Yucaipa council calls June referendum on Freeway Corridor Specific Plan after hours of public comment

The Yucaipa City Council voted to hold a special referendum election on June 2, 2026, to let residents decide the fate of the contested Freeway Corridor Specific Plan update, authorizing a $200,000 budget adjustment to cover election costs. The vote came after more than an hour of public comment and detailed staff briefing on fiscal and legal implications.

Why it matters: The plan has been a multi‑year effort involving environmental review and zoning changes. Staff told the council the preparation effort has cost about $1.2 million and that a private partner (identified in the staff presentation as Pacific Industrial) agreed to reimburse $500,000 of that cost, of which $150,000 has been received. Staff estimated the direct cost of a special election at $200,000 and presented scenarios showing net general fund impacts ranging from approximately $0 (if the update is upheld and reimbursements flow) to roughly $1.0–1.4 million if the update is overturned or the city rescinds it and must redo environmental work.

Public voices were sharply divided. Kathy Sellers, speaking during general public comment, urged council to rescind the update and pursue community study sessions, arguing that putting the question on the ballot would waste “over $200,000” of taxpayer money after a referendum petition she said gathered more than 10,000 signatures. Opposing speakers including property owners and developers told the council they had invested years and money into the plan; Abraham Issa, whose property lies in the project area, said the plan represented a ‘‘golden opportunity’’ and noted a partner had committed about $30 million toward infrastructure.

Legal and procedural questions featured prominently. A member of the public raised a referral to California election law and argued that a filed referendum automatically suspends the challenged legislative acts and freezes zoning actions in the plan area. Planning staff and city counsel disagreed on the application to a particular parcel map, stating that the parcel at issue lies outside the specific plan area and that the map was a split filed in 2023 (before the update) and is not a rezoning.

Council discussion focused on tradeoffs: some members argued the public had spoken through the referendum petition and that voters should decide; others warned that overturning the update would likely require costly additional environmental review and that the city needs revenue and infrastructure options. Deputy Mayor proposed rescinding the update immediately and forming an ad hoc committee to craft alternatives, but that motion failed on a 3–2 vote when councilmembers Miller, Thorpe and Woolsey voted No and the mayor and mayor pro tem voted Yes. The subsequent motion to adopt Resolutions 2025‑61 and 2025‑62 calling the special election and authorizing the $200,000 budget adjustment passed 3–2.

On outreach, city attorneys cautioned that the city is prohibited from advocating for or against measures on the ballot but can distribute fact‑based, educational information; council directed the city manager to monitor any election‑period materials and to return to the council if potential advocacy or unexpected costs arise.

What’s next: The city will place the referendum on the June 2 ballot. If voters overturn the update, staff said the council would have to return to direction‑setting on land uses in the corridor and likely revisit environmental work and funding options; if the update is upheld, staff expects developer reimbursements to cover much of the preparation cost per current agreements.