Agenda, first session — Fairfield City Council, November 19, 2024 (part 2 of 2)

WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are addressed by the certified EIR, pursuant to the CEQA.

No additional impacts have been identified for the amendments that were not previously identified in the EIR.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. The TSSP amendment, as contained and attached hereto, is hereby adopted.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of November 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: MEMBERS: MOY/BERTANI/CARR/PANDURO/TONNESEN/VACCARO/WILLIAMS NOES: MEMBERS: _________________________________________________ ABSENT: MEMBERS: _________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: MEMBERS: _________________________________________________

_________________________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 194 of 401Attachment 1 Page 2 of 2

Exhibit A
Amendments to the “Train Station Specific Plan”

Proposed deletions show in strikeout
Proposed new text is shown in underline

Chapter 4 – Land Use and Development Regulations

1. Amend Policy 4-30 as follows:

All development within PA6 shall meet these minimum requirements:
 30 feet minimum setback from New Canon Road
 25 feet minimum setback from McCrory Road
 Loading area and rear elevations of buildings/development shall not be oriented toward circulation corridors, New Canon Road or McCrory Road.

Chapter 13 – Design Guidelines

1. Amend Policy 13-78 as follows:

Any single building frontage may not be longer than 150 feet without a break of at least 15 feet in width and 5 feet in depth. three of the following design elements:
 A break of at least 15 feet in width and 5 feet in depth  A minimum 3-foot vertical variation along the roofline  An enhanced cornice treatment
 Distinct color blocking on exterior facades to reduce the perception of massing  Faux windows with prominent architectural trim
 Attached or detached architectural elements, such as cantilevered awnings or archways, to introduce shadowing, depth, and dimension

Packet Page 195 of 401Attachment 2 Page 1 of 1

Agenda Item No: 18.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:November 19, 2024
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Public Hearing and;
Resolution 2024270 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Partially Overturning the Planning Commission’s Decision, and Approving a Conditional Use Permit (UP2024 005) to Operate a ‘School, Social and Personal Development’ and a Conditional Use Permit (UP2024006) to Operate a ‘Office, Medical’ at 743 East Tabor Avenue (0037 020460), with Conditions to Resolve Outstanding Administrative Citations Prior to Operation
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Hold public hearing and adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
City Church has been granted two Use Permit to operate a lifeskills program and medical services in addition to their worship services. As approved by the Zoning Administrator, the Use Permits included a condition for City Church to resolve all outstanding administrative citations (Condition #2). Planning Commission granted City Church their Appeal request to remove the condition from both permits. The council has called the Planning Commission action up for review.

DISCUSSION
The proposed project consists of two separate Use Permit applications, one for a “School, Personal and Social Development” and another for an “Office, Medical”, as defined by the Fairfield Zoning Ordinance. The Use Permit requests are to allow City Church to provide a lifeskills program and medical services at its property in addition to its church/place of worship services.

The Zoning Administrator approved both permits with conditions on August 21, 2024, requiring City Church to resolve all outstanding administrative citations prior to beginning operations. The citations can be resolved by payment in full or by entering into a payment plan with the city. On September 9, 2024, City Church filed an appeal of the Use Permit approvals to contest the specific condition included in both permits.

Packet Page 196 of 401

On October 9, 2024, the Planning Commission reviewed the City Church’s appeal request. After a public hearing and discussion, the commission approved City Church’s appeal to remove the subject conditions.

At its October 15, 2024, council meeting two members of the City Council requested the appeal be called up for their review at a de novo hearing. It is within the council’s purview to decide whether to approve the Use Permits and which conditions, if any, should apply.

The attached 10/9/24 Planning Commission report provides an indepth review of City Church’s programs, the permit proposals, and the appeal details. Additionally, a summary timeline (Exhibit A) is attached to this council report to provide a highlevel overview of the City staff’s coordination and actions with City Church over the last three years.

Staff recommends the council adopt this resolution partially overturning the Planning Commission’s decision, and approving the Use Permits with the conditions to require all administrative citations be resolved prior to operation restored.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The decision on whether to include the condition to resolve outstanding citations will not affect City expenditures. However, it may have an impact on the timing or likelihood of the City receiving payment for these fines.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
A public hearing notice for the council meeting was published in the Daily Republic newspaper on November 6, 2024.

At a public hearing on October 9, 2024, the Planning Commission unanimously approved Resolution No. PC202410, approving the Use Permits and granting City Church’s appeal to remove Condition #2.

At a public hearing on August 21, 2024, the Zoning Administrator approved the Use Permits.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose to deny the Use Permits entirely. In this instance neither the lifeskills program nor the medical offices would be allowed to operate.

The council may also choose to approve the Use Permits and uphold the Planning Commission’s decision to grant City Church their appeal request. Under this circumstance, both uses would be approved, and City Church would not be required to resolve their administrative citations prior to operation. It should be noted that the administrative citations would still stand, and payment would be required.

STAFF CONTACT
Meily M Sheehan, Principal Planner
(707) 4287474
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney's Office, City Manager's Office, Fire Department, Police Department ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Packet Page 197 of 401

Agenda Item No: 18.AGENDA REPORTDATE:November 19, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Public Hearing and;Resolution 2024270 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Partially Overturning thePlanning Commission’s Decision, and Approving a Conditional Use Permit (UP2024005) to Operate a ‘School, Social and Personal Development’ and a Conditional UsePermit (UP2024006) to Operate a ‘Office, Medical’ at 743 East Tabor Avenue (0037020460), with Conditions to Resolve Outstanding Administrative Citations Prior toOperationRECOMMENDED ACTIONHold public hearing and adopt resolution.STATEMENT OF ISSUECity Church has been granted two Use Permit to operate a lifeskills program and medical services inaddition to their worship services. As approved by the Zoning Administrator, the Use Permits included acondition for City Church to resolve all outstanding administrative citations (Condition #2). PlanningCommission granted City Church their Appeal request to remove the condition from both permits. Thecouncil has called the Planning Commission action up for review.DISCUSSIONThe proposed project consists of two separate Use Permit applications, one for a “School, Personaland Social Development” and another for an “Office, Medical”, as defined by the Fairfield ZoningOrdinance. The Use Permit requests are to allow City Church to provide a lifeskills program andmedical services at its property in addition to its church/place of worship services. The Zoning Administrator approved both permits with conditions on August 21, 2024, requiring CityChurch to resolve all outstanding administrative citations prior to beginning operations. The citationscan be resolved by payment in full or by entering into a payment plan with the city. On September 9,2024, City Church filed an appeal of the Use Permit approvals to contest the specific condition includedin both permits. On October 9, 2024, the Planning Commission reviewed the City Church’s appeal request. After apublic hearing and discussion, the commission approved City Church’s appeal to remove the subjectconditions. At its October 15, 2024, council meeting two members of the City Council requested the appeal becalled up for their review at a de novo hearing. It is within the council’s purview to decide whether toapprove the Use Permits and which conditions, if any, should apply. The attached 10/9/24 Planning Commission report provides an indepth review of City Church’sprograms, the permit proposals, and the appeal details. Additionally, a summary timeline (Exhibit A) isattached to this council report to provide a highlevel overview of the City staff’s coordination andactions with City Church over the last three years. Staff recommends the council adopt this resolution partially overturning the Planning Commission’sdecision, and approving the Use Permits with the conditions to require all administrative citations beresolved prior to operation restored.FINANCIAL IMPACTThe decision on whether to include the condition to resolve outstanding citations will not affect Cityexpenditures. However, it may have an impact on the timing or likelihood of the City receiving paymentfor these fines.PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATIONA public hearing notice for the council meeting was published in the Daily Republic newspaper onNovember 6, 2024. At a public hearing on October 9, 2024, the Planning Commission unanimously approved ResolutionNo. PC202410, approving the Use Permits and granting City Church’s appeal to remove Condition #2.At a public hearing on August 21, 2024, the Zoning Administrator approved the Use Permits.ALTERNATIVE ACTIONThe council may choose to deny the Use Permits entirely. In this instance neither the lifeskills programnor the medical offices would be allowed to operate. The council may also choose to approve the Use Permits and uphold the Planning Commission’sdecision to grant City Church their appeal request. Under this circumstance, both uses would beapproved, and City Church would not be required to resolve their administrative citations prior tooperation. It should be noted that the administrative citations would still stand, and payment would berequired.STAFF CONTACTMeily M Sheehan, Principal Planner(707) 428[email protected] WITHCity Attorney's Office, City Manager's Office, Fire Department, Police Department ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Attachment 1: Proposed Resolution
Attachment 2: Exhibit A Timeline
Attachment 3: Exhibit B
Attachment 4: Exhibit C
Attachment 5: PC202410
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Beavers, Esther Approved 11/12/2024 4:29 PM
Packet Page 198 of 401

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-270

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD PARTIALLY OVERTURNING THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DECISION, AND APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (UP2024-005) TO OPERATE A ‘SCHOOL, SOCIAL AND PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT’ AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (UP2024-006) TO OPERATE A ‘OFFICE, MEDICAL’ AT 743 EAST TABOR AVENUE (0037-020-460), WITH CONDITIONS TO RESOLVE OUTSTANDING

ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS PRIOR TO OPERATION

WHEREAS, on February 7, 2024, applications for a Conditional Use Permit (UP2024-005) to operate a ‘School, Social and Personal Development’ and a Conditional Use Permit (UP2024-006) to operate an ‘Office, Medical’ at 743 East Tabor Avenue (0037-020-460) (Project) were filed with the Community Development Department in accordance with the rules and regulations governing the official filing of such applications; and

WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator held a duly noticed public hearing on August 21, 2024. The City staff presented substantial factual information regarding the proposed Project to the hearing through an oral presentation before the Zoning Administrator. The Zoning A dministrator considered all public testimony and information presented and determined that the findings for the Use Permits, as conditioned, were met in accordance with Section 25.40 and thereby approved the Use Permits. Furthermore, the Zoning Administrat or determined that the Project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301 Existing Facilities; and

WHEREAS, on September 9, 2024, Pastor Scott Mulvey, on behalf of City Church, properly filed an appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s decision in accordance with the rules and regulations governing the official filing of appeals; and

WHEREAS, on October 9, 2024, the commission held a duly noticed de novo public h earing pursuant to Fairfield Municipal Code Section 25.44.3. The City staff presented substantial factual information regarding the proposed Project in staff reports and through oral presentations before the commission. The commission considered all public testimonies and information presented during the public hearing regarding this application, motioned, and passed Resolution No. PC2024-10; and

WHEREAS, on October 15, 2024, two members of the council requested the commission’s action to be called up for the council’s review; and

WHEREAS, on November 19, 2024, the council held a duly noticed de novo public hearing pursuant to Fairfield Municipal Code Section 25.44.3. The City staff presented substantial factual information regarding the proposed Project in staff reports and through oral presentations Packet Page 199 of 401Attachment 1 Page 1 of 5

RES. NO. 2024-270

Page 2 ends

before the council. The council considered all public testimonies and information presented during the public hearing regarding this application, motioned, and passed this resolution; and

WHEREAS, the council has determined that the proposed project is Categorically Exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Guidelines, Section 15332; and

WHEREAS, the council adopts the following findings in support of the Use Permit to allow a ‘School, Personal and Social Development’ in the High-Density Residential (RH) Zoning designation, to wit:

(a) The location, size, design, operating characteristics, and intensity of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and anticipated future land uses in the vicinity. As proposed and conditioned, the school program is appropriate for the RH zoning designation and will operate as an additional use in the existing church/place of worship. Conditions have been placed to ensure that the building is improved to meet city, county, and state regulations.

Additionally, several operational conditions are imposed to limit program hours, the minimum age of participants, and the maximum total number of people.

(b) The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and any applicable Areawide or Specific Plan. The use is consistent with the applicable General Plan and Zoning designations and the following applicable General Plan objectives and policies: Objective ED 5: Encourage a balance of office/professional uses which support a strong, diverse economic base and are compatible with the needs of the community; Policy LU 1.1: Only allow development that is consistent with the Land Use Diagram and the Land Use Category definitions; Policy PF 10.2: The City shall ensure that the Zoning Ordinance provides adequate land for a variety of health care facilities; Policy PF 10.3: The City should encourage additional health care capacity as needed by the increasing population in the Fairfield area; Policy PF 23.3: Work with adjacent communities to encourage a wide variety of vocational, technical, and post-secondary educational opportunities; Objective LU 13: Minimize conflicts between land uses; Objective LU 17: Encourage mixed-use development that provides for an integrated mixture of residential and employment - generating uses within the same structure.

Packet Page 200 of 401Attachment 1 Page 2 of 5

RES. NO. 2024-270

Page 3 ends

(d) Adequate facilities, such as roads, utilities, and City services are provided to serve the use or will be provided as conditions of approval for the Use Permit. All existing infrastructure and utilities are provided to serve the school.

(e) The proposed use will not create either an imbalance or overabundance of similar uses in the vicinity. The proposed use will not create an overabundance of similar school programs in the vicinity.

(f) The proposal will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, peace, or the general welfare of the surrounding neighborhood and the City. The conditions and limitations on the use identified in the Conditions of the Use Permit will ensure that the use does not bear an adverse effect on the surrounding neighborhood.

As proposed and conditioned, the proposed use will not create a nuisance or negatively impact the surrounding area. Noteworthy conditions include resolving any outstanding Fairfield Police Department citations through payment or a payment plan and ensuring that any illegal structures or improvements on the property are brought up to code before the program begins. Unpermitted activities, such as residential lodging and overnight parking, must cease unless properly authorized. The program activities are restricted to specified hours of operation. Enrollment is limited to 50 participants, all of whom must be 18 or older. If food is prepared on-site, the kitchen must be permitted, with certain cooking equipment requiring additional approvals from County Health and the City. The program is also subject to annual inspections by the Community Development and Fire Departments. Lastly, additional Building Safety Division and Fire Department permits are required to alter the existing assembly-church space into an educational space consistent with the California building code occupancy regulations; and

WHEREAS, the council adopts the following findings in support of the Use Permit to allow an ‘Office, Medical’ in the RH Zoning designation, to wit:

(a) The location, size, design, operating characteristics, and intensity of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and anticipated future land uses in the vicinity. As proposed and conditioned, the medical office is appropriate for the RH zoning designation and will operate as an additional use in the existing church/place of worship. Conditions have been placed to ensure that the building is improved to meet city, county, and state regulations.

Additionally, several operational conditions are imposed to limit the office hours and require proper health care licenses.

RES. NO. 2024-270

Page 4 ends

strong, diverse economic base and are compatible with the needs of the community; Policy LU 1.1: Only allow development that is consistent with the Land Use Diagram and the Land Use Category definitions; Policy PF 10.2: The City shall ensure that the Zoning Ordinance provides adequate land for a variety of health care facilities; Policy PF 10.3: The City should encourage additional health care capacity as needed by the increasing population in the Fairfield area; Policy PF 23.3: Work with adjacent communities to encourage a wide variety of vocational, technical, and post-secondary educational opportunities; Objective LU 13: Minimize conflicts between land uses; Objective LU 17: Encourage mixed-use development that provides for an integrated mixture of residential and employment - generating uses within the same structure.

As proposed and conditioned, the proposed use will not create a nuisance or negatively impact the surrounding area. Noteworthy conditions include resolving any outstanding Fairfield Police Department citations through payment or a payment plan and ensuring that any illegal structures or improvements on the property are brought up to code before the program begins. Unpermitted activities, such as residential lodging and overnight parking, must cease unless properly authorized. All state and county health, safety, and licensing requirements must be adhered to, necessary licenses and certificates from the California Department of Health Care Services must be obtained, and the operator must maintain all required state licenses and certifications. The office is also subject to annual inspections by the Community Development and Fire Departments. Lastly, additional Building Safety Division and Fire Department permits are required to alter the existing Packet Page 202 of 401Attachment 1 Page 4 of 5

RES. NO. 2024-270

Page 5 ends

assembly-church space into a medical office space consistent with the California building code occupancy regulations.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. To partially overturn the Planning Commission’s decision and approve a Use Permit to operate a ‘School, Social and Personal Development’ and a Use Permit to operate an ‘Office, Medical,’ with conditions to resolve the outstanding fines prior to operation .

Section 2. Subject to the proposed resolution being adopted by the council and becoming effective, the Use Permits, UP2024-005, and UP2024-006, are hereby approved, subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of November 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: MEMBERS: MOY / BERTANI / CARR /PANDURO / TONNESEN/ VACCARO / WILLIAMS

NOES: MEMBERS:

ABSENT: MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: MEMBERS:

_________
MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK
Packet Page 203 of 401Attachment 1 Page 5 of 5

EXHIBIT A

TIMELINE HISTORY
 3/23/21 - The City of Fairfield and City Church signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to establish a "pop-up" emergency shelter.
 4/1/21 - City Church was issued a Temporary Shelter Permit, which was set to expire on September 30, 2021.
 8/30/21 - The City issued a formal 30-day notice to City Church, informing Pastor Scott Mulvey that the Temporary Shelter Permit would expire on September 30, 2021, and requiring an exit plan to notify all program participants, as stated in the MOU.  3/9/22 – The Homeless Services Manager emailed Pastor Mulvey regarding City Church's Safe Parking program, notifying him that the Temporary Shelter Permit had expired in September 2021 and further action with the City is required to support any homeless services taking place on the property.
 4/12/22 - An onsite inspection by the Building Division, Planning Division, Fire Department, and Homeless Services Division found multiple zoning, building, fire, and health code violations, including bug infestations, unsafe living conditions, unpermitted structures, and illegal land use.
 4/12/22 - An email from the Planning Division advised City Church to comply with temporary shelter regulations limiting occupancy to nine people and restricting shelter operations to six months.
 4/20/22 - The Fire Marshal informed City staff that prior to an inspection scheduled for 4/21/2022, he had been contacted by Pastor Scott Mulvey and his legal representation stating that the City did not have the right to enter or come on to his property without permission, but that a follow-up Fire/Life Safety inspection would be allowed given the fact that an inspection report had been provided.
 4/21/22 - The Building Official issued the first Notice and Order to City Church, allowing 10 days to address the issues identified during the Fire Marshal’s inspection. No evictions were initiated.
 4/21/22 – The Planning Division confirmed for Code Enforcement that a temporary shelter is permitted under the Zoning Ordinance. The shelter must operate as an ancillary use at the existing church.
 9/30/22 - A meeting with the Building Division, Planning Division, Fire Department, and Homeless Services Division, Code Enforcement, and Solano County Environmental Health was held to address potential outstanding issues with City Church, including zoning/building violations, life safety issues, possible bed bugs, and operating without permits.

Packet Page 204 of 401Attachment 2 Page 1 of 7

EXHIBIT A
 10/4/22 - The City issued a “Preliminary Notice to Abate Public Nuisance” to City Church, directing them to contact the Homeless Services Manager to apply for a new Temporary Shelter Permit and resolve onsite violations. The notice also stated a re-inspection of the property would be conducted within 15 days. **No fines were issued.  10/4/22 - Pastor Mulvey emailed the Homeless Services Manager, citing claims from the Planning Division that the property was “dual-zoned” and only needed showers to support residential activities. However, no records exist of this communication, and the current Planning Division staff do not concur.
 10/11/22 - Solano County Environmental Health inspected City Church's kitchen facilities, ordering its closure due to major violations posing a health risk, including significant pest infestations. The City’s Building Division confirmed that kitchen improvements had been made without permits.
 10/13/22 - The Building Division received an engineer’s report on structural repairs for unpermitted work and subsequently issued a re-roof permit.  10/15/22 - The Planning Division responded to Pastor Mulvey's inquiries, clarifying that the property was zoned RH (Residential, High Density) and identified three possible residential uses: 1) Homeless Shelter, 2) Community Care Facility, or 3) Boarding House – Large. The response outlined three compliance options for City Church: apply for an Emergency Shelter Permit, obtain a Community Care License from the State, or submit a Use Permit for a Boarding House – Large.
 10/19/22 - City Church failed to submit a shelter permit application, missing the compliance deadline in the Preliminary Notice to Abate Public Nuisance (dated 10/4/22). Citations could be issued starting on 10/19/22.
 10/19/22 - A re-inspection, as required in the Preliminary Notice, was conducted wit h representatives from Police, Homeless Services, Building, Fire, Planning, and Solano County Environmental Health. Multiple violations were observed, including unpermitted residential activity, unpermitted structures, roof damage with mold, plumbing issues, nonoperational fire alarms, fire hazards, impeded egress, pest infestations, County Health violations, unpermitted kitchen, unpermitted mobile restroom facilities, an unpermitted RV residence, and illegal wastewater output into the storm drain system.
 10/20/22 - Due to the violations found on 10/19/22, the Building Official issued a second Notice and Order detailing necessary corrective actions for health and safety violations, including pest control, occupancy limits, roof and plumbing repairs, and compliance with fire safety and construction codes. Code Enforcement served this notice to Pastor Scott Mulvey, allowing 24 hours for compliance and notifying him of a re-inspection scheduled for 10/24.

Pastor Mulvey indicated non-compliance and suggested inspection access would be denied.

Packet Page 205 of 401Attachment 2 Page 2 of 7

EXHIBIT A
 10/20/22 - Public Works attempted to conduct a Cross Connection Survey but was denied access by Pastor Mulvey.
 10/24/22 - During a re-inspection, the Building Official, Fire Marshal, and Police Support Manager found continued violations with no corrective actions taken. Pastor Mulvey stated he would not remove tents or comply with city codes, denied being a homeless shelter, and mentioned opening a health clinic. He declined to apply for permits for modifications like kitchen showers and classroom conversions.
 10/24/22 - Public Works sent a formal letter to Deborah Mulvey requesting cooperation for a Cross Connection Survey to ensure the safety of the City’s water supply.  10/26/22 - Solano County inspected and re-opened City Church’s kitchen but did not inspect for bedbugs in living areas.
 10/28/22 - The Building Division approved a roof sheeting inspection, verifying that the roof violations were being properly addressed.
 10/31/22 - Police records noted continued non-compliance from the 10/24 inspection.

