State investigators will look into whether council members broke fair housing law when they turned down $20.1 million for the University Terrace Project.
Candidates from three contested council races respond to questions about city manager retention — and Mike Futrell's decision to stay.
State investigators will look into whether council members broke fair housing law when they turned down $20.1 million for the University Terrace Project.
California’s Civil Rights Department (CRD) opened an investigation into Riverside after advocates accused the city of breaking anti-discrimination law when the council voted in January to reject $20.1 million from the state for a permanent supportive housing project.
The CRD launched the probe following a joint complaint filed on May 8 by the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, the Inland Equity Community Land Trust, and the Inland Empire Tenants Union.
The groups allege that council members relied on discriminatory stereotypes — not evidence — when they voted to turn away $20.1 million in state funding and $9.5 million in additional federal and state money to convert the Quality Inn Motel at 1590 University Ave. into 114 studio apartments.
The units would have offered permanent supportive housing — meaning long-term, stable housing paired with on-site services — for low-income and unhoused residents. The Riverside Housing Development Corporation brought the proposal to the council, which rejected it on Jan. 13.
"All of our Riverside neighbors are entitled under the law to fair housing and equal treatment," said Kath Rogers, a senior attorney at ACLU SoCal, in a May 11 press release. "The fact that this investigation is moving forward reflects the seriousness of these allegations."
Opening an investigation does not mean the CRD has concluded the city did anything wrong. The agency will review the evidence and decide whether further action is needed.
At the heart of the complaint is what council members said during and after the vote. Legal filings cite remarks from Councilmembers Chuck Conder, Phillip Falcone, Sean Mill and Steven Robillard.
Advocates say those comments went well beyond policy disagreement and crossed into illegal bias against people experiencing homelessness, mental illness, and substance use disorders.
Among the statements cited in the filings: Conder allegedly called the project a "warehouse of the homeless" and an "incubator of crime," warning it would endanger students at nearby North High School and UC Riverside. Mill said the Housing First model — the state's evidence-backed approach to addressing homelessness — "is a failure" and said he opposed housing people without requiring them to participate in treatment. Robillard raised concerns about long-term tenancy and whether the site was suited for residential use.
California's fair housing laws prohibit cities from making land use decisions based on stereotypes about protected groups, including people with disabilities and low-income residents who receive housing assistance. The complainants argue the council's comments show the vote was driven by exactly that kind of bias.
"The councilmembers who voted to reject funding made their decisions after hearing community opposition in the form of animus and stereotypes against unhoused residents and people with disabilities," said Ugochi Anaebere-Nicholson of the Public Interest Law Project in the May 11 press release. "This type of discrimination is against the law."
The state's housing department had already raised red flags after the vote. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) wrote to the city in February warning that the council's action raised concerns about Riverside's compliance with state housing law.
The city currently holds a "Prohousing Designation" — a state status that comes with extra funding opportunities, but also with accountability strings attached. HCD suggested that designation, and the money tied to it, could be in jeopardy.
State officials also noted that Riverside has approved zero percent of its required affordable housing units for very low-income residents, while approving more than 31 percent of its market-rate housing quota.
HCD has indicated the Homekey+ funding could remain available through May 30 if the city reverses its vote.
"Affordable housing helps our entire community, and this no vote has negatively impacted all of us," said Maribel Nunez of the Inland Equity Community Land Trust. "If this project was not good enough for some of our council members, what affordable housing project will be?"
A spokesperson for Riverside declined to comment on the matter.
With Riverside far behind on state housing targets, candidates in three ward races outlined their approaches to growth, density and neighborhood character.
From housing first to stricter enforcement, Ward 2, 4 and 6 candidates outlined their approaches to the city's homelessness challenge.
City staff reported 401 affordable units in development at Monday's Housing and Homelessness Committee meeting, as advocates pressed officials to move faster.
Loans will help cover construction delays at the 25-unit senior and 9-unit family affordable housing project on Mulberry Street.
Let us email you Riverside's news and events every morning. For free!
