County/California/County-supervisors-stage-175th-anniversary-roadshow-in-Manteca-outline-county-projects-including-250M-Be-Well-campus","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6539333-a11f455ba0026e217ae24e5e7c9e885f/orig.mp4?Expires=1771137061&Signature=RxXTPPJ5pRP2hVTLdd2GJuzVvasDiaGzGfbp-nylWjL6MQsGwCSJVuK1I3PUGXFDKAZMgNBfRYGu0JYY2~fmvWC5xFkIytyBtRWpBqyvqdApSUzYwH8rjYd5JsiQF7~uRjoyJrNK8CH7ojhpkgML57d0M~uYR-VA3kOGn0ThLS15PZye0tTPidVXpR8~sGcpYfb7quuBgnAUVngYX92l~UKu~sEjCxtX7KO96hdtW0fkBLguNH7C0LegT7dWNxYmK2wR1UVYGCXrmNVHRkYHTQpxUlo2QWNFWMK~Jc-ACtqUvhhSUCzkXgZpRMWs9CvIv9snkvNDJU6DWlo9tFSz3A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","San Joaquin County leaders visited Manteca on June 3 as part of a county “roadshow” marking the county’s 175th anniversary, and outlined several county projects and investments affecting the city and region.

Why it matters: Supervisors used the visit to highlight county investments that could affect local services, infrastructure and land use in Manteca and nearby unincorporated areas.

San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors Chair Paul Canepa and Vice Chair Sunny Dhaliwal spoke to the council and audience about county activity and local partnerships. Canepa said the county is using state and other funds for multiple projects, telling the council that “we just got a hundred and $37,500,000 of SB1 money to do the Be Well campus kitty corner on 22 acres, from the county hospital. And I believe we have close to 92,000,000, so it'll be a quarter of a billion dollar project.” He said the Be Well campus will bring water and sewer to the freeway side of the county hospital and is intended to support behavioral health infrastructure.

Canepa also described other county efforts: a new morgue, a jail expansion, a new district attorney building, purchase of a building at 400 East Main Street (Stockton) and acquisition of Oakmore Golf Course for future county uses (public works, environmental health and community development). He framed the roadshow as a celebration of county history and as an opportunity to discuss ongoing county projects.

Vice Chair Dhaliwal presented a certificate recognizing Manteca’s contributions to regional growth and partnership. The visit included representatives from county departments and the San Joaquin County Historical Museum; Manteca Museum and Historical Society members also presented a short history of the city and remarks about the museum’s collections and facilities.

What to watch: County staff will pursue the Be Well campus project and associated infrastructure extensions; the county’s acquisition and repurposing plans for Oakmore Golf Course and other county projects will proceed through county planning and budgeting processes.","San Joaquin County Chair Paul Canepa and Vice Chair Sunny Dhaliwal presented highlights of county projects in Manteca — including a Be Well campus funded partly by SB1 dollars — and offered a county certificate recognizing the city's regional contributions.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6539338,"Neighbors press council to deny proposed Woodward/Pillsbury gas station, urge full environmental review",0,2324000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3654714-91dda3c35a7a3390685cae45617e9afe&start=2324&end=2324","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3654714-91dda3c35a7a3390685cae45617e9afe/thumbnail_2324000.jpg","/articles/6539338/Manteca/San-Joaquin-County/California/Neighbors-press-council-to-deny-proposed-WoodwardPillsbury-gas-station-urge-full-environmental-review","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6539338-ac5238d821f9405486fcd4a5a832b252/orig.mp4?Expires=1771137061&Signature=OWThT367p2cB87B-TPjWi0tg9mqxhWzr1Qvo3gyjNBnpc5OxBPjbfDcDH-HsjwbsV7HjbMwWlBgdiSN4JdlgrhhAEi6n1IiazXwLIa0amd9qmz3FREDWNg21XDB75kvQHttb73~oUybPfJ57vzJhUIl6yI6pId5Ls8nQUIXD7HhlhaWUBXOUMvga0SIaooPUzfhQKbtcxLpo3Aegb3Cn59j-MPgXNd2cCXFgjnlrvM-YyCWm6kiOmZdwG8OJRnRfkIrv2JEgiZNNmJpyHU3sqvKjzX~Ec-R7dPrcAgfvVxsyqVHBHiAZyJeYHjxaa0B13YLfmKQ90lWLBtdblgUKZQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Several residents told the Manteca City Council on June 3 that a proposed gas station, convenience store and drive‑through at Woodward Park and Pillsbury is incompatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood and requires fuller environmental review.

Why it matters: Public commenters said the project raises health, traffic, noise and safety concerns and that the city's environmental review should include a health risk assessment and consideration of truck traffic, construction impacts and proximity to homes and schools.

