APPLICATION NUMBER PLN23-360;APN 516-210-020; DATE OF HEARING DECEMBER 19, 2024
1 | Page
CPSA [Hereinafter Applicant], hereby request that the following statement be read into the record in preparation for tonight’s hearing and that it be included as an attachment and read into the record and becomes an official part of the City of Richmond planning commission meeting.
We further request that it be reflected in the minutes of the subject meeting.
Applicant further request a continuance of the hearing in consideration of the following:
APPLICANT DID NOT REFUSE CONDITIONS PROPOSED
BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Contrary to the current staff report, and the statements made by Commissioner Jonathan Harrison during the hearing on November 7, 2024, Applicant never rejected the proposed conditions.
The applicant merely requested modifications [ if feasible] and clarification regarding the scope of the conditions to better understand the proposals and proposed conditions.
The conditions were never rejected and making simple inquiries does not constitute a rejection of the proposed conditions.
Applicant therefore requests that the hearing be continued for reconsideration.
Applicant also request waiver of any and all appellate fees to appeal the matter to the Governing Body or City Council if the request for continuance is not granted.
APPLICANT WAS SOLICITED BY THE CITY OF
RICHMOND TO ENGAGE IN THIS VENTURE ON THE
CITY’S BEHALF AND TO BENEFIT THE CITY AND IS
NOW BEING SUBSEQUENTLY TARGETED FOR DENIAL.
APPLICATION NUMBER PLN23-360;APN 516-210-020; DATE OF HEARING DECEMBER 19, 2024
2 | Page
Contrary to the assertions of the commission and the staff report, this project was approved by the City of Richmond and was a functioning entity/nonprofit organization acting directly under the authority of the City of Richmond.
In reliance upon this authority, entity/nonprofit organization and applicant expended significant nonprofit resources, engaged in subleases and contracts and is financially and contractually committed to several third parties resulting in significant financial exposure to CPSA. Denial of the application will result in a significant financial blow to the organization and expose it to several third party lawsuits.
Additionally, it should be noted that this program was originally The City of Richmond’s program and will remain a program Conducted On Behalf Of the City of Richmond. Applicant is being treated unfairly and inaccurately portrayed as a rogue entity attempting to disrupt a neighborhood, when in fact, entity/CPSA was at all times acting on behalf of the city of Richmond.
BARRAGE OF HATEFUL RACIALLY CHARGED
CONDUCT BY ATTENDEES AT THE SUBJECT MEETING
IN WHICH NO ACTION WAS TAKEN BY THE CITY OF
RICHMOND PLANNING COMMISSION
Applicant has been subjected to a barrage of hateful and discriminatory conduct by several members of the community including the use of blatant illegal racial slurs such as “Niggers”, and “Go Back to Africa” among other threats.
Therefore, applicant believes that it has never been given a fair and impartial hearing. Applicant has due process rights including equal protection under the laws.
There is no demonstrative evidence of any criminal activity at the subject site, only speculation, and conjecture recited by a few loud and bolsters members of the community.
APPLICATION NUMBER PLN23-360;APN 516-210-020; DATE OF HEARING DECEMBER 19, 2024
3 | Page
Richmond is a “Drug Ridden City” and this project is an opportunity to mitigate the impact of such substance abuse upon the City.
Nonetheless, Applicant is being treated unfairly because Applicant is being task with completely resolving the cities drug problem and ensuring that crime will not occur, when neither the US Government, the State of California nor the City of Richmond have been able to do so.
CPSA should be given proper consideration by the planning commission to realize that CPSA is providing a service to the community to mitigate the City’s current drug problems and is not a disservice to the community, nor harmful to the city, in spite of hyperbole and diatribe from a few members of the community based entirely upon hearsay.
As a public entity, the planning commission is obligated to do a further analysis as to whether this venture would be a root cause of increasing crime in the neighborhood.
Reliance upon hearsay is insufficient to establish a denial of the subject application. In fact, a more scientific and reasoned approach will reveal that CPSA is providing a service which will mitigate crime, drug use and substance abuse in the area, substantially benefiting the City of Richmond.
The racial comments referenced herein above and corresponding conduct were made and committed openly during the various meetings and no action was taken to curtail or prevent such conduct. Most egregiously, the comments, threats and hate speech was simply ignored by the planning commission.
Additionally, the conduct in question was prohibited by Resolution Number 106.16 adopted December 6, 2016 by the City of Richmond.
The planning commission had a duty to take affirmative action to ensure that the applicants had a fair hearing, free of hate speech and attacks.
Nonetheless, no action was taken.
APPLICATION NUMBER PLN23-360;APN 516-210-020; DATE OF HEARING DECEMBER 19, 2024
4 | Page
Although free speech is protected, hate speech is not protected in a public meeting. See Acosta v. City of Costa Mesa, 718 F.3d 800 (9th Cir. 2013), and Steinburg v. Chesterfield County Planning Comm’n, 527 F.3d 377 (4th Cir. 2008),
Officials presiding over such meetings have a duty and obligation to cut off speech which they reasonably perceive to be, or imminently to threaten, a disruption of the orderly and fair progress of the discussion, whether by virtue of its irrelevance, its duration, or its very tone and manner.
Conclusion: Applicant request a continuance of the hearing for reconsideration of its application and an opportunity to meet with planning commission staff prior to the next meeting to resolve any concerns with the conditions, and to determine whether modifications of any of the conditions are appropriate.
CPSA Electronically Acknowledged and Signed.
Date: December 19, 2024.