Riverbank residents oppose transitional housing project near children's sports complex

In the heart of Riverbank, California, the city council meeting on March 25, 2025, became a platform for passionate voices expressing deep concerns over a proposed housing project. As residents gathered, the air was thick with anxiety and determination, each speaker sharing personal stories that underscored their fears for community safety and well-being.

One resident, a veteran and father, spoke fervently about the dangers he perceives in the proposed transitional and permanent housing near Oakdale and Morel Road. He recounted harrowing experiences from his past, emphasizing that his family’s safety is paramount. “I will defend my family,” he declared, urging the council to reconsider the project, which he believes could invite crime and instability into their neighborhood. His plea resonated with many in attendance, who echoed similar sentiments about the potential risks to their children and families.

Another resident, Steven Vegas, shared his discontent with the idea of tiny homes being introduced into his neighborhood. He expressed concerns about the vetting process for future residents, questioning how the city could ensure the safety of children living nearby. “Safety is the most important part for me and my children,” he stated, reflecting a common worry among parents in the community.

Mary Chris, another concerned citizen, articulated her opposition to the housing project, highlighting its proximity to a sports complex frequented by children. She argued that while the need for housing is undeniable, placing vulnerable populations near areas where families gather could jeopardize community stability. “We must ensure that transitional and permanent housing projects are placed in an appropriate location,” she urged, calling for a balance between supporting those in need and protecting the community.

Lisa Potter echoed these concerns, emphasizing the risks associated with introducing a high-risk population near recreational spaces. She urged the council to explore alternative locations for the housing project, advocating for the safety of children who use these spaces daily.

As the meeting progressed, residents raised questions about the project's funding and the implications of waiving fees for developers. Concerns about the long-term sustainability of such housing initiatives were voiced, with many questioning how the city would manage potential future costs.

The council members listened intently, acknowledging the residents' fears and frustrations. The discussions highlighted a community at a crossroads, grappling with the complexities of addressing homelessness while ensuring the safety and stability of their neighborhoods. As the meeting concluded, it was clear that the path forward would require careful consideration and dialogue, balancing compassion for those in need with the imperative to protect the community’s future.