[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6576272,"mediaKeyId","3142731-31c478ea8434a129707b69ae8e648486","parentId",3142731,"title","Council delays final decision on Freeway Corridor update after hours of public comment; staff to return with revised option 3","audioSeconds",5357,"startMs",5694000,"endMs",11051000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3142731-31c478ea8434a129707b69ae8e648486&start=5694&end=11051","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3142731-31c478ea8434a129707b69ae8e648486/thumbnail_5694000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6576272/Yucaipa/San-Bernardino-County/California/Council-delays-final-decision-on-Freeway-Corridor-update-after-hours-of-public-comment-staff-to-return-with-revised-option-3","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6576272-cd9deaa6e2a336319272658158aa2496/orig.mp4?Expires=1771136951&Signature=jTaSQcgJl9kgUYWBRNiuaYkxkPWjpSeakzBD3CWDaNTdt4084HRdOG4wwSLit8nMGMXmwpgtpgw4kBGfQILnIlEQHy77JVYnq1aB-Y0iL6NP74XCCBQRSDYfmKfDqsDWWPVxSEmJAUuSBdoymyV4zjZ2Z3UePnYPnnuEVjPCI6dHONCAEM1-PN6-T9~wN8xaGN6HD6YmfypFsZ5E4~wIqiGAAskHEcPVb5EpbQuKVqLiTPmYKDw7Gw4J8zhqGGHc6JUSqwqG8tmLjSN0NQ2ebLFf~F9cto2XCcbCZ3FRj1jh--tQFCo~xKxabDr1-OkD5PM-a8D7MkgL0aqDYjqZmQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Yucaipa, CA","date","2025-04-29T05:06:10.973Z","article","The Yucaipa City Council heard a multi-hour study session on April 28 over proposed updates to the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan, then directed staff to return the item for action at the next regular meeting.

Ben Matlock, city planning staff, summarized five options for the freeway corridor area adjacent to Interstate 10: 1) keep the existing 2008 specific plan, 2) the September 2024 draft update presented previously, 3) a March 2025 revised update that clarifies mixed-use and open-space standards (staff's recommendation), 4) a property-owner-submitted high-intensity alternative (more industrial/warehouse-focused) and hybrids, and 5) a concept that would prohibit warehouses entirely in the specific-plan area.

Matlock said the update work began in 2021 and that the council had previously directed staff to provide more flexibility for open space, protect key ridgelines, and balance commercial and housing goals. He described the technical trade-offs among the five options, including differences in acreage set aside for commercial uses, the housing-unit capacity the plan carries forward (about 2,400 net units under the existing plan), traffic implications, and the cost and time to perform a new environmental review if the city substantially rewrote the plan.

Matlock told council the September 2024 plan and the March 2025 revision would reduce net traffic trips compared with the adopted 2008 plan and would be eligible for developer reimbursement of consultant costs for the supplemental EIR. He also noted that state housing law constrains the city's ability to remove units from an existing specific plan without finding replacement sites elsewhere.

The presentation drew a long public comment period: staff reported 18 speakers on the item. Comments were overwhelmingly opposed to allowing large warehouses in the corridor and urged preserving the city's rural character, citing traffic, air quality and public-safety concerns. Several residents asked the council to retain the 2008 plan or to adopt a version that limits warehouses (option 1 or 5). Others, including representatives of property owners and the commercial applicant Pacific Industrial/Pacific Oaks, argued that selective commercial and industrial development would create infrastructure investment (including an estimated $38 million water infrastructure extension presented by the developer) and produce jobs and revenue that the city needs.

Ben Matlock and staff advised the council that some parcels south of the freeway lack existing utilities and any development there would require major off-site infrastructure. Several council members asked about legal and fiscal risks, the scope of environmental review, and how planned regional projects such as the Wildwood interchange could affect property values and permitting pathways.

After deliberation councilmembers agreed to have staff return on May 12 with a refined package centered on the March 2025 revision (option 3) and with the latest property-owner proposal available for review. Mayor Pro Tem Benneville and several council members asked that the packet include a concise comparison of options, their fiscal effects, and clarifications about visibility, traffic mitigation and the Wildwood interchange timing. Councilmembers stressed they wanted Councilmember Beaver present for the final decision; the item was not adopted tonight.

