Ontario council approves resolution to pursue eminent domain for Riverside/Vineyard site after owner objects

The Ontario City Council voted to adopt a resolution of necessity authorizing the city to pursue eminent domain to acquire a 37-acre parcel at the southeast corner of Riverside Drive and Vineyard Avenue for a planned regional sports complex.

At a public hearing the city’s legal counsel, Guillermo Frias, told the council the property consists of multiple assessor parcels and that the city made a precondemnation offer of $37,100,000 on Feb. 21, 2024; notice of the hearing was mailed Oct. 1, 2024. Frias described the sports complex as a 200-acre, multi-use facility that would include fields for baseball, soccer and softball, indoor courts, aquatic facilities, a 10-acre public park and other community amenities.

Eminent-domain counsel for the property owner, Chuck Krolikowski, urged the council not to approve the resolution. He said the owner had an application pending to build 455 dwelling units, including 10% affordable housing, and argued the city’s prior zoning actions and environmental reviews should not be used to lower the property’s valuation. "We do object to the resolution of necessity," Krolikowski said, and he criticized the appraisal methodology, asserting it relied on comparables that were three years old and did not reflect the owner’s planned 455-unit project.

City officials disputed those legal and valuation arguments as beyond the scope of the night’s decision. City Manager (speaker identified in the record as City Manager) said the council’s role in the hearing was to determine public necessity findings and whether a valid precondemnation offer had been made, with ultimate compensation to be resolved in litigation if necessary. Frias added that questions about appraisal methodology and final compensation "are not the types of issues that the city is here to consider" at the public-necessity stage.

After brief council discussion, Councilmember Wapner moved to approve the resolution of necessity; Councilmember Bowman seconded. The motion passed on an electronic vote recorded as 4–0, with the mayor pro tem absent. The action allows the city to proceed with filing an eminent domain action should it choose to do so; the final amount of compensation remains subject to negotiation or litigation.

The council record shows the property owner submitted a written objection and a pending lawsuit was delivered to the city before the hearing. The city’s presentation and subsequent comments noted surrounding acquisitions and recent arm’s-length purchases that the city said informed the precondemnation valuation. The council did not vote on compensation or initiate immediate acquisition; the approved resolution authorizes the city to pursue the next legal step for condemnation.

The council’s next regular meeting is scheduled for Oct. 15; the city may file an eminent domain action following the council’s adoption of the resolution of necessity.