While it is not yet official, it appears that Chris Robles, who has dominated the Democratic Party in San Bernardino County as the chairman of the county central committee since he wangled election to the position of local party chairman in 2012, is about to be deposed.
The results of an informal poll of San Bernardino County Central Committee members taken over the last several days indicates that sufficient support for Kristin Washington throughout the central committee has manifested to virtually ensure that she will outdistance Robles for chairmanship of the local party when the committee holds a zoom meeting tomorrow, July 18, at which its election of officers, which takes place every four years in July, is held.
Robles was elected by the central committee to serve as chairman in 2012, largely on the strength of his professional experience as a campaign consultant. The belief was that he would bring his expertise to bear in the service of all Democratic candidates across the spectrum in San Bernardino County, from those running for Congress, to those seeking legislative posts in Sacramento to county and city candidates, even though local races are not considered to be partisan ones.
In 2009, the number of registered Democrats in San Bernardino County eclipsed the number of registered Republicans, and the gulf between the parties has widened in favor of the Democrats ever since, until at present they hold a commanding lead over the GOP in terms of registration. At present, 428,643 of the county’s 1,042,158 registered voters, or 41.1 percent are Democrats, and 308,721 or 29.6 percent are Republicans. Nevertheless, San Bernardino County remains one of the last bastions of Republicanism in the State of California, as the Party of Lincoln claims the lion’s share of San Bernardino County’s seats in the California Legislature as well as four of five positions on the county board of supervisors. In 17 of the county’s 24 municipalities, the Republicans represent a majority of the those holding positions on the city or town councils.
Robles was reelected to the central committee chairman’s spot in 2016, but within a year, a number of the central committee members had grown disenchanted with him, and an effort to remove him as chairman ensued. That effort failed, as Robles made skillful use of parliamentary procedure and the alliances he had made among the committee’s executive board to stave off that coup attempt.
At this point, however, Washington, who is the chairwoman of the Redlands Area Democratic Club, has gained the trust of a solid majority of the central committee’s members. She has campaigned for the central committee chair post by asserting that she intends to endorse and elect Democrats through coordinated grassroots efforts, increase party transparency by improving communications internally and with voters, build coalitions throughout the county to amplify the party’s efforts and enhance party visibility throughout the county.
Two important strides made by Washington in her ongoing effort to take control of the county party have been the defection from the Robles camp by Jim Gallagher, whom Robles had installed years ago as a member of the committee’s executive board, and the defeat of Mark Westwood in March in his race to remain as a member of the the central committee. Westwood, whom Robles had also installed onto the executive board, was very active and determined in his previous efforts to keep Robles in charge of the county party.
Washington is running for chair as a part of a slate, which also features Stacey Ramos as a candidate for first vice chair, Gallagher as second vice chair, Leslie Irving as third vice chair, Nancy Glenn for secretary, Martina Ortega as treasurer, and Nicholas Christensen as corresponding secretary.
Adding to Washington’s advantage is that she is endorsed by Assemblyman James Ramos and former San Bernardino County Democratic Central Committee Chairwoman Nancy Ruth White.
The meeting at which the selection of the chair is to occur is scheduled for tomorrow at 1 p.m.

The COVID-19 pandemic this week continued its intensification throughout San Bernardino County, as the total number of confirmed cases since the tracking of the virus began in March hit 23,238, with 315 deaths attributed to the disease. Known cases increased by 4,963 since July 10, the highest single week jump in the disease yet, surpassing the previous county record of 4,599 set last week, between July 3 and July 10. There is concern that those already dire numbers are even worse, as a shortage of testing supplies that commenced last week resulted in the cancellation of tests that were to take place on July 8, July 9 and July 10. As there is a several day lag between the time of testing and the reporting of results, it is possible that the increase in the infection numbers reported this week would have been far higher if the tests that were cancelled late last week had been carried out.
A further indication of how serious the situation has become is reflected in San Bernardino County’s inclusion in an order issued today by Governor Gavin Newsom curtailing plans by virtually all of San Bernardino County’s school districts to conduct classroom instruction on a rotating basis involving all or most students with the onset of the 2020-21 school year.
