City Council - Regular Meeting

That's the best part is you fly into an Ontario airport, you look out, you see the poles, you know exactly what it is. So we do see people literally right from the airport, suitcase in hand, taking a lift here. So it's pretty cool. Hello, my name is Brian. I'm the Director of Operations here in Ontario Topgolf. The simplest way to put it, it's a ton of fun. It's three floors of high-tech driving range, for lack of a better term. You don't have to be a golfer. You don't have to know any of the rules of golf. You just come here, pick a game.

Good evening everybody and welcome to a meeting of the Ontario City Council. We'll start with a roll call, Madam City Clerk. Looks like everybody's here.

It looks like, yes, everyone is here in attendance at the meeting tonight.

Everybody's here. Okay, so I'm required to ask if anybody has any conflicts of interest tonight? Okay, no, it looks like no, it looks like no. So we're going to recess into closed session and we'll be back approximately 6.30. I need the city attorney to report on the closed session.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Good afternoon, everyone. You have one item on your closed session agenda this evening. It is being held pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9, subsection D1. You will recognize that as the litigation exemption. The case at issue is the City of Ontario versus the Inland Empire Utilities Agency. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Okay, so we'll be back as soon as we're done. Thank you for being here. Thank you all for your patience. I'll call on our city attorney to, oh, we're gonna do that later. So welcome back and we'll begin our meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council Member Parada and our invocation will be led by Pastor Richard Hernandez from the Church of God.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Dear Heavenly Father, we thank you for the privilege to live and serve in this community.

We ask for special prayer tonight that you would continue to guide our leaders with wisdom, and integrity as they serve. Lord, we thank you for the relative safety and peace and prosperity we are privileged to have in this community. We pray you continue to bless Ontario. We thank you for the police officers and firefighters that help keep us safe. We pray your hand of protection would be over them continually. And thank you also for the people that labor behind the scenes, unseen and faithful. We pray you can bless them, that they would help guide our city with the kind of integrity that you desire to bless. In Jesus' name, amen.

Thank you. So I'll ask our city attorney to provide a closed session report.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. This evening, the council considered the one item that's listed on the closed session agenda a piece of litigation. They were provided a briefing by staff and provided direction on the case, but there is no reportable action tonight, Mr. Mayor. Thank you.

All right, thank you. So we'll move to public comments now. You're limited to three minutes. You'll be given an alert when you have one minute remaining. And in accordance with state law, these comments need to be within the jurisdiction of the city council. Anyone wishing to speak, including council and staff, need to be recognized by the chair before speaking in order for us to conduct a professional business meeting. There'll be no applause. Is there... Anything else to disrupt the meeting? And do we have any email comments? I do know that we do, but you can report on that.

Yes, Mr. Mayor, there are emailed comments that have been printed and placed at the dais.

All right, thank you. So I do have quite a few blue cards, so we'll be very, very close to the time limit. We'll be right there. So our first speaker is Lori Remington.

Mr. Mayor and our City Council, I am here to let you know about the Tabernacle Choir and Orchestra at Temple Square who will be performing a watch party at our Ontario Field here on Friday, June 26th. 100 years ago, the Tabernacle Choir performed at the Hollywood Bowl. And to mark that event, they are performing again on the 24th and 25th of June at the Hollywood Bowl. And then they're gonna take those two performances and put them together and we will see a broadcast of that on the Jumbotron with the wonderful sound and everything at Ontario Field. The event is free. although tickets are required. I have a couple of flyers I'll leave and there's a QR code that can be scanned or you can go to the website of Ontario Field to get your tickets. And parking is also complimentary. The gates open at 5.30, the event starts at six. There will be non-profits there with service projects that people can be participating in throughout the evening. The playground's open, concessions will be opened, although if you want food, you have to pay for that. But tickets are required. There are guest performers, including David Foster, Donny Osmond, Catherine McPhee, Sebastian Arcelis, and Stephanie Block, who will also be performing with the choir. It should be a magnificent event of gorgeous music and hope and uplifting songs of hope. We invite you to come and participate.

Thank you. Stephanie Block was Elphaba and Wicked.

Oh, yeah.

Yeah, I remember that. All right, well, thank you very much. All righty. Our next speaker is Chris Robles. Come on down.

It is a bit of a game show, I guess. My name is Chris Robles. Good evening, council members, city, Mr. Mayor. I am here because it's 14 days until the next fiscal year, and we have no information about the up-and-coming budget, which must exceed the $1.65 billion that you already allocated last year. And in the last six years, every time you've done it, it's been a 24-hour notice special meeting. which is held at some inconvenient time for the public. I am hoping because this is an election year that one of you will wise up and decide that it should be in this room, not in some back room where the video will be running and the public can come at a normal time, like a normal council meeting. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Dale Roberts.

Good evening. Sorry you missed me for the last two months, but never fear, I will be back. The first thing I want to touch on is the Ontario PD. And I don't know why there is no accountability, and I'm looking to find integrity. But what I want you to know, and all these cops that are in here know it, if they don't, they... Okay, when you make your call to the police department, after the call is finished and they decide to send you a text, this is what they send you. The Ontario Police Department appreciates you completing this quick multiple choice. I want you to understand that, multiple choice. survey to help us improve our service. That means they're going to dictate 80% of what you say. You cannot tell them that they didn't show up. You cannot tell them or ask them, where are you? You cannot tell them the problem or anything that has come up. that they are not aware of. I don't know why I keep getting rebuffed by these people and they think I'm scared of them.

I'm not.

That's what I have to say to that. Let me go back to something. With all due respect, Mr. Bowman, a couple of months ago, you was backing up Daisy I can appreciate that wholeheartedly. I really honestly can. However, in my most humble opinion, I think you missed constitutional law 101. I really do. And I followed you. I followed you here in the city. One minute remaining. Okay, so I know what I'm talking about. The next thing is I'd like to know. If the city or the city attorney has looked into what you would consider my complaints when I've been here as pertaining to the police lying on reports, and I've told you some of the reports that they've lied on. They falsify their clearing of an incident without any accountability. Nobody is looking over the ranch. Okay. The car that I called on out here where the guy was parked in the middle of the street. Okay. The cop just took off cars to a bottom bike. They never stopped and woke the guy up and the car is sitting there running. But they cleared the call. They didn't do anything. Okay. They falsified the report big time out of the truck stop. Big time. Okay. And the, oh, I'm sorry. Yeah.

All right. Well, well, thank you, Mr. Roberts. Our next speaker is Rachel New.

Thank you for letting me speak. Um, you are all elected officials and your responsibility I believe is to the citizens of Ontario and to do what is best for Ontario, the citizens. And I'm a homeowner in Ontario and I was trying to help my son because, um, He had to move out of where he lived, where the rent was very low. And when he tried to find another place to live, he couldn't find anything under $3,000 for a two bedroom. And he had to have a two bedroom because he already has a child and another one coming. So there's four people, and they can't live in a one bedroom. So I got thinking, and I thought, well, I'll build an ADU. I have enough property. I'll help him out by letting him move in and he can live with us. Well, I was shocked when I started getting into the process because the contractor has told me that it was going to cost one amount and I'm okay with that. I'm okay with what an ADU, a two bedroom for 975 square feet was going to cost. But then, When I came to get the permits, there were so many corrections. And I know that's not your fault. But every time there's a correction, it's another four weeks, because they're allowed four weeks to review. So this process has been going on since November. And I finally, this week, got it approved. When I came to pay, because they said, all you have to do is go pay.

One minute remaining.

They said, oh, you just come and pay. Well, when I came and found out, it was almost $22,000. I'm just a regular person. I don't have a million dollars. And I just think that for it to cost $22,000 just to get a permit, and then the school fees were another $5,000. So I was already at $27,000. And that didn't even include the architect. And so I'm just saying that normal people like me are being priced out. And there's a waste because everything is third party sourced out. So you're paying three times. You're paying the people that work here, the people that you source it out to. And to me, that's a waste. And then I guess there's a code or a law that it has to be five feet from the property line. And instead of just coming, I'm sorry.

Thank you. Maybe our city manager can have you speak to somebody and you'll have extra time to go in the back and speak about this. Okay?

Mr. Zeledon, maybe you or Ms. Ruddens can speak to this resident.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Tina Silva.

