Rialto council deadlocks on housing element, continues debate for two weeks
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
After lengthy public comment and a detailed presentation from city staff and consultants, the City Council’s attempt to adopt the 6th-cycle housing element and associated rezones ended in a 2–2 tie and was continued to the first March meeting amid warnings of state fines and potential loss of local land-use control.
The Rialto City Council failed to adopt its sixth-cycle housing element and associated rezones on Tuesday after a 2–2 roll-call tie, and instead voted to continue the item for two weeks.
Senior planner Sandra Robles and the city’s consultant from Kimley Horn told the council the package—intended to align Rialto with state housing law and the city’s RHNA allocation—would establish a Housing Opportunity District with densities ranging from 20 to 50 dwelling units per acre and include incentives under Government Code §65583.2 for projects that provide at least 20% affordable units.
During public comment, Jared Sopko, owner/operator of the North Rialto Shopping Center, urged the council not to involuntarily rezone grocery-anchored commercial property into the overlay, saying the change could make existing commercial uses nonconforming and risk long-term vacancies. Anna Gonzales of the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice urged adoption to address the city’s affordable housing shortage while calling for an inclusionary housing ordinance and targeted outreach to affected businesses.
Council debate centered on outreach and property selection, with Mayor Pro Tem Ed Scott and Council member Edward Montoya expressing disappointment in staff notification to property owners. Montoya said, “We are being forced into this vote,” reflecting council unease about state-driven requirements. City Attorney Eric Bell warned of legal consequences if the council did not adopt a compliant housing element, saying the state could impose fines of “$10,000 a month” up to “$100,000 a month,” pursue litigation that could place a receiver in control of land-use decisions, and potentially block permitting until compliance is reached.
Mayor Baca moved to adopt Resolution No. 84-73 and multiple ordinances to implement the rezones. The clerk recorded the roll call as follows: Mayor Baca — Aye; Council member Edward Montoya — Aye; Council member Carla Perez — No; Mayor Pro Tem Ed Scott — No. The city attorney confirmed a 2–2 tie on the resolution; under council rules the tie resulted in a failed vote.
Following the failed roll call, Mayor Pro Tem Scott moved — and the council approved — to continue the public hearing and bring the item back at the first March meeting to permit further review and potential amendments. Staff and the city attorney noted that failing to adopt the package promptly may expose the city to state enforcement or penalties, but the council opted for an additional two-week review period.
Next steps: the council will reconvene the housing element item at the March meeting; the public hearing was reopened to allow additional written and spoken comments if changes are proposed before final action.