Newsom ordered schools in San Bernardino County and 29 other counties in the state to switch to remote learning, meaning instruction will take place on-line, with the schools closed and students remaining at home.

As of today, there is limited information available as to who will be vying in San Bernardino County’s municipal elections this year.
The City of Loma Linda already held its city council election on March 3, corresponding with the California Presidential Primary Election. San Bernardino held an election that day in four of its wards, as well, where as a result there will be runoffs in two of wards in the election to be held on November 3. In the Fifth Ward, incumbent Henry Nickel is being challenged by Ben Reynoso. In the Seventh Ward, incumbent Jim Mulvihill is vying against Damon Alexander.
The filing period for open positions on councils for the county’s 20 remaining cities and its two incorporated towns opened on July 13 and will run through August 7. Phone calls were placed this morning to get an as up-to-date list as possible of those who had taken out candidacy papers thus far.
As the city halls in Upland, Rancho Cucamonga, Adelanto, Twentynine Palms, Fontana, Colton, Montclair, Rialto, Victorville and Highland are closed on Fridays, no information on those cities’ races was obtained.
In the cities of Hesperia, Grand Terrace, Yucaipa, Chino Hills and Barstow, the Sentinel failed to make useful contact with the custodians of those cities’ electoral rosters. Big Bear has a policy of not releasing the names of those taking out candidacy papers until those papers are returned.
In Needles, no one has taken out papers as of this morning.
In the Town of Yucca Valley’s District 2, incumbent Jeff Drozd has taken out papers as has Melvin Costa. In District 4, incumbent Robert Lombardo has pulled papers along with Jeff Brady and Myra Kennedy.
In Redlands’ District 2, incumbent Eddie Tejeda has taken out papers as did Jonathan Grau. In District 4, Joshua Hall has taken out papers.
In the Town of Apple Valley, District 1 incumbent Larry Cusack and District 2 incumbent Art Bishop have taken out papers to run again.
In Chino, incumbent Mayor Eunice M. Ulloa and challenger Christopher E. Hutchinson have taken out mayoral nomination papers, incumbent Paul A. Rodriguez and Christopher A. Flores have pulled papers for District 1 and in District 4 former Police Chief Karen C. Comstock and Anthony M. Honore have retrieved nomination papers.
In Ontario, incumbent Debra Porada and challengers Elvia Rivas and Celina Lopez have obtained nomination papers for the city council. Incumbent Jim Milhiser and challenger Michael Fillpot have in their possession nomination papers for treasurer, and incumbent City Clerk Sheila Mautz has pulled papers, as well.

The variable checkerspot, also known as the chalcedon checkerspot, is a butterfly in the mymphalidae family with the scientific name euphydryas chalcedona.
The variable checkerspot is usually brown-black with extensive yellow, red and white spots on the dorsal wing. The butterfly’s underside usually contains yellow and orange bands. However, as its name suggests, this insect is highly variable in appearance. Dorsal color can range from a brick-red background with brown and yellow markings in Sierra populations to yellow and black in northern Californian populations. Adult wingspan is 1.3 inches-to-2.2 inches.
The variable checkerspot is found in western North America, where its range stretches from Alaska in the north to Baja California in the south and extends east through the Rocky Mountains into Colorado, Montana, New Mexico and Wyoming.
Adult butterflies feed on nectar from flowers while larvae feed on a variety of plants including snowberry, symphoricarpos; purple owl’s clover, castilleja exserta; paintbrush, castilleja; chaparral honeysuckle, lonicera subspicata; buddleja; diplacus aurantiacus and scrophularia californica.
The butterfly’s habitat encompasses a large variety of environments, including sagebrush flats, desert hills, prairies, open forests and alpine tundra
During the breeding period, males congregate around larval host plants to encounter females. Males both perch near food plants and fly around them in order to look for females. Male butterflies do not stay in one encounter site for long and do not typically defend the territory of their encounter site. Males depend on visual rather than chemical cues to locate females.