Staff emphasized the major differences among options: option 1 preserves more mapped open space but leaves problematic development rights in place in the adopted 2008 land-use table; option 2 and 3 are staff updates that aim to make development more feasible while protecting key view corridors; option 4 was submitted by a major property owner and would add warehousing and reduce mapped open space; option 5 would remove warehouses entirely but would require new EIR work to reallocate housing capacity elsewhere if the city reduced units in the plan area.

No zoning or specific-plan changes were adopted at the meeting; the council's direction was to return with a targeted package for a final decision at a future meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City Council Meeting - 4/28/2025 - City of Yucaipa","oneSentenceSummary","After hours of presentations and 18 public comments, the Yucaipa City Council on April 28 declined to adopt changes to the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan and asked staff to return May 12 with a revised version of the March 2025 update (staff's option 3) and supporting materials.","taxTitle","Yucaipa, San Bernardino County, California","taxId",4256,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6576277,"Council receives 2024 audited comprehensive financial report showing general fund growth but flagged DIF and advances",934,7871000,8805000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3142731-31c478ea8434a129707b69ae8e648486&start=7871&end=8805","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3142731-31c478ea8434a129707b69ae8e648486/thumbnail_7871000.jpg","/articles/6576277/Yucaipa/San-Bernardino-County/California/Council-receives-2024-audited-comprehensive-financial-report-showing-general-fund-growth-but-flagged-DIF-and-advances","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6576277-487c3d07d3e3d9972dc60a17ba710716/orig.mp4?Expires=1771136951&Signature=UqLaLwfbQHgBAD-waOFEluSO8wIyX16BXaQBLk6J3YB5PzdY4cuHeW93z40fHYjp~BFlCHVIu48GlyYmPxkT55qIiSBUYgA8~f~IAxwLEB5oO3rzfWVer0M2GueYChZbMvo7YoeA2hSdqzrXcfNjx8s40AlbRmfQtOqRgZt1h0cn4eJOgwlqiPHH-EwqArTU9qr54bXPP0ykg70XeyT-bNQMUG29-PV18M9~X5hCRurLkBbEe029ODI-uexJIHjso0Sn5HtqYVEp-ibrvd-9UQr0j-kKRTWEKCniXtr1mGNFEMeqYgafp8hIOTs-dVYLZBynqlJAptRY8fPtv8dfug__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Yucaipa City Council received and filed the city's audited Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ending June 30, 2024, during its April 28 meeting. Finance Director Phil White presented the audit highlights and the finance committee's review.

White told council the ACFR earned an unmodified (clean) audit opinion. He highlighted three statements the council typically reviews: the governmental funds balance sheet, the governmental funds statement of revenues and expenditures, and the general fund budget-to-actual reconciliation. \"Our general fund looks spectacular,\" White said, noting the city's unassigned general fund balance increased to about $18 million, up roughly $3 million from the prior year.

White also told the council that total governmental fund balance rose to about $51 million and cash increased by roughly $3.5 million from the prior year. But he flagged concerns: the development impact fee (DIF) capital projects fund showed a $21 million deficit on the governmental funds balance sheet, and interfund advances (loans within city funds) remained elevated at about $17 million, down from $19 million the previous year. White said those long-term receivables are classified as nonspendable until repaid and require monitoring because they can overstate the apparent liquidity of the general fund.

On the income statement, White said the city posted a general fund surplus of about $222,000 for fiscal 2024 and an overall activity surplus of $7.5 million across funds. He reviewed the audited budget-to-actual reconciliation, noting that revenues outperformed estimates by roughly 4% while expenditures were about 10% under budget'a historically tighter margin. White said some underspending reflected services or capital purchases not completed during the fiscal year (for example, Tropical Storm Hillary cleanup moving into the next year and postponed capital equipment buys).

The ACFR also includes a $4.5 million loan receivable associated with an option to purchase property and $4.5 million in advanced grant proceeds listed as unearned revenue for a library grant, White said.

Council voted to receive and file the report. White and staff said they will continue monitoring DIF deficits and interfund advances and will bring budget updates as the city finalizes fiscal-year 2026 budget planning.

