Holder Law Group holderecolaw.com
2940 Summit St, Suite 2D
Oakland, CA 94609-3416
(510) 338-3759
[email protected]
July 15, 2025
VIA EMAIL ONLY (PLEASE CONFIRM RECEIPT)
City of Arcata
City Council
Alexandra Stillman, Mayor
Kimberley White, Vice-Mayor
Meredith Matthews, Councilmember
Stacy Atkins-Salazar, Councilmember
Sarah Schaefer, Councilmember
C/O City Clerk:
Email: [email protected]
City of Arcata Planning Department
ATTN: David Loya, Community Dev. Director
736 F Street
Arcata, CA 95521
Email: [email protected]
Re: Agenda Item 9.c.: Necessary Corrections to Inaccurate and Incomplete Description of Roger’s Garage Agenda Item in Proposed Minutes for June 18, 2025, City Council Meeting (1622 & 1632 Old Arcata Road; File No. 242-020) Dear Mayor Stillman, Councilmembers, and Planning Staff:
On behalf of Building Bayside Better (“BBB”), we have carefully reviewed the draft minutes describing the City Council’s consideration of the Roger’s Garage agenda item (Item
10.a., Old Business) from its regular meeting held on June 18, 2025. To ensure accuracy and transparency, we compared the draft description against the official video recording of the meeting, available via the City’s platform (https://pubarcata.escribemeetings.com/Players/ISIStandAlonePlayer.aspx?Id=9f50e48d-2d2a-47f9-b1ac65b32323dbe4, starting at approximately the 1:05 mark) and on YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yduTslTUm8c, beginning at approximately the 55-minute mark). Our review has identified several inaccuracies and omissions in the proposed minutes, which could significantly mislead readers and stakeholders about critical aspects of the Council’s discussion, public comments, and procedural actions. Consequently, we respectfully request that Item 9.c. be removed from the consent agenda, allowing for appropriate revision of the minutes to address the concerns summarized in the following table.
City of Arcata, City Council July 15, 2025
David Loya, Community Development Director
Re: Corrections to Draft Minutes’ Inaccurate and Incomplete Description of Proceedings re Roger’s Garage Project Page 2 No. Draft Minutes Text Discrepancy or Inaccuracy
1. Public Hearing to
Receive Public
Comment on the
Roger’s Garage
The undated public notice posted at City Hall concerning the council’s consideration of Roger’s Garage indicated that staff would recommend a CEQA exemption for the
Project and that the council would consider awarding
CDBG PI funds to the Project. (See Exh. A to our letter to the Council, dated June 17, 2025.)
In contrast, the agenda materials released several days prior to the meeting indicated that staff was reversing its position with respect to the applicability of CEQA
exemptions. The staff report indicated a reversal of
staff’s recommendation, to now take no action and
simply receive public testimony.
The minutes do not reflect staff’s reversal concerning the applicability of CEQA exemptions, nor do the minutes
report the last-minute modifications for this agenda item.
These omissions should be corrected.
2. Director of
Community
Development Loya
announced that no
action would be taken
at this meeting due to
new information
impacting the
California
Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) process.
He said that the City
would be taking a step
back to reassess the
environmental impact
and recommended
that the Council
receive public
comment.
As explained in comments submitted on behalf of BBB on
July 17, 2025, the information concerning the Project site being on the Cortese List has been known to staff and the applicant since at least January 2024 (see Freshwater
Environmental Services Phase 1 ESA; see also May 2024
AEI Consultants second Phase 1 ESA). This was not “new
information” as described in the proposed minutes.
Director Loya also informed the council and the public
that Project documents have been uploaded to the City’s “Major Development Projects” website and that all
“public comments will be seen there as well." (Currently, public comments concerning the Project are not posted
to the Major Developments website. The website also
does not post the Freshwater Phase 1 ESA and omits a
comprehensive remediation plan for site contamination.
(See https://www.cityofarcata.org/705/MajorDevelopment-Projects.) When concluding his presentation, Director Loya also
announced that a “town hall” for the Project would be
City of Arcata, City Council July 15, 2025
David Loya, Community Development Director
Re: Corrections to Draft Minutes’ Inaccurate and Incomplete Description of Proceedings re Roger’s Garage Project Page 3 No. Draft Minutes Text Discrepancy or Inaccuracy
publicly noticed in the “coming weeks.” The proposed
minutes do not mention this.
Correct the inaccurate description concerning the
reasons the CEQA exemptions do not apply to the Project and add staff’s announcements concerning documents
available on the City’s website and the future publiclynoticed town hall meeting.