Males court virgin female butterflies via physical displays. Females can play hard to get by flying away. Once a female moves to the ground or to vegetation, the male will persist in following her, succeeding only when the female remains motionless long enough for the male to effectuate coupling. The physical union between a male and female variable checkerspot typically lasts an hour but may continue for as long as six hours. The male provides unto the female during this encounter a nutrient-rich spermatophore as well as a mating plug that hinders the ability of females to mate with other males. This spermatophore left within the female’s bursa copulatrix, on average represents 7 percent of the male’s body weight.
Pregnant females look for host plants like diplacus aurantiacus that are close to nectar sources when they lay their eggs in clusters. The larvae that emerge from the eggs feed and live on these host plants, some of which have developed strategies to deter larvae from eating their leaves.
Pre-diapause larvae often move to fresher parts of the plant in which they are laid to secure a better food source. Before they enter diapause, the larvae leave the food plant to seek better dormancy sites such as under the bark of dead branches, in the hollow stems of dried weeds and in rock crevices. During diapause, some larvae are able to wake up and feed before re-entering dormancy
After diapause, the larvae emerge between January and March with pupation usually beginning in April. However, in high elevations, larvae can hibernate for several years. After pupation, the adult flight season begins between mid-April and May and continues into June. The adult variable checkerspot has a life span of around 15 days.
The variable checkerspot’s main predators are birds. In their evolution, the variable checkerspot has adopted a larval diet rich in iridoid compounds. Iridoids are chemicals produced by plants that bond to the plants glucose or sugar. Iridoids are bitter. Thus, scientists studying the variable checkerspot have observed birds quite often exhibiting head-shaking and beak-wiping behavior after killing a variable checkerspot, characteristic of tasting unpalatable prey.
In contrast to the herbivorous diet of the larva, the adult variable checkerspot’s main food source is the nectar it obtains from flowers.

From Wikipedia

The blue portal below will convey you to a PDF of the July 10 edition of the San Bernardino County Sentinel.

Sentinel 07-10-20

By Mark Gutglueck
The Yucaipa City Council this week gave Woodside Homes go-ahead to construct 144 homes on property currently lying within a flood zone, while simultaneously signaling there will be an eventual completion of a flood control basin which is intended to alleviate the drainage issues plaguing the property.
Whereas the previous zoning on the property had excluded residential use, the intention toward the ultimate disposition of the property has evolved over the last eight years, and the Oak Glen Creek Specific Plan, which was layered into place in 2018, reconfigured land use designations on 115.6 acres in northern-central Yucaipa to allow residential development to take place on a portion of the land there.
In previous public hearings in Yucaipa relating to the proposed future development of the property and its conversion at least in part to residential use, there was far greater resistance and/or protest on the part of the public than was registered on Wednesday.
Earlier in the late Wednesday afternoon meeting this week, the city council approved a contract for the grading of a parcel near the Woodside Homes project site to be converted to a city equipment yard near or within the Wilson III Basin project expanse. That basin, upon its final completion, is intended to reduce flooding in the immediate area, such that the 38.6 acres where the 144 homes are to be built will no longer lie within the flood zone, but be placed at least one foot above the 100-year flood plain.
A 100-year flood is the amount of water measured through historic records to be statistically likely to occur during a deluge. Locating the foundations for structures one foot above that level of water is a nationally imposed standard used for determining eligibility for federally-guaranteed flood insurance.
According to Benjamin J. Matlock, Yucaipa’s planning manager/city planner, the Wilson III Basin project is identified in the city’s original drainage master plan adopted in 1993 and updated in 2012 as a “proposed regional flood control facility” and a “critical component of the city’s overall effort to reduce peak flow rates in Wilson Creek downstream of the proposed project, resulting in a reduction of the Wilson Creek floodplain within the city.”
City officials use the identifiers Wilson Creek and Oak Glen Creek interchangeably.
Previously, land within northern-central Yucaipa which now contains the 115.6 acre Oak Glen Creek Specific Plan Area bounded by Oak Glen Road to the north, Bryant Street to the east, generally 2nd Street and existing single-family residences to the west, and a natural slope to the south that abuts single-family residences was deemed to be best utilized for institutional, high tech, light industrial, educational and office related uses, and was zoned accordingly.
