Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing University Terrace topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenters, UCR student leaders urge Riverside council to reconsider denied University Terrace/HomeKey housing funding
Summary
Dozens of residents, UCR student leaders and housing advocates urged the Riverside City Council to revisit its decision to deny state housing funding for the University Terrace proposal, raised civil-rights concerns and said the denial will increase costs and harm people experiencing homelessness.
Dozens of residents, student leaders and service providers used the city’s public-comment period to urge the Riverside City Council to reconsider its recent denial of a funding package tied to the University Terrace housing proposal and HomeKey-like state resources.
The comments were led by student and community voices. Joseph Anastasio, legislative director for the Associated Students at the University of California, Riverside, said the student body adopted a resolution expressing formal support for the University Terrace initiative and its goal to create housing near campus. “The Associated Students of UC Riverside have passed a resolution expressing support for the University Terrace project,” Anastasio said, describing the resolution and students’ petitions.
Several speakers said the council’s decision to reject roughly $21 million in housing funding (as described by commenters) will raise long-term costs and worsen outcomes for people living outdoors. Michelle O’Brien, who identified herself as an older adult and resident, urged the council to show compassion and allow housing programs to help people return to stable lives: “I ask you to have compassion for the housing project and allow people experiencing homelessness to become employable and productive members of society,” she said.
Negochi Nember Nicholsen, a public-interest attorney who identified herself as a resident of District 1, said a complaint had been filed with the civil-rights division alleging that the council’s vote raised concerns under state and federal anti-discrimination laws. “The complaint filed today with the civil-rights division alleges discrimination and requests the city to reverse course and work with all parties to bring the project into compliance,” Nicholsen said.
Student speakers emphasized that campus-affiliated housing models can reduce homelessness and benefit students. Multiple UCR students and a student speaker who said the university’s student government represents over 22,000 students recounted petition drives, campus resolutions and turnout in support of the proposal.
Advocates and several service-providers pressed councilmembers for transparency about the decision and urged staff to reopen dialogue with state housing agencies and the project proponents. One commenter who identified herself as a housing activist framed the decision as having reduced opportunities for state funds and called on the council to reconsider the vote and to work with HDC (Housing Development Corporation or equivalent state agency named by speakers) to resolve compliance issues.
Councilmembers did not take action on the project during the public-comment period. The transcript records requests by multiple speakers for the council to place the matter back on a future agenda and for staff to explore whether procedural or compliance concerns could be resolved; the council closed public comment and moved to other agenda items.
What happens next: Speakers repeatedly asked the council to re-open consideration and work with the project team and state funders. The transcript does not record a formal motion to reopen the University Terrace item during the meeting; speakers said they had filed or planned to file administrative complaints and urged continued engagement from city staff.