Citations totaling $6,380 for the pending violations were not been issued and were instead deferred to encourage compliance with the City. Additional daily charges of $550 could apply moving forward.
 11/4/22 - A second Preliminary Notice to Abate Public Nuisance was issued, requiring City Church to work with various departments to address zoning, structural, and pest control violations, and to remove the RV. A re-inspection was scheduled within 15 days. No fines were issued to facilitate cooperation, although the City had the right to issue them.  11/16/22 - Public Works and Code Enforcement noted (internally) that City Church had until 11/24 to allow a Cross Connection Survey, after which a 48-hour notice and possible water service termination would follow.
 11/21/22 - City staff attempted a re-inspection as outlined in the 11/4 Notice and Order. Pastor Mulvey refused access, asserting that a past Planning Division interaction allowed his current activities. He also confirmed the RV was still connected to sewer lines, he had no plans to relocate occupants living in the tents and church, and indicated the City would need to act if eviction was wanted. Staff decided to proceed with citations for all remaining violations.  11/21/22 - The City issued the first citation, #6919, totaling $17,930.  11/29/22 - Public Works completed the Cross Connection Survey, identifying a need for protection measures on both domestic and fire services. City Church was notified of the requirements and deadlines; failure to meet them could result in water service termination.  12/8/2022 - A Zoom meeting was held with Pastor Mulvey, City Church representatives, and City departments to review open violations and discuss options for resolution. Each Packet Page 206 of 401Attachment 2 Page 3 of 7

EXHIBIT A
department presented their findings and allowed Pastor Mulvey to respond. It was clarified that City Church’s current zoning only permits an Emergency or Temporary Shelter program, which is no longer in effect since Pastor Mulvey opted not to reapply. Pastor Mulvey agreed to update the City on pest control efforts and discuss zoning issues at a follow-up meeting.  12/17/2022 - Fairfield Police responded to a call for an unresponsive male at City Church. The individual received medical aid and was transported to a nearby hospital.  12/19/2022 - The Police Manager emailed Pastor Mulvey for an update on outstanding violations, especially the pest infestation. Pastor Mulvey stated that City Church intends to seek a zoning amendment to support current activities but did not address the pest infestation.  12/27/2022 - An internal email from the Police Support Manager to Code Enforcement noted some, slow progress by City Church on several violations. As a result, fines were paused, though the pest infestation remained unresolved.
 12/27/2022 - Citation #6920 was issued for $19,470, covering previously paused fines and adding penalties for the unresolved pest infestation.
 1/9/2023 - City Church submitted a pest control report dated 12/9/2022, which did not specify treatment areas, chemicals used, or evidence of pests but claimed the property was bedbug- free.
 1/11/2023 - The Police Support Manager requested access for a re-inspection of key areas, including living quarters, tents, and the RV connected to the sewer system.  1/12/2023 - The Police Support Manager contacted the pest control company, Official Pest Prevention, for more information about City Church's report. The company representative was unable to provide details, noting that their inspections are generally more thorough.  1/19/2023 - City officials, including the Building Official, Fire Marshal, and Environmental Health Specialist, inspected City Church’s interior and exterior. Pastor Mulvey confirmed exterior tents were now used for storage only, though food storage in these tents was flagged as a violation. The Fire Marshall noted that the tents all had the necessary fire safety equipment - extinguishers and exit signs - and as no one was living in them, Pastor Scott could work with Fire Prevention to obtain permits for the permanent storage tents. Inspectors found that the RV discharge line was improperly used, and Pastor Mulvey was advised on proper waste disposal methods. Inside the church, converted rooms showed signs of mold and water damage, while multiple rooms had pest spray and plastic mattress covers. Pastor Mulvey explained their self-managed pest control process, which Environmental Health found inadequate. At the inspection’s conclusion, Pastor Mulvey was advised of outstanding issues, including zoning, structural damages, and permit requirements, and was informed that licensed pest control must handle future infestations.

Packet Page 207 of 401Attachment 2 Page 4 of 7

EXHIBIT A
 1/23/2023 - The Police Support Manager emailed Pastor Mulvey, outlining steps for City Church to show progress and avoid further penalties. Code Enforcement offered to stay fines until an Abatement Hearing on February 2, 2023, where both parties would mediate fines. The City suggested a 90-day grace period for City Church to focus on resolving issues. The message reiterated outstanding violations and explained that non-compliance could result in an abatement order and backdated fines.
 1/23/2023 - Notice of the Abatement Hearing was sent to the property owner and tenant via regular and certified mail.
 02/02/2023 - The Abatement Hearing was held with City Church representatives, architect Tim Demming, and City staff. The Hearing Officer reviewed whether the property should be deemed a public nuisance. Both parties agreed to stay the fines until all issu es were resolved, with a goal for completion by August 10, 2023, with the option for an extension.  4/20/2023 - A follow-up meeting discussed City Church's progress and long-term plans. City Church expressed interest in operating as a dormitory, permitted under current zoning with a Conditional Use Permit, and acknowledged that more extensive plans would require zoning changes. City staff noted the need for outstanding permits for the commercial kitchen. The meeting was cordial, with all parties acknowledging City Church's cooperation.  5/29/2023 - An email from Principal Planner to City Church’s architect outlined land use entitlement options for addressing zoning issues. Required application forms and submission guidelines were attached.
 5/30/2023 - The original agreement from the Abatement Hearing was extended due to continued cooperation between City Church and the City, with acknowledgment of completed and ongoing work.
 9/7/2023 - A re-inspection was conducted by City officials and state representatives. Exterior and interior inspections showed previously cleared violations remained resolved. However, unpermitted construction and zoning issues were still outstanding. Pastor Mulvey stated that he believed his architect had submitted the necessary documents. City representatives encouraged Pastor Mulvey to prioritize compliance over program expansion and provided information on the citation and appeal process. The inspection ended on a cordial note.  9/21/2023 - Pastor Mulvey emailed City Manager David Gassaway, asking the City Council to waive entitlement application fees for addressing zoning violations.  10/17/2023 – At a Council meeting, the City Council denied City Church's request to waive entitlement application fees.
 11/9/2023 - City Church filed an appeal on the administrative citations totaling $77,660 for violations related to unpermitted construction and zoning.

Packet Page 208 of 401Attachment 2 Page 5 of 7

EXHIBIT A
 11/15/2023 – An Abatement Hearing was held on City Church's appeal. Pastor Mulvey and architect Tim Demming proposed conceptual solutions but admitted no plans had been formally submitted. The Hearing Officer upheld the fines.  2/7/2024 - City Church submitted entitlement applications for Use Permits for a "School Personal and Social Development" and a "Medical Office."  2/27/2024 - Members of the California State Department of Health Care Services (DHCS), Licensing and Certification Division, Code Enforcement and Fairfield Police officers conducted a property inspection under a warrant obtained by the DHCS.  3/19/2024 - Building Official and Fire Marshal issued another Notice and Order (N&O), declaring dormitories, tents, and certain uninhabitable and use of the areas with unpermitted construction, specifically the clinic and the "laundry room" must be ceased immediately or 72 hours from the date of the notice (3/19/2024). A copy of the N&O was provided directly to Pastor Scott Mulvey, and was posted in several conspicuous location on the exterior of the building, including the exterior tents, the main clinic entrance, and to the doors leading to the rooms currently utilized for housing residents. The main entrance and the parish used for religious services and meetings are open to occupants and did not display red tag.  4/3/2024 - City staff met with City Church members to discuss the two Use Permit applications.  4/4/2024 - Principal Planner emailed supplemental questions to Pastor Mulvey for more details on Use Permit activities.
 4/5/2024 - Pastor Mulvey responded to the supplemental questions from the Planning Division.
 4/9/2024 - Dr. Cline, operator of the medical clinic, also responded to the supplemental questions.
 5/14/2024 - City Church submitted an additional entitlement application for a Use Permit to operate a "Boarding House - Large."
 6/26/2024 - Principal Planner sent Pastor Mulvey a list of supplemental questions for the "Boarding House - Large" Use Permit application.
 6/29/2024 - Pastor Mulvey responded to the supplemental questions.  8/4/2024 - A public hearing notice was posted in the Daily Republic Newspaper and mailed to all property owners within a 500ft radius of the church property, informing the public that a Zoning Administrator Hearing will take place on 8/21/24 to take action on the two Use Permit applications.
 8/21/2024 - The Zoning Administrator hearing was held. Four members of the public speak during the public comment period. The Zoning Administrator approves both of the Use Permits Packet Page 209 of 401Attachment 2 Page 6 of 7

EXHIBIT A
subject to conditions of approval, including an additional condition added to the Medical Clinic Use Permit that addresses comments made during the public hearing.  8/21/2024 - The Pacific Justice Institute sent a letter to the City Council and City Manager threatening legal action against the City's citation and permit process.  9/9/2024 - Pastor Mulvey filed an appeal to remove "Condition #2" from the permits, which required all fines to be paid or a payment plan established before operation.  9/23/2024 - A notice was posted in the Daily Republic Newspaper and mailed to all property owners within a 500ft radius of the church property, informing the public that a Planning Commission meeting will take place on 10/9/24 to take action on the Appeal request.  10/9/2024 - The Planning Commission approved City Church’s appeal, removing the condition requiring payment of fines before operation.
 10/11/2024 - Pastor Mulvey emailed the Principal Planner requesting an update on the "Boarding House - Large" Use Permit.
 10/15/2024 - During a City Council meeting, two council members requested a de novo review of City Church's appeal.
 10/18/2024 - Principal Planner informed Pastor Mulvey that the site-management plan for the "Boarding House - Large" Use Permit was insufficient and requested additional details. The email detailed what information should be provided and included example s ite-management plans.
 11/6/2024 - A public hearing notice was posted in the Daily Republic Newspaper and mailed to all property owners within a 500ft radius of the church property, informing the public that a City Council meeting will take place on 11/19/24 to take review the Planning Commission’s decision on the Appeal request.

Packet Page 210 of 401Attachment 2 Page 7 of 7

EXHIBIT B
UP2024-005

USE PERMIT

CITY HALL, CIVIC CENTER
FAIRFIELD, CA 94533

Scott Mulvey, on behalf of City Church, is hereby granted a Use Permit (UP2024-005) to allow the establishment of a ‘School, Personal and Social Development’ in the Residential High-Density (RH) Zoning District on the property at 743 East Tabor Avenue under the provisions of Section 25.40.6 of the Zoning Ordinance.

The following findings meet the requirements of Section 25.40.6 of the Zoning Ordinance for the grant of Use Permit:

1. The location, size, design, operating characteristics, and intensity of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and anticipated future land uses in the vicinity.

2. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and any applicable Areawide or Specific Plan.

4. Adequate facilities, such as roads, utilities, and City services, are provided to serve the use or will be provided as conditions of approval for the Use Permit.

5. The proposed use will not create either an imbalance or an overabundance of similar uses in the vicinity.

6. The proposal will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, peace, or the general welfare of the surrounding neighborhood and the City. The conditions and limitations on the use identified in the Conditions of the Use Permit will assure the use does not bear an adverse effect on the surrounding neighborhood.

This grant is made pursuant to the application of Scott Mulvey, on behalf of City Church, on file in the Community Development Department and is subject to compliance with the following conditions:

1. Operation of the ‘School, Personal and Social Development’ shall be substantially in accordance with the petition for the Use Permit and plans dated "Received, February 7, 2024", and the supplemental land use description responses dated “Received, April 5, 2024” except as modified by conditions stated herein;

2. All Fairfield Police Department administrative citations associated with the subject property, to date, must be paid in full or a payment plan put in place;

Packet Page 211 of 401Attachment 3 Page 1 of 3

EXHIBIT B
UP2024-005

3. All illegal structures, building improvements on the subject property, and areas of use of the building shall be brought up to code through proper permitting procedures, as required per the Building Safety Division and Fire Department prior to occupancy, use, and or operation of the school;

4. All illegal land use activities on the subject property must cease immediately. Known activities include medical offices, residential lodging, and overnight safe parking. Activities may be permitted if proper applications and procedures are followed with the Planning Division and Homeless Services Division;

5. All areas of the building(s) where the school program will take place must be legally improved to meet Group E Occupancy per the California Building Code;

6. Land use activities tied to the school program shall take place between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday;

7. Land use activities shall be limited to the permitted activities defined in the Fairfield Zoning Ordinance, including social skills, life skills, employment counseling, basic job training, and similar educational programs. Residential lodging is not permitted under this Use Permit;

8. A maximum of 50 people shall be enrolled in the program. The maximum number of people permitted within the areas of the building(s) where the school program will take place shall be consistent with the Group E Occupancy per the California Building Code;

9. People enrolled in the program must be a minimum age of 18 years old ;

10. Food may be provided with the school program. If food is prepared on-site, the current kitchen must be permitted. No frying or grease-laden vapor cooking equipment is allowed unless the proper Building Safety Division, Fire Department, and Solano County Environmental Health permits are obtained;

11. Annual inspections from the Community Development and Fire Departments are required;

12. Compliance with the RH zoning provisions that are applicable to this site;

13. Operation of the use shall be in compliance with all State and City Codes;

14. The Use permit shall be obtained and shall be continually exercised in such a manner that the following conditions are fully complied with:

a. The Use Permit was obtained without fraud or misrepresentation; and

b. The Use Permit has been exercised by the person(s) granted the Use Permit or their representative, successors, or assignees, in compliance with the conditions of approval, and in accordance with any statute, ordinance, law, or regulation not excused by the Permit; and

Packet Page 212 of 401Attachment 3 Page 2 of 3

EXHIBIT B
UP2024-005
c. The Use Permit is being or has been exercised in a manner which is not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare or so as not to constitute a nuisance;

15. The Scott Mulvey/City Church, property owner(s), and their successors in interest, shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officials, officers, agents and employees (collectively "Indemnitees") from and against any and all claims, actions, lawsuits, damages, losses and liabilities arising or resulting from the granting of this permit by the City, the performance of the use authorized by this permit or the exercise of the rights granted by this permit. This indemnification obligation shall include, but not be limited to, paying all fees and costs incurred by legal counsel of the City's choice in representing the Indemnitees in connection with any such claims, actions or lawsuits, any expert fees, and any award of damages, judgments, verdicts, court costs or attorneys' fees in any such claim, action or lawsuit. The City shall promptly notify Scott Mulvey/City Church and property owner(s) of any claim, action, or proceeding and the City shall reasonably cooperate in the defense. In the event such a legal action is filed, the City shall estimate its expenses for litigation.

Scott Mulvey/City Church or property owners shall deposit such amount with the City or enter into an agreement with the City to pay such expenses as they become due.

Scott Mulvey/City Church and property owners shall reimburse the City, and each of the Indemnitees for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by it in enforcing the indemnity herei n provided.

Approved by action of the City of Fairfield on the 19th day of November 2024 (effective date of permit).

The Use Permit is automatically revoked and terminated unless it is used within twenty-four (24) months from the date of approval.

MAYOR

____________________________

CITY CLERK

c: David Gassaway, City Manager
David Lim, City Attorney
Dave Zellers, Community Development Department Director Dave Feinstein, Planning Division Manager
Jeff Thomas, Chief Building Official
Jeremey Profitt, Police Support Manager
Steven Conti, Fire Marshall
Samatha Burrows, Homeless Services Manager
Packet Page 213 of 401Attachment 3 Page 3 of 3

EXHIBIT C
UP2024-006

USE PERMIT

CITY HALL, CIVIC CENTER
FAIRFIELD, CA 94533

Scott Mulvey, on behalf of City Church, is hereby granted a Use Permit (UP2024-006) to allow the establishment of an ‘Office, Medical and Dental’ in the Residential High-Density (RH) Zoning District on the property at 743 East Tabor Avenue under the provisions of Section 25.40.6 of the Zoning Ordinance.

The following findings meet the requirements of Section 25.40.6 of the Zoning Ordinance for the grant of Use Permit:

1. The location, size, design, and operating characteristics, and intensity of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and anticipated future land uses in the vicinity.

2. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and any applicable Areawide or Specific Plan.

4. Adequate facilities, such as roads, utilities, and City services are provided to serve the use, or will be provided as conditions of approval for the Use Permit.

5. The proposed use will not create either an imbalance or overabundance of similar uses in the vicinity.

This grant is made pursuant to the application of Scott Mulvey, on behalf of City Church, on file in the Community Development Department and is subject to compliance with the following conditions:

1. Operation of the ‘Office, Medical and Dental’ shall be substantially in accordance with the petition for Use Permit and plans dated "Received, February 7, 2024", and the supplemental land use description responses dated “Received, April 5, 2024” except as modified by conditions stated herein;

2. All Fairfield Police Department administrative citations associated with the subject property, to date, must be paid in full or a payment plan put in place;

3. All illegal structures, building improvements on the subject property, and uses of the building shall be brought up to code through proper permitting procedures, as required per the Building Safety Division and Fire Department;
Packet Page 214 of 401Attachment 4 Page 1 of 3

EXHIBIT C
UP2024-006

5. All areas of the building(s) where the medical offices will take place must be legally improved to meet Group B Occupancy per the California Building Code;

6. Land use activities tied to the medical offices shall take place between the following hours:

a. Monday 10:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.
b. Tuesday 10:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m.
c. Wednesday 10:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.
d. Thursday 10:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. and 5:30 p.m. – 8:30 p.m. e. Friday 10:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.;

7. Land use activities shall be limited to the permitted activities defined in the Fairfield Zoning Ordinance, including providing outpatient med ical, mental health, surgical, and other personal health services;

8. Operation of the use shall be in compliance with all State and or County Health, safety or licensing regulations. Obtain proper licenses and/or certificates from the California Department of Health Care Services (DHSC). Contact Nicolé Nicholson-Sands, Licensing and Certification Division, at (916) 345- 7584 or [email protected] to obtain a DHCS LOC (level of care) Designation and/or a residential American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) LOC Certification ;

9. The operator of the medical office shall be responsible for obtaining and maintaining the proper State licensing and certifications, as required;

10. Annual inspections from the Community Development and Fire Departments are required;

11. Compliance with the RH zoning provisions that are applicable to this site;

12. Operation of the use shall be in compliance with all State and City Codes;

13. The Use permit shall be obtained and shall be continually exercised in such a manner that the following conditions are fully complied with:

a. The Use Permit was obtained without fraud or misrepresentation; and

b. The Use Permit has been exercised by the person(s) granted the Use Permit or his representative, successors, or assignees, in compliance with the conditions of approval, and in accordance with any statute, ordinance, law, or regulation not excused by the Permit; and

Packet Page 215 of 401Attachment 4 Page 2 of 3

EXHIBIT C
UP2024-006
c. The Use Permit is being or has been exercised in a manner which is not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare or so as not to constitute a nuisance;

14. The Scott Mulvey/City Church, property owner(s), and their successors in interest, sha ll indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officials, officers, agents and employees (collectively "Indemnitees") from and against any and all claims, actions, lawsuits, damages, losses and liabilities arising or resulting from the granting of this permit by the City, the performance of the use authorized by this permit or the exercise of the rights granted by this permit. This indemnification obligation shall include, but not be limited to, paying all fees and costs incurred by legal counsel of the City's choice in representing the Indemnitees in connection with any such claims, actions or lawsuits, any expert fees, and any award of damages, judgments, verdicts, court costs or attorneys' fees in any such claim, action or lawsuit. The City shall promptly notify Scott Mulvey/City Church and property owner(s) of any claim, action, or proceeding and the City shall reasonably cooperate in the defense. In the event such a legal action is filed, the City shall estimate its expenses for litigation.

Scott Mulvey/City Church or property owners shall deposit such amount with the City or enter into an agreement with the City to pay such expenses as they become due.

Scott Mulvey/City Church and property owners shall reimburse the City, and each of the Indemnitees for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by it in enforcing the indemnity herein provided.

Approved by action of the City of Fairfield on the 19th day of November 2024 (effective date of permit).

The Use Permit is automatically revoked and terminated unless it is used within twenty-four (24) months from the date of approval.

MAYOR

______________________________

CITY CLERK

STAFF REPORT Meeting
Date:

To:

From:

Subject:

October 9, 2024
Chairperson and Members of the Planning Commission
Community Development Department
ITEM B: CITY CHURCH FAITH-BASED COLLEGE & MEDICAL CLINIC USE PERMIT APPEAL
Resolution No. PC2024 -10
Appeal (APP2024-002),
Use Permit (UP2024-00S), Use Permit (UP2024-006),
Environmental Review (ER2024-007)
Location: 743 E Tabor Avenue
Applicant: Scott Mulvey, City Church
Owner: Grace International Churches and Ministries Inc
A public hearing on a request by Scott Mulvey, on behalf of City Church, to appeal a condition of approval in both the "Faith-Based College" (UP2024-005) and "Medical Clinic" (UP2024-006) Use Permits for 743 East Tabor Avenue. The Zoning Administrator approved Conditional Use Permits to establish a Personal and Social Development School program (Faith-Based College) and a Medical Office (Medical Clinic) in the Residential High (RH) zoning district at this location on August 21, 2024. The appellant is seeking to remove the conditions requiring the settlement of Police Department citations. The project has been deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA Section 15301 Existing Facilities. (Planner: Meily M Sheehan, [email protected], 707-428-7 4 7 4) City of Fairfield Community Development Department Prepared by: ).J.S Reviewed by:2)/-
00001
Packet Page 217 of 401Attachment 5 Page 1 of 161

PC ITEM NO.: B PC DATE: 10/09/24
PC FILE NO.: APP2024-002| UP2024-005 |UP2024-006 |ER2024-007 PAGE 2 S:\PLANNING\PC MEETINGS\PC-2024\24-10-09\ITEM B - CITY CHURCH APPEAL\1. STAFF REPORT.DOCX

PROJECT OVERVIEW AND REQUESTED ACTIONS
The proposed project consists of two separate Use Permit applications, one for a “School, Personal and Social Development” and another for an “Office, Medical.” The Use Permit requests are to allow for City Church to provide a life-skills program and medical services at its property in addition to its church/place of worship services.

In accordance with Zoning Ordinance Section 25.4.1 Authority for Land Use and Zoning Decisions, Use Permits are reviewed by the Zoning Administrator. On August 21, 2024, the Zoning Administrator approved both of the Use Permits with various conditions of approval to meet the City’s findings of support. On September 9, 2024, City Church filed an appeal of the Use Permit approvals to contest a specific condition included in both permits.

The subject condition requires City Church to resolve all outstanding Police Department citations.

In considering the appeal, it is important to note that it is not under the Planning Commission’s purview to decide whether the citations should have been issued or what the total fine amount is. The commission is tasked with determining whether to approve the Use Permits and, if approved, what conditions should be incorporated.

This staff report, and the multiple attachments included, detail the extensive history of the City Church programs, the Use Permit proposals, and the appeal request.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION
For several years City Church has been providing a variety of unpermitted services for the homeless. In an effort to address the State’s shelter crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic, the City coordinated with City Church to regulate portions of their program under a Temporary Shelter Permit. However, after the 6-month permit expired in September 2021, the City Church programs significantly exceeded the allowable scope of the temporary permit. The site conditions and operations exhibited multiple land use, building, fire, and health code violations.

Despite ongoing correspondence with City staff, the unpermitted programs, and illegal construction, and unsafe living conditions went unaddressed. City Church’s lack of action to ensure their facility meets the health and safety standards required for the desired programs resulted in numerous citations and fines. To date, there are still outstanding violations for unpermitted construction and illegal activities. A description and history of these matters is detailed in the “City Church Timeline and Background Information,” attached as ‘Attachment 5’.