In March 2011, the city council approved the preparation of a specific plan and an environmental impact report for the development of the Wilson Creek Business Park and Flood Control Basin Project. In September 2011, the city council directed staff to pursue a feasibility analysis for a broader array of development opportunities for the Wilson Creek Business Park site. In 2012, the city council reconsidered the options for that proposed development and authorized additional feasibility studies and analyses of traffic, biological resources, and the environmental impacts the different options would entail as well as an economic analysis of each development concept. In January 2013, the city council directed staff to amend the land use mix for the specific plan to eliminate high tech and light industrial uses, while the likely proposals remained focused on institutional, educational and office related uses. In May 2013, the city council approved the execution of a memorandum of understanding between the San Bernardino County Flood Control District and the city for the project, including an agreement that flood control district-owned property not required for the project deemed “surplus” property was to be transferred to the city. On July 11, 2016, the city council made a pronounced alteration of the intent with regard to the eventual development of the property, designating the “preferred” land use alternative for the Oak Glen Creek Specific Plan as primarily residential with some parcels retained for the innovation center. The council renamed the Wilson Creek Innovation Center Specific Plan the Oak Glen Creek Specific Plan. The city made further notice of its intention of using some of the land for a relocated city maintenance yard. What was designated as the “innovation center” was to be located on the north and east side of the Oak Glen Creek Specific Plan area, and the Wilson III basin was to be located within the southern portion of the site. The remaining area was designated as residential, permitting what was enumerated at that time as up to a total of 200 homes within the specific plan area. In November 2016, the city council authorized a memorandum of understanding with the Inland Empire Resource Conservation District for the use of one of the innovation center parcels, pursuant to the elevation of the property being raised above the flood plain with excess material generated from the drainage project being compacted as a foundation, such that a 5,000-square foot office and education center, outdoor amphitheater, and associated infrastructure could be constructed.
On April 24, 2017, the city council approved entering into an exclusive negotiating agreement with KB Homes, giving KB Homes the right to negotiate the terms of a disposition and development agreement for the single family homes subdivision.
The proposal to develop the property residentially provoked a reaction from a cross section of Yucaipa’s citizenry.
“I know you need 20 million dollars to run this city, but filling in any open space there is with homes on small lots will create overcrowding of our streets and schools,” stated Bill Napier at the time. “The very thing that is Yucaipa – open space – is being threatened.”
Napier questioned whether the flood control facility to be built would adequately deal with the sheet flow once more property in the area is developed, preventing the natural absorption and percolation of water into the water table. “Adding more streets and paved areas will cause more more run-off. The primary area should be used for flood control, then it should be kept ‘open space’ for that reason and kept in its ‘natural’ state, which means leaving all of the animals in their natural habitat. If all the people in Yucaipa knew about this project and all of the approved projects, they would have objections. My suggestion would be to develop it as a natural area for a large upper Yucaipa dog park and keep them out of the community parks and away from walkers, picnickers, etc. With all the families with children, Oak Glen would be a perfect spot for a skate park and BMX area.“
Elaine Lane told city officials, “I am opposed to removing existing trees and brush. A wildlife tunnel goes under Bryant Street. Do not disturb the wildlife sanctuary. Of concern are lights, noise, water, traffic.” Lane said the city should “limit lighting and cut down on existing lighting in this area to bring back the night sky, instead of obstructing it entirely for the residents.”
Delbert Fandrich, who is also a general contractor, told the city that in considering Wilson Creek, “That’s exactly what it is – ‘a creek.’ Water has run down from the mountains and the Oak Glen area for years. Is the flood from Dunlap Acres already ‘washed’ from your memories? If you think catch basins are going to control the water, look what happened to the basins just below Riley’s Orchard. They were all destroyed a couple of years ago.”
Somewhat perceptively, Fandrich predicted, “The people involved in this project will not let it die just because a few homeowners object.”
John Lane was somewhat critical of city officials, saying they were driven by a developmental imperative that leveled all reasonable objections that stood in their path.