Public comment highlights: Johanna, representing Woodward Park United, said the group had collected 925 verified signatures opposing the project and asked council to require a full environmental impact report (EIR). Johanna told the council the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District reviewed the city's environmental document and “raised serious concerns,” including that the report “failed to address emissions from increased vehicle traffic, especially heavy‑duty trucks,” relied on outdated tools, and “skipped a full health risk assessment even though the district specifically recommended one.”

Rick Martinez, a long‑time resident, listed risks he said accompany gas stations near homes: volatile organic compound emissions (benzene), groundwater contamination from leaking underground storage tanks, increased traffic at a T‑intersection, fire hazards, and potential crime or loitering. Martinez said some homes are “as close as 40 feet from the proposed gas station” and cited California Air Resources Board guidance (as reported by public comment) recommending 300 feet between new gas stations and sensitive land uses; he also noted newer research suggesting 500–1,000 feet.

Other commenters raised CEQA concerns and urged mitigation or denial. Council and staff did not take final action on the project at the June 3 meeting; the remarks were recorded during the public comment period. City staff reminded speakers of the three‑minute time limit and directed that procedural questions on specific agenda items be raised when the item is formally considered.

What to watch: The matter appears to be active with organized neighborhood opposition and an outstanding request for a full EIR. When the project reaches a formal agenda item, staff will present the city's environmental determination and proposed mitigations; the air district’s written comments were cited by speakers and could be part of the administrative record.","Residents and an organized opposition group told the council they have gathered at least 925 verified signatures opposing a proposed 24/7 gas station, convenience store and drive‑through at Woodward Park and Pillsbury, and asked the city to conduct a full environmental impact report citing air quality, traffic and public‑health concerns.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6539343,"City unveils proposed FY2025‑26 budget and Measure Q spending plan; council to consider final budget June 17",1666,7106000,8772000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3654714-91dda3c35a7a3390685cae45617e9afe&start=7106&end=8772","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3654714-91dda3c35a7a3390685cae45617e9afe/thumbnail_7106000.jpg","/articles/6539343/Manteca/San-Joaquin-County/California/City-unveils-proposed-FY202526-budget-and-Measure-Q-spending-plan-council-to-consider-final-budget-June-17","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6539343-5284ad325646b0c9c397a660a92d3107/orig.mp4?Expires=1771137061&Signature=dKNmaqWdVXXG6fpfqv98PcWeSBFKpbVImvjzQZSXkLxujbM7af~4EeO11OcyICM-D3KlAK10Dn6QrZbKb1-hoMp2b8T7YKHU7vJ3gyS0Vg9B9OaXlkyCKA5gf772jH9~k8~UrbKW2URvz5BIVPJyQfqmCfp2vLPh7YxyF-JH2HPwhPw~aT7HYXTfXbM5U6dICBboXT3FxlbjKeyB-L1XgLm3Ww9AYO0UY31dOqLKnFM3~NHUb4TZL~QPs-z7hVJzlA6-jSv0E-hiLXnhfkvMje7Jn0nEocsXnXQUbgoRrX0MQ86zACZmlcp2nTeqvcH59lPWqKM8t-QZfQurLuBQsw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City staff presented the proposed fiscal year 2025–26 budget to the Manteca City Council on June 3, laying out a draft operating plan that anticipates Measure Q sales tax revenue and proposes targeted one‑time and ongoing spending for streets, public safety and capital projects.

Why it matters: Measure Q (a 0.34 percent local sales tax approved by voters) is expected to create a new annual revenue stream for the city; the council’s early allocations will shape capital projects, staffing and services for the coming year.

Interim Director of Finance Matt Boring and Budget Manager Lana McBroom described a citywide proposed operating budget of roughly $312.6 million in revenues and $311.2 million in expenses, producing an initial citywide surplus of about $1.4 million before pending personnel adjustments. General Fund revenue was shown at approximately $80.5 million with proposed general fund expenditures near $80.8 million, including $511,000 in one‑time general fund capital. Staff emphasized the budget is a working draft and will be refined before final adoption.

Measure Q and priorities: Staff and the finance ad hoc (Mayor Singh and Vice Mayor Halford) presented a Measure Q allocation plan that dedicates $4.5 million to street improvements, $2 million for one‑time police needs and $3.65 million for fire needs in the first year. City Manager Toni Lundgren said Measure Q funds allow the city to begin staffing and capital projects residents prioritized during the measure campaign, including land acquisition and initial design work for a new police headquarters and Fire Station 6.

Personnel and operations: The draft budget proposes seven new full‑time positions and one reclassification; three positions would impact the General Fund (including a fully funded community service officer and two patrol officers partially funded by a federal COPS grant and Measure M). Staff warned adding personnel could reduce reserves and that a citywide class and compensation study is underway to address recruitment and retention.

Enterprise funds and timing: Staff noted planned water and sewer rate increases to support utility enterprise funds; short‑term deficits for sewer and water reflect timing gaps before anticipated bond proceeds. Solid waste rates implemented in FY2024 have begun to build a reserve for that fund. The budget also reflects $14 million in ARPA allocations that must be spent by the federal deadline.