3. Councilmember
Atkins-Salazar
announced that she
needed to recuse
herself from the
matter due to her
husband having future
involvement in the
project, she left the
Chamber at 6:58 p.m.
The councilmember disclosed that her husband had
accepted a position at Danco, an entity affiliated with the Roger’s Garage project applicant and site owner. Thus,
all other councilmembers now know that Councilmember
Atkins-Salazar and her family have a direct financial and political connection with this business entity affiliated with the Project applicant. For this reason, the manner of disclosure of this conflict of interest itself has the tendency to improperly influence the Council to favor the Project.
The minutes should accurately report Councilmember
Atkins-Salazar’s explanation concerning her recusal due to a conflict of interest.
4. Mayor Stillman
opened the public
hearing.
Public Comment:
Due to varying
concerns including the
project's CEQA
exemption, location,
design, proximity to
school, funding, site
contamination, health
safety risk, and traffic
impacts; the following
members of the public
The minutes are incomplete and should be revised to
describe the specific concerns raised by commenters.
Commenters opposed to the Project, as proposed, raised
the following issues:
Site contamination & CEQA: Phase I/II ESA show lead,
zinc, and petroleum hydrocarbons still exceed residential cleanup levels. Speakers argue the City cannot rely on a categorical exemption because of “unusual
circumstances” (§15300.2, CEQA Guidelines).
Property title issues and funding gap: the first
commenter raised the issue of an unexplained $1M
“funding gap” and an unexplained but problematic
property title issue.
City of Arcata, City Council July 15, 2025
David Loya, Community Development Director
Re: Corrections to Draft Minutes’ Inaccurate and Incomplete Description of Proceedings re Roger’s Garage Project Page 4 No. Draft Minutes Text Discrepancy or Inaccuracy
expressed opposition
to the proposed
project:
An unidentified
member of the
audience, Kevin, an
unidentified member
of the audience, Lynn
Roberts, Michelle
Warner, Jeanette
Wilson, Fareed
Ahmed, Tara Moss,
Alan Cook, Jim
Hartshorn, Kevin
Johnson, Kari
Samlaska, Erin
Bennett, Joe Serene,
Joanne McGarry, Lisa
Brown, and Megan
Davis.
[….]
Proximity to Jacoby Creek School / health risk: Parents and a student expressed fear of airborne dust during
excavation and requested independent soil-gas sampling
beneath former shop slabs. Parents and neighbors
expressed concern about other potentially significant
Project impacts and criticized the proposed location for high-density housing.
Traffic & safety on Old Arcata Road: Residents cite
already congested corridor and inadequate parking near
the school, requesting a full traffic impact study.
Funding equity / public subsidies: Several speakers
objected to using local CDBG program income to help
purchase contaminated land. Some speakers expressed
concerns regarding perceived City favoritism towards the developer. Speakers also contended the subsidy would
violate HUD policies.
Design & scale: Commenters criticized proposed threestory massing that would “dwarf” surrounding one-story homes and requested the Project be capped at two
stories.
5. No action was taken.
Councilmember
Atkins-Salazar
reentered the
Chamber at 7:55 p.m.
RECESS: the Council
recessed from 7:55
p.m. to 8:02 p.m.
The proposed minutes correctly report that no action
was formally taken by the council.
The minutes should reflect that staff reversed its initial recommendation for the Council to take action on the
Project. By recommending no action, the hour-long
proceeding was converted into a brief explanation from
Director Loya followed by extensive public comments.
The council chair did not formally close the public
comment after receiving the comments via zoom.
City of Arcata, City Council July 15, 2025
David Loya, Community Development Director
Re: Corrections to Draft Minutes’ Inaccurate and Incomplete Description of Proceedings re Roger’s Garage Project Page 5 Conclusion and Requests:
In light of the inaccurate description of the proceedings concerning the Roger’s Garage agenda item detailed above, BBB respectfully requests the Council:
1. Remove Item 9.c. from the consent agenda;
2. Not approve the proposed minutes in the agenda packet as the official minutes for the June 18, 2025 City Council meeting;
3. Direct staff to correct the draft minutes to accurately and completely reflect the proceedings;
4. Formally close the public hearing concerning the Roger’s Garage proposed project until (and unless) staff have returned to the council with a proposal.
As we previously requested in written correspondence concerning this Project, please provide notice of all future proceedings, communications, and public information concerning the Project to the undersigned via email at [email protected] and to BBB representatives at [email protected].
Very Truly Yours,
_________________________
Jason Holder
cc: (Via e-mail only)
Merritt Perry, City Manager, City of Arcata ([email protected]) Client contacts