Moreno Valley — The City Council on Oct. 7 approved the mayor’s slate of nominees to multiple advisory boards and commissions but voted to reject the mayor’s recommended planning commission slate after a heated exchange about the nominations process and council‑level recommendations.

The council approved mayoral nominations to bodies including the Public Arts Commission, the Emerging Leaders Council, the Environmental & Historical Preservation Commission, Library Commission, Parks & Community Services and others in a single omnibus vote. Those nominations passed unanimously after brief procedural confirmation.

In contrast, the planning commission slate prompted extended discussion. City Clerk Addie Rodriguez presented the list of nominees and noted each mayoral nomination was based on councilmember recommendations pursuant to Legislative Policy 1.1 (appointments procedures). A discrepancy emerged over the planning slate when a councilmember said one nominee listed on the packet (Denise Jimenez) had not been their recommended choice; the clerk said she had contacted the nominee to confirm the mayor’s nomination and that the mayor had nominated the candidate after discussion with the councilmember. Councilmember Bernard voiced concerns about process transparency and the provenance of some application entries.

Public testimony at the appointments agenda item included criticism from several community speakers who said the planning commission nominations appeared to favor younger, less experienced applicants and urged the council to include more long‑tenured residents with institutional knowledge. Community commenter Roy Bleckard and others argued the city should preserve experienced voices on commissions; other public speakers urged the council to approve the mayor’s slate and allow new community members to serve.

After deliberation the council took two votes. First, by roll call the council approved all mayoral nominations other than the planning commission slate. Then members voted separately on the planning commission slate and the motion to reject that slate passed 3‑2 (Councilmember Bernard, Councilmember Delgado and Mayor Pro Tem Santa Cruz voted yes to reject; Councilmember Gonzales and Mayor Cabrera voted no). With the planning slate rejected, the incumbents whose terms had expired remain in place under the city’s continuity rules until the council adopts a new planning commission slate.

Why it matters: Planning commissions review development projects and make formal recommendations that can have legal and financial implications for the city. The council’s action preserves the mayor’s ability to nominate members for most advisory panels but left the planning commission to be reconsidered, after requests for clearer nominations protocol and greater transparency.

What’s next: The mayor and council members may rework the planning commission nominations or conduct interviews in a later session. Several council members also asked staff to return with clarifying changes to the city’s appointment policy for discussion.

Provenance: The clerk’s slate presentation began in the staff report and public testimony and council deliberations concluded with the separate roll‑call votes recorded on the agenda item.