Good evening, Mayor, City Council. Before I begin, I want to acknowledge that we gather tonight on the ancestral lands of the Tongva people who cared for this region long before Ontario existed. May we honor that history through our actions and our commitment to justice. I also want to speak about the fear many immigrant families in Ontario are living. with today on june seventh a family was stopped on baker and six one person was kidnapped the next day another person was detained near bond view park a place where our children should be able to play without families fearing that a loved one may disappear On June 6th, someone was kidnapped, but we're still trying to find out who that was. This last Sunday, a man with infant children was stopped on San Antonio and Park and kidnapped. They are now struggling to feed their newborn twins. a line on some formula hit me up regardless of where people stand politically no family should have to live in this kind of fear no child should come home wondering if their parent will be there i urge this council to support ontario's immigrant residents by once again i'm asking to create an immigrant family assistance fund to help families facing emergencies caused by detention or deportation. Other cities have stepped up to support their residents and Ontario should do the same. Our immigrant neighbors are part of this community. They deserve to know that their city stands with them. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Our next speaker is Tommy Michigan.

Once again, I advise you, stop building. Excuse me. Have a smart growth policy. Stop subdividing and giving off the rest of the former agricultural preserve. It's like it's in your religion to build, build, build. And I think that, according to Mr. City Manager, you need to dissolve the solid waste department in the city and contract out to a private company, at least for residential. Then for commercial, you need to open it up to franchises without a percentage for the franchise fee. So, and then, isn't it true, Mr. City Manager, when you were in Monrovia, you needed a loan, you asked the city for a loan to pay off your house before you went to Glendale? Okay, well...

That's what I read.

So now Mr. Wapner, on your California 464 for your semiannual statement of 22, you received $3,000 campaign contribution from our current mayor. Then also you received $15,300 for a total of $25,000 from the Ontario Police Officers Association. That doesn't go on in other cities where we own real property. It's amazing how you guys get away with it here. And the non-monetary contributions received from your firefighters for responsible government, same political action committee as the police department. For mailers, they give you $5,114 for a total of $25,000. Then, oh, here we go. Leon, for mayor, for voter ID calls, you gladly gave Mr. Wapner $12,000 at one point for a total of $15,000. Then over here, I see that we have the same amount, $1,707 even for Taxifornia, for Tax Fighters Newsletter, the Women's Voice, the California Public Safety Voters Guide, the California Tax Reduction Committee, and also... One minute remaining. Save Prop 13, as long as they don't split the rolls. All the same amount, all out of Lacuna Niguel. Then, I love your expenditures over here for campaign literature and mailings. Creative Print Consulting LLC out of Long Beach, $26,381.26. What are you consulting for, for campaign literature and mailings? $26,381.26. And then over here, you've got Competitive Edge out of San Diego. For point and survey research, you gave them $20,950 out of your campaign for your own whatever.

Our next speaker is Randy Beckendam.

Good evening, Mayor, Council. My name is Randy Beckendam. My daughter Amy and I are operating Amy's Farm, too, and this year we have the honor of being in the parade, so stay tuned for our float. Independence Day is upon us in a couple of weeks, so we all are aware that We gained our independence with a lot of bloodshed. And less than 100 years later, we shed more blood to preserve the Union. But here we are still standing after 250 years by God's grace. And we have a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. So all of you have... probably a hard job trying to discern what the people need, what they want. And for example, if you took a survey, which we have done, actually thousands, and we just asked a simple question. Do you want more warehouses or do you want to preserve farmland? I think we have one person who did not want to preserve farmland. But then we all know that all those who don't want more warehouses are going to continue to order all of their goods online, next day delivery. So what are you to do? If people are going to keep doing that, that fuels the demand for warehouses. But I suggest that you can do both. We have many warehouses about to have more. We also have a 200 acre farm.

One minute remaining.

That could be preserved as farmland. Does not have to be bought by the city or sold by the county. Does not have to be repurposed into a great park. People want farmland, they want open space. We can grow healthy food on that farmland. So strongly urge you to reconsider your decision to break up that 200 acre preserve.

All right, thank you. So that ends our pub. Oh no, we have one more speaker, Brad Newman.

Hello friends. My name is Brad Newman. I am the former city auditor for the city of Ontario in beautiful Southern California. Uh, now as you're aware, mayor, I am the former city auditor because I was ordered to violate the public's trust. And for the past two years, I've been coming to city council to warn the public and city council that the greatest threat to the city of Ontario has been and continues to be Scott Ochoa, the city manager, and the unethical conduct of his administration. Now, Mayor, every time I come here, you act like you're surprised at what I'm saying, but you know what I'm saying is true, even if City Attorney Ruben Duran wants to threaten me with defamation. You understand, Ruben Duran, that there is no magical word or phrase I could say into this microphone that would damage the name and reputation of the City of Ontario, Scott Ochoa, or any one of his executives who engaged in very clear, unambiguous retaliation. What damages the city of Ontario and the reputations of these individuals is the unethical conduct and behavior, the decisions and deliberate acts of the city manager and his subordinates that to me communicate this is an unreputable organization and the public is endangered by his continued leadership. I was told by Jordan Vilwock to stand down while OPD investigates a credible whistleblower report. Ruben Duran and Ms. Parada, if you actually are anti-corruption, could I ask one favor of you? I want you to ask city attorney Ruben Duran one thing. Ask him to define California government code 53087.6. Because according to California state law, the city audit function has the authority to investigate allegations of corruption, fraud, that we received through the whistleblower report. As city auditor, I received that report almost a full week before attorney Michael Allen Heider was assigned to investigate that report. Now, according to attorney Michael Heider, he failed to gather any documents or data when investigating. Because I've spoken on this before, you're familiar. Human resources records, the actual contracts, the financial transactions, all of those are evidence that we paid attorney Michael Heider $89 an hour. to investigate and he didn't investigate. The median annual income of an Ontario resident is $40,000 a year, less than $20 an hour. We paid attorney Michael Heider $89 an hour for him to fail to investigate the city manager's alleged corruption. Who signed the contract named in whistleblower case 44, Scott? You did. Who quashed the investigation into whistleblower case 44? According to Michael Heider, you did. If you'd like to respond, I'd like to stand here so I can look you in the eye, but thank you for your time.

We can't respond. You know the rules.

You just responded before. You just responded earlier today.

Okay, thank you. Well, we're not going to now. Oh, no, we have another. Somebody else came in. Anna Gonzalez.

Good evening, Mayor, Council, staff, and community. Ana Gonzalez representing CCAEJ. I'm here to speak on the injustice that continues about displacing Prop 70 land. These lands were explicitly acquired and protected utilizing Prop 70 funds. Under the strict provisions of Prop 70 and Senate Bill 1124, these parcels are legally bound to a specific and intentional purpose, agricultural preservation, open space conservation, and wildlife protections. Continuing land swabs and displacement of these lands is a clear way for industrial logistics development and non-agricultural uses, and it is a bad faith evasion of a voter approved mandate. Also, I am here to speak on civil rights and procedural violations, the Brown Act and AB 39. I want to formally place on the record that this legislative body is operating in severe procedural and civil rights violations, specifically regarding the Brown Act and language access equity. Translating public comments is not enough. True access means meaningful participation. The monolingual Spanish-speaking members that are here today that are Ontario residents have been systemically denied proper equitable access to this meeting. Access to listen to the presentations of this meeting to make informed input, vital environmental impact reports, and swap details have not been fully and accessibly provided in Spanish, preventing non-English speaking constituents their due right to access to this meeting. By failing to provide simultaneous two-way translation and fully accessible translated materials, you are suppressing public testimony and violating the core spirit of the Brown Act, which guarantees the public's right to meaningful participation. Additionally, under the California planning mandates and environmental- One minute remaining. Including equity frameworks tied to Assembly Bill 39 and general plan updates, you are legally required to prioritize fair, prioritize investments and protections for disadvantaged communities. Shutting out our Spanish speaking neighbors while pushing important projects that will impact their lives in their backyards is a textbook environmental racism and procedural violations. Thank you for listening.

All right, that ends our public comments. We're now with the agenda review and announcements, Mr. City Manager.

No changes, sir.

All right, thank you. So we're gonna move on to consent calendar and all matters listed under the consent calendar will be enacted by one motion and there'll be no separate discussion on these items unless a member of the council requests an item to be removed from the consent calendar for a separate vote. We do have one blue card from Mr. Robles and he's gonna come on up and tell us what he has to say.

Before the clock starts, two minutes, three minutes?

Two minutes. Two minutes from now on with all the comments.

