CITY OF
Item No.
STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 9, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council ^�
FROM: Dr. Sean M. Moore, City Manager
SUBJECT: Recission of Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Update and Related Approvals and Cancellation of Referendum Election
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 2026-06, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Yucaipa, California, Rescinding Resolution No. 2025-61 and Resolution No. 2025-62, thereby canceling the call for the Special Municipal Referendum Election scheduled for June 2, 2026; and
2. Adopt Resolution No. 2026-07, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Yucaipa, California, Rescinding Resolution No. 2025-54, which approved and adopted the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Update and Rescinding Conditional Use Permit, Architectural Design, and all other Entitlements for the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center (POCC) Project; and
3. Adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 480, an Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Yucaipa, California, Rescinding Ordinance No. 448, which amended the Official Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance; or
4. Provide further direction to staff.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The Freeway Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP) area comprises approximately 1,242 acres generally located along Interstate 10 from Live Oak Canyon Road to County Line Road. The original FCSP was adopted in 2008 to facilitate commercial, residential, and industrial development. Due to changing market conditions, an update to the FCSP was proposed (Case No. 24-044/GPA/SPA). The FCSP Update contemplated land use changes allowing for up to 2,472 residential units and approximately
5.1 million square feet of nonresidential uses, including business park and regional commercial designations. The legislative history of this item is as follows:
August 25, 2025: The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-54, approving the FCSP Update and certifying the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report.
September 8, 2025: The City Council adopted Ordinance No. 448, amending the Official Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance consistent with the FCSP Update.
September — October 2025: Proponents of a referendum effort timely filed petitions protesting both Resolution No. 2025-54 and Ordinance No. 448. The San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters subsequently certified that the petitions contained the requisite number of valid signatures to qualify for the ballot.
January 12, 2026: The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-61 and Resolution No. 2025-62 formally calling for the Special Municipal Referendum Election to be consolidated with the Statewide Primary Election on June 2, 2026.
March 2, 2026: The City received a letter from David Palmer of Palmer General Corporation. The letter introduces significant new information that materially alters the context of the upcoming referendum. Mr. Palmer confirms that Pacific Industrial has terminated its purchase and sale agreement and "will no longer pursue any warehouse development on the Palmer property." Furthermore, the letter indicates that the Palmer Family has regained full control over the property. Previously, the contract granted Pacific Industrial broad discretion over development plans. With this control returned, the property owner expresses a desire to develop plans that better address community desires.
Under the California Elections Code, the City Council has specific authority to address referenda.
Suspension of Actions (Elections Code §9237): The filing of a valid referendum petition suspends the effective date of the challenged ordinance or resolution until it is submitted to voters. Currently, Resolution No. 2025-54 and Ordinance No. 448 are suspended.
Authority to Repeal (Elections Code §9241): When a valid referendum petition is certified, the legislative body must either (1) submit the resolution/ordinance to the voters, or (2) repeal the resolution/ordinance. The Council retains the authority to repeal the challenged actions at any time prior to the election, thereby rendering the referendum moot.
Rescinding the approvals allows the City to reset the planning discourse for the Interstate 10 corridor.
It presents an opportunity to engage the community in a new visioning process that addresses the concerns raised during the referendum drive, such as traffic impacts and compatibility of uses. The property owner's expressed commitment to address and incorporate many of the community's desires aligns with the City Council's goal of fostering transparent and collaborative planning. This action avoids a contentious election campaign and fosters a more constructive environment for future land use decisions while saving the taxpayers significant amounts of money.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The recommendations would result in budgetary cost avoidance of an undetermined amount. Estimates for the election are currently $200,000 and while some preliminary administrative costs may have already been incurred by the County Registrar of Voters, it is anticipated that the bulk of the election costs: printing, mailing, and poll worker operations, can be avoided if notice is provided immediately.