This supplemental information also references and provides context to the other documents attached to this report.
00002
Packet Page 218 of 401Attachment 5 Page 2 of 161

PC ITEM NO.: B PC DATE: 10/09/24
PC FILE NO.: APP2024-002| UP2024-005 |UP2024-006 |ER2024-007 PAGE 3 S:\PLANNING\PC MEETINGS\PC-2024\24-10-09\ITEM B - CITY CHURCH APPEAL\1. STAFF REPORT.DOCX

SITE INFORMATION
A. Location: 743 E Tabor Avenue (APN: 0037-020-460)
B.Parcel Size: 2.02-acres
C.Zoning and Land Use:Zoning Land Use
Project Site: High Density Residential (RH) Church / Place of Worship North: RH Single-Family Homes
South: Low Medium Density
Residential (RLM)
Single-Family Homes
East: RLM Single-Family Homes
West: RH Apartments
D.General Plan Designations:

Project Site: Residential High
North: Residential High
South: Residential Low Medium
East: Residential Low Medium
West: Residential High
E.Site Characteristics/Special Features:

The project site is surrounded by apartment buildings to the west, single-family residential homes to the east, north, and south. The property is developed with an existing building which currently hosts a church/place of worship land use.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project includes two separate land-use activities: a “Faith-Based College” and a “Medical Clinic.” The two proposals are best categorized as the following Zoning Ordinance defined land uses, respectively.

School, Personal and Social Development: A public or private establishment offering education and training in social skills, life skills, employment counseling and basic job training, and similar educational programs for the unemployed, the disabled, and youth. This education occurs in an office/classroom setting.
00003
Packet Page 219 of 401Attachment 5 Page 3 of 161

PC ITEM NO.: B PC DATE: 10/09/24
PC FILE NO.: APP2024-002| UP2024-005 |UP2024-006 |ER2024-007 PAGE 4 S:\PLANNING\PC MEETINGS\PC-2024\24-10-09\ITEM B - CITY CHURCH APPEAL\1. STAFF REPORT.DOCX Office, Medical and Dental: Offices providing outpatient medical, mental health, surgical, and other personal health services. Includes general practitioner, specialized medicine, chiropractic, psychiatric, psychological, ophthalmic, blood banks, and similar offices. This classification does not include any facility to which ambulance service is provided on a regular basis.

Review Section B. Use Permit Review under the Analysis for Planning Commission subsection below for additional information on the proposed uses.

ANALYSIS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION
A.General Plan/Zoning Consistency: The proposed land uses are consistent with the Residential High General Plan and RH Zoning designations in that ‘School, Social and Personal Development’ and ‘Office, Medical’ are conditionally permitted uses. The project is also consistent with the following General Plan Objectives:

Objective ED 5: Encourage a balance of office/professional uses which support a strong, diverse economic base and are compatible with the needs of the community.

Policy LU 1.1: Only allow development that is consistent with the Land Use Diagram and the Land Use Category definitions.

Policy PF 10.2: The City shall ensure that the Zoning Ordinance provides adequate land for a variety of health care facilities.

Policy PF 10.3: The City should encourage additional health care capacity as needed by the increasing population in the Fairfield area.

Policy PF 23.3: Work with adjacent communities to encourage a wide variety of vocational, technical, and post-secondary educational opportunities.

Objective LU 13: Minimize conflicts between land uses.

Objective LU 17: Encourage mixed-use development that provides for an integrated mixture of residential and employment-generating uses within the same structure.

B.Use Permit Review:

School, Personal and Social Development: The proposed ‘Faith-Based College’ program offers social and life skills training to individuals facing challenges or are re-entering the community. Students are supported through scholarships, along with food, clothing, and other assistance. Operating Monday through Friday and on Sundays, the program will have 4-6 staff members on-site and will serve 25-50 people at a time. The program is structured into five phases: 1) it begins with teaching basic life skills, addressing medical needs, and obtaining proper identification; 2) participants then progress to learning 00004
Packet Page 220 of 401Attachment 5 Page 4 of 161

PC ITEM NO.: B PC DATE: 10/09/24
PC FILE NO.: APP2024-002| UP2024-005 |UP2024-006 |ER2024-007 PAGE 5 S:\PLANNING\PC MEETINGS\PC-2024\24-10-09\ITEM B - CITY CHURCH APPEAL\1. STAFF REPORT.DOCX communication skills; 3) next, they acquire basic computer skills; 4) this is followed by job searching, financial management, and budgeting; and 5) finally, participants work toward securing employment, opening a bank account, and finding permanent housing. While the school is not state-licensed or accredited, it serves adults 18 and older. A third and separate Conditional Use Permit application is under review to add a residential housing component to the program. Currently, no residential occupancy is permitted.

To ensure the school program does not become a nuisance or negatively impact the surrounding neighborhood and city, special conditions have been incorporated into the Use Permit. These include resolving any outstanding Police Department citations through payment or a payment plan, and ensuring that any illegal structures or improvements on the property are brought up to code before the program begins. Unpermitted activities, such as residential lodging and overnight parking, must cease unless properly authorized.

The program activities are restricted to specified hours of operation. Enrollment is limited to 50 participants, all of whom must be 18 or older. If food is prepared on-site, the kitchen must be permitted, with certain cooking equipment and required approvals from Solano County Health and the City. The program is also subject to annual inspections by the Community Development and Fire Departments. It should be noted that additional Building Safety Division and Fire Department permits are required to alter the existing assembly-church space into an educational space consistent with the California building code occupancy regulations.

Office, Medical: The proposed Medical Clinic will be open to the public Monday through Friday, with two employees on-site at any given time. It will provide medical consultations, prescriptions, and minor wound care. While the clinic will not fill prescriptions, it may dispense medications when appropriate.

Similar to the proposed school, the Use Permit for the medical office includes several special conditions. Many of these overlap with the school permit, such as paying outstanding police citations, bringing illegal structures up to code through proper permits, ceasing unpermitted land use activities, and restricting hours of operation. Additionally, the Use Permit outlines specific conditions to ensure the clinic operates safely and in compliance with regulations. These include adhering to all state and county health, safety, and licensing requirements, obtaining the necessary licenses and certificates from the California Department of Health Care Services, and ensuring the operator maintains all required state licenses and certifications. Again, it should be emphasized that additional Building Safety Division and Fire Department permits are required to alter the existing assembly-church space into a medical office space consistent with the California building code occupancy regulations.

C.Environmental Review: Following a review of the project, staff has determined that it is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Under CEQA, the State has identified a list of project classes that have been determined not to 00005
Packet Page 221 of 401Attachment 5 Page 5 of 161

PC ITEM NO.: B PC DATE: 10/09/24
PC FILE NO.: APP2024-002| UP2024-005 |UP2024-006 |ER2024-007 PAGE 6 S:\PLANNING\PC MEETINGS\PC-2024\24-10-09\ITEM B - CITY CHURCH APPEAL\1. STAFF REPORT.DOCX have a significant effect on the environment and are, therefore, exempt from the requirements of CEQA. The proposed project is exempt under Class 1, which consists of projects characterized as the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures. The proposed project meets the conditions described in Section 15301 Existing Facilities.

D.Summary of Appeal and Staff Analysis: The appellant is requesting the removal of Condition #2 from both Use Permits, which states that all Police Department citations must be paid in full, or a payment plan established for the school and medical clinic to operate. The appellant argues that this condition is punitive and unrelated to the zoning land use requests. The letter from the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI), dated August 21, 2024 (attached as ‘Attachment 9’), is also part of the appeal application and provides additional assertions. PJI claims that the City’s inspection and enforcement actions hinder the church’s ability to serve the homeless. They contend that these restrictions may violate the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), as well as constitutional protections for religious freedom and equal protection. Furthermore, since the church serves a population that is often disabled, federal and state fair housing and disability laws may also be relevant.

To mitigate any negative effects that may be caused by a proposed use, the Zoning Ordinance provides provisions for Use Permit conditions to be placed. Approval of the Use Permits is pursuant to findings by the Planning Commission that the operation will not create a nuisance. The appellant has demonstrated its operations are out of compliance with multiple City, County, and State regulations, notably health and safety violations. This has required extensive staff time and effort to remedy the situation, an effort that is still ongoing. Staff strongly feels that it is essential to resolve all existing nuisances before allowing the two requested Use Permit operations to begin. Paying the fines, or being on a payment plan, is a component directly tied to addressing the nuisances and supporting the proposed land uses. The conditions in question provide a level of certainty that any remaining violations will be addressed, allowing the property to operate safely and appropriately moving forward. Moreover, the Use Permit conditions are the strongest tool to ensure the fines are actually paid, or that the appellant is in good standing on a payment plan. In regard to the PJI assertions, the City Attorney has reviewed these claims and finds that they are without merit.

Again, in considering the Appeal, it is important to acknowledge that it is not the Planning Commission’s jurisdiction to decide whether the citations are valid. As identified in the attached Abatement Hearing document (Attachment 6), there is a separate process for City Church to appeal the citations and exhaust their options. The commission is tasked with determining whether the Use Permits meet the City’s findings for approval and whether they should contain the condition requiring the citations to be resolved. 00006
Packet Page 222 of 401Attachment 5 Page 6 of 161

PC ITEM NO.: B PC DATE: 10/09/24
PC FILE NO.: APP2024-002| UP2024-005 |UP2024-006 |ER2024-007 PAGE 7 S:\PLANNING\PC MEETINGS\PC-2024\24-10-09\ITEM B - CITY CHURCH APPEAL\1. STAFF REPORT.DOCX E.Correspondence: A public hearing notice was published in the Daily Republic newspaper on September 29, 2024, and was mailed to all persons who own property within 500 feet of the subject property and all persons in attendance at the Zoning Administrator hearing on August 21, 2024. At the time of this writing, the City has not received questions or comments regarding this proposal.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the commission adopt Resolution No. PC2024-10 denying the appeal (APP2024-002) and upholding the Zoning Administrator’s decision to approve the Conditional Use Permits (UP2024-005 and UP2024-006), with conditions of approval as written.

Attachments:

1.Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2024-10
a.Exhibit A: Conditional Use Permit: School, Personal and Social Development (UP2024-005)
b.Exhibit B: Conditional Use Permit: Office, Medical (UP2024-006)

2.Zoning Administrator Public Comment Cards, August 21, 2024

3.Appeal Application, September 9, 2024

4.PJI Letter to City, August 21, 2024

5.City Church Timeline and Background Information

6.City Church Abatement Hearing, February 2, 2023

7.Administrative Hearing Officer Letter, February 13, 2023

8.Police Department Administrative Citation, September 13, 2023

9.Notice and Order, March 19, 2024 and Citations, March 20, 2024

10.City Council Resolution No. 2023-260

11.Supplemental Exhibits in Support of Appeal, (Received) October 2, 2024

12.General Plan Land Use and Zoning Exhibits

13.Plans and Project Description Responses (Link to view the project plans) 00007
Packet Page 223 of 401Attachment 5 Page 7 of 161

City of Fairfield Planning Commission
RESOLUTION NO. PC2024 -10

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION UPHOLDING THE ZONING

ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A 'SCHOOL, SOCIAL AND PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT' AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A 'OFFICE, MEDICAL' AT 743 EAST TABOR AVENUE (0037-020-460); AND GRANTING CITY CHURCH'S APPEAL TO REMOVE CONDITION #2 FOR BOTH CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS

T H E P LA N N IN G C O M M IS S IO N O F T H E CI T Y O F FA IR FIELD H ER EB Y R EC IT ES, FIN D S, D ET ER M IN E S, O R D ER S , A N D R ESO LV ES A S FO LLO W S :

SE C T IO N 1. O n Fe b ru a ry 7, 20 2 4 , app lication s fo r a C on d itio n al Use Pe rm it (U P 2 0 24 -0 0 5 ) to o p e rate a 'S ch o o l, So cia l an d P e rso n a l D e v e lop m e nt' and a C o n d ition al U se Pe rm it (U P2 024 -0 06 ) to o p e rate an 'O ff ice , M e d ical' at 74 3 East T ab o r A ven u e (0 0 37 -0 20 -4 6 0) (P ro je ct) w ere file d w ith th e C o m m u n ity D e ve lo p m e n t De p a rt m e n t in accord an ce w ith th e rule s an d reg u latio ns go v e rn in g th e off icia l fi lin g o f su ch app lication s.

SEC T IO N 2. T h e Zo n in g A d m in istrato r he ld a du ly no ticed pu blic he arin g on A ug ust 21, 2024 . Th e C ity staff p re se n te d su b stan tia l fa ctu a l in fo rm atio n reg ard in g the pro p ose d Pro je ct to th e he arin g th ro u g h o ral prese n tatio n be fo re th e Zon in g A d m in istrato r. T he Zo n ing Ad m in istrator con sid e red all p u b lic te stim o n y an d in fo rm atio n pre se n te d an d de te rm in e d th at the fin d in g s fo r the U se Pe rm its, as co n d itio n e d , w e re m e t in accord a n ce w ith S e ctio n 25 .4 0 an d th e reb y app ro ved th e U se Pe rm its. Fu rt h e rm o re , th e Zo n in g A d m in istrator de te rm in e d th at th e Proje ct is cate go rically exe m p t fr o m th e re q u ire m e n ts o f th e C a lifo rn ia Enviro n m e ntal Q uality A ct (C EQ A), pu rsu an t to C E Q A G u id e lin e s, Se ctio n 15 3 0 1 Existin g Fa cilitie s.

SEC T IO N 3. O n Se p te m b e r 9, 20 2 4 , Sco tt M u lvey, o n be h alf of C ity Ch u rch, prop e rly file d an ap p e a l o f th e Zo n in g A d m in istrato r's d e cision in acco rd an ce w ith th e rule s an d reg u lation s go v e rn in g th e offi ci a l fi lin g of ap p e a ls.

SEC T IO N 4 . O n O cto b e r 9, 20 2 4 , th e com m issio n he ld a du ly no ticed de novo pu blic he arin g pu rsu a n t to Fairfi e ld M u n icip a l C o d e Se ctio n 25 .4 4 .3. T h e C ity staff prese nted su b stantial fa ctu al in fo rm atio n reg ard in g th e pro p o se d Pro je ct in staff re p orts an d th roug h oral prese ntation s be fo re th e co m m issio n . T h e co m m ission co n sid ered all pu blic testim o n ie s an d in fo rm atio n pre se n te d du rin g th e pu b lic he a rin g re g ard in g th is app licatio n, m o tio n e d , an d passe d th is re so lu tio n .

S E C T IO N 5 . T h e co m m issio n ha s de te rm in e d th at th e pro p ose d pro je ct is C ate gorically Exe m p t fr o m th e re q u ire m e n ts of th e C a lifo rn ia En viron m en tal Q uality Act (C EQA ) pu rsu ant to G u id e lin e s, Se ctio n 15 3 0 1 Existin g Facilitie s.

P C IT E M N O .: B
P C FIL E N O .: A P P 2 0 2 4 -0 0 2 I U P 2 0 24 -0 0 5 I U P 2 0 2 4 -0 0 6 I ER 2 0 2 4 -0 0 7 S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2024\24-10-09\ltem B - City Church Appeal\New folder\2. Resolution REVISED.docx PC D A T E : 10 /9 /2 4
PA G E 1
Packet Page 224 of 401Attachment 5 Page 8 of 161

SE C T IO N 6 . T h e co m m issio n ad o p ts th e fo llow ing fin ding s in su pp ort of th is U se Pe rm it to allow a 'Sch o o l, Pe rso n a l an d So cia l D e v e lo p m en t' in th e Hig h-D e n sity Re sid e ntial (R H ) Zo n in g de sig n atio n :
(a) T h e lo catio n , size , de sig n, o p e ratin g ch a racte ristics an d in te n sity of th e pro p ose d use are co m p atib le w ith th e existin g an d an ticip ated futu re lan d uses in th e vici nity. A s pro posed an d cond itioned, the school progra m is appropriate for the RH zoning designation and w ill op era te as an ad ditional use in the existing church/place of w orship. Cond itions have been placed to ensure that the building is im pro ved to m eet ci ty, county, and state regulations.

A d ditionally, severa l operational cond itions are im p osed to lim it pro gra m hours, the m inim um ag e of participants, and the m axim um total num ber of people. (b ) T h e pro p o se d use is co n siste n t w ith th e G e n e ral Plan an d Zo n in g O rd in a n ce, an d an y ap p licab le A re a w id e o r Sp e cific P la n . The use is consistent w ith the applica ble G enera l Plan and Zoning designations and the follow ing applicable G enera l Plan objectives and policies: O bjective ED 5: Encoura ge a balance of office/professional uses w hich support a strong, diverse econom ic base and are com p atible w ith the needs of the com m unity; Policy LU 1.1: O nly allow developm ent that is consistent w ith the Land U se D iagra m and the Land U se Category definitions; Policy PF 10.2 : The Ci ty shall ensure that the Zoning O rdinance pro vides ad equate land for a variety of health care faci lities; Policy PF 10 .3 : The Ci ty should en coura g e ad ditional health care capaci ty as needed by the increasing pop ulation in the Fairfield area; Policy PF 23.3 : Work w ith adjacen t com m unities to encoura ge a w ide variety of vocational, technical, and post-second ary educational opp ortunities; O bjective LU 13 : M inim ize conflicts betw een land uses; O bjective LU 17 : Encoura ge m ixed-use developm en t that pro vides for an integra ted m ixture of residential and em ploym ent- ge nera ting uses w ithin the sam e structure.
(c) A n y po te n tia lly sig n ifi can t ne g ativ e im p acts to environ m e ntal quality and natu ral re so u rce s ha v e be e n pro p e rly scre e n e d ou t. Fo r th is reason, the pro p o sed C on d itio n al U se Pe rm it co m p lie s w ith th e C alifo rn ia En viro n m e n tal Q uality A ct (C EQA ). The pro posed project has been determ ined to be categorically exem p t as an in-fill developm ent project und er CEQ A G uidelines Section 15 30 1 Existing Faci lities. (d ) A d e q u a te fa cilitie s, su ch as ro ad s, utilitie s, an d C ity se rv ices are pro vid e d to se rve th e use o r w ill be pro v id e d as co n d itio n s o f ap pro val fo r th e U se Pe rm it. A ll existing infra structure an d utilities are pro vided to serve the school.
(e ) T h e pro p o se d use w ill no t cre ate eith e r an im b ala n ce o r ov e rabu n d a n ce of sim ilar uses in th e vicin ity . The prop osed use w ill no t create an overa bund ance of sim ilar school progra m s in the vici nity.
(f) T h e pro p o sa l w ill no t co n stitu te a nuisa n ce o r be de trim e n tal to th e he alth , safety, m o rals, pe a ce , o r th e ge n e ra l w e lfa re o f th e su rro u n din g neig h b o rhood an d th e C ity. T he P C IT E M N O .: B
P C FILE N O .: A P P 2 0 2 4 -0 0 2 I U P 2 0 2 4 -0 0 5 I U P 2 0 2 4 -0 0 6 I ER 2 0 2 4 -0 0 7 S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2024\24-10-09\ltem B - City Church Appeal\New folder\2. Resolution REVISED.docx PC DA T E: 10 /9 /24
PA G E 2
Packet Page 225 of 401Attachment 5 Page 9 of 161

co n d itio n s an d lim itatio n s o n th e use ide ntifi e d in th e Co n ditio n s of th e U se Pe rm it w ill en su re th at th e use do e s no t be a r an ad ve rse eff ect on th e su rro u nd in g ne ig hb o rhood.

As proposed and conditioned, the proposed use will not cr eate a nuisance or negatively im pact the surr ounding area. N otew orthy conditions include resolving any outstanding Fairfield Police Departm ent citations through paym ent or a paym ent plan and ensuring that any illegal structures or im provem ents on the property are bro ught up to code before the program begins. Unperm itted activities, such as residential lodging and overn ight parking, m ust cease unless pro perly authorized. The pro gra m activities are restricted to specified hours of opera tion. Enrollm ent is lim ited to 50 participants, all of whom m ust be 18 or older. If food is prepared on-site, the kitchen m ust be perm itted, with certain cooking equipm ent requiring additional appro vals from County Health and the City. The progra m is also subject to annual inspections by the Com m unity Developm ent and Fire Departm ents. Lastly, additional Building Safety Division and Fire Departm ent perm its are required to alter the existing assem bly-church space into an educational space consistent with the Californ ia building code occupancy regulations.

S E C T IO N 7. T h e co m m issio n ad o p ts th e fo llo w in g fin din g s in supp o rt oft h is U se Pe rm it to allow a 'O ff ice , M e d ical' in th e R H Zo n in g de sig n a tion :
(a ) T h e lo catio n , size , de sig n, o p e ratin g ch a racte ristics an d inte n sity of th e pro p osed use are co m p atib le w ith th e existin g an d an ticip ated futu re lan d uses in the vicin ity. As proposed and conditioned, the m edical office is appropriate for the RH zoning designation and will opera te as an additional use in the existing church/place of worship. Conditions have been placed to ensure that the building is im pro ved to m eet city, county, and state regulations.

Additionally, severa l operational conditions are im posed to lim it the office hours and require proper health ca re licenses.
(b ) T h e pro p o se d use is co n siste n t w ith th e G en e ral Plan an d Zo n ing O rd in a n ce, an d an y ap p licab le A re aw id e o r Sp e cifi c Pla n . The use is consistent with the applicable Genera l Plan and Zoning designations and the follow ing applica ble Genera l Plan objectives and policies: Objective ED 5: Encoura ge a balance of office/professional uses which support a stro ng, diverse econom ic base and are com patible with the needs of the com m unity; Policy LU 1.1: Only allow developm ent that is consistent with the Land Use Diagra m and the Land Use Category definitions; Policy PF 10.2: The City shall ensure that the Zoning Ordinance pro vides adequate land for a variety of health care facilities; Policy PF 10.3 : The City should encoura ge additional health care capacity as needed by the increasing population in the Fairfield area; Policy PF 23.3 : W ork with adjacent com m unities to encoura ge a wide variety of vocational, technical, and post-seco ndary educational opportunities; Objective LU 13: M inim ize co nflicts between land uses; Objective LU 17: Encoura ge m ixed-use developm ent that provides for an integra ted m ixture of residential and em ploym ent- genera ting uses within the sam e structure.

P C IT E M N O .: B
P C FIL E N O .: A P P 2 0 2 4 -0 0 2 I U P 2 0 24 -0 0 5 I U P 2 0 2 4 -0 0 6 I ER 2 0 2 4 -0 0 7 S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2024\24-10-09\ltem B - City Church Appeal\New folder\2. Resolution REVISED.docx PC DA T E: 10 /9/24
PA G E 3
Packet Page 226 of 401Attachment 5 Page 10 of 161

(c) A n y po te n tia lly sig n ifi can t ne g ativ e im pacts to enviro n m e ntal qu a lity an d natu ral re so u rce s hav e be e n pro p e rly scre e n e d ou t. For th is reason, th e pro p o sed C on d itio n al U se Pe rm it co m p lie s w ith th e C alifo rn ia En viro n m e n tal Q uality Act (C EQA ). The pro posed project has be en determ ined to be categ orically exem p t as an in-fill developm ent project und er CE Q A G uidelines Section 15 301 Existing Facilities. (d ) A d e q u a te fa cilitie s, su ch as ro a d s, utilitie s, an d C ity se rv ices are pro vid e d to se rve th e use o r w ill be pro v id e d as co n d itio n s o f ap p ro v al fo r th e U se Pe rm it. All existing infra structure and utilities are provided to serve the school.
(e ) T h e pro p o se d use w ill no t cre ate eith e r an im bala n ce o r ove rab u n d an ce of sim ilar use s in th e vicin ity . The proposed use w ill not create an overa bund ance of sim ilar school progra m s in the vicinity.
(f) T h e pro p o sa l w ill no t co n stitu te a nuisa n ce o r be de trim e ntal to th e he alth, safety, m orals, pe ace , o r th e ge n e ral w e lfa re o f th e su rro u nd in g ne ig h b o rhoo d an d th e C ity. The co n d itio n s an d lim itatio n s o n th e use id entifi e d in th e C o n ditio n s of th e U se Pe rm it w ill en su re th a t th e use do e s no t be a r an ad ve rse eff ect o n th e su rro u nd in g ne igh b o rhoo d.