Good evening again, council members, Mr. Mayor. Before you approve the consent calendar, I'd like to address a larger issue, and that is this council continuously approves major amounts of money on consent in this instance you're approving more than fifty million in contracts amendments loans and other commitments through the consent calendar nearly twenty one million is being added to the public safety center project ten million is being approved for communication services and item eighteen authorizes eight twenty million dollar loan to confire whoever they are to establish an ambulance services I support public safety. I support emergency medical services. But I also support transparency, and that's not what this is. A $20 million loan is not routine business. Residents deserve to know why that amount is needed, how it was calculated, how it will be repaid, what protections exist for us, the taxpayers, and what happens if the project revenues don't materialize. Unfortunately, this is a pattern with this council. I've attended plenty of other meetings on the Animal Resource Center and the Sports Empire and the professional stadium. You did the same thing. And those were even bigger amounts. In each case, major financial commitments are approved without the type of public presentation, public workshop, or substantive council decision that residents reasonably expect. These projects involve tens or hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars, and you're just voting on it in one lump sum. Ontario has developed a troubling habit of governing through consent items, amendments and technical agenda reports rather than through open public dialogue. Residents should not have to search through hundreds of pages on the agenda. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. So, um, I'll continue with a motion and a second by the council. So moved. Moved by Mr. Bowman.

Second.

Second by Ms. Parada. We'll take an electronic vote. All right. Consent calendar passes 5-0. And that takes us to public hearings. Madam City Clerk. Sheila? I'm sorry? Public hearings, item number 20.

This is a public hearing to consider City Council certification of a supplemental environmental impact report, including adoption of a mitigation, monitoring, and reporting program, and a statement of overriding approval of a zoning map amendment, and an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Ontario, California, approving a citywide zoning map amendment to implement the Ontario Plan 2050 policy and amendment and making findings in support thereof. Notice of public hearing has been given. Affidavits of compliance are on file and we have four written communications.

Okay. So I'll open the public hearing and let the record reflect any written comments. Yes, there are. So I'd like to call on Mr. Zeledon for some background before we go into the blue cards.

Good evening, mayor, members of city council. The item before you tonight is an amendment to the Ontario plan 2020 policy plan, which is our general plan. The amendment will update existing land use designations to reflect the current development patterns and market conditions. Maintains compliance with state mandates that include housing requirements, good movements, and transportation requirements. It also improves land use compatibility, including truck route refinements near sensitive receptors, and supports our long term vision for our premier community. Compliance with state mandate includes SB 330, AB 98, SB 14, and SB 932, and SB 1000. The amendment proposes land use changes to over 1300 acres of land. It maintains our housing capacity consistent with SB 330 and SB 166. It revises our housing element to maintain residential capacity and again, refines truck routes per AB 98 to address exposures to sensitive receptors. Also updates the policy plan policies to reflect the proposed land uses and circulation changes. So there's a total of roughly eight areas that are being changed. We'll start with area one. Hopefully this mouse works here. Area one will increase the minimum density from 14 dwelling units per acre to 25 dwelling unit per acres for the Meredith specific plan area, which is an arch ball and Inland Empire. Second is it changes land use designation for business park to mix use from campus along Holt to Bondview, about 700 feet east of Bondview. And that is to support the West Valley Connector to be able to provide residential and commercial use to support the transit station that is planned for that area. The third is changes to land use from airport to industrial for the part 150 properties which are just to the west of the airport. The fourth change occurs is to establish the mixed use district around the sports empire. This again to support commercial and residential development around the sports empire. And then fifth is to increase land use densities to comply with state housing laws. so intensifying the corridors along Vineyard and along Ontario Ranch Road or Edison Avenue. The sixth one is the change in land use designation from general commercial mixed use to business park. This is the area just south of Schaefer and just east of Sultana. And then seven is the extension of the Grand Park from Campus Avenue to Euclid. And then last is the change in land use designation for medium density, mixed use to business park. This is the area along Eucalyptus from Euclid all the way to Walker Avenue. This is also in relations to comply with AB 98. So the amendment increases the residential capacity by 7,000 units, increases population by 16,000, and non-residential square footage, that's business park and commercial, by about four million square feet, and adds an additional total of about 2,000 jobs. It's part of AB 98 and SB 14. It requires cities to balance minimizing exposure to sensitive receptors such as homes, schools, and parks, and truck routes. The city evaluated truck routes to address existing conflicts with sensitive receptors. Through community outreach, residents expressed concerns with existing truck routes. As a result, the amendment proposes the elimination of Archibald as a truck route from Merrill to the 60 Freeway. It also eliminates the truck route from Euclid Avenue on Ontario Ranch Road to Walker Avenue. This reduces impact to approximately 1600 existing homes on Archibald and eliminates exposure to about 11,000 proposed homes along the corridor on Ontario Ranch Road. It also removes the truck routes adjacent to parks and sensitive uses, and again, it's consistent with AB 98 and SB 415. In addition, the amendment designates Eucalyptus Avenue from Euclid to Hellman Avenue, and also Walker from Ontario Ranch Road south to Merrill, and then a portion of Hellman as truck routes, and this is to serve the industrial uses in that area. So final supplemental environmental impact report was prepared. It also combined a programmatic project level analysis for the proposed eucalyptus business park specific plan. All feasible mitigation measures incorporated through the mitigation program and reporting program. Some impacts remain significant and unavoidable even with mitigation. Findings supported through a statement of overriding considerations. The less than sensitive included anything from aesthetics all the way down to wildlife. Significant and unavoidable were air quality, greenhouse gases, cultural resources, noise, and transportation. And this is all consistent with the 2022 TOP update as well as the 2010 TOP update. Public outreach was conducted per state law. Notices of preparation were circulated to agencies and public. 25 comment letters were received. Multiple outreach efforts conducted over the past nine months, including online surveys, community events, and pop-up events. Notice of availability was circulated to agencies and the public. The draft supplemental environmental impact report was circulated for a 45-day review period from March 2026 to April of 2026. A total of 17 commenters were received. Comments generally focused on agriculture land conversion, warehouse development, housing capacity, air quality, greenhouse gases, truck routes, environmental justice, transportation impacts, and consistency with our state housing law. The final supplemental environmental impact report, written responses to all comments received during the review period were addressed. Of those 17 comments, six letters from public agencies, three from organizations, and eight letters and emails from residents. Staff is recommending that the City Council adopt a resolution certifying the Ontario Plan Amendment Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, including the CEQA Findings of Fact, Mitigation and Monitoring Program, and Statement of Overriding Considerations. And second, adopt a resolution approving the Ontario Plan 2050 Policy Plan Amendment and introduce for first reading of an ordinance approving the Zoning Map Amendment. Also with me this evening is our place work, our environmental consultant, Nicole Vermillion is here to answer any questions regarding the environmental impact report or the changes to the policy plan. And that concludes my staff report, thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Elidon. Before we get into the council comments and questions, we do have quite a few blue slips. And so I want to remind everybody that you have two minutes and there's quite a few. So I'm going to really stick real on to that two minutes. First speaker is Chris Robles.

Good evening again. Mayor and Council, for years residents have been told Ontario is pursuing a balanced growth, but the record tells a different story. Tonight, you are approving policy amendments that moves land away from residential and mixed-use opportunities towards additional business park development. At the same time, the city is asking you to adopt a statement of overriding considerations because significant impacts remain unavoidable. Now think about that. The city acknowledges the impacts. We just heard it today at the presentation. The city acknowledges that it cannot fully mitigate, and yet the recommendation is to prove anyway. Why? Because somewhere along the way, This council, this city, stopped asking simple questions. How much is enough? How many industrial projects are enough? How much truck traffic is enough? How much air pollution is enough? How much housing opportunity are we willing to sacrifice? Residents experience cumulative effects of these decisions every day, even if City Hall analyzes them one project at a time. And 20 years from now, Ontario will live with the consequences of this decision long after tonight's meeting is forgotten. I urge you to reject item 20.

All right, thank you. Our next speaker is Tina Silva.

Good evening.

Many residents are already concerned about the future of the agricultural preserve and the continued loss of open space in our region. That's why tonight's amendment is so troubling. The staff is asking you to approve a plan that it acknowledged will create significant and unavoidable impacts to air quality, traffic, and noise. Ontario has become a logistics hub for the entire region, but residents are increasingly questioning how much more industrial growth our community can absorb. We should be protecting opportunities for housing, quality neighborhoods, and open space instead of continuing to move toward more industrial development. I urge the Council to think about the long-term future of our city and whether adding more industrial land is worth the impacts that Ontario families will continue to bear. Thank you.

All right, our next speaker is Alec Aragon.