Attachment(s):
1. Resolution No. 2026-06
2. Resolution No. 2026-07
3. Urgency Ordinance No. 480
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO.2026-06
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA, CALIFORNIA, RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2025-61 AND
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-62, THEREBY CANCELING THE CALL FOR
THE SPECIAL MUNICIPAL REFERENDUM ELECTION SCHEDULED
FOR DUNE 2, 2026
WHEREAS, on August 25, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-54, approving and adopting the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Update (Case No. 24-044/GPA/SPA); and
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2025, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 448 amending the Official Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance of the City of Yucaipa; and WHEREAS, proponents timely filed referendum petitions protesting both Resolution No. 2025-54 and Ordinance No. 448, which petitions were certified as bearing sufficient signatures to qualify the measures for the referendum ballot; and
WHEREAS, on January 12, 2026, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-61, calling for a Special Municipal Referendum Election on June 2, 2026, for submission to the qualified voters of the City of Yucaipa Resolution No. 2025-54, and requesting the County of San Bernardino to consolidate said election with the Statewide Primary Election; and WHEREAS, on January 12, 2026, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-62, calling for a Special Municipal Referendum Election on June 2, 2026, for submission to the qualified voters of the City of Yucaipa Ordinance No. 448, and requesting the County of San Bernardino to consolidate said election with the Statewide Primary Election; and WHEREAS, on March 2, 2026, the City received correspondence from David Palmer of Palmer General Corporation on behalf of the Palmer Family, notifying the City that Pacific Industrial has terminated its purchase and sale contract with the Palmer Family and will no longer pursue warehouse development on the Palmer property. The Palmer Family requested that the City consider removing the FCSP Referendum from the ballot and reviving the FCSP Update planning efforts with community involvement; and
WHEREAS, California Elections Code section 9241 authorizes the City Council to submit a measure subject to referendum to the voters or, alternatively, to repeal the measure, thereby rendering the referendum moot and eliminating the need for the election; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interests of the City and its residents to repeal Resolution No. 2025-54 and rescind Ordinance No. 448, thereby rendering the referenda moot and eliminating the need for the Special Municipal Referendum Election; and
WHEREAS, concurrently with the adoption of this Resolution, the City Council is adopting Resolution No. 2026-07 rescinding Resolution No. 2025-54, and adopting Urgency Ordinance No. 480 rescinding Ordinance No. 448; and
WHEREAS, because the underlying measures subject to the referenda are being repealed and rescinded, there is no longer any purpose for the Special Municipal Referendum Election scheduled for June 2, 2026, and the call for that election should be canceled; and WHEREAS, the San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters and the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of San Bernardino County should be promptly notified of the cancellation of the election to avoid unnecessary expense and administrative burden.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference as operative parts hereof.
Section 2. Rescission of Resolution No. 2025-61. Resolution No. 2025-61, adopted on January 12, 2026 and as subsequently amended, calling for a Special Municipal Referendum Election on June 2, 2026, for submission to the voters of Resolution No. 2025-54, is hereby rescinded in its entirety.
Section 3. Rescission of Resolution No. 2025-62. Resolution No. 2025-62, adopted on January 12, 2026 and as subsequently amended, calling for a Special Municipal Referendum Election on June 2, 2026, for submission to the voters of Ordinance No. 448, is hereby rescinded in its entirety.
Section 4. Cancellation of Special Municipal Referendum Election. The Special Municipal Referendum Election scheduled for June 2, 2026, for submission to the voters of Resolution No. 2025-54 and Ordinance No. 448, is hereby canceled. All election proceedings related to that election are hereby terminated.
Section 5. Notice to County Officials. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to immediately transmit certified copies of this Resolution to the San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters and to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of San Bernardino County, notifying them of the cancellation of the Special Municipal Referendum Election and requesting that they take all necessary actions to remove the City's measures from the June 2, 2026 ballot and to cease all election -related activities for the canceled election.
Section 6. Withdrawal from Consolidated Election. The City hereby withdraws its request to the Board of Supervisors of San Bernardino County to consolidate the Special Municipal Referendum Election with the Statewide Primary Election scheduled for
June 2, 2026, and requests that the Board of Supervisors take all necessary actions to effectuate that withdrawal.
Section 7. Staff Actions. The City Manager and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to take all actions necessary and appropriate to effectuate the cancellation of the election, including but not limited to:
• Notifying all interested parties, including referendum proponents, of the cancellation;
• Withdrawing all election -related materials submitted to the County; • Ensuring that no ballot arguments, impartial analyses, or other election materials related to the canceled measures are printed or distributed; and • Taking all other actions reasonably necessary to implement this Resolution.