“Increasing the population of this city has been the dream of the city manager and city council for years,” Lane wrote. “The city does not care to consider negative consequences of additional traffic, noise or light pollution.”
Lane alluded to the city’s significant reorientation of its zoning, codes, development plans and standards in suggesting that top city officials were untrustworthy. He related that he and his wife, Elaine, “were told, by the city clerk’s office before we purchased our house that the basin is a natural wildlife corridor. The lady took out maps and a general plan to show us the area would not be developed. So much for the integrity of the city.”
In particular, he indicated that City Manager Ray Casey had been duplicitous in his dealing with city residents, providing them with assurances and promises that were not adhered to.
“It would seem that City Manager Ray Casey is not to be believed when he speaks with local residents,” Lane stated in a written comment dated September 8, 2017. “Due to Casey’s deception, we, the citizens, who met with him, are aghast by the latest development plans. The ‘current’ development plan is nothing like the plans discussed in the meeting with Mr. Casey on August 4, 2016. At that meeting, he indicated the new homes would be built on existing land without encroaching on the floor of the existing basin. The biggest concern with development on the north side of the basin, as stated during our meeting with Mr. Casey, is noise and additional lighting which will negatively affect those of us living along the south side of the basin.”
Lane clarified that “To have the noise and lighting of the city yard where it currently stands is hardship enough for the homeowners adjacent to the basin project. To have the yard moved to the rear of the [Wildwood] church will create even more light at night close to our homes. As it is, with the lights of Stater Bros. Market, Rite Aid, and the ever shining lights at the community park, the night sky is almost nonexistent in this part of the city. The city yard should be kept separate and away from the residential area. Taking into consideration the proximity of a school where youngsters play outside, a facility such as a city yard would be considered a possible hazard for the students.”
According to Lane, “Mr. Casey also talked about leaving the east end of the basin as it is today so as to build an “innovation center’ similar to the environmental nature center in Newport Beach where children can come and learn about local flora. This new plan appears to remove most of the area intended for children to become educated in native plants and animals.”
Dr. Paul Thomas made a written request to the city, stating, “Please do not not relocate the city yard to the area behind Wildwood Calvary Chapel.”
Satashi Sakaino, who lives on Deerfield Drive, told city officials, “I do not want to have more houses on the next street because we will get more traffic jams, the school level will go down, there will be too much dust, there will be damage to my house from construction vibration and I do not want weird people around my neighborhood.”
Billie Randolph told the city council that previous development in the area that had disturbed the former tranquility of the environs and its livability had been accepted “as improvements to our city and necessary for the population. We have always thought of the wash behind our home as a flood plain. It was with surprise that we watched an entire neighborhood of tract homes spring up almost overnight on Oak Glen Road and seemingly in the flood plain. We now understand that flood control has been accomplished and that further development is to come. Our wish is that the planners will do due diligence in planning for this area as if they were going to be living above this area as are the many homes overlooking the wash. While realizing that nothing can remain the same, I urge the committee/planners to give this the same thought and care that they might have given in the past to the betterment and beautification of our town.”
Carolyn Smith and John Manlowe told the city, “We do not want an ugly basin as was built above Bryant Street. We want a wildlife corridor that is not a cemented wash. We want trails for walkers and horses, not for bikers. We are concerned about night sky pollution. We want to be able to continue to stargaze and teach the stars to our 4-month-old granddaughter as she grows up. We want to continue to hear and see coyotes, roadrunners, and wildlife that burrows as well as flies in the air.”
Susanne Marco said she wanted city officials to note that “Once a change is made, it cannot be reversed. The property has always been designated and used as a wildlife corridor, connecting the Crafton Hills to the Oak Glen area. Twice each year, the north banks of the wash area are used by the coyotes as whelping dens. It is one of the few remaining parcels of ‘raw’ land within the city limits that has the original ‘rural’ atmosphere, which has attracted so many of our residents.”