Good evening, mayor and city council members. I'm here tonight to strongly oppose items 20 and 21 on the agenda. Let's be honest about what that eucalyptus business park really is. Neither 3 million square feet of new warehouses, fulfillment centers and relentless diesel traffic. Tonight, city staff is asking you to sign a statement of overriding considerations. By doing this, the city is openly admitting that the air quality, traffic, noise, and greenhouse gases and the impacts of this development are significant and unavoidable. Let me ask you this. If the damage to our community is unavoidable, why is this the right project? This is textbook failure of environmental justice. Ontario already carries one of the heaviest logistics burdens in the entire Inland Empire. Developers and outside investors get the development rights and the massive profits while we get traffic, the noise, and the smog. Every single day, our residents pay the price for your zoning decisions with their lungs and their quality of life. You're actively neglecting the well-being of our citizens to accommodate endless industrial sprawl. Furthermore, to make way for this pollution, you are amending the Ontario Plan 2050 to erase zoning meant for affordable housing in agricultural land. At a time when we are in a desperate housing crisis, and when residents are fighting to protect our agricultural preserve in the context of Prop 70, you are choosing to replace our future, neighborhoods, and open spaces with concrete and warehouses. This amendment is not mandated by the state. It is a deliberate policy choice made by this council. When you vote tonight, you're choosing your legacy. 20 years from now, nobody is going to wish Ontario had more warehouses. We will wish we had clean air, safe housing, and a healthy community. Stop treating our health as an unacceptable casualty for industrial growth. I urge you to reject items 20 and 21. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker is Francis Park.

Good evening, I'm Francis Park from the law firm of Park and Blyos representing public storage. My client owns the property located in 932 and 936 East Holt. I'm a land use attorney with over 32 years of experience and an expert in CEQA. Unfortunately, I'm here tonight to discuss the city's failure to comply with CEQA. I submitted a comment letter today that provides the main technical deficiencies in your EIR. I also came here tonight in the hopes of avoiding litigation with the city. There are many deficiencies, but let me just highlight two in my short time. First, the noticing of affected property owners has been non-existent. Given the significant scope of the project, it is incomprehensible that is moving forward without outreach to everyone affected. My client has not been contacted once by the city. This is even more troubling since we have been working with the city and in constant communication for the last two years for our storage project. and we have been pursuing building permits diligently over the last five months. The second major deficiency is the undisclosed significant land use impact. Our approved self-storage project included findings by the city that our storage use was compatible and an improvement to this area. As you may know, this area is industrial. There are body shops, manufacturing, truck centers, and a major freight line operated by Union Pacific immediately to the south of our property. There's a strong public policy to not locate residential uses in industrial areas because of noise, vibration, public safety, and health risk reasons to name just a few. This means that locating residential uses here would be a significant land use impact and the city cannot make the required finding of compatibility. I urge you to read and consider all the fatal flaws set forth in my comment letter. If you do vote to approve this project tonight, you should do so with the knowledge that public storage will pursue this in litigation. And given the many flaws and deficiencies, we believe this approval will be invalidated by a court of law. Thank you for your consideration.

All right, our next speaker is Brian Ulrich.

Good evening, Council. My name is Brian Ulrich. I work with Public Storage. I oversee development and acquisition in California. As Frances already mentioned, we've been working hand-in-hand with planning for over two years going back to 2024. In my time pursuing opportunities for development in the City of Ontario go back years prior to that. At one point in time, we were looking at sites including the former Kmart, that we identified as a desirable location. We did outreach with your planning group and learned quickly that that was viewed as a housing site. We moved on. Likewise, we looked down along Riverside and looked at the desirability of growth in the Ontario Ranch area. That was also explained to be non-compatible, so we moved on. We arrived in 2024 on Holt and were given the direction that this would be compliant. we proceeded to spend millions of dollars, not only acquiring the land, but going through design and approvals, which were given as of January of this year. So as Francis already mentioned, We covered all the bases. We did all the studies. We're found to be compliant. And ultimately, this goes against everything that we've been told. And not only that, were we not ever told that this was a process underway or that there could be some potential future impacts to our site by rezone or otherwise. So we ask that you continue this. We'd love to engage with you all and figure out a reasonable solution to what we've already done today. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Randy Beckendam.

Good evening again. So the original TLP, even though it didn't make provision for preserving agriculture, at least I felt it was balanced. and we have that on the logo. Four years ago, our city manager and former city council person came to Amy's Farm. They knew we were concerned because the plan says no warehouses north of Eucalyptus, but we knew that warehouse developers were buying up all the land between Eucalyptus and Edison. We knew that the development community, the warehouse development community, intended to put pressure on the city and bring warehouses all the way to Edison. So they came down to talk to us at Amy's Farm. And our city manager said, well, we can't control Who buys land? But I can tell you, we're drawing the line at Eucalyptus. There will be no warehouses north of Eucalyptus. And they were adamant about that because it was supposed to be housing, then the Grand Park, and then more housing. And it was balanced and reasonable enough. But we were correct. Now the warehouses are coming all the way up to Edison. The houses have been moved. We were always going to lose the ag land, but bowing to the warehouse developers has just been an ongoing pattern.

All right. Thank you, Randy. Our next speaker is Joaquin Castillejos.

Good evening, Mayor, Councilmembers. My name is Joaquin Castellanos and I'm speaking today regarding the proposed amendments to the Ontario Plan 2050. I respectfully urge the City Council to postpone approval of these amendments and require additional community outreach before approving and adopting the statement of overriding considerations and certifying the supplemental environmental impact report. Ontario is one of the most diverse communities in Southern California. Our residents represent many cultures, languages, and economic backgrounds. Meaningful public participation requires more than meeting minimal legal notice requirements. It requires intentional engagement with the communities that will bear the impacts of these land use decisions. According to the city's own environmental review, significant and unavoidable impacts will remain related to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, transportation impacts, and noise, even after mitigation measures are implemented. The report also identifies significant and unavoidable regional air quality impacts and greenhouse gas emissions. These are not minor concerns. They are public health concerns. They affect children, seniors, workers, and families. who already experienced cumulative environmental burdens. The staff report acknowledges that public comments raised concerns regarding truck routes, air quality noise, agricultural land conversion, warehouse development, green gas emissions, and environmental justice. Yet the city received only 17 comment letters during the review process. Given the scale of these amendments and their citywide implications, that number suggests not broad public participation, but limited public awareness and engagement. Ontario has an opportunity to become a regional leader in sustainable development. We have valuable agricultural resources, opportunities for regenerative farming, local food production, and long-term food store security strategies that deserve protection and consideration in future planning decisions. Before approving a project with a knowledge significant and unavoidable impacts, I respectfully ask the council to ensure that all communities, especially those most affected by truck traffic.

Sir, your time is up and we can't extend and we have too many speakers, so thank you very much. Okay, our next speaker is Ana Gonzalez.

Good evening again, Mayor and Council. Again, Ana Gonzalez representing CCAEJ. I have given the city clerk a copy of the region in crisis report two that was just released on World Environment Day. I hope that it serves as homework for you all to read what's happening in our communities. The staff report states that the proposed amendments will convert certain residential mix use and open space designated properties to business park uses and support millions of square feet of additional non-residential development. At the same time, concerns raised by the public included agricultural land conversions, warehouse development, truck routes, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and environmental injustices. Ontario's future should not be measured solely by development intensity or economic output. We must consider community health, environmental sustainability, and long-term resilience as it is stated in the government code you swore to protect. The city's own supplemental environmental impact report concludes that significant and unavoidable impacts will remain related to greenhouse gas emissions, air quality, transportation, and noise. There are no proper mitigations and no alternatives were put in place. That's required by CEQA. Noise pollution is not simply an inconvenience. Chronic exposure to freight traffic and industrial activity can negatively affect quality of life, sleep, learning outcomes for children, and overall community well-being. I am also concerned that Ontario is not fully evaluating the value of preserving agricultural opportunities. We were not given enough time to read the responses from the final EIR. While the report describes outreach efforts, many residents remain unaware. This plan is not AB 98 compliant. I respectfully ask the council to deny items 20 and 21 or delay approval, conduct additional community engagement, and explore alternatives that better protect public health, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and preserve agricultural land. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next. Our next speaker is Claudia Cuevas.

Good evening, my name is Claudia Cuevas. And I am with the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice. And representing the Ontario community. I come today to counsel in opposition of the amendment for the general plan of Ontario that is being proposed in item 20.

Este concilio y la comunidad trabajamos juntos para aprobar el plan general. This council and the community work together to adopt a general plan.

