Planning commissioners press staff for answers on Ostrom's Way recuperative-care operations

San Bernardino Planning Commission members on Tuesday pressed city staff for clearer records and faster follow-up after inspections of a motel at 1960 Ostrom's Way that the commission approved for a recuperative‑care use earlier this year.

Commissioner Ivan Garcia asked staff to explain when occupants can lawfully move into the site and how the city will ensure conditions tied to the conditional use permit (CUP) are met. He said he wants “an open discussion perhaps on the recuperative facility center” and urged clearer procedures for closing out conditions of approval.

Community Development Director Elliott (referred to in the meeting as Mr. Elliott) said staff has been conducting monthly, unannounced inspections and will bring a report to the planning commission. “For the inspection yesterday, building safety, code enforcement, planning and the police department were there. And they all made observations,” Elliott said. He added the commission retains the legal tool of the CUP and “we can revoke it if we think things are not being done properly.”

Commissioner Galande pressed for specifics about which entities are operating at the Ostrom's Way motel and whether the operator has purchased or leased the property from the Motel 6 owner, identified in the discussion as Mr. Patel. Galande said the commission had approved the site for recuperative care use on the understanding the operator would occupy the motel; she said she believes the property is currently being used by multiple entities and that the split use complicates inspections and accountability. She asked staff to provide a list of every entity operating at the location, their purpose, and whether they hold business licenses.

Elliott told the commission the city’s records show a business license dated Aug. 1, 2025, covering the specific use approved by the commission and that the CUP was granted on July 8, 2025. He also said staff had observed voucher placements by both the City of San Bernardino and San Bernardino County at the site and that the applicant organization before the commission is listed as NNHA (the application is not for Illumination Foundation). Staff said they have no confirmed evidence the recuperative‑care operator was functioning at the site before the CUP was approved; if members of the commission or the public can provide such evidence, staff asked to be notified so they can pursue it.

Commissioner Carleone asked whether building and fire inspections had been performed before occupancy; staff replied that a change of use does not always trigger the same scope of physical upgrades as new construction, but the building safety unit will verify code compliance where required. The building official and code enforcement manager joined the discussion: Christie Rolodur, the city’s code enforcement manager, said code officers have been realigned with police beats and that the department has 16 officers assigned to beats, each responsible for proactive and complaint inspections.

Multiple commissioners requested more rapid and concrete follow-up. Elliott reported staff attempted to reach the motel owner that day and pledged to provide the commission an update at the next meeting on who is operating at the site, the ownership status, the results of the recent inspection and the city’s plan for ensuring CUP conditions are satisfied. He said the city's monthly inspection reports and the six‑month compliance review are the mechanisms staff is using now to determine whether to pursue enforcement or revocation.

Commissioners and staff also discussed a related past case: the Illumination Foundation's recuperative program on Redlands Boulevard, which staff said had operated under a short, negotiated agreement with the city while the nonprofit applied for its CUP amid an injunction the city faced years earlier. Elliott said that history explains why that earlier project had different timing and documentation than the current Ostrom's Way application.

The commission did not take new formal action at the workshop; members directed staff to return with a written inspection summary and a list of entities operating at 1960 Ostrom's Way for the next planning commission meeting.

The issue will be revisited once staff delivers the requested documentation, inspectors’ findings and any recommended enforcement steps.