Marco asked, “Why does the city have such a need to develop one of the few natural pieces of property remaining within the city proper? Would not a ‘natural’ setting be more consistent with Yucaipa’s ‘hometown’ reputation? Would not the captured groundwater be able to percolate back into the underground water table with a green or natural base? Does not the city have a piece of property that would be more conducive to the placement of the city yard than behind the church and school, shown as an innovation center?”
Marco said, “Since the major stated reasons for the entire project is to provide additional flood control and water storage, it is hard for me to understand how scraping the ground bare, as it is in the holding ponds east of Bryant Street now, would help the water percolate faster than with the limited natural vegetation that is there now.”
If the city is intent on allowing the housing component of the project to proceed, Marco said, it should consider reducing the number of homes by 40, specifically those planned south of the extension of a line from the homes at Amberleaf Way all the way to the drainage channel, so that “it would allow a much wider catch basin, require less shifting of earth, and not affect the wildlife as the current plan would.”
The Oak Glen Creek Specific Plan was reviewed and recommended for adoption at the November 15, 2017 planning commission meeting. On February 26, 2018, the city council adopted Resolution No. 2017-47 approving the Oak Glen Creek Specific Plan. It also certified the environmental impact report for the project was completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, accepting the mitigation measures identified in the environmental impact report, despite citizen objections. The city council directed staff to file a notice of determination to complete and fulfill the required environmental review.
At that point, much of the fight went out of those registering opposition to the project.
The city remained committed to KB Homes, which over time sought and obtained four amendments or extensions to the exclusive negotiating agreement with city. Those amendments prolonged the negotiating arrangement with KB Homes until November 24, 2018. City staff and KB Homes representatives ultimately were unable to come to a final agreement on the terms of the development agreement and a disposition and development agreement for the project. KB Homes relinquished its interest in the project and discontinued its negotiations with the city.
Casting about for some other entity to fill the void left by KB’s withdrawal, the city ultimately made contact with Riverside-based Woodside O5S, LP, which has been in existence since 2008 and has another corporation, Paracorp Incorporated, as its registered agent and chief corporate officer. Paracorp Incorporated has as its registered agent Matthew Marzucco of Sacramento.
With virtually no alteration of the parameters of the project as proposed by KB Homes, the city proceeded in closing a deal with Woodside. On September 23, 2019, the city council approved and authorized an exclusive negotiating agreement with Woodside O5S relating to the Oak Glen Creek Specific Plan, including the Wilson III Basin Project. The negotiating agreement was extended at the regular May 11, 2020 city council meeting to allow for additional time to finalize the development agreement and the disposition and development agreement pertaining to the land Woodside O5S intended to purchase from the city to undertake the project. A portion of the property that the developer has to acquire from the city includes the San Bernardino County Flood Control District surplus property which is to come into the possession of the city with the completion of the basin project. On May 20, 2020, Woodside Homes submitted a letter of intent to the city, which was approved by the city council on June 8. The letter of intent essentially serves as the outline of the development agreement. At its June 22, 2020 meeting, the city council approved an amended letter of intent for Woodside to purchase the proposed 144 lots within Tentative Tract Map 20130.
Thus, the action taken this week, on Wednesday, was essentially a formality, as the commitment between the city and Woodside Homes was for all intents and purposes a done deal when the terms laid out in the letter of letter of intent were approved on June 22.
The project had come before the Yucaipa Planning Commission on June 17, 2020, essentially to be rubberstamped by that body.
The inevitability of that outcome was telegraphed when a resident in the area proximate to the project, David Noble, asked about characterizations of the basin to be built as a “lake.” Planning Commission Chairman J.R. Allgower nimbly deflected the question by stating that the basin would be constantly filled with water.
With little further ado, the commission, with Commissioner Aron Wolfe absent, adopted by a vote of 6-to-0 the development agreement with Woodside Homes and determined that the subdivision and development agreement are within the scope of the environmental impact report for the project as it was approved when KB Homes was the applicant.