No public comment was offered on this agenda item.","The city's audited 06/30/2024 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) received a clean audit opinion. Staff highlighted a stronger general fund unassigned balance and cash increases but warned of development impact fee deficits and long-term interfund advances that require monitoring.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6576281,"Yucaipa council approves purchase of two frontline fire engines after finance briefing",1032,6865000,7897000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3142731-31c478ea8434a129707b69ae8e648486&start=6865&end=7897","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3142731-31c478ea8434a129707b69ae8e648486/thumbnail_6865000.jpg","/articles/6576281/Yucaipa/San-Bernardino-County/California/Yucaipa-council-approves-purchase-of-two-frontline-fire-engines-after-finance-briefing","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6576281-b8a4ca4807e65fcb884b7fef285c3f41/orig.mp4?Expires=1771136951&Signature=R~Hbe~Q3LEjzJxXfkzp3I4VoK-WmSP1vwfuUHsTk9o-UhQuJ4P2VU33FE4W~c5YTRHE8xSxGKEAdJfvoUOIenS3IHe6OTtwbBd0dY0G2yOX5MyfROo8zbYfDrDYKbZX~~ax9KPD2nyAHZ0gjd5vzTT0NbusUaAAJr3OMhLDrH4hRDhI8Zx3WI0gmX0P-~jHNfMJKDx8Jqn6h1f9c30KAE8M5XKBcTO8uP749zmaIN3HopxDLsvmg96qjrqXYjB7raLepupr-i8wxnY2hArzLWSaUlj99gdgboYTaWJFdS6byTWpHSoO5N7wqEAX4Wqa58RQnAQUW7ywDyhxP-JP0aQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Yucaipa City Council on April 28 approved the purchase of two replacement frontline type 1 fire engines for the Yucaipa Fire Department, a contract of about $2.4 million that will be paid from the department's fire fund.

Fire Chief Malinowski told the council the engines would replace frontline medic engine 551 (a 2016 KME with about 96,000 miles) and medic engine 552 (a 2012 KME). \"These would not be additional engines. These will be replacing our existing frontline medic engine 551 and medic engine 552,\" Malinowski said. He told council the department specifies severe-duty platforms because Yucaipa must serve both structural incidents and wildland fire conditions.

The recommended purchase is an updated clone of the department's 2021 KME build and would be procured through a piggyback (Sourcewell contract 113021) to reduce procurement risk. Malinowski said current manufacturer lead time for a type 1 engine is approximately 24 months and that crews typically schedule frontline engines for a 10-year, 100,000-mile service life; reserve engines are expected to remain in service up to 20 years or 200,000 miles.

Phil White, the city's finance director, told council the purchase would be drawn from the fire fund rather than the general fund. \"The fire fund conservatively has a $5,000,000 balance,\" White said, adding that staff expects the department to finish the fiscal year under budget and that mutual-aid reimbursements from state wildfire responses are still pending.

During the discussion council members asked whether the city could phase the purchases. Malinowski noted the fleet already includes units past recommended service life and said the department's preference was to replace both frontline units to maintain fleet reliability. Council also discussed payment options; staff recommended paying on delivery rather than prepaying to retain reserves, even though prepayment would have produced an estimated discount.

Joe Perdetto, director of governmental affairs, briefed council on national market conditions for fire apparatus. He said private-equity-driven consolidation has reduced the number of builders and increased prices and lead times, and he noted that Senators Elizabeth Warren and Roger Wicker (transcript referenced senators conducting an inquiry) had launched a congressional investigation into the market. Council gave staff consensus to draft a letter to the jurisdiction's federal representatives in support of that inquiry.

Council made a motion to proceed with the recommended procurement (staff's option to pay on delivery) and the motion was seconded. The mayor called the vote; the council recorded the motion as approved. Staff will return with contract documents and recommended disposition of retired reserve engines.

The department said the new engines will be placed on frontline status on delivery; the replaced frontline apparatus will be re-designated as reserve engines and staff will return with a recommended disposition (historically donated to training programs or small departments when surplus). The estimated delivery window, given the current lead time, is approximately spring 2027 to early 2028.","The Yucaipa City Council approved purchase of two KME type 1 fire engines to replace aging frontline apparatus, authorizing staff to use the city's fire fund. The council also asked staff to send a letter supporting a federal inquiry into consolidation in the fire-engine market.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council delays final decision on Freeway Corridor update after hours of public comment; staff to return with revised option 3

Council receives 2024 audited comprehensive financial report showing general fund growth but flagged DIF and advances

Yucaipa council approves purchase of two frontline fire engines after finance briefing