Que reflejaba el deseo de tener una ciudad con una economía diversa y sostenible y un ambiente limpio y sano.

That work together to...

Excuse me.

This council and the community worked together to adopt a general plan that reflected the wish to have a diverse economy and sustainable and a clean and healthy environment.

La comunidad sigue comprometida en este plan general y esperando ver que se cumpla.

The community continues to be committed to this general plan and hoping to see it be completed.

Pero desde que el plan general se aprobó en el 2022.

But since the general plan was approved in 2022.

Miles de acres han sido resonificados usando enmiendas.

Thousands of acres have been rezoned using amendments.

Y hoy quiere cambiar más de 180 acres para construir un parque industrial.

And today you continue to do that to build an industrial park that's larger than 180 acres.

Instead of maintaining these zones for agriculture areas, affordable housing that do benefit the community, you want to bring projects that pollute and impact with more trucks. Before changing truck routes with these amendments, you should apply AB 98 Que deberían incluir participación pública.

With all of its full force that includes public participation.

Y eso no lo estamos viendo hoy. Muchísimas gracias. And today we are not seeing that. Thank you very much. Oh, sorry. Un punto más. Necesitamos para las personas hispanohablantes traducción. No solo para hablar, sino para escuchar lo que ustedes están diciendo.

She's requesting that this be translated also in audio for the people attending. not just for translation for the added or the atoms, I'm sorry, the Spanish speakings so that they also can understand. Thank you.

Our next speaker is Luz Maria Hernandez.

Buenas tardes. Buenas tardes. Mi nombre es Luz Maria Hernandez, residente de esta hermosa ciudad que es Ontario.

Good evening. My name is Luz Maria Hernandez, a resident of the beautiful city of Ontario.

Hoy estoy aquí porque me preocupa la contaminación que tenemos en esta área.

I am here today because I am worried about the pollution in this area.

Que es una de las más contaminantes.

that is one of the most polluted areas.

I'm not only here for myself, but also my community and for all the children that daily breathe this polluted air. We have a lot of warehouses in our nearby area. con boileres contaminando y emitiendo contaminantes al aire. With industrial boilers that emitiendo contaminantes al aire that release air pollution into the air and make y para hacer el problema más grave and to make matters worse en los últimos cinco o seis años in the last five or six years están circulando de manera más continua There are circulating in the downtown area trucks in Euclid Avenue that is in downtown Ontario. Making the air pollution worse. That is why I'm kindly asking that we look for solutions such as alternative routes for trucks or industrial boilers that are less contaminated. It is worrisome that we do not have the public participation that understand these amendments that are being proposed. I am asking that you vote no and give more To understand more what is being proposed.

Thank you.

All right, our next speaker is Marty McBride.

Good evening, mayor and city council. It's nice to be here again and see you all. I'm gonna try and be brief. I am asking very respectfully that the council postpone the approval of items 20 and 21 on the agenda for public hearing. And I wanted to say that Tina Silva earlier said a reminder to all of us that we stand on Tongva land. The indigenous peoples of this nation understood that it was essential to their continued survival to live in harmony with the land, to not take too much, to use only what they needed, and to leave enough for future generations, to leave the land in essence better than when they found it. for future generations. I want to ask the city council to think of that when considering these incredibly expensive development plans. We have a seal that says we are a balanced community, but our community is not in balance. This city council is making decisions that continually affect not only our present residents in terms of health and quality of living, but also future generations will be affected by what we can regrettably say, is some of the most contaminated and polluted air in the nation. This is a title that I would love this council, while it's here, to make every effort to reverse. Thank you so much.

All right. Our next speaker is Karen May.

Good evening, Council, Mayor. I did submit a letter in public comment, and I agree with all of the speakers so far that are asking the council to postpone the approval of items 20 and 21. And I always hate to be on the other side of the table as my labor brothers, but we cannot continue to build anything and everything. The cost is just too high. And I just want to sort of reiterate for the audience and for all of us that the staff and the council acknowledge that these environmental effects are sort of beyond repair and we're asking, they're asking for, to basically override the consideration that these, that the cost is too high to the environment. So I know that you all did sort of the letter of the law and had these public events, but the point is clearly the residents are concerned and y'all are not listening. That's the point. We have had input into this process and everyone I know is opposed to the specific plan and this general plan that allows for more warehouses and does not preserve the Prop 70 land. I know that you did sort of the letter of the law, you got approval from the state parks department. I wonder what that correspondence said, because I do not think it provided the full information about what we would lose here in Ontario. And I don't think it's ethical at all to basically swap that Prop 70 land and designate part of the Grand Park that was already owned by Ontario. So please vote no.

All right, thank you. That ends the public comment portion of that item. So I'll close the public hearing and entertain a motion or discussion.

Mr. Mayor, for the sake of the record, would it be appropriate for either city attorney or myself just to make a couple of observations?

It would not only be appropriate, I think it would be informational.

In that instance, Mr. Mayor, will you reopen the public hearing so anything that transpires now is a part of the official record? We do have several- We'll reopen the public hearing so we can hear from the city attorney.

Thank you, sir. Maybe in tandem, and I'll start with the comment that was from Mr. Beckenham, because I think there's a lot of context that's missing in the observation or his recollection of a conversation that he had with myself and with former Councilman Valencia. the the idea and if you look at the if you know this area and i know you do because see you you're very familiar with but the material much of what you're seeing and hearing tonight has to do with the very southwest part of the city in the agricultural preserve uh... and the area that straddles eucalyptus avenue And the council has made a decision in previous land use decisions that warehouses, modern warehouses, million square foot distribution centers would exist south of Eucalyptus and they would not exist north of Eucalyptus. And that's the conversation that I had had with Mr. Beckendam. The business park designation that's being created and being recommended for the north side of Eucalyptus is not a function of semantics. It's a function of the reality that you have a land use pattern that really speaks to the balance that we've heard so many of the speakers mention. The idea that you would have million square foot modern state of the arts buildings that are on the south side of Eucalyptus, smaller varying sizes from 50,000 to 400,000, but nothing approaching a million or more on the north side of Eucalyptus. Then the city's grand park, which is not property that the city owns today. And then medium density housing that would butt up to the south side of Ontario Ranch Road. And as you look at the materials that Mr. Zeledon had presented, again, the idea is along those major corridors, you have medium and high density residential with low density residential in the areas in between, which is very much in line with modern land use planning. On high density corridors, you put high density residential and then in the lower density, you step it down into areas where it makes the most sense such that as you progress from south to north, as you get closer and approach Riverside Drive, you have a land use pattern that is very similar to what's on the north side of Riverside Drive. That's what's before you here today. And I'm sorry if Mr. Beckenham doesn't recall it that way, but that's the conversation, or at least that's the- Excuse me.

There'll be none of that. We're gonna just- So- Excuse me. So- You cannot do that, okay? We're gonna keep a professional meeting going, yes?

That's important from the standpoint of environmental justice as well. Because if you were to continue to allow residential on the north side of Eucalyptus, when you have these million square foot buildings on the south side of Eucalyptus, who among us would want to live across the street from them?

Excuse me, one more time and I'm gonna have to ask you to leave. We need to conduct a professional meeting without interruptions and you had your time. It's over.

When you look again, as simple as looking at Google Maps, very few, if anybody, in a large metropolitan sense of looking at the population base, lives in that area. It's the old Ag Preserve. That part is very, very true. But even on the property south of Eucalyptus, the Prop 70 property that's gotten some attention, You're not growing fruits and vegetables in that area. It's feedstock for the dairy farms that still are here. And we have a right to farm ordinance in town that farmers can continue to farm and would not be pushed off the land. What those farmers are seeing in many cases is that the land is too valuable for them and the environment in California is too restrictive for them to continue dairy farming. And so they're making a move on their own. And that trend that has been experienced from the time that the dairies were in the southeast Los Angeles part of the region to them migrating over to the area of Artesia and Cerritos and then ultimately moving further out this way, that migration continues on forward. So the idea of environmental justice is palpable certainly for the council, but it's reflected in the decisions that you're making because the idea would be that you don't want to put, as you heard under the discussion of AB 98, put sensitive receptors like residents across the street from high density users like warehouses. And so again, the idea of going from large warehouse to business park, to grand park, to residential, that scaling of the area makes the most amount of sense from a rational land use approach. On the issue of air quality, because we hear this again and again and again, the air quality in Ontario We have a challenge of their quality. There's no two ways about it.