On Wednesday, Matlock told the public and the city council that Tentative Tract Map No. 20130 and the development agreement between the City of Yucaipa and Woodside Homes, if approved, would clear the way for the subdivision of a portion of the Oak Glen Creek Specific Plan area into 144 single-family residential lots with a 7,200-square foot minimum lot size, which is slightly smaller than one-sixth of an acre. Matlock said the project will also set aside a single lot for the designated innovation center, and lettered lots for future flood control improvements and landscape areas, and will include a public park, the acreage for which he did not identify.
Under the Oak Glen Creek Specific Plan reviewed and recommended by the planning commission on November 15, 2017 and adopted by city council on February 26, 2018, Matlock said there were to be three specific components, which included a residential district of up to 200 single family lots of 7,200 square feet, an open space district to include the Wilson III Basin, native open space, recreational amenities and a so-called innovation district of up to 5,000 square feet of non-residential structures, not including accessory structures.
While the project was yet being pursued by KB Homes, Matlock said, the planning commission on November 15, 2017, reviewed and recommended a development proposal deemed to be consistent with the specific plan which called for constructing 144 single family lots, a lot for the city yard, a lettered lot to connect to the basin and lettered lots for landscaping. Lettered is a term peculiar to planning professionals that designates a lot upon which no structures are to be established, distinguishable from numbered lots, where structures are to be built.
Obliquely, Matlock stated that no environmental impact report for the project as put forth by Woodside Homes was carried out but that rather the city was proposing that the environmental impact report adopted by the city council for the specific plan be substituted for that purpose. That previously completed environmental impact report, Matlock said, had determined that all potentially significant impacts could be mitigated and that no statement of overriding considerations was required. He said the environmental impact report included a mitigation monitoring and reporting program and that the California Code of Regulations Section 15168 allowed the use of the prior environmental impact report to be applied to the current approval of the project, such that no additional California Environmental Quality Act document was required for the tentative tract map or development agreement.
Matlock said the planning commission had recommended that the city council approve the tentative tract map, subject to the conditions of approval as contained in the staff report for the project, and that it approve the development agreement between the city and Woodside Homes and make a finding that the subdivision and development agreement are within the scope of the environmental impact report.
This week, only two people registered an objection to the project being approved. One, Leola Green, said the project posed an existential risk to wildlife in the area. She said the city had issues with the provision of both water and electrical power to sections of the city, including that in the area of Oak Glen Creek. There were problems with water quality as well as silt and rocks clogging water filters, she said. The area had been hit by electrical blackouts, as well, Leola Green said. Sinkholes had plagued the area she maintained, suggesting the property where the homes were to be built was not stable and might give way under the weight of homes that would be constructed there.
“We are losing our open space,” Leola Green said. “We already have enough housing as it its. Are we really ready to add to [our neighborhood]? I think not.”
Leola Green also questioned why the city was taking up the issue of approving the project while the state and its residents are yet under restrictions and mandates to refrain from participation in public forums.
Norma Green told the council that Yucaipa was already experiencing “power outages” which she quantified as “at least seven a year.” Putting more homes and utility uses into the area would involve further “power shutdowns,” she said.
She likewise cited a problem with water quality in the area, in particular, she said, water that was malodorous. Referencing 177 homes in the project, she said they were too closely packed together “like crackerboxes. Those are half lots.”
The city council was clearly favorably disposed to the project. Councilman Greg Bogh seized upon Norma Green’s misreading of 144 homes as 177, adroitly using that as a rhetorical point and pretext to persuade his council colleagues to disregard and reject her reasoning. After Bogh had Matlock establish that the project consisted of 144 homes, Councilman Bobby Duncan moved that the council adopt the staff and planning commission recommendations and approve the development agreement, the tentative tract map and the project. “I think this is a fantastic project,” Duncan stated. All five members of the council voted in favor of approving the project.
Prior to that, the city council had followed a staff recommendation relating to the awarding of a contract for the grading of a new city yard site within the footprint of the Wilson II Basin. The low bid that had been submitted on the project by James McMinn of Riverside was deemed unresponsive, and a $156,804 contract with Three Peaks Corporation of Yuciapa was approved to have that company do site preparation for the new city yard, including mobilization, clearing and grubbing, over excavation, and rough and final grading for the street building and drainage improvements.