Section 8. Effect on Referendum Petitions. The City Council acknowledges that the referendum petitions protesting Resolution No. 2025-54 and Ordinance No. 448 were validly filed and certified. However, because the underlying measures are being repealed and rescinded concurrently with the adoption of this Resolution, the referenda are rendered moot and there is no longer any measure to be submitted to the voters.
Section 9. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the Resolution which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are severable. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Resolution irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof.
Section 10. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 9th day of March, 2026.
Chris Venable, Mayor
ATTEST:
Ana V. Sauseda, MMC
Director of General Services/City Clerk
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION NO.2026-07
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA, CALIFORNIA, RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2025-54, WHICH
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THE FREEWAY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC
PLAN UPDATE (CASE NO. 24-044/GPA/SPA) AND RESCINDING ALL
ENTITLEMENTS FOR THE PACIFIC OAKS COMMERCE CENTER,
INCLUDING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
REVIEW, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, AND ALL OTHER APPROVALS
GRANTED UNDER CASE NO.21-196/CUP/ARC/TPM
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Yucaipa ("City Council") has long considered the Freeway Corridor area as an opportunity for commercial, residential, and industrial development due to its proximity to Interstate 10; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP) in 2008, which set forth new land use districts and standards that would allow the area to be developed successfully for the future benefit of the community at large; and WHEREAS, due to changes in market conditions, consumer preferences, and the overall cost of development, the City Council previously found that updates were necessary to the adopted plan to best ensure that development could occur and meet the original expectations set forth by prior City Councils and community engagement efforts; and WHEREAS, the City undertook a comprehensive process for the development of the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Update to implement the long-range vision for the City, which included conducting Study Sessions, workshops, stakeholder meetings, and hearings, while also leveraging core elements from the existing Freeway Corridor Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed FCSP Update (Case No. 24-044/GPA/SPA) contemplated a total of 2,472 residential units and 5,093,265 square feet of nonresidential uses within the 1,242- acre plan area, representing an increase of 25 residential units and 2,786,461 square feet of Business Park uses, and a reduction of 2,278,976 square feet of Regional Commercial uses compared to the existing FCSP; and
WHEREAS, the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center (Case No. 21-196/CUP/ARC/TPM) consisted of the development of two buildings with warehouse and office spaces totaling 2,054,000 square feet of building space, as well as truck parking and docking bays, which were consistent with the provisions of the proposed FCSP Update; and
WHEREAS, on August 25, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-54, which approved and adopted the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Update (Case No. 24- 044/GPA/SPA and also, by separate but concurrent action, approved the entitlements for the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center (Case No. 21-196/CUP/ARC/TPM); and
WHEREAS, a referendum petition protesting the adoption of Resolution No. 2025-54 was timely filed with the City Clerk, and was subsequently certified by the San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters as containing the requisite number of valid signatures to qualify for the ballot; and
WHEREAS, the filing of the sufficient referendum petition suspended Resolution No. 2025-54, meaning the FCSP Update never took legal effect, and the separate, but concurrent, Pacific Oaks Commerce Center entitlements granted therein never became operative or vested; and
WHEREAS, on January 12, 2026, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-61 calling for a Special Municipal Referendum Election to be held on June 2, 2026, to submit Resolution No. 2025-54 to the voters; and
WHEREAS, on March 2, 2026, the City received a letter from the Palmer Family (Palmer General Corporation) stating that Pacific Industrial has terminated its purchase and sale contract with the Palmer Family and that Pacific Industrial will therefore no longer pursue any warehouse development on the Palmer property, and requesting that the City consider removing the FCSP Referendum from the ballot and revive planning efforts with community involvement; and WHEREAS, pursuant to California Elections Code section 9241, the legislative body may repeal the measure against which a petition is filed rather than submit it to the voters; and WHEREAS, at its meeting on March 9, 2026, the City Council is concurrently taking action to adopt a resolution rescinding Resolution Nos. 2025-61 and 2025-62 (canceling the call for the election) and adopt an urgency ordinance rescinding Ordinance No. 448; and WHEREAS, because Resolution No. 2025-54 was suspended by operation of law and never became effective, no vested rights were created, no construction has commenced, and no substantial liabilities have been incurred in good faith reliance on the resolution; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to rescind Resolution No. 2025-54 and the associated entitlements to allow for a new, community -driven planning process for the Freeway Corridor that reflects current circumstances and community desires; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the rescission of these approvals is not a "project" under CEQA or is otherwise exempt because it involves the rescission of prior approvals without approving any substitute development, effectively returning the property to its prior regulatory status.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein and by this reference made an operative part hereof as findings of fact.