Excuse me. Hold on. Let me just explain that. I don't allow anybody to hijack our meeting, ever. That's been my, and you know what, ma'am? There's a lot of things I could say, but I'm not going to because I believe in being polite. And I already told you, if you keep it up, I'm going to have to ask you to leave. The other thing is, You cannot approach the dais. We don't know what's going on. You're a nice guy, okay, but just like you say to me sometimes, oh, you said something, yeah, I didn't mean anything by it. I know you didn't mean anything by it, but can you imagine what could possibly happen if somebody walks up here and we're unprotected? You cannot do that. And that's what she told you. So we're going to continue to conduct this meeting in a very professional manner. I told you when the meeting began that you can't be clapping or yelling or speaking out unless you're recognized by me and not even doing that. So we're going to conduct this meeting the way that it's laid out, to be professional and respectful. You don't hear any of us jumping in and tearing anybody up because we want to do it respectfully. So if you can continue this meeting like that, please, I ask you respectfully to let him speak. We let all of you speak. We didn't interrupt. We're going to do this like we always do it professionally here in Ontario. Yes, Mr. City Manager, continue.

Yes, sir. The issue of air quality as it comes up is not a function of the decisions that you're making here. The reason why it's unavoidable is because we have three high capacity freeways that run through the city, two freight rail lines and an international airport. And those are not going away. So any decision that you make is going to have the unavoidable impacts that are being brought forward here. The idea of industrial sprawl, this is quite the opposite of industrial sprawl because of the warehouse, because of the freeways, because of the rail lines, This is the ideal location in this southwest part of the city where there are industrial buildings today is the greatest opportunity for us to make sure that long term we have that balanced community. We are not talking about putting business park or warehouse near downtown. We're not talking, even if you, again, pull up Google Maps and you don't see a whole lot of homes, if any, on that stretch. That's what we're talking about. And so there's land use policy and there's politicking. I would submit to you that from the land use policy perspective that's being brought to you by the community development department, planning department, you're seeing that rationale, that understand people can disagree with it, rational people can disagree with it, but the idea that it makes the most amount of sense from a land use pattern development That's what is underpinning all of this. I guess the last thing I would say is that the gentleman that got up and talked about compatibility on Hope Boulevard, I am sensitive to the comments that he's made as they've gone through this process. But two things can be true at the same time. And the other thing that's true is that the West Valley Connector is a billion dollar investment from the region that's going to hopefully expectantly alleviate traffic congestion as we collect, as we connect the east part of LA County up to the station in Rancho by way of Holt Boulevard, which allows us to renovate and really mitigate a number of the issues that have plagued that stretch of street for a generation or more as we go through with the West Valley Connector. If Council so directs, if you were to move forward tonight, what we as your staff would request is that between now and the second reading of the proposed ordinance, that we would have an opportunity to talk to those folks to see if there's a way for us to be able to work together, understanding that they've gone through that land use entitlement process. We may disagree with some of the comments that were made about technical defaults in the EIR and under CEQA, but we can still have that conversation before we get to the next meeting. Mr. City Attorney, if there's anything you needed to cover.

I will just echo the city manager's comments on the letter that we received from Mr. Park representing Mr. Ulrich and his company. I concur in that approach, Mr. Mayor and members of the council. I think it's a wise one not to let this relatively minor issue, no disrespect to you, sir, but as I think the council and everyone here tonight can see, there's been a lot of time and effort put into what is placed before you. Far reaching consequences, the fact that Mr. Ulrich said that he is willing to engage with staff and Mr. Ochoa said the same thing now, I think portends very well for this piece of the approval process. And so I'm committed to working with Mr. Ochoa and Mr. Ulrich's council to make that happen in concert with your direction, of course.

All right, are we ready to close the public hearing? So Mr. City Attorney, we're ready to close the public hearing.

I believe that is true. Mr. Mayor.

Okay. So we're going to close the public hearing and, but that's in a moment. Okay. Okay. So I'll close the public hearing and entertain a motion and discussion from the council.

Okay. Um, one of the comments was something about how we are not, uh, compliant with AB 98. Um, Rudy, could you talk to that for us?

Yes, we are compliant. We went through, as you recall, our last general plan amendment. We went through and eliminated Euclid Avenue from Mission to the 10 Freeway as a truck route. And in this go-around, we evaluated all truck routes and determined that... Archibald Avenue from Merrill to the 60 Freeway did have impacts on existing residents, and then also that portion of Edison from Euclid to Walker would have impacts on future residents, I think 16,000 units. So we are compliant with AB 98. We'll probably in the future come back and revisit again as we grow, but we are compliant, Our environmental consultant is here, and if there's specific questions on that, but we are compliant.

All right, thank you. Anybody else have any comments or a motion? Yeah, no, go ahead, Deb. You got the floor.

You know, the one thing that I wanted to say to everybody, too, is that the challenges that cities face today, you know, when it comes to balancing jobs, housing, and transportation, and the quality of life while complying with the increasing number of state mandates, it's tough. And the goal is not to eliminate employment-generating land uses. My goal is to make sure they are located where they need to and make the most and the best sense. In regards to the ag, nothing's more precious to me than ag. I mean, I love plants and all that kind of stuff. You drive by my house and you'll see everything that I've got going there. But I can't begrudge the farmers and the dairy owners. That's their property. Many of them have worked that property for a long, long time and they see the benefit of selling that property and retiring and I can't begrudge them that. So with this, I'll be glad to make a motion to support.

So we have a motion to approve by Ms. Perotta and then a second by Mr. Bowman, but he'd like to speak.

I would second that. The caveat would be to agree with what's been said by staff and our good city attorney and city manager, of course, have the opportunity to meet with the party Hope Boulevard and any others that would be of significant importance.

I'll amend it to include that.

Okay. Mr. Watner. I don't know what the amendment was. Well, to continue to discuss with the Hope Boulevard property owner. Sure, basically.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Our job is not easy, folks. Our job is to listen to what you have to say, have discussions with our professionals and our staff members, and then it's difficult. All the information you brought out is absolutely true. I don't think anyone's happy with the quality of the air that we have, and I think we have an obligation to mitigate that best that we can. But at the same time, we talk about housing shortages, we talk about the fact that none of our children could afford to buy the houses that we're in. The quality of life that we have is supported by creation of jobs. And creation of jobs requires us to provide housing for the folks that are working here. We try to maintain that balance of housing and jobs. And at the same time, try to figure out how we mitigate whatever impacts are occurring. But we have to look at all sides of these issues. We have to think of what's best for the entire community. And I'm not gonna minimize the importance of clean air. Obviously, we need to have that. But we also have folks who are trying to survive, earn a living to support their family, have houses that they can live in, affordable houses that they can live in. So once again, there's no right or wrong answer. We just have to do the best we can do with the information that we receive. And in this case, I do support the motion. I think it's important for us to maintain quality of life for all of Ontario. Quality of life, I guess, kind of contradiction there, right? Quality of life does include clean air, but we also have to pay attention to the folks that really need places to live, we need to be able to make sure we can provide proper public services, and if we don't create those jobs and the housing opportunities, we're not gonna be able to do that.

Anybody else? I'll just say this, and I'm not gonna reiterate Good comments by my counsel. I apologize if I've offended anybody by saying I need to keep this meeting professional, but I do. It's not personal. It's the way we do it here. You know, this isn't, we can't do a free-for-all. And if it starts getting out of hand, then I have to nip that in the bud. So if I've offended anybody by maintaining decorum, that wasn't my intent, and I hope it didn't come off that way. And I know that there's an organization here and you're represented well by your people and your staff and you're all professional and you do what you do at your job and I respect that. But we do have to have a professional meeting and my voice is just going away real fast. So I'm gonna stop talking and just say, I agree with much of what was said. So we're gonna go ahead and take that electronic vote. Item passes 5-0. So we're going to move on to item number 21. Madam City Clerk.

Thank you. This is a public hearing to consider the approval of the Eucalyptus Business Park specific plan. Notice of public hearing has been given. Affidavits of compliance are on file and there are two written communications.

Okay, so at this time, I'll open the public hearing and let the record reflect any written comments. Okay, thank you. And we do have, once again, quite a few blue cards to this item, and we're gonna go ahead and start. You have two minutes. Chris Robles, imagine that. Came loaded.

Somehow it got darker in here, too. Good evening, once again. I'm going to somewhat alter what I was going to say. Bottom line is, no. Vote no on 21, right? This euphemism of business park, in spite of what we've heard already from staff, is ridiculous. This is a warehouse. We've already been texting in the room. There's two of them that are over 800 square feet. This is nonsense. Come on. Bottom line here, I'm sitting here.

