Zoning map change (RDash01Dash2026) fails to advance after recusal reduces support

The committee of the whole discussed case RDash01Dash2026, a proposed zoning district change for identified city lots from R2 to B1, and voted on whether to add legislation for the item to the next council meeting. The chair introduced the case and a council member asked that legislation be prepared for the May 28, 2026 council meeting.

The law director read the applicable standard from the municipal code for zoning changes and emphasized that the current vote would not itself approve or deny the zoning change but only place the legislation on a future agenda so the council could consider the substantive decision later. “Whenever the public necessity, convenience, general welfare, or good zoning practice require, council may, after recommendation by the planning commission and subject to procedure in this section, amend . . . district boundaries,” the law director said.

A motion to add the legislation to the next council meeting was called to roll call. The roll produced three yes votes and at least one recusal; because council rules required four yes votes to move the legislation forward, the motion failed. The chair summarized the result: “So we needed 4 to move it forward. It got 3 yeses to move it forward, so it will not move forward.”

The transcript shows a recusal was recorded before the vote; a council member had stepped out of the room for the zoning item. The committee did not vote on the zoning change itself; any substantive approval or denial would require placement on a future agenda and a subsequent vote.

Next steps: staff was asked to prepare legislation for the next council meeting so council could consider the matter on the record; whether the item will be added to a future agenda remains contingent on future motions and the presence of a sufficient number of members.