As pro pose d and cond itioned, the prop osed use w ill no t create a nuisance or negatively im p act the surro und ing area. N otew orthy conditions incl ud e resolving any outstanding F airfield Police D epartm ent citations through paym ent or a paym en t plan and ensuring tha t any illegal structures or im provem ents on the prop erty are bro ught up to code before the progra m beg ins. U np erm itted activities, such as residential lod ging and overn ight parking, m ust cease unless prop erly authorized. A ll state and county health, safety, and licensing requirem ents m ust be ad hered to, necessary licenses and certificates from the Californ ia D ep artm ent of H ealth Care Services m ust be obtained, and the op era tor m ust m a intain all required state licenses and certifications. The office is also subject to annual inspections by the Com m unity D evelopm ent and Fire D epartm ents. Lastly, additional Building Safety D ivision and Fire D ep artm ent perm its are required to alter the existing assem bly-church space into a m edical office space consistent w ith the Californ ia building co d e occupancy regulations.

S EC T IO N 8 . B ase d up o n th e w ritt e n fi n din g s set fo rth in se ctio n s 5, 6, an d 7 of th is Re so lu tion , th e co m m issio n he re b y d e n ie s th e ap p e a l an d aff irm s th e de cisio n of th e Zon in g Ad m in istrator by ap p ro v in g :
(a ) U se Pe rm it (U P 2 0 2 4 -0 0 S ), su b je ct to th e con d ition s contain e d in th e attach e d Exhibit "A ". (b ) U se Pe rm it (U P2 0 2 4 -0 0 6 ), su b je ct to th e co n dition s contain e d in th e attach e d Exh ib it "B ".

S E C T IO N 9 . T h e re co rd o f pro ce e d in g s sh a ll be lo cate d at th e C ity's C o m m un ity D e velopm e nt D e p a rt m e n t, an d th e d ire cto r o f com m un ity de v elop m e nt sh all be the cu sto d ian of su ch do cu m e n ts.

P C IT E M N O .: B
P C FILE N O .: A P P 2 0 2 4 -0 0 2 I U P 2 0 2 4 -0 0 5 I U P 2 0 24 -0 0 6 I ER 2 0 24 -0 0 7 S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2024\24-10-09\ltem B - City Church Appeal\New folder\2. Resolution REVISED.docx PC D A T E: 10 /9 /24
PA G E 4
Packet Page 227 of 401Attachment 5 Page 11 of 161

P A S S E D A N D A D O P T E D t h is 9 th day of October, 2024.

AYES: COMMISSIONERS:

NOES: COMMISSIONERS:

ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:

ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:

George KENNEDY (Chair) / Tina WERBLIN (Vice) / Chris
MATTHEWS/ Don GREVE/ Shashi PAUL/ Rheonna REESE/
Jasmine SINGH
Nooe-,
Nane
Non~.
_A---- \L --
GEORGE KENNEDY, Chair
ATTEST:
~t i- e:J__;, ~
DAVID FEINSTEIN, Secretary
P C IT E M N O .: B
P C FILE N O .: A P P 2 0 2 4 -0 0 2 I U P 2 0 2 4 -0 0 5 I U P 2 0 2 4 -0 0 6 I ER 2 0 2 4 -0 0 7 S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2024\24-10-09\ltem B - City Church Appeal\New folder\2. Resolution REVISED.docx PC D A T E: 10 /9 /24
PA G E 5
Packet Page 228 of 401Attachment 5 Page 12 of 161

E X H IB IT A
U P 2 02 4 -0 0 5

USE PERMIT

CITY HALL, CIVIC CENTER
FAIRFIELD, CA 94533
Sco tt M u lv e y, o n be h a lf o f C ity C h u rch , is he re b y gran te d a U se Pe rm it (U P 2 024 -0 0 5 ) to allow th e estab lish m e nt o f a 'Sch o o l, Pe rso n a l an d So ci a l D e v e lo p m e n t' in th e Re sid e ntial Hig h-D e n sity (R H ) Zon in g D istrict o n th e pro p e rty at 74 3 East T ab o r A ve n u e un d e r th e pro visio n s of Sectio n 25 .4 0 .6 of th e Zon ing O rd in a nce .

T h e fo llo w in g fi n d in g s m e et th e re q u ire m e n ts o f Se ctio n 25 .4 0 .6 of th e Zon in g O rd in an ce fo r th e grant of U se Pe rm it:

1. T h e lo catio n , size , d e sig n , o p e ratin g ch a racte ristics, an d inte n sity of th e pro p osed use are co m p atib le w ith th e existin g an d an ticipate d futu re lan d use s in th e vicin ity.

2. T h e pro p o se d use is co n siste n t w ith th e G e n eral P lan an d Zo n in g O rd in a n ce an d an y app licable A re aw id e o r Sp e cifi c P la n .

3. A n y po te n tia lly sig n ifi can t ne g ativ e im p a cts to en viro n m e n tal qu ality an d natu ral resou rces have be e n pro p e rly m itig ate d . Fo r th is rea son , th e pro p osed C o n ditio n al U se Pe rm it com plie s w ith th e C alifo rn ia En viro n m e n ta l Q ua lity A ct (C E QA ). 4 . A d e q u ate fa ci litie s, su ch as ro ad s, utilitie s, an d C ity se rv ice s, are pro vid e d to se rve th e use o r w ill be p ro v id e d as co n d itio n s of ap p ro val fo r th e U se Pe rm it.

5. T h e p ro p o se d use w ill no t cre ate eith e r an im ba lan ce or an ove rab u n dan ce of sim ilar use s in th e vici n ity .

6. T h e pro p o sa l w ill no t co n stitu te a nu isa n ce o r be de trim e ntal to th e he alth , safety, m orals, pe ace, or th e ge n e ral w e lfa re o f th e su rro u nd in g ne ig h b o rhood an d th e C ity. T he co n ditio n s an d lim itation s o n th e use id e n tifi e d in th e C o n d ition s of th e U se Pe rm it w ill assu re th e use doe s no t bear an ad ve rse eff e ct o n th e su rro u n d in g ne ig h b orh oo d .

T h is gran t is m a d e pu rsu a n t to th e ap p licatio n of Sco tt M u lv e y, o n be h a lf of C ity C h urch, o n file in th e C om m u nity D e v e lo p m e n t D e p a rtm e n t an d is su b je ct to com plia n ce w ith th e fo llow ing con d itio n s:

1. O p e ratio n o f th e 'S ch o o l, Pe rso n a l an d So ci a l De v e lo p m e nt' sh all be su b stan tially in accord an ce w ith th e pe titio n fo r th e U se Pe rm it an d pla n s d ated "R e ce iv ed , Fe b ru ary 7, 2024", an d th e su pple m e n tal la n d use de scrip tio n re sp o n se s date d "Re ce iv ed , A p ril 5, 2024 " exce p t as m odifi e d by con d itio n s state d he re in ;

2. A ll ille g al stru ctu re s, bu ild in g im p ro ve m e n ts o n th e su bject pro p e rty, an d areas of use of th e bu ilding sh a ll be bro u g ht up to co d e th ro u g h pro p e r pe rm ittin g pro ced u res, as req u ired pe r th e Bu ildin g Safety D iv isio n an d Fire D e p a rt m e n t prio r to occu pan cy, use, an d o r o p e ratio n of th e schoo l; Packet Page 229 of 401Attachment 5 Page 13 of 161

E X H IB IT A
U P 2024-005

4. All areas of the building(s) where the school program will take place must be legally improved to meet Group E Occupancy per the California Building Code;

5. Land use activities tied to the school program shall take place between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday;

6. Land use activities shall be limited to the permitted activities defined in the Fairfield Zoning Ordinance, including social skills, life skills, employment counseling, basic job training, and similar educational programs. Residential lodging is not permitted under this Use Permit;

7. A maximum of 50 people shall be enrolled in the program. The maximum number of people permitted within the areas of the building(s) where the school program will take place shall be consistent with the Group E Occupancy per the California Building Code;

8. People enrolled in the program must be a minimum age of 18 years old;

9. Food may be provided with the school program. lffood is prepared on-site, the current kitchen must be permitted. No frying or grease-laden vapor cooking equipment is allowed unless the proper Building Safety Division, Fire Department, and Solano County Environmental Health permits are obtained;

10. Annual inspections from the Community Development and Fire Departments are required;

11. Compliance with the RH zoning provisions that are applicable to this site;

12. Operation of the use shall be in compliance with all State and City Codes;

13. The Use permit shall be obtained and shall be continually exercised in such a manner that the following conditions are fully complied with:
a. The Use Permit was obtained without fraud or misrepresentation; and b. The Use Permit has been exercised by the person(s) granted the Use Permit or their representative, successors, or assignees, in compliance with the conditions of approval, and in accordance with any statute, ordinance, law, or regulation not excused by the Permit; and
c. The Use Permit is being or has been exercised in a manner which is not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare or so as not to constitute a nuisance; Packet Page 230 of 401Attachment 5 Page 14 of 161

EX H IBIT A
UP2024-005
14 . T h e Sco tt M ulvey/City C h u rch , prop e rty ow ner(s), an d the ir successors in interest, shall indem nify, de fe n d an d ho ld ha rm le ss th e C ity, its off ic ials, off icers, agents and em plo yees (co llectively "ln d e m n ite e s") fr o m an d ag ain st an y an d all cl aim s, actions, law suits, dam ag es, losses and liabilities arisin g o r resu ltin g fr o m th e gran tin g of th is pe rm it by the City, th e pe rfo rm ance of the use au th o rize d by th is pe rm it o r th e exercise of th e rights granted by this pe rm it. This indem nification o b lig atio n sh all in cl u d e , bu t no t be lim ite d to , payin g all fees and co sts in curred by legal counsel of th e C ity 's ch oice in rep rese ntin g th e ln d e m nitees in conn ection w ith any such cl aim s, actions or la w su its, an y exp e rt fee s, and an y aw ard of dam ages, ju dg m ents, verdicts, court co sts or att orn eys' fee s in an y su ch cl aim , actio n o r law su it. The C ity shall pro m ptly no tify Scott M u lvey/City C hurch and p ro p e rty o w n e r(s) of an y cl aim , action, o r pro ceed in g and th e City shall reasonably co operate in the de fe n se . In th e ev ent su ch a le g al actio n is file d, th e City sh all estim ate its expe nses fo r litigation.

Sco tt M u lv e y/City C h urch o r pro p e rty ow n e rs shall de posit such am ou nt w ith the City or enter into an ag re e m ent w ith th e C ity to pay su ch exp en ses as they becom e du e .

Sco tt M u lv e y/City C h u rch and pro p e rty ow ners shall reim bu rse the C ity, and each oft he lndem nitees fo r an y an d all le gal exp e n ses an d co sts in cu rred by it in enfo rcing the in d e m nity he rein pro vided.

A p p ro ve d by actio n o f th e C ity of Fairfie ld on th e 9th day of O ctobe r 20 24 (eff ective date of perm it).

T h e U se Pe rm it is au tom atically revoke d and te rm in ated unless it is used w ithin tw enty-fo ur (24) m onths fr om th e date o f ap p ro val.
~GTTE N N ED Y
Planning C om m ission Chair

D A V E FEIN S T EIN
S e cre ta ry
c: D av id G a ssaw ay , C ity M an ag e r
Dav id Li m , C ity A tt orn e y
D av e Ze lle rs, C om m un ity D eve lo p m e nt De p art m e nt Director Dav e Fe in ste in , P lan nin g D ivisio n M a n ag er Je ff T h o m a s, C h ie f Bu ild ing O ff icia l
Je re m e y P ro fitt , Police Su pp o rt M a n ag e r
Ste v e n C o n ti, Fire M a rsh all
Sam a th a Bu rro w s, H o m e le ss Se rvices M an ag e r Packet Page 231 of 401Attachment 5 Page 15 of 161

E X H IB IT B
U P 2024-006

USE PERMIT

CITY HALL, CIVIC CENTER
FAIRFIELD, CA 94533
Scott Mulvey, on behalf of City Church, is hereby granted a Use Permit (UP2024-006) to allow the establishment of an 'Office, Medical and Dental' in the Residential High-Density (RH) Zoning District on the property at 743 East Tabor Avenue under the provisions of Section 25.40.6 of the Zoning Ordinance.

The following findings meet the requirements of Section 25.40.6 of the Zoning Ordinance for the grant of Use Permit:

1. The location, size, design, and operating characteristics, and intensity of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and anticipated future land uses in the vicinity.

2. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and any applicable Areawide or Specific Plan.

4. Adequate facilities, such as roads, utilities, and City services are provided to serve the use, or will be provided as conditions of approval for the Use Permit.

5. The proposed use will not create either an imbalance or overabundance of similar uses in the vicinity.

This grant is made pursuant to the application of Scott Mulvey, on behalf of City Church, on file in the Community Development Department and is subject to compliance with the following conditions:

1. Operation of the 'Office, Medical and Dental' shall be substantially in accordance with the petition for Use Permit and plans dated "Received, February 7, 2024", and the supplemental land use description responses dated "Received, April 5, 2024" except as modified by conditions stated herein;

2. All illegal structures, building improvements on the subject property, and uses of the building shall be brought up to code through proper permitting procedures, as required per the Building Safety Division and Fire Department;
Packet Page 232 of 401Attachment 5 Page 16 of 161

E X H IB IT B
U P2024-006

3. A ll ille g al la n d use acti v iti e s o n th e su b je ct pro p erty m u st cease im m e d iate ly. Kn o w n acti viti e s in cl u d e m e d ical o ffi ce s, re sid e n ti a l lo d g in g , an d ov e rn ig ht safe parkin g . Acti viti e s m ay be pe rm itt ed if prop e r ap p licati o n s an d pro ced u re s are fo llow ed w ith th e Plan n in g D ivision an d Ho m e less Se rvices D ivision ; 4 . A ll are as of th e bu ild in g (s) w h e re th e m e d ical offi ces w ill tak e place m u st be le g ally im p ro ved to m e et G ro u p B O ccu p a n cy pe r th e C alifo rn ia B u ild in g C o d e ;

5. Lan d use acti v iti e s ti e d to th e m e d ical offi ce s sh all take place betw ee n the fo llow in g hou rs:
a. M o n d ay 10:00 a.m . -1:00 p.m .
b . T u e sd a y 10:00 a.m . -4:00 p.m .
c. W e d n e sd ay 10:00 a.m . -1:00 p.m .
d. T h u rsd ay 10:00 a.m . -1:00 p.m . an d 5:30 p.m . - 8:30 p.m . e. Frid ay 10:00 a.m . -1:00 p.m .;

6. La n d use acti v iti e s sh all be lim ite d to th e pe rm itt e d acti viti e s de fi n e d in th e Fairfie ld Zo n ing O rd in a n ce , in cl u d in g pro vid in g o u tp a ti e n t m e d ical, m e ntal he alth, su rgical, an d oth e r pe rso n al he alth se rv ice s;

7. O p e rati o n of th e use sh a ll be in com plia n ce w ith all State an d o r C ou n ty He alth, safety o r lice n sin g re g u la ti o n s. O b tain pro p e r lice n se s an d /o r ce rti ficates fr om th e C alifo rn ia De p artm e nt of H e alth C are Se rv ice s (D H S C). C o n tact N ico le N ich o lso n -San ds, Lice n sin g an d C e rtificati o n D ivisio n, at (916) 345- 7584 o r N ico le .N ich o lso n -S a n d s@ dh cs.ca.g o v to obtain a D H C S LO C (leve l of care ) De sig n ati o n an d /o r a re sid e n ti a l A m e rican So cie ty of A d dicti o n M e dicin e (A SA M ) LO C C e rti ficati o n ; 8 . T h e o p e rato r o ft h e m e d ical o ffi ce sh a ll be re sp on sible fo r o b tain in g an d m aintain in g th e pro p e r State lic e n sin g an d ce rti fi cati o n s, as re q u ire d ; 9 . A n n u a l in sp e cti o n s fr o m th e C o m m u n ity De v e lopm e nt an d Fire D e p artm e nts are req u ired ;

10. C o m p lia n ce w ith th e R H zo n in g pro v isio n s th at are app licable to th is site;

11. O p e rati o n o f th e use sh a ll be in co m plia n ce w ith all State an d C ity C o d e s; 12 . T h e U se pe rm it sh a ll be o b tain e d an d sh a ll be conti n ua lly exe rcised in su ch a m a n n er th at th e fo llo w in g co n d iti o n s are fu lly co m plie d w ith:
a. T h e U se Pe rm it w as o b taine d w ith o ut fr au d o r m isre p rese ntati o n; an d b. T h e U se Pe rm it ha s be e n exe rcised by th e pe rson (s) granted th e U se Pe rm it o r his re p re se n tati v e , su ccessors, o r assig n e e s, in com plian ce w ith th e con d iti o ns of app ro val, an d in acco rd a n ce w ith an y statute, o rd in a n ce, law , o r reg ulati o n no t excused by the Pe rm it; an d
c. T h e U se Pe rm it is be in g o r ha s be e n exerci se d in a m an ne r w h ich is no t to be de trim e ntal to th e pu b lic he a lth , safety, an d gen eral w e lfa re o r so as no t to con sti tute a nu isan ce; Packet Page 233 of 401Attachment 5 Page 17 of 161

E X H IB IT B
U P 2024-006

13. The Scott Mulvey/City Church, property owner(s), and their successors in interest, shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officials, officers, agents and employees (collectively "lndemnitees") from and against any and all claims, actions, lawsuits, damages, losses and liabilities arising or resulting from the granting of this permit by the City, the performance of the use authorized by this permit or the exercise of the rights granted by this permit. This indemnification obligation shall include, but not be limited to, paying all fees and costs incurred by legal counsel of the City's choice in representing the lndemnitees in connection with any such claims, actions or lawsuits, any expert fees, and any award of damages, judgments, verdicts, court costs or attorneys' fees in any such claim, action or lawsuit. The City shall promptly notify Scott Mulvey/City Church and property owner(s) of any claim, action, or proceeding and the City shall reasonably cooperate in the defense. In the event such a legal action is filed, the City shall estimate its expenses for litigation.

Scott Mulvey/City Church or property owners shall deposit such amount with the City or enter into an agreement with the City to pay such expenses as they become due.

Scott Mulvey/City Church and property owners shall reimburse the City, and each of the lndemnitees for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by it in enforcing the indemnity herein provided.

Approved by action of the City of Fairfield on the 9th day of October 2024 (effective date of permit).

The Use Permit is automatically revoked and terminated unless it is used within twenty-four (24) months from the date of approval.
/2 {L=---· ----
--'GEORGEKENNEDY
Planning Commission Chair

DAVE FEINSTEIN
Secretary
c: David Gassaway, City Manager
David Lim, City Attorney
Dave Zellers, Community Development Department Director Dave Feinstein, Planning Division Manager
Jeff Thomas, Chief Building Official
Jeremey Profitt, Police Support Manager
Steven Conti, Fire Marshall
Samatha Burrows, Homeless Services Manager
Packet Page 234 of 401Attachment 5 Page 18 of 161

To speak on an agenda item, please complete this card and give itm tnb staff persorisitting next to the podium before the meeting or,at the latesi, prior to the-public input time for the meeting.Gity of Fairfield Planning GommissionSPEAKER CARDPLPRIGLAGENDA ITEM:DATE:8/z,z /ztt7L/NAMEADDRESS:67-17 E),r e-t k A*Gity of Fairfield Planning GommissionSPR GARDTo speak on an agenda item, please complete this card and give itto the staff person sitting next to the podium before the meeting or,at the latest, prior to the public input time for the meeting.PLPRINT CLEARLAGENDA ITEM(L6Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes. Thank you.8-er'zDATE:NAME:LETALCATADDRESS:/Il oPtf=Drt -ktaliileCNaPlease limit your comments to three (3) minutes. Thank you.ATTACHMENT 200019Packet Page 235 of 401Attachment 5 Page 19 of 161