For some reason, I don't know if you have your microphone misplaced. Can you hear me?

Apparently also it's not streaming very well because people are complaining to me via text that they are getting cut off. So can we fix the technical stuff and start my clock again, please?

I'm working on it. Let's make sure we can hear him. All right, go.

Don't start the clock, can you hear me? Yeah, okay, all right. I'll start over. Item 21, bottom line is I'm against it. The community is against it. We're asking you to not move forward with it. But as you could see me in the room, I always put my hand up like this when all of you show up. And that's exactly how your votes go. It is no shock or surprise except the Littleton field. That's different, isn't it? And that's also when you did listen to people from the audience. reopened the public hearing, had people come up. So it's not a precedent that you, or there is a precedent for you to bring people up during public hearings. But look, this is a business park, euphemistically called a business park with 800, two 800 square feet, 8,000 square feet, warehouses, thank you. And the nonsense that we were hearing earlier in the comment, and we rarely get to comment again after we've heard it from staff, this agricultural land is a preserve. It's owned by the state of California, managed by the county. That's the Prop 70 land we've all referred to. It is ridiculous for you to say that it's not being used properly or that somehow these cows are there. The land is preserved for agriculture, whatever that looks like. Farmer Randy has talked about that numerous times. It is not about cattle or cows. I'm just so frustrated with you all.

Our next speaker is Tina Silva.

Hello again, and I will reiterate that I'm very upset right now, and I do not feel listened to, and I don't think our community feels listened to. And I have never disrespected any of you while I'm up here speaking, but I feel disrespected tonight, and that's enough of that. I'm concerned about the Eucalyptus Business Park because despite its name, this project will allow warehouses, distribution and fulfillment uses that will bring even more truck traffic to our community. Ontario already carries more than its fair share of the region's logistic industry. Residents don't experience these projects one at a time. We experience them collectively through increased traffic, poor air quality, noise, and thousands of truck trips moving through our neighborhoods every single day. I ask you to think about truck safety. If you remember, I am a volunteer with the Truck Safety Coalition. Every additional warehouse project means more trucks on our roads. Those trucks share our streets with families, children, pedestrians, cyclists, and commuters. For some of us, truck safety is not an abstract policy discussion. We know firsthand, I know firsthand, the devastation that can result from truck-related crashes. That is why every decision that adds more truck traffic deserves serious scrutiny. The people making these decisions may never experience the consequences, but residents do. At some point, we have to ask when enough is enough. Ontario should not continue approving industrial expansion without considering the cumulative impacts on the people who live here. I urge you to put community health and safety ahead of more warehouse development, aka business parks. Thank you.

All right, our next speaker is Randy Beckendam.

Good evening again. I live on Eucalyptus Avenue. My morning walk takes me off my farm, past the monster warehouse. As I'm walking down the sidewalk, I pick up trash, put it in the trash can at the warehouse. These warehouses are actually beautiful, beautifully landscaped. They set back from the land. I live right across the street. I live on Eucalyptus. If we could go back to the original plan and have high density housing on Eucalyptus and preserve the Prop 70 land as open space, agriculture, regenerative farming, not dairies, perhaps even rebuild Amy's Farm, people would love to live there. It's just not true that you couldn't live on eucalyptus. I live on eucalyptus. So this doesn't have to be. We talk about semantics. Two of the buildings are 800,000 square feet. So they're just under a million. But it could be housing. It was housing.

All right. Thank you, Randy. Joaquin Castillejos again.

Good evening, my name is Joaquin Castillejos. I am with the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice, an organizer here in Ontario working with the Ontario community to let them know about the impacts of air quality, of the fright movement, and the potential of what another Ontario could look like where we have more sustainable economy, regenerative agriculture. And what we're seeing here tonight is that the city council or the staff is continuing this path towards industrialization of agricultural lands, of residential land, and straying away from the general plan and what the wishes of most residents is. I am also a resident of Bloomington where we did have A BLOOMINGTON BUSINESS PARK SPECIFIC PLAN. AND THOSE WAREHOUSES THAT WERE PROPOSED IN THAT BUSINESS PARK PLAN ARE OVER A MILLION SQUARE FEET. SO JUST BECAUSE IT'S A BUSINESS PARK DOESN'T MEAN IT CAN'T BE A LARGE WAREHOUSE. It's possible for a different Ontario, it's possible to not have to be swayed by market conditions or whatever excuse it is to change these lands. A good buffer could be agricultural land. Don't build housing if you don't want to, even though housing will go, but you could build agricultural and that's perfectly fine. regenerative farming, which is good for the environment, it's possible to clean the air. Just because there's an airport and all the excuses, it's possible to have clean air. You have in your sign, in God we trust, doesn't God say everything could be possible? Everything's possible to me. It's possible to clean the air while also developing the community. It's not unavoidable or whatever the excuse that's being made. You have to stop this, and I urge the council to vote against this. Thank you.

Thank you, Joaquin. Ana Gonzalez. All right.

Ana Gonzalez, again, Executive Director at CCAEJ. Since we're so worried about jobs, I wanted to read a page of our region in crisis report, page 17. Despite the significant increase of new warehouse space, there are now fewer jobs in the wholesale trade warehousing and transportation employment categories. than there were in November 2021. There is significant seasonality in logistics employment, but the annual number for 2022 is clearly higher than 2024 and 2025 year to date. This is partially due to a decrease in market demand, partially a result of tariff-related shifts in global trade patterns, and partially due to a long-term trend in automation and warehouse work. According to the spatial economic analysis, 75% of warehouse jobs and almost two-thirds of transportation jobs and wholesale trade jobs are vulnerable to automation. Despite the strength of research on warehouse automation, we have heard elected officials and developers dismiss potential job losses due to automation and AI. There was no presentation on community benefit agreements for this project. What are the benefits in the long run and annual benefits that the city is getting out of this project? There's no mitigations, there's no alternatives. You guys are continuously violating CEQA and it is so disheartening and heartbreaking that you guys gaslight the community, especially Farmer Randy who has been in this community forever. How dare you? And you guys talk about the cows and this and that. Yes, we know that. That's why that space can easily be regenerative farming and we can transform those farms into good food producing spaces that we can secure food for our people that are food insecure right now with all these craziness happening in the federal world. So please vote no.

Thank you. Claudia Cuevas. Okay, Marty McBride.

Hello again. Everybody that has spoken here has spoken from the very depths of their heart out of their concern for the city of Ontario, its residents, and its future. You've been elected to represent our interests. You've been elected to represent us and what we need, not just now, but in the future as well. Our future is in your hands. There are ways. You don't have to accept a development that has what is called, what is this? Let me see. It is called significant and unavoidable impacts even with mitigation. You don't have to accept that as reality. That is not your only option. You have other options besides saying, you know what? Yeah, it sucks, but we're going to do it anyway. You don't have to do that. You have options. on behalf of everybody who has spoken here, I implore you to please postpone the vote on this second half of what item 20 paved the way for you to acknowledge and accept without any concerns whatsoever in spite of what you say are your concerns. If they are really concerns, please vote as if they are true concerns. Postpone this vote. Postpone this project. Look at alternatives, please. Thank you.

All right, our next speaker is Karen May.

Well, you can feel the emotion in this room. There's a lot of passionate people in this room. And we don't feel heard. We don't feel listened to. And Mr. Ochoa, I would love to have a conversation with you about land use planning and professional standards. It does not have to be that way, okay? I'm not sure why you're apparently not paying attention. But, you know, the city of Cleveland, for example, had an economic development strategy around food and the food industry and sustainable agriculture and farm-to-table restaurants, which we have the potential to do here with the preserve of agricultural land, which would be the buffer from those mega warehouses, right? It does not have to be light industrial to be a buffer for the housing. You put the agricultural land there that does sustainable regenerative farming there, you're creating jobs, you're creating food, you're creating cleaner air. And there are planning standards. You don't have to gaslight us and say that this is the only professional way to do land use planning. That is simply false. And I would love to have a conversation with you about it because I actually have some experience in that area. So let's talk about it. Let's talk about Thrive Inland SoCal that was actually not, did not put logistics on the target industry list. We put cybersecurity and clean industries in order to grow jobs. We don't have to continue to build warehouses. There are ways to plan in a professional way that brings jobs. I would love to see some community benefits agreements In fact, I would love to see some project labor agreements, right, guys? We would love some guaranteed union labor in the construction and post-construction for the warehouses, right? Wouldn't that be nice to have some actual quality jobs? We can still do the high-density housing.