Next steps and council directions: Councilmembers asked for additional detail on (1) which funds are producing the citywide surplus, (2) Great Wolf Lodge tax sharing and when the city will begin retaining larger shares of TOT, (3) golf course subsidies, and (4) development‑fund drawdowns. Staff agreed to provide fund‑level schedules, clarify Great Wolf revenue timing and carryovers, and return with the final budget for adoption on June 17. No final appropriations were made on June 3; council received the presentation and provided feedback.","Staff presented a draft FY2025‑26 budget that relies on new Measure Q sales tax revenue, includes seven proposed full‑time positions, and allocates one‑time Measure Q funds to roads, police and fire. The council accepted the presentation and asked for follow‑up detail with several items to return June 17.",{"_33":111,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":112,"_41":113,"_43":114,"_45":115,"_47":116,"_49":117,"_51":118,"_53":119,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":120,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":121,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6539348,"Council asks staff to return with narrower flag policy; consensus favors U.S., California and city flags plus limited leased‑property exceptions",2588,4881000,7469000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3654714-91dda3c35a7a3390685cae45617e9afe&start=4881&end=7469","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3654714-91dda3c35a7a3390685cae45617e9afe/thumbnail_4881000.jpg","/articles/6539348/Manteca/San-Joaquin-County/California/Council-asks-staff-to-return-with-narrower-flag-policy-consensus-favors-US-California-and-city-flags-plus-limited-leasedproperty-exceptions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6539348-90ab1fcb8600f09735084de64740490d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771137061&Signature=incEaRUF-YZnRDLj-70kQHzzPZnKMjZmLhtQP2bgVxsZzusHg7xIV6C9EofT-rq1~tY7hppJgLK0fYsdYkLym5wBCiURwzpEOwTsmBxNtO9~tqsXCYe6-kFCE4oxe7PbV1~N7Yzg~nAiqs3EysOCXwSKqkpyAQQybtJ1ZRkcFsZCGHdrBRS5PpgzoDhwO~s2t0LhXxfvLBX2R-J8RXOkOttDTrOFUwWZEeSdaSc5YmTI9VBM9MgTfnMlmj6Tn-1zhmV4YoqJyiVBNJZrdGLNNTc-KOJ41GG-OLRLD0866mXIMX65CzfrSN4uv3d0edIhwDbXh0cKAxfQezT6dso4xw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Manteca City Council on June 3 directed staff to return with a revised city flag policy that would restrict flags displayed on city‑owned property to the United States flag, the California state flag and the City of Manteca flag, while allowing narrowly defined exceptions for department flags and leased city properties whose operations warrant particular flags.

Why it matters: Council members said a narrow, consistent policy reduces legal risk while preserving official city identity. The discussion followed a request to revisit the city’s existing flag policy and included concerns about fairness, administrative burden and possible litigation after the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision involving municipal flag displays.

City Attorney David Nafusi reviewed four options for council: (1) limit flags to the U.S., California and city flags (with limited leased‑property exceptions); (2) maintain a broader, manager‑approved list published annually; (3) remove the policy and rely on the municipal code delegation to the city manager; or (4) retain the current policy. Nafusi said the council’s choice should be consistent with the U.S. Supreme Court precedent referencing a 2022 case involving Boston and municipal flags.

After public comment — including remarks from John (San Joaquin County Pride Center) urging the council to preserve pride flag proclamations and Bill (resident) suggesting proclamations be treated the same as flag raisings — councilmembers discussed tradeoffs between a single, clear rule and the administrative flexibility of a calendar or manager list. Several councilmembers expressed a preference for the narrower approach to minimize divisiveness and litigation risk; others favored a calendar approach to allow scheduled flag raisings.

Council consensus: Staff was asked to prepare revised language for the June 17 meeting reflecting option 1 (U.S., California and city flags), with modifications clarifying that department flags and flags on leased city properties (for example, the VFW POW/MIA flag or golf‑course event flags) may be flown consistent with the leased entity’s mission. The council did not adopt a final policy at the June 3 meeting; it asked staff and the city attorney to return with a draft ordinance or administrative policy for final consideration.

What to watch: The June 17 return item will include draft policy language covering leased properties and department flags and will address whether public proclamations should be governed under the same rule or retained as a separate practice.","After a lengthy discussion, the council directed staff to return June 17 with a draft that would limit flags on city property to the U.S., California and the city flag while allowing department flags and certain leased properties to fly flags consistent with their missions.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council approves SB1 project list, subdivision improvement agreements and district assessments; multiple motions pass unanimously

County supervisors stage 175th anniversary 'roadshow' in Manteca, outline county projects including $250M Be Well campus

Neighbors press council to deny proposed Woodward/Pillsbury gas station, urge full environmental review

City unveils proposed FY2025‑26 budget and Measure Q spending plan; council to consider final budget June 17

Council asks staff to return with narrower flag policy; consensus favors U.S., California and city flags plus limited leased‑property exceptions