ESCH-ING FOR A RAISE
Published in the Jan. 24, 2026 issue
The Town of Mammoth Lakes extended its temporary contract with Eastern Sierra Community Housing (ESCH) for the second time, rather than reaching agreement on new terms, much to the dismay of the organization‘s officials who were seeking a funding increase.
The extension was approved unanimously by the Mammoth Lakes Town Council on Wednesday.
ESCH is a local nonprofit that supports community housing throughout the Eastern Sierra. For years, the Town of Mammoth Lakes has contracted with the organization to implement housing requirements, secure grant funding, administer deed restrictions, and help develop affordable housing.
Under the most recent contract, signed in July 2022, the Town pays ESCH $84,000 per quarter, or $336,000 annually. That figure has remained effectively unchanged for the past 13 years, aside from a modest $6,000 increase in the late 2010s, ESCH Executive Director Patricia Robertson said.
So, when the contract expired in June, ESCH asked for a raise. Six months later, the parties have yet to reach agreement on revised terms and have instead returned to extending the existing contract at the same funding level and scope.
“Every time the contract is up, [Town] leadership wants to revise the deliverables and there’s always been this culture that we’re not doing enough for the amount of money that they give us,” Robertson told the Sheet. “So we really end up doing more for less.”
When Robertson took over the organization seven years ago, she said she quickly noticed the stagnation in Town funding and moved to diversify ESCH’s revenue. Over time, that effort doubled the organization’s overall budget.
“We expanded staff and got new contracts with the counties because the point of [the Town] not increasing the contract over a long period of time is to suffocate us out,” she said.
She complained that the Town’s contract structure was overly rigid, arguing that it fails to reflect the full scope of ESCH’s work. A more flexible description of services, she said, would better capture the organization’s role, and justify increased funding levels.
“[The Town] treats its partners like a business transaction,” Robertson said. “Like, you’re going to work 40 hours a week only on Town stuff. This is how much it costs and that’s it. But I really believe it needs to take a different lens and see the added value that a local nonprofit brings to the housing landscape.”
She said it seems like the town doesn’t trust ESCH, but that friction didn’t arise in a vacuum.
The Town of Mammoth Lakes originally created ESCH, formerly Mammoth Lakes Housing (MLH), in 2003, during a period of explosive real estate growth and mounting state pressure to address affordable housing.
The goal was to establish a nonprofit housing authority that could implement the Town’s affordable housing requirements, access grant funding, and deliver workforce housing that the private market was failing to provide.
But the organization’s first major development, Meridian Court, quickly became a liability.
MLH rushed the project forward at the height of the housing boom, paying roughly $1 million for a small parcel of land and using density bonuses to push zoning, parking, and setback limits to their maximum.
The project assumed continued market growth and offered little margin for error. Then, when the housing market collapsed in 2008, those assumptions failed.
MLH lacked the financial reserves and policy flexibility to respond. Foreclosures followed, deed restrictions were lost, and investor ownership replaced workforce housing in a project designed to remain affordable in perpetuity. In the aftermath, the organization suffered litigation, strained relationships with homeowners, and the permanent loss of public investment.
Although MLH later revised its deed-restriction policies and development practices, the damage to institutional trust had already been done. The Sheet covered this fallout as it occurred, but there’s a concise recap in the Jan. 29, 2015 issue for those interested in revisiting it.
Against that backdrop, Robertson’s assertion that it appears to be a “cultural”problem reflects more than a simple contract dispute. While ESCH has since evolved into a regional housing nonprofit with a stronger reputation, it remains tied to its origins and early missteps.
That context is especially relevant now. The contract extension comes a week after the Town proposed taking over ESCH’s role in deed-restriction agreements, a move that raised significant questions from ESCH board members about the future of the partnership.
On Wednesday, Town staff framed the extension as a stopgap measure while negotiations continue.
Town Manager Rob Patterson said the extension was simply to carry forward the existing contract terms and compensation through the end of the fiscal year on June 30.
Patterson said the Town’s goal over the next six months is to renegotiate a contract that is more clearly focused on deliverables and expectations, rather than extending the current agreement indefinitely.
He stressed that the Town views ESCH as an integral partner, but wants greater clarity around scope, assignments, and outcomes as the Town’s housing programs evolve.
Patterson added that he does not intend to seek further extensions without either a new contract or an alternative agreement in place.