Gity of Fairfield planning GommissionSPEAKER GARDTo.speak-on an agenda item, prease comprete this card and give itt9 1!''" staff person sitting next io the podium before itre meetiig or,at the latest, prior to the public input time for the me"ting.PRIGLEAAGENDA ITEM:ClurcDATE:L1---2 +NAME(ADDRESS:4trrtsPlease limit your comments to three (3) minutes. Thank you.Gity of Fairfield Planning GommissionSPEAKER CARDTo.speak-on an agenda item, please complete this card and give ittg !!," staff person sitting next to the podium before the meetiig or,at the latest, prior to the public input iime for the meeting.EASE PNTGAGENDA ITEM'lDATE:k- t.t - 'L'\NAME:(iADDRESSPlease limit your comments to three (3) minutes. Thank you.ATTACHMENT 200020Packet Page 236 of 401Attachment 5 Page 20 of 161

nF'lwill.lrFAIRFIELDmffiCITY OF FAIRFIELDAPPEAL FORMCommunity Development DepartmentRECEIVEDSEp g 2t;tr+fffi,l^fffit#fi6ffi!fl,EPROJ ECT LOCATION (ADDRESS)APPEEMAIL ADDRESSHTYPoPROJCELLPHAny party aggrieved or affected by a decision or determination in the administration of the Zoning or Subdivision Ordinancer.yfil"anappealwithinfourteen(i+)businessdaysofthedecisionusingthisform. Appeals,addressedinSection25.34oftheFairfield City Code, are subject to the following:1. Appeals of actions by City Staff or the Zoning Administration are heard by the Planning Commission.2. Appeals of the Planning commission actions are heard by the city council.3' Rn ,pp"rl should be based on either an alleged error by staff, or the Planning Commission in interpreting or applying theZoning or Subdivision Ordinance, or an adverse impact or effect caused wholly or in part by the decision or determination'4. All proceedings on the action being appealed shall be stayed during the appeal process'5. Upon hearing the appeal, the Planning Commission or the City Council may either wholly or partially affirm, change ormodify, or reverse the appealed decision or determination upon making findings justifying and supporting the action'To file an appeal, complete this form and file it with the applicable fee to the Community Development Department, l'000 Websterstreet, Room 200, Fairfield, cA 94533, no later than fourteen (14) business days after the decision (postmarks are acceptable.)You will be notified in writing of the hearing dates for your appeal.finrfth,htJPu;rt,fl,?nA,Ll,na0LNTEfllI6L.t^VLn0AlVN(LtthI.0!ADoLbNctA'lafurLl_-6n70PPNafrWT,JO4The decision or determination requested for appeal was made by (check one):d citv st^t tr Planning commissionon the date of,2ovil.Describe the decision or determination being appealed. lf applicable, be sure to include the type of application, and the name andaddress of the project in General lnformation aboveList the specific element{s) of the above decision or determination which are subject to this appeal. Attach additional sheets ifIt/a-Wo4Noz fu Rcnoveo nslL.M4.0ILtpflwALnecessary.JUNE 2014APPEAL FORMFORM CD.FM-08ATTACHMENT 300021Packet Page 237 of 401Attachment 5 Page 21 of 161

nwaFAIRFIELDEffiCITY OF FAIRFIELDAPPEAL FORMCommunity Development DepartmentRECEIVEDsE? s 2024,irffiil'';ilffo!5^!R'Explain how you are aggrieved or adversely affected by the decision or determination for eachof the elements described on Page 1and specifically state the reason(s) why it should be changed, modified, or reversed. Describe any error(s) you believe staff or theplanning Commission made in making the decision or determination, citing the applicable City Code section(s) if appropriate' Be asconcise and thorough as possible. The information contained herein shall be the basis for making a decision on the appeal. Attachadditional sheets asfrt, t*u,N ITEtv) No L /rw'roLLw| tflttur,rruo /3 \c2,0Dt.cD W L'uc-1^ t *, tl,or,.^,Attrr*,,v{ p)t.,f od- +h'Lsir,rwLWas the information contained in your argument made known to CityDATEXion at thebwNotrXpublic hearing or instaff or the Planning Commissrior to, or at, the public hearing? (check one)written correspondence p|,nlpne DunW l. fr,\krtl[ ,"r.lf yes, please exPlain.vla(V TolD 1oWhat is your relationship to the item being appealed? (check one)v{E/ig \^}f\,!FProject proponenttr ConcernedANENLcitizenf ' EOtherNeighborAPPELLANTSIGNATUREluNE 2014APPEAL FORMFORM CD-FM-0800022Packet Page 238 of 401Attachment 5 Page 22 of 161

________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 太平洋法律協會 chinese.pji.org | Español spanish.pji.org | 태평양 법률협회 korean.pji.org | Тихоокеанский Институт Правосудия russian.pji.org
ALBANY

NEW YORK

ATLANTIC CITY

NEW JERSEY

BALTIMORE

MARYLAND
BILOXI

MISSISSIPPI
BOSTON

MASSACHUSETTS

CHICAGO

ILLINOIS

CINCINNATI
OHIO
COEUR D’ALENE
IDAHO

COLUMBUS
OHIO
DENVER

COLORADO

DETROIT

MICHIGAN

GALVESTON
TEXAS

HONOLULU
HAWAII

HOUSTON
TEXAS

IOWA CITY
IOWA

LAKE CHARLES

LOUISIANA
MIAMI

FLORIDA

MILWAUKEE

WISCONSIN

NASHVILLE

TENNESSEE

NEW YORK

PHILADELPHIA

PENNSYLVANIA
RENO
NEVADA

SACRAMENTO

CALIFORNIA
SALEM
OREGON

SAN FRANCISCO

CALIFORNIA

SANTA ANA

CALIFORNIA

SEATTLE

WASHINGTON

SPOKANE

WASHINGTON

TRI CITIES

WASHINGTON
TUCSON

ARIZONA

WINSTON-SALEM

NORTH CAROLINA

PJI VIA EMAIL ONLY TO AVOID DELAY
August 21, 2024
Cathryn Moy, Mayor
Pam Bertani, Vice Mayor
David Gassaway, City Manager
City of Fairfield
Planning Department
Re: City Church Fairfield – legal concerns with proposed conditions of approval
Dear Fairfield Planning Department,
This office represents and is writing to you on behalf of City Church Fairfield, in its ongoing efforts to minister to the needy and homeless as it has been doing for much of the last 20 years at its present location on East Tabor Avenue. We have reviewed proposed conditions of approval for the church to resume its ministries, and we believe some of them to be onerous and legally unjustified.

City Church does not desire to be needlessly contentious; it seeks to fulfill its biblical mandate to serve the marginalized. Nevertheless, we must caution that the City’s hostile and onerous actions toward the church and the vulnerable population it serve s are placing the City in peril of significant legal liability. We have been representing churches and ministries in similar circumstances for more than 25 years. Our office has secured some of the leading precedents on the West Coast favoring churches in land-use disputes with cities. See, e.g., International Church of the Foursquare Gospel v. City of San Leandro, 673 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2011), cert. denied, 132 S. Ct. 251; New Harvest Christian Fellowship v. City of Salinas, 29 F.4th 596 (9th Cir. 2022), cert. denied, 2023 U.S. Lexis 202 (Jan. 9, 2023). We have also participated as amicus in decisions such as Harbor Missionary Church Corp. v. City of San Buenaventura, 642 Fed. Appx. 726 (9th Cir. 2016) (reversing denial of preliminary injunction to church, since restriction of its homeless ministry was substantial burden). Given City Church’s long track record in the community of offering one of the few places where the unhoused and disadvantaged have been welcomed, and given Fairfield’s critical need for s uch services, extended adversarial proceedings will not benefit anyone. As more fully explained below, we urge you to negotiate in good faith so the church can get back to doing what it does best—embrace the least, the lonely, and the lost who have been left behind by society.

Summary of Relevant Facts
A thorough exposition of the church’s many years of serving the socioeconomically disadvantaged in Fairfield, and its more recent series of interactions with the City, is beyond the scope of this letter. Suffice it to note for present purposes the following. For most of the past 20 years, before the City ordered the discontinuation of its safe parking, medical clinic, and residential recovery outreaches, City Church was one of very few providing any such opportunities to the community. The City even worked with City Church at one time. The shutdown of City Church’s programs followed closely on ATTACHMENT 4
00023
Packet Page 239 of 401Attachment 5 Page 23 of 161

NEW YORK

ATLANTIC CITY

NEW JERSEY

BALTIMORE

MARYLAND
BILOXI

MISSISSIPPI
BOSTON

MASSACHUSETTS

CHICAGO

ILLINOIS

CINCINNATI
OHIO
COEUR D’ALENE
IDAHO

COLUMBUS
OHIO
DENVER

COLORADO

DETROIT

MICHIGAN

GALVESTON
TEXAS

HONOLULU
HAWAII

HOUSTON
TEXAS

IOWA CITY
IOWA

LAKE CHARLES

LOUISIANA
MIAMI

FLORIDA

MILWAUKEE

WISCONSIN

NASHVILLE

TENNESSEE

NEW YORK

PHILADELPHIA

PENNSYLVANIA
RENO
NEVADA

SACRAMENTO

CALIFORNIA
SALEM
OREGON

SAN FRANCISCO

CALIFORNIA

SANTA ANA

CALIFORNIA

SEATTLE

WASHINGTON

SPOKANE

WASHINGTON

TRI CITIES

WASHINGTON
TUCSON

ARIZONA

WINSTON-SALEM

NORTH CAROLINA
PJI the heels of the church pastor’s decision to become more engaged with civic involvement. Although the amounts claimed to be due have fluctuated significantly over time, we have reviewed proposed conditions of approval which demand that the church pay more than $310,000 in fines and penalties in order to resume its ministries to the homeless. As of earlier this month, the City’s attempt to explain the fines and penalties lacks credence. The City claims $550/day for 188 days of violations, which comes to just over $103,000. It then doubles the amount for two supposed violations during the same time period, and for good measure adds a 50 percent penalty as a late fee. During the more than six months when these massive fines were accruing, church leaders were led to believe that the City was working with them in good faith as they took action to correct perceived violations. City personnel further assured the church that any fines so levied would not be collected. Meanwhile, the church voluntarily discontinued many of the services it had been providing to the community for years previously. Nor did the City create comparable new shelter space, safe overnight parking options, or a volunteer medical clinic to replace what it shut down at City Church. Now, the City further demands, as a condition of approval, that the church indemnify it against any potential legal action, however baseless or unjustified, that might be brought by antagonists opposing lawful approval of the church’s application.

Summary of Legal Concerns
The current restriction of the church’s ability to minister effectively to the homeless, with onerous and arbitrary fines as a condition for re-starting, raises a number of statutory and constitutional concerns. As will be detailed below, some of the background facts in Fairfield are remarkably similar to those in a federal case in Oregon where, earlier this year, a federal judge rebuked and issued harsh consequences to a city engaged in similar behavior. Fairfield’s approach is also reminiscent of delay tactics and attempts to impose costs on a church by a town in New York that, after protracted litigation, earned a scathing rebuke from the federal trial court and then the appellate court. There, the town wielded its environmental review process (known as SEQRA, not unlike our CEQA) to unlawfully forestall the church’s approval. The court held (among many other favorable findings in a lengthy opinion):

The court finds that the town used the SEQRA process in the issuance of a positive declaration punitively because of the church’s refusal to make a significant donation of value or monetary payment to the town and because of certain town board members’ desire to delay the project and increase the expense of the SEQRA process to the church.

Fortress Bible Church v. Feiner, 734 F. Supp. 2d 409, 434 (S.D.N.Y. 2010), affirmed 694 F.3d 208 (2d Cir. 2012).

As more fully explained below, the conditions of approval as presently constituted are in tension with 42 U.S.C. Section 2000cc et seq., the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA). Additionally, free exercise of relig ion and equal protection under both federal and state constitutions are at stake. Moreover, in that City Church is seeking to serve a population that tends to be disproportionately disabled, federal and state fair housing and disability laws may also be implicated. 00024
Packet Page 240 of 401Attachment 5 Page 24 of 161

NEW YORK

ATLANTIC CITY

NEW JERSEY

BALTIMORE

MARYLAND
BILOXI

MISSISSIPPI
BOSTON

MASSACHUSETTS

CHICAGO

ILLINOIS

CINCINNATI
OHIO
COEUR D’ALENE
IDAHO

COLUMBUS
OHIO
DENVER

COLORADO

DETROIT

MICHIGAN

GALVESTON
TEXAS

HONOLULU
HAWAII

HOUSTON
TEXAS

IOWA CITY
IOWA

LAKE CHARLES

LOUISIANA
MIAMI

FLORIDA

MILWAUKEE

WISCONSIN

NASHVILLE

TENNESSEE

NEW YORK

PHILADELPHIA

PENNSYLVANIA
RENO
NEVADA

SACRAMENTO

CALIFORNIA
SALEM
OREGON

SAN FRANCISCO

CALIFORNIA

SANTA ANA

CALIFORNIA

SEATTLE

WASHINGTON

SPOKANE

WASHINGTON

TRI CITIES

WASHINGTON
TUCSON

ARIZONA

WINSTON-SALEM

NORTH CAROLINA
PJI

Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act
RLUIPA, adopted unanimously by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton in 2000, is best known for its protections of churches and houses of worship, see, e.g., Int’l Church of the Foursquare Gospel, supra; Guru Nanak Sikh Soc’y v. County of Sutter, 456 F.3d 978 (9th Cir. 2005). It encompasses, though, a wide array of religious ministry and outreach. See, e.g., Harbor Missionary Church Corp., supra (homeless outreach); Westchester Day School v. Vill. of Mamaroneck, 504 F.3d 338 (2d Cir. 2007) (religious school); Sisters of St. Francis Health Services, Inc. v. Morgan County, Ind., 397 F. Supp. 2d 1032 (S.D. Ind. 2005) (religious hospital).

Should the City continue to maintain unjustifiable barriers to approval of City Church’s ministries, we believe the text of RLUIPA would support a substantial burden claim, and possibly equal terms and non-discrimination RLUIPA claims as well.

As to substantial burden, RLUIPA mandates:

No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person, including a religious assembly or institution, unless the government demonstrates that imposition of the burd en on that person, assembly, or institution--
(A) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (B)is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.
42 U.S.C. § 2000cc(a)(1). Denial of a permit to a religious institution is one of the primary ways in which local governments impose the substantial burden contemplated by the statute. See, e.g., Guru Nanak Sikh Soc’y of Yuba City v. County of Sutter, 456 F.3d 978 (9th Cir. 2006); Sts. Constantine and Helen Greek Orthodox Church, Inc. v. City of New Berlin, 396 F.3d 895 (7th Cir. 2005). The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Harbor Missionary Church Corp. is illuminating as to the courts’ willingness to grant relief to churches seeking to serve the homeless and disadvantaged. Courts have also been amenable to finding a substantial burden where, as here, the Church has expressed willingness to work with the City to find common ground and mutually acceptable conditions. Guru Nanak, 456 F.3d at 989.

Even more recently, the U.S. District Court in Oregon issued summary judgment for a church whose homeless outreach had been subjected to restriction by a city. St.

Timothy’s Episcopal Church v. City of Brookings, 2024 U.S. Dist. Lexis 54893 (D. Or.

March 27, 2024). Relying on our firm’s win in Int’l Church of the Foursquare Gospel, as well as Harbor Missionary Church and similar decisions, the Oregon court had no difficulty finding that the city’s restrictions on a church’s homeless ministry constituted a substantial burden under RLUIPA. Id. at *22-23. See also, Micah’s Way v. City of Santa Ana, 2023 U.S. Dist. Lexis 100988, at *16 (C.D. Cal. June 8, 2023) (finding that city’s threats of fines, denial of occupancy permit, and inaction for previous 5 years constituted substantial burden on homeless ministry under RLUIPA).

Indeed, in keeping with unbroken, millennia-old religious traditions of offering hospitality to strangers, feeding the hungry, caring for the sick and disabled, and ministering to the physical and spiritual needs of the poor, City Church seeks to welcome 00025
Packet Page 241 of 401Attachment 5 Page 25 of 161

NEW YORK

ATLANTIC CITY

NEW JERSEY

BALTIMORE

MARYLAND
BILOXI

MISSISSIPPI
BOSTON

MASSACHUSETTS

CHICAGO

ILLINOIS

CINCINNATI
OHIO
COEUR D’ALENE
IDAHO

COLUMBUS
OHIO
DENVER

COLORADO

DETROIT

MICHIGAN

GALVESTON
TEXAS

HONOLULU
HAWAII

HOUSTON
TEXAS

IOWA CITY
IOWA

LAKE CHARLES

LOUISIANA
MIAMI

FLORIDA

MILWAUKEE

WISCONSIN

NASHVILLE

TENNESSEE

NEW YORK

PHILADELPHIA

PENNSYLVANIA
RENO
NEVADA

SACRAMENTO

CALIFORNIA
SALEM
OREGON

SAN FRANCISCO

CALIFORNIA

SANTA ANA

CALIFORNIA

SEATTLE

WASHINGTON

SPOKANE

WASHINGTON

TRI CITIES

WASHINGTON
TUCSON

ARIZONA

WINSTON-SALEM

NORTH CAROLINA
PJI

and share its resources with those who are transitioning out of homelessness. The church recognizes that the City has a role in maintaining health and other ordinances. The church does not believe, however, that the City may legally bar it from offering any shelter to the needy. Thus, denial of permits to practice such core religious tenets is unacceptable and unlawful.

As decades of both RLUIPA and Free Exercise jurisprudence preceding it attest, the strict scrutiny triggered by a showing of substantial burden or treatment on less than equal terms is nearly impossible for local governments to overcome—to the extent that several local governments acting as RLUIPA defendants have not even attempted to identify one. Guru Nanak, 456 F.3d at 992; Konikov v. Orange County, Fla., 410 F.3d 1317, 1329 (11th Cir. 2006).

The recent decision in St. Timothy’s Episcopal Church is again highly instructive.

There, as here, the church had been conducting its ministry for many years, at times even with governmental support and partnerships, before the city decided to impose fines, permit requirements, and restrictions. This prompted the court to chide the city for its inconsistency and complacency for years before it suddenly burst into action and began fining the church. Id. at *26-28. There, as is likely to be the case here, the court rejected the city’s belated, post hoc rationalizations. Id. at *28-29.

Free Exercise of Religion
In comparable situations, some courts have seen enough and, finding a city in violation of RLUIPA, do not even reach the other strong constitutional and statutory claims available to a church. See, e.g., St. Timothy’s Episcopal Church, supra. Some discussion of those potential claims is necessary here to provide a more complete picture of the City’s legal exposure.

Even prior to the enactment of RLUIPA, or in conjunction with it, several courts have held that governmental attempts to restrict the free exercise rights of religious institutions in land use contexts violate the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

See, e.g., Cottonwood Christian Ctr. v. Cypress Redvlpmt. Agency, 218 F. Supp. 2d 1203 (C.D. Cal. 2003) (applying strict scrutiny under the Free Exercise Clause in addition to RLUIPA).

In St. John’s Evangelical Lutheran Church v. City of Hoboken, 195 N.J. Super. 414 (1983), the court held that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment protected the right of St. John’s to operate a homeless shelter. The court noted that “sheltering the homeless and caring for the poor has consistently been a church function, carried out for centuries by religious persons. It is among one of the basic mandates of the Judeo-Christian heritage.” Id. at 418. On this basis, the court granted injunctive relief, prohibiting the city from closing down the shelter.

Post-RLUIPA, in Fifth Avenue Presbyterian Church v. City of New York, 293 F.3d 570 (2d Cir. 2002), a federal appellate court held that where a church, pursuant to its religious beliefs, invited homeless to sleep on its property, the city could not demonstrate a compelling, narrowly-tailored interest which would justify its dispersal of persons who accepted the church’s hospitality. A preliminary injunction was therefore issued in favor of the church. The Second Circuit’s observations are instructive:
00026
Packet Page 242 of 401Attachment 5 Page 26 of 161

NEW YORK

ATLANTIC CITY

NEW JERSEY

BALTIMORE

MARYLAND
BILOXI

MISSISSIPPI
BOSTON

MASSACHUSETTS

CHICAGO

ILLINOIS

CINCINNATI
OHIO
COEUR D’ALENE
IDAHO

COLUMBUS
OHIO
DENVER

COLORADO

DETROIT

MICHIGAN

GALVESTON
TEXAS

HONOLULU
HAWAII

HOUSTON
TEXAS

IOWA CITY
IOWA

LAKE CHARLES

LOUISIANA
MIAMI

FLORIDA

MILWAUKEE

WISCONSIN

NASHVILLE

TENNESSEE

NEW YORK

PHILADELPHIA

PENNSYLVANIA
RENO
NEVADA

SACRAMENTO

CALIFORNIA
SALEM
OREGON

SAN FRANCISCO

CALIFORNIA

SANTA ANA

CALIFORNIA

SEATTLE

WASHINGTON

SPOKANE

WASHINGTON

TRI CITIES

WASHINGTON
TUCSON

ARIZONA

WINSTON-SALEM

NORTH CAROLINA
PJI

[T]he City argues that allowing homeless persons to sleep outside is not a meaningful provision of "services" and does not constitute legitimate religious conduct. Presbyterian responds that its outdoor sanctuary forms an integral part of its religious mission and that the police's removal of the homeless interferes with the Church's ministry and homeless outreach program. In an affidavit submitted in support of the application for injunctive relief, the Church's homeless liaison states that the Church is “commanded by scripture to care for the least, the lost, and the lonely of this world” and in ministering to the homeless, the Church is "giving the love of God . . . . There is perhaps no higher act of worship for a Christian." We agree with the District Court that on the present record, the Church has demonstrated a likelihood of success in establishing that its provision of outdoor sleeping space for the homeless effectuates a sincerely held religious belief and therefore is protected under the Free Exercise Clause.

Id. at 574-75. See also, Bikur Cholim, Inc. v. Vill. Of Suffern, 664 F. Supp. 2d 267 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) (holding that offering lodging to observant Jews visiting a nearby hospital was religious exercise under RLUIPA).

On a state level, in City of Woodinville v. Northshore United Church of Christ, 211 P.3d 406 (Wash. 2009), the Washington Supreme Court interpreted its own constitution to protect the religious exercise of a church that hosted a homeless encampment, even beyond RLUIPA and the First Amendment. In a concurrence, Justices Sanders and Chambers noted that the city’s refusal to process a use permit for the homeless encampment would also likely violate RLUIPA and the federal Free Exercise Clause, and the city could expect to pay damages and attorney’s fees on remand.

City Church, pursuant to its sincerely held religious beliefs, seeks to open its property to the needy and unhoused; this effort is fully protected under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment as an extension of the Church’s religious ministries.

Micah’s Way, 2023 U.S. Dist. Lexis at *17 (holding that, in addition to RLUIPA, homeless ministry stated a valid free exercise claim based in part on city’s selective enforcement against it). Because of the individualized assessments which inhere in the CUP process, the City must demonstrate a compelling interest in order to prevent City Church from fulfilling its mission to the disadvantaged and downtrodden. Id.

Furthermore, the City must show that its means of fulfilling that interest are narrowly tailored (or “least restrictive”). Id. As stated above, we are aware of no compelling, narrowly tailored justifications on the City’s part which support continued delay or undue restriction of these religious ministries. “Indeed, the Supreme Court has identified only a few circumstances manifesting interests that satisfy the compelling interest test when applied in the free exercise context.” Elsinore Christian Ctr. v. City of Lake Elsinore, 291 F. Supp. 2d 1083, 1092 (C.D. Cal. 2003), rev’d on other grounds, 197 Fed. Appx. 718 (9th Cir. 2006) (reversing holding that RLUIPA was unconstitutional and ruling in church’s favor).

Equal Protection
00027
Packet Page 243 of 401Attachment 5 Page 27 of 161

NEW YORK

ATLANTIC CITY

NEW JERSEY

BALTIMORE

MARYLAND
BILOXI

MISSISSIPPI
BOSTON

MASSACHUSETTS

CHICAGO

ILLINOIS

CINCINNATI
OHIO
COEUR D’ALENE
IDAHO

COLUMBUS
OHIO
DENVER

COLORADO

DETROIT

MICHIGAN

GALVESTON
TEXAS

HONOLULU
HAWAII

HOUSTON
TEXAS

IOWA CITY
IOWA

LAKE CHARLES

LOUISIANA
MIAMI

FLORIDA

MILWAUKEE

WISCONSIN

NASHVILLE

TENNESSEE

NEW YORK

PHILADELPHIA

PENNSYLVANIA
RENO
NEVADA

SACRAMENTO

CALIFORNIA
SALEM
OREGON

SAN FRANCISCO

CALIFORNIA

SANTA ANA

CALIFORNIA

SEATTLE

WASHINGTON

SPOKANE

WASHINGTON

TRI CITIES

WASHINGTON
TUCSON

ARIZONA

WINSTON-SALEM

NORTH CAROLINA
PJI

In City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, 473 U.S. 432 (1985), the Supreme Court chastised a city which had attempted to use its zoning ordinances to prevent a group home for the mentally handicapped from operating. The Court opined that:
[M]ere negative attitudes, or fear, unsubstantiated by factors which are properly cognizable in a zoning proceeding, are not permissible bases for treating a home for the mentally retarded differently from apartment houses, multiple dwellings, and the like . . . . The City may not avoid the strictures of [the Equal Protection] Clause by deferring to the wishes or objections of some fraction of the body politic.