Section 2. Rescission of Resolution No. 2025-54. Resolution No. 2025-54 is hereby rescinded in its entirety and shall have no further force or effect.
Section 3. Rescission of Pacific Oaks Commerce Center Entitlements. All entitlements, approvals, permits, and authorizations granted for the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center (also referred to as the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center) under Case No. 2 1 - 196/CUP/ARC/TPM are hereby rescinded in their entirety and shall have no further force or effect. This rescission specifically includes, but is not limited to:
(a) The Conditional Use Permit;
(b) The Architectural Design Review approval;
(c) The Tentative Parcel Map approval; and
(d) Any and all other entitlements, conditions of approval, findings, or authorizations associated with the project.
Section 4. No Vested Rights. The City Council finds and determines that Resolution No. 2025-54 was suspended by operation of law upon the certification of the referendum petition and never took legal effect. Consequently, no vested rights were created by said resolution or the entitlements contained therein. The City Council further finds that no construction has commenced, no substantial expenditures have been made in good faith reliance on a valid permit, and the project proponent has terminated its interest in the property and is no longer pursuing the project.
Section 5. Reinstatement of Original FCSP Standards. The land use standards, regulations, development standards, and zoning designations for the Freeway Corridor area shall return to and remain those in existence prior to the City Council's adoption of Resolution 2025-54.
Section 6. Intent for Community Planning Process. The City Council hereby declares its intent to undertake a new, comprehensive, community -driven planning process for the Freeway Corridor area. This process shall include extensive public participation and stakeholder engagement and shall be open to the development of alternative plans that address community desires and concerns.
Section 7. Direction and Authorization for City Manager. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to take all necessary actions to effectuate the intent of this Resolution.
Section 8. CEQA Findings. The City Council hereby finds that the adoption of this Resolution is exempt under CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question
(rescission of approvals that never took effect) may have a significant effect on the environment.
Section 9. Effect on Referendum Proceedings. The City Council finds and declares that, by virtue of the rescission of Resolution No. 2025-54 in its entirety, the referendum petition proceedings regarding said resolution are rendered moot.
Section 10. Findings Supporting Rescission. The City Council finds that this rescission is justified and in the public interest because rescission allows for a comprehensive community planning effort that can better align with current community sentiment, rescission avoids unnecessary election costs; and there is no prejudice to any party as the lawn owner and applicant has voluntarily withdrawn interest in the project.
Section 11. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the Resolution which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are severable. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Resolution irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof.
Section 12. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 9th day of March, 2026.
Chris Venable, Mayor
ATTEST:
Ana V. Sauseda, MMC
Director of General Services/City Clerk
ATTACHMENT 3
ORDINANCE NO. 480-U
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA, CALIFORNIA, RESCINDING ORDINANCE NO. 448; REINSTATING THE LAND USE
DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING STANDARDS IN EFFECT PRIOR TO THE ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 448; AND DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Yucaipa ("City Council") has long considered the Freeway Corridor area as a significant opportunity for commercial, residential, and industrial development due to its proximity to Interstate 10; and
WHEREAS, in 2008, the City Council adopted the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP), which set forth land use districts and development standards for approximately 1,242 acres along the Interstate 10 corridor; and
WHEREAS, on August 25, 2025, at a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-54, approving the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Update (Case No. 24- 044/GPA/SPA); and
WHEREAS, on August 25, 2025, the City Council approved the introduction and first reading of Ordinance No. 448; and
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2025, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 448, amending the Official Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance of the City of Yucaipa, changing land use designations for approximately 1,242 acres in the FCSP area to "Planned Development" and "Institutional" and modifying related General Plan Figures; and WHEREAS, opponents of the ordinance timely filed a referendum petition with the City Clerk's Office protesting the adoption of Ordinance No. 448; and WHEREAS, the San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters examined the petition signatures and certified that the petition was signed by the requisite number of registered voters to qualify the referendum for the ballot; and
WHEREAS, the filing of the sufficient referendum petition suspended the effective date of Ordinance No. 448, preventing it from taking effect unless and until approved by a majority of voters; and
WHEREAS, on January 12, 2026, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-62, calling for a Special Municipal Referendum Election to be held on June 2, 2026, for the purpose of submitting Ordinance No. 448 to the voters; and
WHEREAS, concurrently with this Ordinance, the City Council has adopted Resolution No. 2026-06, rescinding Resolution No. 2025-61 and Resolution No. 2025-62, thereby canceling the call for the Special Municipal Referendum Election; and
WHEREAS, concurrently with this Ordinance, the City Council has adopted Resolution No. 2026-07, rescinding Resolution No. 2025-54, which approved the underlying Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Update; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that immediate action is necessary to preserve the public peace, health, and safety, and that the adoption of this Ordinance as an urgency measure is required to avoid unnecessary public expenditure and resolve immediate land use uncertainty.