Thank you, Ms. May. Your time is up. Our next speaker is, uh-uh, no applause, Joseph Quesada. Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor and members of the Council. My name is Joseph Quesada. I am here on behalf of the hardworking men and women of Labor's Local 73. I would like to express our support for the proposed Eucalyptus Business and Parks Physical Plan. Projects like this create real opportunity for local workers and their families. The development of the business park facility represents thousands of construction work hours and can provide good paying jobs, family support wages, health care benefits, retirement security for workers throughout the Inland Empire and the surrounding areas. Laborers Local 73 members live, work, raise their families in the City of Ontario and the surrounding communities. This project has potential to put local residents to work on building the infrastructure and other critical components necessary to bring this development to life. Beyond the construction phase, projects like this generates economic activities and benefits local businesses, increases tax revenues, and creates long-term employment opportunities for the region. We respectfully ask the City Council to consider the positive impacts this project will have on working families and support opportunities that maximize local hire and use of skilled union labor. So on behalf of Labor's local cemetery, we support this project. Thank you for your time.

All right. Thank you. Thank you very much. So do either of you have any comments about any of the things that were said?

Just very briefly, I guess it's worth noting that the $800,000 or 800,000 square foot number isn't about a building, it's about an area where that is the maximum density that can be developed. So the largest building is somewhere in the neighborhood of 400 or $540,000 Square feet. 540, we have budget on the brain, square feet for those locations. In terms of public benefits, the 36 acres of park space, the creation and the extension of the Grand Park that will become the buffer that is required, presuming it's acquired with Prop $70, will be required to be compliant with Prop 70, which is farming and agricultural recreation, will in fact serve to be that buffer that's been discussed here so far. So I don't know that there's a whole lot of difference between what's been said other than no business park. But again, we would recommend to you that as a land use zoning strategy that this makes the most amount of sense.

Okay, so I'll close the public hearing and I'll now entertain a motion discussion. Mr. Bowman. Hold on, Jim. Okay, there you go. Okay, you're on now.

I'd like to move the motion, but I'd like to also, as we look at the time and space of where we exist today, and we're talking about fuels, emissions, and those types of things, and I do believe in the earlier part of the presentation there were some significant approaches on how we attempt and, in fact, will accomplish through routing traffic as we see it today to ease a lot of our concerns. And let's not forget, we're living in an age of electric transportation. That is a big push in the trucking industry that will not only help today and in the future, but in what we're doing right now and those trucks that are still on the road that will be mandated. to go to electric. So the future is very promising also without crippling the opportunity for growth. So you're making a motion to approve? Yes, sir.

Buddy? I'll second the motion. Yes, Ms. Prada. So we have a second with Mr. Schwabner.

I would just like to offer again that we've already brought up the fact that we have a right to farm ordinance here in town. We want those farmers that want to farm to farm. I mean, what makes it hard for them is that, you know, between the AQMD and some of the state mandates they run into, it makes it expensive for them to farm here. I can appreciate Randy's talk about regenerative farming and being that I do some master gardening and stuff on the side and I read a lot of literature and stuff. you know back in like wyoming and colorado where they are doing a lot of that regenerative farming especially with the cattle where they figured out now that if they rotate the cattle and keep them off of you know part of the farm and then they can rotate them back where they they really don't even have to do hay and alfalfa and all the other things that they do if they just let that soil and all those plants regenerate and that's a i don't know that we can do that here And the other thing that I wanted to make note, too, that I asked Stater Brothers, because I had this idea in my head, that what if they just got one of these big warehouses and did some hydroponic stuff where they could grow all the fruits and vegetables that were here and needed in the area, and they didn't like that idea. So it's not that we don't want it, it's that we do want it, but it just has to be economically feasible. It's, you know, like I say, we do support the farmers that are here and want to stay here, and so those are my comments.

All right.

Go ahead and take a vote.

Passes 5-0.

Let's move on to item number 22, Madam City Clerk.

Thank you. This is a public hearing to consider an amendment to the Meredith International Center specific plan to establish a mixed-use overlay district. Notice of public hearing has been given. Affidavits of compliance are on file and we have no written communications.

Okay, so I'll open the public hearing. We have Mr. Robles.

Mr. Mayor, City Council, can you hear me? Because I can't.

I can hear you. You can hear me? Okay.

So I actually live very close to this, was looking forward to the IKEA, but this is crazy. You've got a 2015 EIR in 2026, and you're justifying not having to do another one when... Clearly, the entire city has changed and altered. Specifically, that freeway where there was construction for years and that entire corridor plus all the warehouses across the street from me and the massive apartment building complex that's there and you're not going to do a new EIR? That's absurd. Before approving this, you need to explain why a 2015 environmental baseline remains sufficient for a 2026 project in one of the fastest growing parts of Ontario.

Thank you. Thank you. Okay. So, any comments? Mr. Shoah.

Yeah, I would defer to our community development executive director, Mr. Zeledon, to address the particulars of the environmental review.

thank you um the so the addendum was done and all the all the studies were done to traffic air quality and all were consistent with our top currently and also the environmental impact report that was done for the meredith international specific plan this was going to provide opportunity for residential housing and also commercial commercial development that currently does not allow that with this overlay district so All the traffic impacts of EMT were all analyzed and was consistent, both TOP and as well as the Meredith International Environmental Impact Report. Thank you.

All right, thank you. So I'll close the public hearing and entertain a motion discussion from council. Mr. Wagner.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just a little bit of history behind the site, because a lot of these facts may not be out there. We all wanted and envisioned in IKEA their retail store. At some point, IKEA came and said, we don't need any more retail stores. We're going to build an IKEA warehouse there. Warehouse. So this is one instance where the city council and the city said, we don't want a warehouse in the middle of that area. We really need it. It's a prime commercial area. What we need is we need some stores and restaurants and a place for people to live that are going to be working there. So that's kind of how we got to where we are right now. And I think it's a great use. It's very uncommercially viable right off the freeway. And the folks, including Ms. Robles, really need some quality places to eat in the shop.

So we had a motion to approve by Mr. Bowman. I'll second. Second by Ms. Macias. Let's go ahead and take a vote. Passes 5-0. That moves us to administrative discussion and action. Item 23, Madam City Clerk.

Well, I'd be happy to ask her to announce it. Item 23, Mr.

Yes.

This is a technological disruption policy. There are no written communications on this item.

Okay, so I'll entertain a motion or discussion on the item. I'll make a motion. Motion to approve, second by Ms. Macias, I'll take a vote. All right, thank you, this passes five to zero. Staff matters, Mr. City Manager? Nothing to answer. I'll say Council matters. I'm going to try to do this as quickly as possible for me. I was honored to be included in the presentation made by astronaut Victor Glover, who is a graduate of Ontario High. All I can say is he was spectacular. I can't be more proud of an Ontario resident that has accomplished as much as him. He told his life story and it was full of roadblocks. And he just jumped over all of them. I think at one time he even worked for the city of Ontario. I heard that he used to work at Bonnevue Park. But he's a special person. I guess, of course, he's an astronaut. He said some amazing things. And he comes from a great family. And I couldn't be more proud to be there and listen to this amazing man. He went further than anybody. out in space, his crew. And yeah, I just can't talk.

Mr. Watner. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. As you're all aware, or maybe not, the airport authority has a commission comprised of five folks with the very quick and necessary expansion of the airport. There's been some discussion about potentially increasing the size of this board and what I'm asking for is consensus of the council that it comes back to our council to kind of just discuss that and see where it might go.

Okay, thank you. He's asked and put it on the agenda to discuss expanding the board at the airport.

The general topic is expansion of the OIAA board. Yes. The city is a member of that joint powers authority, and so it would be appropriate for the council to have that discussion if there's a majority of the council who wants to bring it back, certainly.

All right, thank you. All right, okay. I don't see any opposition to that. Ms. Parada.

I just wanted to acknowledge the fact that the Ontario Walking Group that meets on Sundays has been in existence now for 18 years. You're welcome to come join them on Sundays at 8 o'clock. They meet at the bandstand and they go for a three-mile walk. I also wanted to acknowledge the fact that we're not gonna be meeting again until after the 4th of July. So not only is it the United States' 250th birthday, but it's Ontario's 135th birthday, it's the Granada Theater's 100th birthday, it's the Post Office's 100th birthday, and it's the Chaffey Community Museum's 85th birthday, so we have a lot of good things to celebrate in this town, so thank you.

Thank you for participating in our meeting. Our next regularly scheduled meeting will be on July 7th, 2026. This meeting is adjourned.