Id. at 448.

A federal court in Florida held similarly in Open Homes Fellowship v. Orange County, Fla., 325 F. Supp. 2d 1349 (M.D. Fla. 2004). There, the County required Open Homes, a religious institution ministering to substance-addicted persons, to apply for a special exception for non-conforming use. Subsequently, the County denied Open Homes’ application. The court held that by requiring and denying special exception, the County violated Open Homes’ equal protection rights, not only on as-applied basis, but also on the basis of Open Homes’ status as a religious institution. Like Open Homes, City Church is a religious institution, seeking to serve the addicted, the disabled, and the disadvantaged. Denying or unreasonably conditioning the church’s CUP application would appear to be a likely violation of the Equal Protection Clause.

The City has a duty to exclude irrational fears and prejudices from its decision- making process. In Ass’n of Relatives and Friends of AIDS Patients v. Regulations and Permits Admin., 740 F. Supp. 95, 107 (D.P.R. 1990), the court noted that “a decisionmaker has a duty not to allow illegal prejudices of the majority to influence the decisionmaking process.” The court further found that “direct statements by public officials at a public hearing were not the sole means to prove discriminatory intent; circumstantial evidence, such as citizen’s statements, also could prove discriminatory intent.” Id. See also, Seattle Title Trust Co. v. Roberge, 278 U.S. 116 (1928) (striking down as arbitrary and violative of due process an ordinance which required consent from 2/3 of neighbors prior to establishment of group homes for children and the elderly).

Ironically, the church has maintained good relationships with its neighbors over the course of many years; most of them would rather see the homeless receiving concentrated services from the church in a safe atmosphere than wandering the area with fewer opportunities to break the cycles of addiction and poverty. The hostility to City Church appears to emanate primarily from outside the neighborhood.

Fair Housing
The federal Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq., bars local governments from limiting the housing options of disabled, marginalized, or undesirable segments of the population. Thus, in Children’s Alliance v. City of Bellevue, Wash., 950 F. Supp. 1491 (W.D. Wash. 1997), the federal court struck down ordinances enacted by Bellevue, Washington, which attempted to restrict the locations of housing for at-risk youth.

As with the preceding Equal Protection analysis, the courts have been vigilant to utilize the FHA to protect housing from government restrictions motivated by 00028
Packet Page 244 of 401Attachment 5 Page 28 of 161

NEW YORK

ATLANTIC CITY

NEW JERSEY

BALTIMORE

MARYLAND
BILOXI

MISSISSIPPI
BOSTON

MASSACHUSETTS

CHICAGO

ILLINOIS

CINCINNATI
OHIO
COEUR D’ALENE
IDAHO

COLUMBUS
OHIO
DENVER

COLORADO

DETROIT

MICHIGAN

GALVESTON
TEXAS

HONOLULU
HAWAII

HOUSTON
TEXAS

IOWA CITY
IOWA

LAKE CHARLES

LOUISIANA
MIAMI

FLORIDA

MILWAUKEE

WISCONSIN

NASHVILLE

TENNESSEE

NEW YORK

PHILADELPHIA

PENNSYLVANIA
RENO
NEVADA

SACRAMENTO

CALIFORNIA
SALEM
OREGON

SAN FRANCISCO

CALIFORNIA

SANTA ANA

CALIFORNIA

SEATTLE

WASHINGTON

SPOKANE

WASHINGTON

TRI CITIES

WASHINGTON
TUCSON

ARIZONA

WINSTON-SALEM

NORTH CAROLINA
PJI

stereotypical fears or prejudices. In Potomac Group Home Corp. v. Montgomery County, Md., 823 F. Supp. 1285 (D. Md. 1993), the court faulted the county for requiring group homes for the elderly to contact neighbors and invite the neighbors’ comments to county authorities about the homes. Perhaps not surprisingly, these comments were overwhelmingly negative, with neighbors expressing concerns ranging from loss of property values to Alzheimers patients wandering about the neighborhood. The court found the regulation discriminatory on several levels, stating:

The neighbor notification rule, and defendants’ proffered justifications for it, necessarily assume that [group home members] are different . . . and must take special steps to “become a part of the community.” This requirement is equally as offensive as would be a rule that a minority family must give notification and invite comment before moving into a predominantly white neighborhood.

Id. at 1296-97. Again, in its many years of ministry, City Church has encountered remarkably little opposition from its neighbors. It may be that neighbors recognize the value of having the unhoused in a safe, sheltered, supervised location. There is even les s of a basis for the City to oppose City Church’s outreaches, which were in harmony with its surroundings for years.

City Church is answering the call to care for the “least of these.” (Matthew 25:40, The Holy Bible.) In light of the critical shortage of shelter which exists for this disadvantaged segment of society, we are of the opinion that adverse actions by the City of Fairfield against the Church could implicate and violate the Fair Housing Act, and likely California’s counterpart, the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Cal.

Govt. Code § 12940 et seq.

Indemnification
One further objection must be raised to the City’s inclusion of a sweeping indemnification clause among its conditions of approval. In light of the foregoing discussion that discriminatory stereotypes cannot be a legitimate basis for denying the church’s application, neither can they serve as a deterrent by forcing the church to pay for frivolous legal actions. Perhaps the City has become accustomed to such cost-shifting in other contexts, but the First Amendment commands to the contrary here. Where, for instance, cities have demanded indemnification as conditions for permits of core free speech activities, the federal courts in this state have remonstrated. See, e.g., Santa Monica Food Not Bombs v. City of Santa Monica, 450 F.3d 1022 (9th Cir. 2006).

Indemnification against discriminatory legal actions is not a legitimate condition for approval.

Conclusion
City Church can hardly improve on the assessment of Judge Clark, when he concluded his summary judgment ruling for the church and against the city as follows:

The City . . . is very fortunate to have [the pastor and church congregation] as compassionate, caring, and committed members of the community. 00029
Packet Page 245 of 401Attachment 5 Page 29 of 161

NEW YORK

ATLANTIC CITY

NEW JERSEY

BALTIMORE

MARYLAND
BILOXI

MISSISSIPPI
BOSTON

MASSACHUSETTS

CHICAGO

ILLINOIS

CINCINNATI
OHIO
COEUR D’ALENE
IDAHO

COLUMBUS
OHIO
DENVER

COLORADO

DETROIT

MICHIGAN

GALVESTON
TEXAS

HONOLULU
HAWAII

HOUSTON
TEXAS

IOWA CITY
IOWA

LAKE CHARLES

LOUISIANA
MIAMI

FLORIDA

MILWAUKEE

WISCONSIN

NASHVILLE

TENNESSEE

NEW YORK

PHILADELPHIA

PENNSYLVANIA
RENO
NEVADA

SACRAMENTO

CALIFORNIA
SALEM
OREGON

SAN FRANCISCO

CALIFORNIA

SANTA ANA

CALIFORNIA

SEATTLE

WASHINGTON

SPOKANE

WASHINGTON

TRI CITIES

WASHINGTON
TUCSON

ARIZONA

WINSTON-SALEM

NORTH CAROLINA
PJI

Consistent with their faith, and with the City’s full awareness, [the church] has cared for vulnerable people in the community for decades, including during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic when there were few, if any, other accessible resources in the area. The clergy and congregation at [the church] have shown that they have been prepared to work with the city to care for those in need, and at the same time preserve the livability of the area for their neighbors by cooperating with law enforcement when necessary. The homeless are not vagrants, but are citizens in need. This is a time for collaboration, not ill-conceived ordinances that restrict care and resources for vulnerable people in our communities.

St. Timothy’s Episcopal Church, 2024 U.S. Dist. Lexis at *32-33 [brackets added].

In light of the foregoing analysis, City Church is optimistic that the City will reconsider and revise its proposed conditions of approval. Legitimate conditions must reflect the realities that the church was successfully serving the unhoused for many year s prior to the City’s interference, and that continued delays and demands by the City that are punitive and untethered to meeting the needs of this vulnerable population could lead to costly legal action. As outlined above, churches and homeless ministries have been highly successful in these types of actions, but their clientele has suffered in the interim.

Because cooperation and not contention are in everyone’s best interests, we look forward to a productive reassessment of the CUP.

We look forward to working with the City to address the urgent needs of the homeless through City Church’s proposals.

Respectfully,
Matthew B. McReynolds
Deputy Chief Counsel

PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE
[email protected]
00030
Packet Page 246 of 401Attachment 5 Page 30 of 161

ATTACHMENT 5

CITY CHURCH TIMELINE AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Shelter Crisis; Temporary Shelter Program; Emergency Shelter Program:

On September 4, 2018, the City Council adopted Resolution 2018-223, finding that the health and safety of homeless individuals in Solano County was threatened by a lack of shelter and declared the existence of a shelter crisis in the City of Fairfield pursuant to Government Code Section 8698.2.

People experiencing homelessness are especially vulnerable to poor health and highly communicable diseases like COVID-19 due to limited options for safe and sanitary shelter, an inability to practice social distancing, and a lack of access to health care. In response to the statewide shelter crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2020- 19 amending Chapter 5A of the Fairfield Municipal Code to implement the Temporary Shelter Program. Under the Temporary Shelter Program, religious facilities and other assembly uses within the City can provide temporary shelter to a maximum of nine (9) homeless individuals for a maximum of 6-month period.

In September 2022, the council adopted Ordinance 2022-11 amending Chapter 5D of the Fairfield Municipal Code to incorporate an Emergency Shelter Program. Similar to the Temporary Shelter Program, the Emergency Shelter Program provides provisions to mitigate threats to the public health, safety, and welfare presented by the lack of available shelters. The Emergency Shelter Program differs from the Temporary Shelter Program in that it allows a higher occupancy of persons, permits building expansions and/or additions for shelter facilities, and is valid for a 1- year period with eligible annual renewals until the state's shelter crisis declaration is lifted.

City Church Permit and Code Enforcement Proceedings:

In April 2021, the City issued a Temporary Shelter Permit to City Church to provide homeless services in compliance with Chapter 5A of the Municipal Code. In early 2022, City staff informed City Church that their Temporary Shelter Permit had expired in September 2021 and that further permitting or entitlements were necessary for the church to continue offering homeless services.

On April 12, 2022, the Fairfield Building Safety Division, Planning Division, Fire Department, Police Department, and Homeless Services Division staff conducted an on-site inspection of the church property. Numerous zoning, building, fire, and health code violations were identified, including, but not limited to, bug infestations, unsafe living conditions, unpermitted structures, and illegal land use operations. Staff sent correspondence to City Church from April 2022 to September 2022, identifying areas of concern and presenting options to resolve life-safety violations and to bring the property into compliance with City and County regulations. Options to address land use violations included permitting City Church’s homeless services programs under either the Temporary Shelter Program or the Emergency Shelter Program regulations. Based on descriptions provided by City Church, City staff concluded that neither program would permit the full extent of City Church’s homeless services, which include drug rehabilitation, general health clinic services, employment navigation, a safe park program, and shelter services for 20+ persons. 00031
Packet Page 247 of 401Attachment 5 Page 31 of 161

ATTACHMENT 5
To meet City Church’s preferred operations, both parties agreed that the best way to categorize the services under the City's Zoning Ordinance would be as a "School, Personal and Social Development," "Office, Medical," and "Boarding House, Large." Each of these land use categories requires a separate Conditional Use Permit. City Church can run its programs as planned with these permits and physical improvements to the building and property. Approval of the Use Permits would be conditioned upon remedying all the other violations Extensive correspondence between City Church and City staff continued, but very little effort was made by City Church to remedy the multiple violations identified during the site inspection. On October 4, 2022, a correction notice from Code Enforcement was provided to City Church with directions to begin corrective actions for the identified violations within 15 days. On October 18, 2022, the City conducted another inspection of the church property where zoning, building, fire, and health code violations were once again identified. On October 20, 2022, Code Enforcement served the Building Official’s Notice and Order directly to Pastor Scott Mulvey of City Church, noting nine (9) violations and required corrective actions. On October 24, 2022, a re-inspection was conducted by the Building Division, Fire Department, and Code Enforcement staff. Per the findings of the Police Support Manager, the identified violations had still not been adequately corrected.

On November 4, 2022, Code Enforcement issued a preliminary notice to abate the public nuisance and began issuing citations. From November 2022 to January 2023, staff continued to coordinate with City Church to address the violations identified. On January 26, 2023, Code Enforcement notified City Church that the City was willing to stay (place on hold) all fines until Feb 2, 2023, when an abatement hearing would take place. Attached as 'Attachment 6’ is the “City Church Abatement Hearing” book that provides a summary of the ongoing coordination between City staff and City Church, as well as copies of communication, citations, hearing notices, and photographs.

The abatement hearing identified five (5) citations under review and two (2) fines in the amounts of $17,930.00 and $19,470.00. The property owners and City staff came to an agreement to stay the fines until all the citation matters were successfully resolved. If all the items were adequately addressed within 6-months of the hearing date, the fines would have been abolished. If the property owners needed more time to address the violations, they had to provide a written extension request to the City no later than five (5) months from the hearing date. Attached as 'Attachment 7’ is the “Administrative Hearing Officer” summary letter signed by all participating parties. On September 13, 2023, Code Enforcement issued a citation of $77,660.00, attached as 'Attachment 8’. This citation encompasses 72 days of violations from the initial Nov. 2022 correction notice through to the Feb. 2023 abatement hearing.

On February 27, 2024, Building Safety and Fire staff conducted another site inspection and found several violations to still be present. On March 19, 2024, the City issued another Notice and Order identifying three (3) remaining violations. On March 20, 2024, the City issued a citation for $206,800.00, attached as ‘Attachment 9’. This citation encompasses the 188 days between the September 13, 2023, citation and the current March 20, 2024, one. The City could have included 00032
Packet Page 248 of 401Attachment 5 Page 32 of 161

ATTACHMENT 5
the additional 72 days of violation from the initial November 2022 but did not. To date, the citation violations have not been resolved, and late fees are at a 50% rate. At the time of this writing, $310,200.00 is due.

City Church Entitlement Application Waiver Request:

City Church expressed that the total costs to address their various violations are too great. The construction and permitting costs related to the required building and site improvements, combined with citation fines, are significant. Therefore, City Church requested the City Council consider waiving all Community Development Department/Public Works Department entitlement application fees necessary to establish their services legally. On October 17, 2023, the council reviewed the waiver request and praised City Church for its philanthropy but raised concerns about the unresolved violations and multiple missed deadlines. In the end, the council voted to deny the request, as documented in Resolution No. 2023-260, attached as ‘Attachment 10’.

Planning Division Entitlement Applications:

As discussed in the ‘City Church Permit and Code Enforcement Proceedings’ subsection above, City Church needs Conditional Use Permits to continue offering its services at the desired level.

In February 2024, two application packages were submitted to the Community Development Department: one for a “Faith-Based College” (School, Personal and Social Development land use) and another for a “Medical Clinic” (Office, Medical land use). City staff worked with City Church to clarify building code requirements, program details, the number of participants, and necessary licenses. After considering all testimony presented during the public hearing, the Zoning Administrator approved the permits on August 21, 2024, finding them consistent with the Fairfield General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Each permit comes with specific conditions that must be followed for them to remain valid. The conditions, which include resolving outstanding fines, are further detailed in Section B. Use Permit Review under the Analysis for Planning Commission subsection in the staff report. The proposed Use Permits themselves are Exhibits A and B of the attached Resolution.
00033
Packet Page 249 of 401Attachment 5 Page 33 of 161

00034
Packet Page 250 of 401Attachment 5 Page 34 of 161

00035
Packet Page 251 of 401Attachment 5 Page 35 of 161

00036
Packet Page 252 of 401Attachment 5 Page 36 of 161

00037
Packet Page 253 of 401Attachment 5 Page 37 of 161

00038
Packet Page 254 of 401Attachment 5 Page 38 of 161

00039
Packet Page 255 of 401Attachment 5 Page 39 of 161

00040
Packet Page 256 of 401Attachment 5 Page 40 of 161

00041
Packet Page 257 of 401Attachment 5 Page 41 of 161

00042
Packet Page 258 of 401Attachment 5 Page 42 of 161

00043
Packet Page 259 of 401Attachment 5 Page 43 of 161

00044
Packet Page 260 of 401Attachment 5 Page 44 of 161

00045
Packet Page 261 of 401Attachment 5 Page 45 of 161

00046
Packet Page 262 of 401Attachment 5 Page 46 of 161

00047
Packet Page 263 of 401Attachment 5 Page 47 of 161

00048
Packet Page 264 of 401Attachment 5 Page 48 of 161

00049
Packet Page 265 of 401Attachment 5 Page 49 of 161

00050
Packet Page 266 of 401Attachment 5 Page 50 of 161

00051
Packet Page 267 of 401Attachment 5 Page 51 of 161

00052
Packet Page 268 of 401Attachment 5 Page 52 of 161

00053
Packet Page 269 of 401Attachment 5 Page 53 of 161

00054
Packet Page 270 of 401Attachment 5 Page 54 of 161

00055
Packet Page 271 of 401Attachment 5 Page 55 of 161

00056
Packet Page 272 of 401Attachment 5 Page 56 of 161

00057
Packet Page 273 of 401Attachment 5 Page 57 of 161

00058
Packet Page 274 of 401Attachment 5 Page 58 of 161

00059
Packet Page 275 of 401Attachment 5 Page 59 of 161

00060
Packet Page 276 of 401Attachment 5 Page 60 of 161

00061
Packet Page 277 of 401Attachment 5 Page 61 of 161

00062
Packet Page 278 of 401Attachment 5 Page 62 of 161

00063
Packet Page 279 of 401Attachment 5 Page 63 of 161

00064
Packet Page 280 of 401Attachment 5 Page 64 of 161

00065
Packet Page 281 of 401Attachment 5 Page 65 of 161

00066
Packet Page 282 of 401Attachment 5 Page 66 of 161

00067
Packet Page 283 of 401Attachment 5 Page 67 of 161

00068
Packet Page 284 of 401Attachment 5 Page 68 of 161

00069
Packet Page 285 of 401Attachment 5 Page 69 of 161

00070
Packet Page 286 of 401Attachment 5 Page 70 of 161

00071
Packet Page 287 of 401Attachment 5 Page 71 of 161

00072
Packet Page 288 of 401Attachment 5 Page 72 of 161

00073
Packet Page 289 of 401Attachment 5 Page 73 of 161

00074
Packet Page 290 of 401Attachment 5 Page 74 of 161

00075
Packet Page 291 of 401Attachment 5 Page 75 of 161

00076
Packet Page 292 of 401Attachment 5 Page 76 of 161

00077
Packet Page 293 of 401Attachment 5 Page 77 of 161

00078
Packet Page 294 of 401Attachment 5 Page 78 of 161

00079
Packet Page 295 of 401Attachment 5 Page 79 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00080
Packet Page 296 of 401Attachment 5 Page 80 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00081
Packet Page 297 of 401Attachment 5 Page 81 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00082
Packet Page 298 of 401Attachment 5 Page 82 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00083
Packet Page 299 of 401Attachment 5 Page 83 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00084
Packet Page 300 of 401Attachment 5 Page 84 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00085
Packet Page 301 of 401Attachment 5 Page 85 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00086
Packet Page 302 of 401Attachment 5 Page 86 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00087
Packet Page 303 of 401Attachment 5 Page 87 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00088
Packet Page 304 of 401Attachment 5 Page 88 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00089
Packet Page 305 of 401Attachment 5 Page 89 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00090
Packet Page 306 of 401Attachment 5 Page 90 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00091
Packet Page 307 of 401Attachment 5 Page 91 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00092
Packet Page 308 of 401Attachment 5 Page 92 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00093
Packet Page 309 of 401Attachment 5 Page 93 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00094
Packet Page 310 of 401Attachment 5 Page 94 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00095
Packet Page 311 of 401Attachment 5 Page 95 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00096
Packet Page 312 of 401Attachment 5 Page 96 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00097
Packet Page 313 of 401Attachment 5 Page 97 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00098
Packet Page 314 of 401Attachment 5 Page 98 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00099
Packet Page 315 of 401Attachment 5 Page 99 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00100
Packet Page 316 of 401Attachment 5 Page 100 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00101
Packet Page 317 of 401Attachment 5 Page 101 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00102
Packet Page 318 of 401Attachment 5 Page 102 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00103
Packet Page 319 of 401Attachment 5 Page 103 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00104
Packet Page 320 of 401Attachment 5 Page 104 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00105
Packet Page 321 of 401Attachment 5 Page 105 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00106
Packet Page 322 of 401Attachment 5 Page 106 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00107
Packet Page 323 of 401Attachment 5 Page 107 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00108
Packet Page 324 of 401Attachment 5 Page 108 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00109
Packet Page 325 of 401Attachment 5 Page 109 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00110
Packet Page 326 of 401Attachment 5 Page 110 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00111
Packet Page 327 of 401Attachment 5 Page 111 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00112
Packet Page 328 of 401Attachment 5 Page 112 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00113
Packet Page 329 of 401Attachment 5 Page 113 of 161

ATTACHMENT 6
00114
Packet Page 330 of 401Attachment 5 Page 114 of 161

ATTACHMENT 7
00115
Packet Page 331 of 401Attachment 5 Page 115 of 161

00116
Packet Page 332 of 401Attachment 5 Page 116 of 161

00117
Packet Page 333 of 401Attachment 5 Page 117 of 161

00118
Packet Page 334 of 401Attachment 5 Page 118 of 161

ATTACHMENT 8
00119
Packet Page 335 of 401Attachment 5 Page 119 of 161

00120
Packet Page 336 of 401Attachment 5 Page 120 of 161

00121
Packet Page 337 of 401Attachment 5 Page 121 of 161

00122
Packet Page 338 of 401Attachment 5 Page 122 of 161

00123
Packet Page 339 of 401Attachment 5 Page 123 of 161

00124
Packet Page 340 of 401Attachment 5 Page 124 of 161

00125
Packet Page 341 of 401Attachment 5 Page 125 of 161

00126
Packet Page 342 of 401Attachment 5 Page 126 of 161

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
RESOLUTION NO.2023-260

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD DENYING A COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT APPLICATION FEE WAIVER