URGENCY DECLARATION
The City Council hereby finds, determines, and declares as follows:
1. Government Code § 36937(b) authorizes the City Council to adopt an ordinance for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, provided the ordinance contains a declaration of the facts constituting the urgency and is passed by a four -fifths vote of the City Council.
2. The City Council finds and determines that the following facts constitute an urgency requiring the immediate effectiveness of this Ordinance:
(a) The San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters has established approaching deadlines for the submission of arguments, rebuttals, and impartial analyses for the June 2, 2026 Special Municipal Referendum Election. Immediate action is required to rescind the underlying ordinance and cancel the election to avoid the City incurring significant and unrecoverable election preparation costs and to prevent the printing of ballots for a measure that is no longer being pursued.
(b) Continued uncertainty regarding the applicable land use designations and development standards in the 1,242-acre Freeway Corridor area creates immediate economic harm to property owners who are unable to make investment, leasing, or sale decisions due to the suspended status of Ordinance No. 448.
(c) The suspended state of Ordinance No. 448 creates regulatory confusion that is harmful to the public interest, leaving the City's primary economic development corridor in a state of planning limbo that deters beneficial economic activity. (d) Prompt rescission of Ordinance No. 448 allows the City to immediately begin a new, comprehensive community planning process for the Freeway Corridor that reflects current circumstances and community desires, which serves the public health, safety, and welfare of the entire community.
3. Based on the foregoing facts, the City Council declares that the adoption of this Ordinance as an urgency measure is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals.
The City Council hereby finds and determines that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 2. Rescission of Ordinance No. 448.
Ordinance No. 448, entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.343, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL LAND USE PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA," is hereby rescinded in its entirety and shall be of no further force or effect.
Section 3. Reinstatement of Prior Land Use Designations.
Effective immediately, the land use designations and zoning standards for all properties within the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan area shall be those in effect under Ordinance No. 343 as it existed prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 448.
Section 4. General Plan Figures.
All figures, including CDL-3 of the City's General Plan shall be reinstated to their configurations as they existed prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 448, removing the "Planned Development" and "Institutional" designations applied by said Ordinance and restoring the previous designations.
Section 5. Authorization to City Manager.
The City Manager is authorized and directed to take all necessary actions to effectuate the intent of this Ordinance.
Section 6. Direction to City Clerk.
The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to:
(a) Certify the adoption of this Urgency Ordinance;
(b) Cause this Ordinance to be published as required by law.
Section 7. Effect on Referendum Proceedings.
The City Council finds and declares that by the rescission of Ordinance No. 448 in its entirety, the referendum petition proceedings protesting said Ordinance are hereby rendered moot, and no election shall be held on the matter.
Section 8. Severability.
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Section 9. Effective Date.
This Ordinance is adopted as an urgency measure and shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by a four -fifths (4/5) vote of the City Council.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 9th day of March, 2026.
ATTEST:
Ana V. Sauseda, MMC
Director of General Services/City Clerk
Chris Venable, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Steven Graham Pacifico
City Attorney