Organizers say more than 5,200 signatures were submitted; an earlier petition has already qualified. City must repeal its approvals or call an election after first petition qualified.
Cross County Roundup
Cajon shut down Redlands East Valley’s high-powered offense Thursday night, rolling to a 54-0 victory
Organizers say more than 5,200 signatures were submitted; an earlier petition has already qualified. City must repeal its approvals or call an election after first petition qualified.
YUCAIPA, Calif. — A citizens group’s first petition to halt Yucaipa’s warehouse zoning has been verified, and a second petition was filed this week — a pair of moves that require the City Council to either rescind its approvals or set the matter for a public vote.
Yucaipa NOW said it submitted 5,232 signatures—about 45% above the 3,617 required—targeting a land-use ordinance adopted as part of the city’s Freeway Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP) update. The first petition, the group said, has already been verified by the San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters, which means the City Council must now either rescind its approval or call a citywide vote on the measure.
“This second referendum proves the people of Yucaipa are paying attention and taking a stand,” said Ro Randolph, a proponent of the measure, in an Oct. 20 news release. “Residents want a voice in what kind of city Yucaipa becomes—and they don’t want it turned into another warehouse corridor.”
The dual filings reflect a strategy to challenge both the resolution and ordinance the council used to advance the Freeway Corridor plan. City officials cast the referendums as a decision about corridor-wide standards and housing capacity; organizers say targeting the legislative actions is the only legal lever available to curb warehouse expansion along I-10.
Campaign consultant Chris Robles said organizers pursued two parallel petitions “out of an abundance of caution” because the council advanced the corridor plan through two legislative actions—a resolution and an ordinance. He identified the targets as Resolution 2025-54 (the “white” petition) and Ordinance 448 (the “yellow” petition). Robles said verification “was completed on Oct. 14 for the first referendum,” while the second filing now moves into the city’s count and, if sufficient, county verification.
The City Council voted on Resolution 2025-54 and introduced Ordinance 448 on Aug. 25 in a 4–1 vote. The ordinance was adopted after a required second reading on Sept. 8 in a 5–0 vote. Under California law, ordinances take effect after final adoption, which also starts the 30-day window to file a referendum.
The Pacific Oaks Commerce Center — a two-building, 2 million-square-foot distribution complex proposed off I-10 at Live Oak Canyon Road — drew months of public opposition from residents who said it would increase truck traffic, worsen air quality and harm the rural landscape. The project stalled in September 2024 following strong community opposition. Supporters, including city officials, say the project would bring jobs, infrastructure investment and long-term revenue.
In an Oct. 9 written response to Community Forward Redlands, the city said it “is committed to carrying out the will of the voters,” but stressed that voters should understand the consequences.
“If the referendum succeeds, it won’t eliminate warehouse uses but take us back to the less restrictive 2008 standards,” the city said. “If successful, we’ll also have to move the 2,400+ planned housing units to other existing neighborhoods. The FCSP is not an embrace of warehouse development but a pragmatic and strategic use of them to keep state-mandated housing out of existing neighborhoods and help generate revenue to pay for the rising costs of City services, including public safety services.”
At a Sept. 22 study session, staff and council reviewed potential effects if voters overturn the 2025 FCSP update. Staff said reverting to the 2008 plan would allow more visible warehouse sites on both sides of the freeway and remove restrictions adopted in 2025 to confine such uses behind ridgelines near the wastewater-treatment plant.
Officials also warned a reversal could jeopardize the city’s certified housing element, which relies on the corridor for roughly 2,400 units — including about 500 affordable homes by 2029 — and could expose Yucaipa to the builder’s remedy if the plan were decertified.
“Once we no longer have a certified housing element, that is when the builder’s remedy comes into play,” the city attorney told the council. “The goal is to educate, not fearmonger. So I don’t think that this is the most likely path, but it is a possible path.”
Director of Development Services/City Engineer Fermin Preciado said the corridor has long been the linchpin of infrastructure financing via development-impact fees; without it, fees elsewhere could rise and projects could be delayed. In a Sept. 5 open letter, Mayor Jon Thorp argued the FCSP update modernizes standards, limits where warehouses can be built, and aligns with state housing and infrastructure needs, citing projected $14 million in fees and $38 million in privately funded improvements.
With one petition verified and a second filed Oct. 20, the council will be required to rescind the targeted action(s) or call an election. The next likely ballot would be June 2026, the next regular statewide election, unless the council opts for a special election.
Campaign consultant Chris Robles called the back-to-back filings unusual in scale and speed. “In my 25 years of experience, it’s rare to see this level of sustained civic engagement,” Robles said in a statement Oct. 20. “To qualify two referendums in just weeks is a clear message: Yucaipa residents want to protect their valley, not pave it over.”
Sign up for our weekly newsletter