REQUEST FOR CITY CHURCH ENTITLEMENTS RELATING TO HOMELESS SHELTER SERVICES AT 743 E TABOR AVENUE
WHEREAS, on September 30, 2021, the Temporary Shelter Permit for City Church expired; and WHEREAS, on October 4, 2022, Fairfield Code Enforcement sent a correction notice to City Church to address various building, site, and land use violations in relation to homeless services; and
WHEREAS, on October 20, 2022, the Fairfield Building Official issued a Notice and Order to City Church for building and fire safety code violations; and WHEREAS, as of September 13, 2023, a total of $77,660 in citation fines have accrued; and WHEREAS, a total of $29,108 application fees are required to begin the Planning Division entitlement process for a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Conditional Use Permit, Development Review, and Environmental Review; and
WHEREAS, due to high costs for construction, permitting, and citation fines, City Church requests entitlement application fees be waived; and
WHEREAS, the City Council does not find it appropriate to provide a fee waiver for the entitlement application fees; and
WHEREAS, City Church will still be responsible for paying all applicable entitlement application fees, building permit issuance, development impact fees, and citation fines for their property at 743 E Tabor Avenue.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. The application fee waiver request for entitlements related to Homeless Shelter services at 743 E Tabor Avenue is hereby denied.
00127
Packet Page 343 of 401Attachment 5 Page 127 of 161

RES. NO. 2023-260

Page 2 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 171" day of October, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES: MEMBERS: MOY / BERTANI / CARR /PANDURO / TONNESEN/ VACCARO / WILLIAMS NONE
NOES:. MEMBERS:

NONE
ABSENT: MEMBERS:

NONE
ABSTAIN: MEMBERS:

N
MAYOR
ATTEST:

FS "I., wpj,,.A
MW INall-i
00128
Packet Page 344 of 401Attachment 5 Page 128 of 161

DOVER AVE TABOR AV

E TRAVIS BL SUNSET AVSAN REMO ST

MEADOWLARK DR

SAN MARCO ST
E PACI
FI
C
A
V

CARDINAL WYLINEA
R
P
A
R
K
P
A
T
H
W
A
Y

FINCH WY

SCOTT STEAGLE

WYFLAMINGO DRSAN DIEGO STTHRUSH WYSTARL
ING

WYBLUEB
IRD
WY
NIGHTI
N
G
AL
E
D
R
ROBIN

DRSANTA MONICA STSWAN WYFALCON DRSAN JOSE ST

DANIEL STRAILR
OA

D AVSAN BRUNO STWARBLER WYSAN G
A
B
RI
EL
S
T

SAN CARLOS STMATTHEW DR

SAN PEDRO STORIOLE WYSAN LUIS STSANTA ROSA STSAN BENITO STSAN JUAN STSAN MATEO ST

SAN RAFAEL ST SAN TOMAS STSAN ANSELMO STSANTA FE STSAN CLEMENTE STSAN SALVADOR STSAN DIMAS ST

WREN CTSANTA CRUZ DRDANIEL CTDAKOTA ST

BRANDON WY

MATTHEW CT

PHOENIX DRSAN ANGELO STARKANSAS ST

SWAN CT
±
LEGEND
Zone Designations
AG
CC
CD
CDC
CM
CN
CO
CR
CS
CT
IBP
IG
IL
ITP
OSC
PF
REC
RVL
RL
RLM
RM
RH
RVH
None
Overlays
-NC
-PD
-P1
-H
Agriculture
Community Commercial
Downtown Commercial
Downtown Commercial Core
Mixed Commercial
Neighborhood Commercial
Office Commercial
Regional Commercial
Service Commercial
Thoroughfare Commercial
Industrial Business Park
General Industrial
Limited Industrial
Industrial Technology Park
Open Space Conservation
Public Facilities
Recreation
Very Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Low-Medium Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Very High Density Residential
Not in City / No Pre-Zoning
North Cordelia Overlay
Proposed Development Overlay
Downtown Parking Overlay
Hillside Overlay
Project Site
Parcels
Zoning
ZONING EXHIBITCIty Church Faith-Based College & Medical Clinic Use Permit Appeal(APP2024-002)(UP2024-005)(2024-006)(ER2024-007) 00129
Packet Page 345 of 401Attachment 5 Page 129 of 161

Legend
Agriculture
AI Intensive
AE Extensive
Open Space
OSR Recreation
OSC Conservation
Residential
RVL Very Low Density
RL Low Density
RLM Low-Medium Density
RLM-C Low-Medium Density (Cap)
RM Medium Density
RM-C Medium Density (Cap)
RH High Density
RVH Very High Density
Commercial
CN Neighborhood
CC Community/CBD
CS Service
CHR Highway & Regional
CO Office
Industrial
IL Limited
IG General
IBP Business & Industrial
Park
Other
PF Public Facilities
MU Mixed Use
Phasing/
Special Study Area
Suisun Marsh
Protection Boundary
Urban Limit Line
Boundary between
Phasing Areas D & E
Scale: N.T.S.

General Plan Land Use Exhibit
City of FairfieldCommunity Development Department NORTH SITE
00130
Packet Page 346 of 401Attachment 5 Page 130 of 161

12J456789101.11,21.3141.5161,71819202'l22232425262728RECEIVEDocl 0 2 202\CITY OF FAIRFIELDCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTBEFORE THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD PI-ANNING COMMISSIONAPPEAL - ALPP2024-002In RE City Church FaitfieldAppeal of Decision on Conditional UsePetmitREQUEST FOR DOCUMFNTDate: OCTOBER 9,2024Time: 6:00 PMCoutttoom: 12))))))))))))))REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTSATTACHMENT 1100131Packet Page 347 of 401Attachment 5 Page 131 of 161

_____________________________________________________________________________ 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28

SUPPLEMENTAL EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL
Matthew B. McReynolds
Milton E. Matchak

PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE
P.O. Box 276600
Sacramento, CA 95827
Tel. (916) 857-6900
Emails: [email protected]; [email protected]
Attorneys for City Church Fairfield
00132
ATTACHMENT 11
Packet Page 348 of 401Attachment 5 Page 132 of 161

_____________________________________________________________________________ 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
Exhibit List
Exhibit A 100124 City Church Planning Commission
Exhibit B 092124 Dr Cline Letter in Support
Exhibit C 091824 Caringello Email in Support
Exhibit D 092024 Deborah Letter in Support
Exhibit E 092024 RHM Letter in Support
00133
ATTACHMENT 11
Packet Page 349 of 401Attachment 5 Page 133 of 161

Exhibit A
00134
ATTACHMENT 11
Packet Page 350 of 401Attachment 5 Page 134 of 161

� tE'ITVCHURCH r:--1 TYL IF E SC HC)O L
.,.

September 20, 2024
City Council
Deputy Chief Counsel - N. California
Pacific Justice Institute
Re: City Church 2:42, City Livin' Center, Fairfield, CA Dear Matthew:

The City Livin' Center was started l 7 years ago with the permission of the Fairfield Planning Department. We were told beforehand that we had Dual Zoning: Commercial and High Density.

Over the years, the City of Fairfield has thanked us for our multi-faceted operation, and given us plaques and other awards, including asking us to expand. We became the largest faith-based, but not faith-required, provider in Solano County. We averaged 33 to 65 residents a day.

Some of our biggest supporters were the Criminal Court, the Public Defender's Office, Parole, and Probation. We took in the homeless that the Fairfield Police Department dropped off three to four times a week. We also assisted Law Enforcement in housing those trapped in Human Trafficking.

Our City Free Clinic medical office served the community by providing medical to those without access to services. People came in from all over Fairfield.

All this ended on March 19, 2024, when the City of Fairfield "Red-Tagged" our Shower trailer, upstairs living area, and the City Free Clinic. As a result, we were City Church, 743 East Tabor Avenue, Fairfield, CA 94533-4046 [email protected]
uon 426-2172
00135
ATTACHMENT 11
Packet Page 351 of 401Attachment 5 Page 135 of 161

immediately forced to move everyone off the property! It was painful and chaotic for all. Some went back to the drug-infested streets with their hopes and dreams suddenly and completely shattered. As a result, 4 of our residents died.

We currently try to place those seeking help in other facilities offering services to no avail. Most of our residents were turned away because of their inability to pay processing and program fees.

Scott Mulvey
Lead Pastor, City Church
Director: City Life School
Page -2
00136
ATTACHMENT 11
Packet Page 352 of 401Attachment 5 Page 136 of 161

Exhibit B
00137
ATTACHMENT 11
Packet Page 353 of 401Attachment 5 Page 137 of 161

00138
ATTACHMENT 11
Packet Page 354 of 401Attachment 5 Page 138 of 161

00139
ATTACHMENT 11
Packet Page 355 of 401Attachment 5 Page 139 of 161

Exhibit C
00140
ATTACHMENT 11
Packet Page 356 of 401Attachment 5 Page 140 of 161

From: Hope Van Schaick [email protected]
Subject:Fwd: Me
Date:October 2, 2024 at 11:52 AM
To :[email protected]
From: Richard caringello
Date: September 18, 2024 at 5:17:29 PM PDT
To: Scott Mulvey
Subject: Me
Reply-To: Richard caringello
One of the many success stories of City Church in Fairﬁeld, California, is mine. My name is Richard Caringello, and I ﬁrst attended City Church in 2017. I learned about their recovery program through conversations with their residents. I was present for a few of their residents' one-year graduations.

In July of the following year, I reached out to City Church seeking assistance with my prescription drug addiction. I was promptly admitted and underwent the intake process. Initially, I felt apprehensive and isolated, but the welcoming and supportive staff made me feel at ease.

The weekly meeting schedule was meticulously structured with a variety of classes, ranging from Bible studies to drug addiction recovery and the Live Free ministry. These classes played a pivotal role in my transformation, empowering me to achieve complete freedom from addiction.

We had Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous along with other professional facilitators.

I was ﬁnancially challenged for the ﬁrst ten months of my time at City Church. They allowed me to stay even without paying program fees. In addition to attending classes and counseling, I also completed special projects for the church as needed.

I participated in a mission trip to the Los Angeles Dream Center with six other individuals. During the trip, we attended workshops and engaged in various outreach ministries to assist the less fortunate in the Los Angeles area. This experience facilitated a profound spiritual connection and a deeper understanding of my relationship with Jesus Christ.

Following my graduation, I continued my association with the organization as a staff member and guidance counselor. Without the positive inﬂuence of City Church in my life, I am certain that I would have found myself in a state of homelessness or worse, deceased. City Church has been 00141
ATTACHMENT 11
Packet Page 357 of 401Attachment 5 Page 141 of 161

state of homelessness or worse, deceased. City Church has been instrumental in saving my life, as well as the lives of countless others that I have personally witnessed over the years.

I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Pastor Scott, Pastor Debra, and all the facilitators at City Church for their unwavering support and guidance.

It is with great disappointment that I must inform you of the unfortunate closure of the city church program by the city of Fairﬁeld. This program has proven to be instrumental in saving countless lives by providing support and resources to individuals struggling with addiction.

The effectiveness of this program is undeniable, as evidenced by the tragic consequences faced by those who have left the program. It is deeply saddening to witness the loss of such a valuable initiative, even if it had only saved a single life. However, the reality is that it has saved countless lives, making its closure all the more regrettable.

Yahoo Mail: Search, Organize, Conquer
00142
ATTACHMENT 11
Packet Page 358 of 401Attachment 5 Page 142 of 161

Exhibit D
00143
ATTACHMENT 11
Packet Page 359 of 401Attachment 5 Page 143 of 161

00144
ATTACHMENT 11
Packet Page 360 of 401Attachment 5 Page 144 of 161

Exhibit E
00145
ATTACHMENT 11
Packet Page 361 of 401Attachment 5 Page 145 of 161

00146
ATTACHMENT 11
Packet Page 362 of 401Attachment 5 Page 146 of 161

8'-9"16'-1"SWW
N
W
SEENESNNFPA 72 FIRE ALARM CODE W/CALIFORNIA AMENDMENT
2022 CBC 2022 CEC 2022 CMC 2022 CPC 2022 CFC 2022 BUILDING STANDARDS CODETITLE 19,CCR, PUBLIC SAFETY, STATE FIRE MARSHALL REGULATIONS

APPLICABLE CODES - NEW CONSTRUCTION

EXISTING

SITE PLAN
MODIFIED 10-18-2011LICES
T

ATE OF CA L IF O RNIANSEDPR O F
E
NEERExp. 12/31/2024

CIVILIMOTYDEM
N
GI

NIGLANOISSE
No. 31608
H J.

C A L IFORNIA RO F E SSIONAL
A
R
C
HITECTNo.17784P
Exp.10/30/2025
FOETATSREGISTEREDTIMOTHY J .DE
M
I
NGDEMINGCHANGE OF USE - ADULT EDUCATIONCITY CHURCH743 EAST TABOR AVENUEFAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA 94533Parcel 0037020460TITLE SHEET

EXISTING USECODE COMPLIANCE
2/7/2024
tjd
2023-011
of 1

EXISTINGFIRE DEPARTMENTCONNECTION

EXISTING WATER SERVICEDDCV

TRANSFORMER
EXISTINGSHOWER TRAILER ROLL-GATE8' CMU FENCE

PROPERTY LINE
8' CMU FENCEPROPERTY LINE8' CMU FENCE

PROPERTY LINE
8' CMU FENCE
PROPERTY LINE 8' CMU FENCEPROPERTY LINEA1 TITLE SHEET

EXISTING SITE PLAN

PROGRAM REQUEST
A2 PROPOSED SITE PLAN
A3 CONTEXTUAL MAP
EXISTINGSIGN1

SIDEWALK
23456789101112
13141516
535455565758596061626364656667
686970
22 21 20 19 18 1723
3435363738394041424344454647484950
51 727374757677 71788182838485867980909192888987133132131130129101100999897105104103102 282930312425262712212112011912612512412396C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C CCCCCCCCC CC109108107106113112111110118117116115114128127C FIRE LANEFIRE LANEFIRE LANEFIRE LANEFIRE LANE33
52 50
32 959493C

EXISTING CHILDREN

RELIGIOUS EDUCATION

RE-PURPOSED

FOR ADULT EDUCATION

EXISTING

KITCHEN
(ALTERED)
Packet Page 363 of 401Attachment 5 Page 147 of 161

21'-10"23'-9"28'-5"18'-0"14'-0"19'-0"19'-0"36'-9"14'-0"24'-3"17'-0"25'-3"17'-0" 17'-0"25'-11"22'-0"28'-7"8'-9"16'-1"25'-11"17'-0"6'-0"18'-0"18'-0"UP MODIFIED 10-18-2011LICES
T

ATE OF CA L IF O RNIANSEDPR O F
E
NEERExp. 12/31/2022

CIVILIMOTYDEM
N
GI

NIGLANOISSE
No. 31608
H J.

C A L IFORNIA RO F E SSIONAL
A
R
C
HITECTNo.17784P
Exp.10/30/2023
FOETATSREGISTEREDTIMOTHY J .DE
M
I
NGDEMINGUSE PERMIT - ADULT EDUCATION SCHOOLCITY CHURCH743 EAST TABORFAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIAPROPOSED

SITE PLAN
2/7/2024
TJD
2023-011
of 1SWW
N
W

SEENESNPROPOSED

SITE PLAN
1 8' SIDEWALK
23456789101112
13141516
22 21 20
19 1723

C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C CC CCROLL-GATESECURITYPEDESTRIANGATE

EXISTINGFIRE DEPARTMENTCONNECTION

EXISTING WATER SERVICEDDCV

TRANSFORMER
8' CMU FENCE

PROPERTY LINE
8' CMU FENCE

PROPERTY LINE
8' CMU FENCE
PROPERTY LINE 8' CMU FENCEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE8' CMU FENCEPROPERTY LINE8' CMU FENCE 535455565758596061626364656667
686970
3435363738394041424344454647484950
51 727374757677 71788182838485867980909192888987133132131130129101100999897105104103102 282930312425262712212112011912612512412396CCCCCCCC10910810710611311211111011811711611511412812733 52 50
32 959493C
19 18

ACCESSCOMPLIANT EAST TABOREXISTINGMONUMENT SIGN

EXISTING CHILDREN

RELIGIOUS EDUCATION

RE-PURPOSED

FOR ADULT EDUCATION

EXISTING

KITCHEN
(ALTERED)
LIFT 40x54ACCESSCOMPLIANT

ACCESSCOMPLIANT

ALTEREDWOMENRESTROOM

MENRESTROOM
Packet Page 364 of 401Attachment 5 Page 148 of 161

MODIFIED 10-18-2011LICES
T

ATE OF CA L IF O RNIANSEDPR O F
E
NEERExp. 12/31/2022

CIVILIMOTYDEM
N
GI

NIGLANOISSE
No. 31608
H J.

C A L IFORNIA RO F E SSIONAL
A
R
C
HITECTNo.17784P
Exp.10/30/2023
FOETATSREGISTEREDTIMOTHY J .DE
M
I
NGDEMINGUSE PERMIT - ADULT EDUCATION SCHOOLCITY CHURCH743 EAST TABORFAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIACONTEXTUAL PLAN 2/7/2024
TJD
2023-011
of 1SWWNWSEENESNCONTEXTUAL
PLAN
CITY
CHURCH
SCHOOL

BUS ROUTEBUS ROUTEBUS ROUTEFH FH FH
Packet Page 365 of 401Attachment 5 Page 149 of 161

8'-9"16'-1"SWW
NWSEENESNNFPA 72 FIRE ALARM CODE W/CALIFORNIA AMENDMENT 2022 CBC 2022 CEC 2022 CMC 2022 CPC 2022 CFC 2022 BUILDING STANDARDS CODETITLE 19,CCR, PUBLIC SAFETY, STATE FIRE MARSHALL REGULATIONS

APPLICABLE CODES - NEW CONSTRUCTION

EXISTING

SITE PLAN
MODIFIED 10-18-2011LICES
T

ATE OF CA L IF O RNIANSEDPR O F
E
NEERExp. 12/31/2024

CIVILIMOTYDEM
N
GI

NIGLANOISSE
No. 31608
H J.

C A L IFORNIA RO F E SSIONAL
A
R
C
HITECTNo.17784P
Exp.10/30/2025
FOETATSREGISTEREDTIMOTHY J .DE
M
I
NGDEMINGCHANGE OF USE - CLINICCITY CHURCH743 EAST TABOR AVENUEFAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA 94533Parcel 0037020460TITLE SHEETEXISTING USE

CODE COMPLIANCE
2/7/2024
tjd
2023-011
of 1

EXISTINGFIRE DEPARTMENTCONNECTION

EXISTING WATER SERVICEDDCV

TRANSFORMER
EXISTINGSHOWER TRAILER ROLL-GATE8' CMU FENCE

PROPERTY LINE
8' CMU FENCEPROPERTY LINE8' CMU FENCE

PROPERTY LINE
8' CMU FENCE
PROPERTY LINE 8' CMU FENCEPROPERTY LINEA1 TITLE SHEET

EXISTING SITE PLAN

PROGRAM REQUEST
A2 PROPOSED SITE PLAN
A3 CLINIC

EXISTING FLOOR PLAN

PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN
A4 CONTEXTUAL MAP

EXISTINGSIGNEXISTING NURSERY

SCHOOL AREA

TO BE ALTERED FOR

MEDICAL CLINIC
1 SIDEWALK
23456789101112
13141516
535455565758596061626364656667
686970
22 21 20 19 18 1723
3435363738394041424344454647484950
51 727374757677 71788182838485867980909192888987133132131130129101100999897105104103102 282930312425262712212112011912612512412396C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C CCCCCCCCC CC109108107106113112111110118117116115114128127C FIRE LANEFIRE LANEFIRE LANEFIRE LANEFIRE LANE33
52 50
32 959493C
Packet Page 366 of 401Attachment 5 Page 150 of 161

21'-10"23'-9"28'-5"18'-0"14'-0"19'-0"19'-0"36'-9"14'-0"24'-3"17'-0"25'-3"17'-0" 17'-0"25'-11"22'-0"28'-7"8'-9"16'-1"25'-11"17'-0"6'-0"18'-0"18'-0"UP MODIFIED 10-18-2011LICES
T

ATE OF CA L IF O RNIANSEDPR O F
E
NEERExp. 12/31/2022

CIVILIMOTYDEM
N
GI

NIGLANOISSE
No. 31608
H J.

C A L IFORNIA RO F E SSIONAL
A
R
C
HITECTNo.17784P
Exp.10/30/2023
FOETATSREGISTEREDTIMOTHY J .DE
M
I
NGDEMINGUSE PERMIT - CLINICCITY CHURCH743 EAST TABORFAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIAPROPOSED

SITE PLAN
2/7/2024
TJD
2023-011
of 1SWW
N
W

SEENESNPROPOSED

SITE PLAN
1 8' SIDEWALK
23456789101112
13141516
22 21 20
19 1723

C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C CC CCROLL-GATESECURITYPEDESTRIANGATE

EXISTINGFIRE DEPARTMENTCONNECTION

EXISTING WATER SERVICEDDCV

TRANSFORMER
8' CMU FENCE

PROPERTY LINE
8' CMU FENCE

EXISTING NURSERY

SCHOOL AREA

TO REMAIN
C
19 18

ACCESS COMPLIANTPEDESTRIANGATE

ACCESSCOMPLIANT

ACCESSCOMPLIANT EAST TABOREXISTINGMONUMENT SIGN
Packet Page 367 of 401Attachment 5 Page 151 of 161

MODIFIED 10-18-2011LICES
T

ATE OF CA L IF O RNIANSEDPR O F
E
NEERExp. 12/31/2022

CIVILIMOTYDEM
N
GI

NIGLANOISSE
No. 31608
H J.

C A L IFORNIA RO F E SSIONAL
A
R
C
HITECTNo.17784P
Exp.10/30/2023
FOETATSREGISTEREDTIMOTHY J .DE
M
I
NGDEMINGUSE PERMIT - CLINICCITY CHURCH743 EAST TABORFAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIAFLOOR PLANEXISTING / PROPOSED 2/7/2024
TJD
2023-011
of 1SWWNWSEENESNPROPOSED

FLOOR PLAN

EXISTING

FLOOR PLAN

EXISTING

NURSERY
SCHOOL

EXISTING

NURSERY
SCHOOL

EXISTING
WOMEN

EXISTING
MEN

EXISTING

NURSERY
SCHOOL
FOYER

WAITING
AREA

RECEPTION
FILES

STORAGE
UNISEX
OFFICE
EXAM
ROOM
EXAM
ROOM
LAB
Packet Page 368 of 401Attachment 5 Page 152 of 161

MODIFIED 10-18-2011LICES
T

ATE OF CA L IF O RNIANSEDPR O F
E
NEERExp. 12/31/2022

CIVILIMOTYDEM
N
GI

NIGLANOISSE
No. 31608
H J.

C A L IFORNIA RO F E SSIONAL
A
R
C
HITECTNo.17784P
Exp.10/30/2023
FOETATSREGISTEREDTIMOTHY J .DE
M
I
NGDEMINGUSE PERMIT - CLINICCITY CHURCH743 EAST TABORFAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIACONTEXTUAL PLAN 2/7/2024
TJD
2023-011
of 1SWWNWSEENESNCONTEXTUAL
PLAN
CITY
CHURCH
SCHOOL

BUS ROUTEBUS ROUTEBUS ROUTEFH FH FH
Packet Page 369 of 401Attachment 5 Page 153 of 161

C I TY OF F A I R F I E L D
Founded 1856 - Incorporated December 12, 1903
Community Development Department
April 5, 2024
Pastor Mulvey
City Church
743 East Tabor Avenue
Fairfield, CA 94533
Faith-Based College Use Permit (UP2024-005); and
City Church: Medical Clinic Use Permit (UP2024-006)
743 East Tabor Avenue, Fairfield, CA 94533
Attached
Packet Page 370 of 401Attachment 5 Page 154 of 161

Faith-Based College:

1.What is the California Building Code Occupancy Type you are requesting? Group E Occupancy Per Section 305.1.1
Group E Occupancy Per Section 305.2, Appendix 452
B Occupancy per Section 301.1

2.What are the hours of operation?
8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday
8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Sunday

3.How many employees will be on-site at any given time? Four to six (4 – 6)

4.What is the enrollment criteria?
Desire to achieve a better life

5.How many students will be enrolled at any given time? Approximately 15 to 25

6. What signifies completion of the course of study, and what is the typical timeframe to completion?
Course Study will be based on completion of five (5) different phases:

Phase 1

1.Learn basic life skills, e.g., hygiene, manners, dress/attire

2.Address medical issues

3.Obtain proper identification, etc.

Phase 2
Communication Skills,
-- Anger management
-- Speaking English Properly
-- Reading
-- Writing
Phase 3
Basic Computer Skills
-- Job Assessment
-- Interview Training
Phase 4
•Job Search
•Financial Practices
•Budgeting
Packet Page 371 of 401Attachment 5 Page 155 of 161

Phase 5
Employment
•Opening a Bank Account
•Savings Program Advantages
•Obtaining Permanent Housing

7. What class subjects are offered? For example, computer skills, employment counseling and basic job training, etc.
•Health
•Hygiene
•Dress – Proper Attire
•How to Job Search
•Basic Computer Skills
•Criminal Thinking
•CEO Boot Camp – Starting a Business
•Manners
•Communication Skills
•Ethics
•Reading and Writing
•Narcotics Anonymous
•Alcoholic Anonymous

8.Will the school be licensed by the State of California? No

9.Will the school be accredited in any way?
Yes, and once we are officially open, we will seek accreditation

10.What is the age range of students? Is there an age minimum? 18 Years to 100 Years

11. Are food accommodations provided with enrollment? If yes, is the food prepared on- site? If food is prepared on -site, what is the extent of cooking provided; are there grease-laden vapors?
Yes, onsite
No frying or grease vapors
Mostly heating and baking
Packet Page 372 of 401Attachment 5 Page 156 of 161

Medical Clinic:

1.What is the California Building Code Occupancy Type you are requesting? Group B Occupancy, Per Section 304.1

2.What are the hours of operation?
Monday - by Appointment
Tuesday - 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

Wednesday by Appointment
Thursday - 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

Friday by Appointment

3.How many employees will be on-site at any given time? Two (2)

4.What state and/or federal licenses and/or certifications will the employees have? Dr. Jerry Michael Cline will follow-up (Presently out of the country. He will respond upon his scheduled return tomorrow, 04/06/24)

5.Is the clinic open to the general public or only to members of the Faith-Based College? Both

6. What type of medical services are provided? Please provide specific information. For example, medical examinations, prescribing medications, pharmacy operations, lab testing, detoxification services, vaccinations, dialysis, oxygen therapy or other medical gases such as anesthesia, etc.

Medical consultation, prescribing medications, minor wound care

7.Will the clinic fill prescriptions by on-site or off-site licensed medical professionals? Off-site

8.What is your security plan for medical supplies and pharmaceuticals? Locked, secured cabinets
Packet Page 373 of 401Attachment 5 Page 157 of 161

Sincerely,

MEILY M SHEEHAN
Principal Planner
c.Tim Deming, [email protected]
David Gassaway, [email protected]
David Lim, [email protected]
Dave Zellers, [email protected]
Dave Feinstein, [email protected]
Jeff Thomas, [email protected]
Jeremy Profitt, [email protected]
Steven Conti, [email protected]
Samatha Burrows, [email protected]
Packet Page 374 of 401Attachment 5 Page 158 of 161

From:Jerry Michael Cline
To:Scott Mulvey; Sheehan, Meily
Cc:Burrows, Samantha; Feinstein, David M; [email protected]; Gassaway, David; Lim, David G. (RWG Law); Zellers, David; Profitt, Jeremy; Thomas, Jeff; Conti, Steven Subject:Re: City Church Project Description Request Letter Date:Tuesday, April 9, 2024 7:34:22 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or openattachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

No Good afternoon,
I am responding to questions about the proposed medical clinic at City Church.

1. What is the California Building Code Occupancy Type you are requesting? Group B Occupancy, Per Section 304.1

2. What are the hours of operation?
Monday - 10:00 AM to 1:00 PM
Tuesday - 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM
Wednesday -10:00 AM to 1:00 PM
Thursday -10:00 AM to 1:00 PM and 5:30 PM to 8:30 PM
Friday - 10:00 AM to 1:00 PM

3. How many employees will be on-site at any given time? Two (2)

4. What state and/or federal licenses and/or certifications will the employees have? Medical Board of California licensure: Physician & Surgeon, Licensed Clinical Social Worker, Licensed Marriage & Family Therapist, Registered Nurse, Licensed Vocational Nurse, CLIA License, etc.

5. Is the clinic open to the general public or only to members of the Faith-Based College? General Public as a free clinic.

6. What type of medical services are provided? Medical examinations, prescribing medications, pharmacy operations, lab testing, detoxification services, vaccinations, wound care, minor procedures, psychotherapy, family medicine, obstetrics.

7. Will the clinic fill prescriptions by on-site or off-site licensed medical professionals? Prescriptions will be created using an electronic medical record and transmitted electronically to independant local pharmacies.

The clinic will not fill prescriptions on site but will dispense free medications when necessary to individuals who qualify (<300% of FPL).

8. What is your security plan for medical supplies and pharmaceuticals? No narcotics or scheduled medicines.

Compliance with local pharmacy standard of care (locked and secured room).

Security cameras.

Please let me know if I can clarify anything.

Packet Page 375 of 401Attachment 5 Page 159 of 161

Thanks for this opportunity!
-jerry cline
On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 4:03 PM Scott Mulvey wrote:

FYI
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:

From: Scott Mulvey
Date: April 5, 2024 at 8:20:19 PM CDT
To: "Sheehan, Meily"
Cc: [email protected], "Gassaway, David"
, "Lim, David G. (RWG Law)"
, "Zellers, David" ,
"Feinstein, David M" , "Thomas, Jeff"
, "Profitt, Jeremy" ,
"Conti, Steven" , "Burrows, Samantha"

Subject: Re: City Church Project Description Request Letter Reply-To: Scott Mulvey

Attached are responses from CITY CHURCH Fairfield.

Scott
On Thursday, April 4, 2024 at 11:38:41 AM PDT, Sheehan, Meily wrote:

Hello Scott,
As we discussed in our meeting yesterday, please see the attached letter identifying a list of questions to help define the uses for the two proposed Use Permits.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.

Best,
Packet Page 376 of 401Attachment 5 Page 160 of 161

Meily M. Sheehan | Principal Planner
Community Development Department | City of Fairfield
O | 707-428 -7474
1000 Webster Street 2nd Floor, Fairfield, CA 94533
www.fairfield.ca.gov
**City Hall is closed the 1st and 3rd Fridays of the month**

Packet Page 377 of 401Attachment 5 Page 161 of 161

Agenda Item No: 19.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:November 19, 2024
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Public Hearing and;
Resolution 2024271 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield [Approving/Sustaining] [Denying/Overruling] the Appeal of the City of Fairfield Administrative Hearing Determination Regarding Interest on Delinquent Transient Occupancy and Tourism Tax Assessment/ Quality Inn Previously Known as Super 8 Motel Located at 2170 North Texas Street, Fairfield, CA 945333204 Owners: Shri Guru Hari, LLC, Shri Mahant, LLC, and Marie Parunjanwala
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Hold a public hearing and adopt the resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The Fairfield Municipal Code allows the Operator to appeal the assessment of the tax to the City Council. Fairfield Municipal Code section 18.20 requires the council to conduct a hearing and approve/sustain or deny/overrule the appeal.

DISCUSSION
On June 11, 2024, the City of Fairfield issued a letter (Attachment 2) of Notice of Assessment and Hearing Rights for Interest on Delinquent Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) to the operator of Super 8 (now renamed Quality Inn) located at 2170 North Texas Street for $ 58,356.15. The current operator of the motel, Shri Guri Hari, LLC, through their attorney Frank A. Weiser, appealed the assessment to the finance director (in his capacity of tax administrator) on June 14, 2024, and was granted a date of hearing on July 16, 2024, at 11 a.m. to have the appeal heard.

The tax administrator provided an appeal letter (Attachment 3) which was discussed during the hearing.

The City's finance director, acting in their delegated capacity as the City tax administrator, reviewed and verified the information and documentation provided on behalf of the client by Mr. Weiser and determined that the request for relief of the total tax assessment amount was denied and the proper interest amount on the tax to be remitted remains in the full amount of $58,356.15 (Attachment 4).

Packet Page 378 of 401

The appeal contended that the client has no financial rapport with the prior hotel owner(s), was unaware of the outstanding TOT amount, and is not responsible for such delinquent amounts. Pursuant to Chapter 18, Article III, Section 18.17.1(c) and (d) of the Fairfield Municipal Code, any person purchasing an ongoing hotel business may apply to the tax administrator for a tax clearance certificate showing the tax due, if any, from the selling operator. Suppose an operator is liable for delinquent taxes or penalties under this article and sells its business. In that case, its successor shall withhold a sufficient portion of the purchase price to satisfy the delinquency.

On August 23, 2024, Shri Guri Hari, LLC, Shri Mahant, LLC, and Marie Parunjanwala, through their attorney Frank A. Weiser appealed the assessment to the City Clerk and are granted a date of hearing of November 19, 2024, at 6:00 p.m. to have the appeal heard by the council (Attachment 5 & 6).

The current operator of the motel, Shri Guri Hari, LLC, through their attorney Frank A. Weiser, previously had appealed the assessment for $686,542.98 to the finance director (in his capacity of tax administrator) and council and both appeals were denied on April 12, 2023, by the finance director and on August 15, 2023, by the council, respectively. The council had instructed staff to enter into negotiations with the owners to look into the option of settling on the payment amount, however multiple attempts to connect with the owner's Attorney to sign a tolling agreement were unsuccessful. Since after the end of the tolling period, no response nor payment was received, a lien for $686,613.98 was placed on February 15, 2024 (Attachment 7).

Fairfield Municipal Code 18.20 states:

18.20 Appeal from decision of tax administrator; findings conclusive.

Any operator aggrieved by any decision of the tax administrator with respect to the amount of such tax, interest, and penalties, if any, may appeal to the council by filing a notice of appeal with the city clerk within 15 days of serving or mailing of the determination of tax due. The council shall fix a time and place for hearing such appeal and the city clerk shall give notice in writing to such operator at his last known place of address. The findings of the council shall be final and conclusive and shall be served upon the appellant in the manner prescribed above for service of notice of hearing. Any amount found to be due shall be immediately due and payable upon the service of notice.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The financial impact is minimal, as the hearing will occur during a regularly scheduled City Council meeting. However, approving the appeal would cost the City $58,356.15 in lost TOT revenue, and could adversely impact the original amount due of $686,613.98 that was sustained on the same grounds.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
By operation of the Municipal Code, the council must issue a ruling to approve/sustain or deny/overrule the appeal.

STAFF CONTACT
John Furtado, Finance Director
(707) 428 7629
[email protected]
Packet Page 379 of 401

Agenda Item No: 19.AGENDA REPORTDATE:November 19, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Public Hearing and;Resolution 2024271 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield [Approving/Sustaining][Denying/Overruling] the Appeal of the City of Fairfield Administrative HearingDetermination Regarding Interest on Delinquent Transient Occupancy and Tourism TaxAssessment/ Quality Inn Previously Known as Super 8 Motel Located at 2170 NorthTexas Street, Fairfield, CA 945333204 Owners: Shri Guru Hari, LLC, Shri Mahant,LLC, and Marie ParunjanwalaRECOMMENDED ACTIONHold a public hearing and adopt the resolution.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe Fairfield Municipal Code allows the Operator to appeal the assessment of the tax to the CityCouncil. Fairfield Municipal Code section 18.20 requires the council to conduct a hearing andapprove/sustain or deny/overrule the appeal.DISCUSSIONOn June 11, 2024, the City of Fairfield issued a letter (Attachment 2) of Notice of Assessment andHearing Rights for Interest on Delinquent Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) to the operator of Super 8(now renamed Quality Inn) located at 2170 North Texas Street for $ 58,356.15. The current operator ofthe motel, Shri Guri Hari, LLC, through their attorney Frank A. Weiser, appealed the assessment to thefinance director (in his capacity of tax administrator) on June 14, 2024, and was granted a date ofhearing on July 16, 2024, at 11 a.m. to have the appeal heard.The tax administrator provided an appeal letter (Attachment 3) which was discussed during the hearing.The City's finance director, acting in their delegated capacity as the City tax administrator, reviewed andverified the information and documentation provided on behalf of the client by Mr. Weiser anddetermined that the request for relief of the total tax assessment amount was denied and the properinterest amount on the tax to be remitted remains in the full amount of $58,356.15 (Attachment 4).The appeal contended that the client has no financial rapport with the prior hotel owner(s), was unawareof the outstanding TOT amount, and is not responsible for such delinquent amounts. Pursuant toChapter 18, Article III, Section 18.17.1(c) and (d) of the Fairfield Municipal Code, any personpurchasing an ongoing hotel business may apply to the tax administrator for a tax clearance certificateshowing the tax due, if any, from the selling operator. Suppose an operator is liable for delinquent taxesor penalties under this article and sells its business. In that case, its successor shall withhold a sufficientportion of the purchase price to satisfy the delinquency.On August 23, 2024, Shri Guri Hari, LLC, Shri Mahant, LLC, and Marie Parunjanwala, through theirattorney Frank A. Weiser appealed the assessment to the City Clerk and are granted a date of hearingof November 19, 2024, at 6:00 p.m. to have the appeal heard by the council (Attachment 5 & 6).The current operator of the motel, Shri Guri Hari, LLC, through their attorney Frank A. Weiser, previouslyhad appealed the assessment for $686,542.98 to the finance director (in his capacity of taxadministrator) and council and both appeals were denied on April 12, 2023, by the finance director andon August 15, 2023, by the council, respectively. The council had instructed staff to enter intonegotiations with the owners to look into the option of settling on the payment amount, however multipleattempts to connect with the owner's Attorney to sign a tolling agreement were unsuccessful. Since afterthe end of the tolling period, no response nor payment was received, a lien for $686,613.98 was placedon February 15, 2024 (Attachment 7).Fairfield Municipal Code 18.20 states:18.20 Appeal from decision of tax administrator; findings conclusive.Any operator aggrieved by any decision of the tax administrator with respect to the amount of such tax,interest, and penalties, if any, may appeal to the council by filing a notice of appeal with the city clerkwithin 15 days of serving or mailing of the determination of tax due. The council shall fix a time andplace for hearing such appeal and the city clerk shall give notice in writing to such operator at his lastknown place of address. The findings of the council shall be final and conclusive and shall be servedupon the appellant in the manner prescribed above for service of notice of hearing. Any amount found tobe due shall be immediately due and payable upon the service of notice.FINANCIAL IMPACTThe financial impact is minimal, as the hearing will occur during a regularly scheduled City Councilmeeting. However, approving the appeal would cost the City $58,356.15 in lost TOT revenue, and couldadversely impact the original amount due of $686,613.98 that was sustained on the same grounds.PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATIONN/AALTERNATIVE ACTIONBy operation of the Municipal Code, the council must issue a ruling to approve/sustain or deny/overrulethe appeal.STAFF CONTACTJohn Furtado, Finance Director(707) 428 7629 [email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney's Office
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Attachment 1: Proposed Resolution
Attachment 2: Notice of Second Assessment
Attachment 3: Operator Appeal Request to Director of Finance Attachment 4: Notice of Decision
Attachment 5: Operator's Attorney Letter to Council
Attachment 6: Appeal Notice Hearing with Council
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Beavers, Esther Approved 11/6/2024 9:13 AM
Packet Page 380 of 401

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-271

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD [APPROVING/SUSTAINING] [DENYING/OVERRULING] THE APPEAL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING

DETERMINATION REGARDING DELINQUENT TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY AND TOURISM TAX ASSESSMENT/QUALITY INN PREVIOUSLY KNOW AS SUPER 8 MOTEL LOCATED AT 2170 NORTH TEXAS STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533-323021 OWNERS: SHRI GURU HARI, LLC AND SHRI

MAHANT, LLC AND MARIE PARUNJANWALA

WHEREAS, on June 11, 2024, the City of Fairfield issued Notice of Assessment and Hearing Rights for interest due on Delinquent Transient Occupancy Tax to the operator of Super 8 (now renamed Quality Inn) located at 2170 North Texas Street for $58,356.15. The current operator of the Motel, Shri Guri Hari, LLC, through their attorney Frank A. Weiser, appealed the assessment to the finance director (in his capacity of tax administrator) on June 14, 2024, and was granted a date of hearing of July 16, 2024, at 11 a.m. to have the appeal heard; and

WHEREAS, on August 12, 2024, the City finance director, acting in their delegated capacity as the City Tax Administrator, reviewed and verified the information and documentation provided on behalf of the client by Mr. Weiser and determined that the request for relief of the tota l tax assessment amount is denied and the proper tax to be remitted remains in the full amount of $58,356.15; and

WHEREAS, Fairfield Municipal Code section 18.20 states, “Any operator aggrieved by any decision of the tax administrator with respect to the amount of such tax, interest and penalties, if any, may appeal to the council by filing a notice of appeal with the city clerk within 15 days of serving or mailing of the determination of tax due. The council shall fix a time and place for hearing such appeal and the city clerk shall give notice in writing to such operator at his last known place of address. The findings of the council shall be final and conclusive and shall be served upon the appellant in the manner prescribed above for service of notice of hearing. Any amount found to be due shall be immediately due and payable upon the service of notice ;” and WHEREAS, the Motel Operator, Shri Guri Hari, LLC, Shri Mahant, LLC, and Marie Parunjanwala, through their attorney Frank A. Weiser have timely exercised their right of appeal to the City Council through delivery to the City requesting an appeal of the Transient Occupancy Tax on or about August 23, 2024; and

WHEREAS, Fairfield Municipal Code section 18.20 requires the City Council to “fix a time and place for hearing such appeal and the collector shall give notice in writing to such person of the time and place of the hearing by serving it personally or by depositing it in the post office in the city, postage prepaid, addressed to such person at the address appearing on his last license or application;” and

Packet Page 381 of 401Attachment 1 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2024-271

Page 2 ends

WHEREAS, the council has held the hearing on the appeal of the determination regarding delinquent Transient Occupancy and Tourism Tax Assessment by hearing and considering sworn testimony from all parties wishing to be heard and receiving and considering all evidence lawfully admitted before it.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. The council finds that the appeal brought by The Motel Operator, Shri Guri Hari, LLC, Shri Mahant, LLC, and Marie Parunjanwala regarding delinquent Transient Occupancy and Tourism Tax Assessment is (choose one): APPROVED/SUSTAINED or DENIED/OVERRULED.

Section 2. City Staff for the City of Fairfield are authorized to do all things proper and necessary consistent with the findings of this resolution.

Section 3. A copy of this resolution shall be served on the hotel operator by serving it personally or depositing it in the post office in the city, postage prepaid, addressed to such person at the address appearing on the Grand Deed or application within 10 business days of this hearing. The city clerk is directed to keep a copy of the proof of service.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of November 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: MOY/BERTANI/CARR/PANDURO/TONNESEN/VACCARO/WILLIAMS

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: _____________________________________________

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: _____________________________________________

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: _____________________________________________

MAYOR
ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK
Packet Page 382 of 401Attachment 1 Page 2 of 2

Packet Page 383 of 401Attachment 2 Page 1 of 4

Packet Page 384 of 401Attachment 2 Page 2 of 4

Packet Page 385 of 401Attachment 2 Page 3 of 4

Packet Page 386 of 401Attachment 2 Page 4 of 4

Packet Page 387 of 401Attachment 3 Page 1 of 5

Packet Page 388 of 401Attachment 3 Page 2 of 5

Packet Page 389 of 401Attachment 3 Page 3 of 5

Packet Page 390 of 401Attachment 3 Page 4 of 5

Packet Page 391 of 401Attachment 3 Page 5 of 5

Packet Page 392 of 401Attachment 4 Page 1 of 3

Packet Page 393 of 401Attachment 4 Page 2 of 3

Packet Page 394 of 401Attachment 4 Page 3 of 3

Packet Page 395 of 401Attachment 5 Page 1 of 5

Packet Page 396 of 401Attachment 5 Page 2 of 5

Packet Page 397 of 401Attachment 5 Page 3 of 5

Packet Page 398 of 401Attachment 5 Page 4 of 5

Packet Page 399 of 401Attachment 5 Page 5 of 5

David G. Lim
T 415.421.8484
F 415.421.8486
E [email protected]
1 Sansome Street, Suite 2850
San Francisco, CA 94104-4811
rwglaw.com
September 17, 2024
Shri Guru Hari, LLC and Shri Mahant, LLLC and Marie
Parunjawala
Quality Inn
2170 N. Texas St.

Fairfield, CA
94533
4105 Canyon Creek Ct.

Fairfield, CA
94534
Re: Appeal Hearing Pursuant to Chapter 18 of Fairfield Municipal Code for Quality Inn (formerly Super 8) at 2170 N. Texas Street, Fairfield To Whom It May Concern:

On behalf of the City Clerk of the City of Fairfield, this letter serves as your written notice under Section 18.20 of the Fairfield Municipal Code, for the appeal hearing challenging the decision of the tax administrator regarding your business, Quality Inn, located at 2170 N. Texas Street in Fairfield.

The City Council has fixed the time and place for a hearing on your appeal for:

Date: Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Time: 6:00 pm
Location: City Council Chambers - 1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, CA 94533 Please bring your attorney and any evidence you wish to present to the City Council at the hearing.

Please arrive no later than 6:00 PM for the hearing but note that your hearing will be preceded by other City Council business, so your hearing may not start until after 7:00 PM. Please bring Packet Page 400 of 401Attachment 6 Page 1 of 2

Shri Guru Hari, LLC and Shri Mahant, LLLC and
Marie Parunjawala
4105 Canyon Creek Ct.

September 17, 2024 Page | 2
any evidence you wish to present . If you have any questions or concerns, please have your attorney, Mr. Weiser, contact the City Attorney’s office prior to the hearing date.

Very truly yours,
David G. Lim
cc: Frank Weiser via email as requested [email protected] Karen L. Rees, City Clerk
11245-0001\3013811v1.doc
Packet Page 401 of 401Attachment 6 Page 2 of 2

Fairfield City CouncilNovember 19, 2024

Fairfield City Council
November 19, 2024