Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 12386 City of Palo Alto (ID # 12386) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 8/9/2021 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: 505 E Charleston: Appeal of Safe Parking Approval Title: QUASI-JUDICIAL. 505 E Charleston Road [21PLN-00068]: Appeal of Director's Approval of a Safe Parking Permit Application. Approved by the Director of Planning and Development Services on May 12, 2021. Environmental Assessment: Exempt per CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). Zoning District: Single-Family Residential (R-1) From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council deny the appeal request and uphold the Director’s Decision to approve a Safe Parking Permit at 505 E. Charleston, the Unitarian Universalist Church of Palo Alto. Executive Summary On June 11, 2021 the Planning and Development Services Department received a timely request for an appeal to the Safe Parking Permit application, 21PLN-00068 at 505 E. Charleston, the Unitarian Universalist Church of Palo Alto. The Appellant is asking for “background checks” to be required for participants in the Safe Parking Program. However, accepting this request would conflict with the County of Santa Clara’s “housing first” policy approach to addressing homelessness. Therefore, Staff recommends that Council deny the appeal request and uphold the Director’s Decision to approve the project. Background: City Council approved the Safe Parking ordinance in January of 20201, which is now Palo Alto Municipal Code 18.42.160. The global COVID-19 pandemic began shortly thereafter, dampening interest in the program. Between November 2020 and June 2021, four congregations applied 1 Link to January 13, 2021 Staff Report: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes- reports/reports/city-manager-reports-cmrs/year-archive/2020/safe-parking-10789.pdf City of Palo Alto Page 2 for Safe Parking Permits. Of the four, (1) one has been approved and is in operation; (2) one is on hold by the applicant’s choice; (3) one is currently under review; and (4) the last is the subject of this appeal. Project Description On March 10, 2021, the Unitarian Universalist Church of Palo Alto (UUCPA) submitted an application for a Safe Parking Permit. The permit allows for four (4) passenger vehicles to park onsite during the hours of 6:00 pm to 7:30 am. The Safe Parking Lot shall be operated by MOVE Mountain View (MOVE MV), as per the agreement dated December 15, 2020 (Attachment D). Required Findings A Safe Parking Permit application is required to meet the following Findings: 1. The proposed safe parking use complies with the standards listed PAMC 18.42.160(f), as follows: a. Qualifying site. Safe parking may be allowed on a parcel with an existing, legal church or religious institution use. b. Number of vehicles. At no time shall more than 4 vehicles be used for safe parking. c. Hours of operation. A safe parking use may only occur between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. d. Noise. Audio, video, generator, or other amplified sound that is audible outside the vehicles parked in the safe parking program is prohibited. e. Shelter in vehicles. All persons receiving safe parking shall shelter within the vehicles. No person shall be housed in tents, lean-tos, or other temporary facilities. f. Required facilities. Accessible restroom facilities, including a toilet and handwashing sink, shall be available to persons utilizing the site for safe parking at all times during the hours of operation. These facilities may be the existing onsite facilities or mobile facilities brought onsite on a temporary basis to serve persons utilizing safe parking. g. Contact information. The following emergency contact information shall be posted on site in a place readily visible to persons utilizing safe parking: (i) a contact phone number for the safe parking program operator; (ii) the police non- emergency phone number; and (iii) 911. The safe parking program operator shall be available at all hours of operation at the posted phone number and shall be the first contact for non-emergency matters. h. Connection to county case management system. The safe parking use shall be managed and operated by a safe parking program operator that participates in the federal Homeless Management Information System with Santa Clara County or other county. i. Safe, clean, orderly premises. The safe parking area and other onsite areas City of Palo Alto Page 3 accessed by persons utilizing safe parking shall be maintained in a safe, clean and orderly condition and manner. j. Compliance with laws. The safe parking use shall be operated in a manner that is fully in conformance with all state and local laws including regulations and permit requirements. 2. The proposed safe parking use at the location requested will not adversely affect the health, safety, or welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding area. 3. The proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the safe parking use. Director’s Approval The project was tentatively approved with conditions on May 12, 2021, subject to a 14-day appeal period (Attachment A). Per PAMC 18.42.160(d)(2)(ii), notice was sent to all owners and residents of property within 600 feet of the subject property. As a courtesy, the Planning and Development Services Department arranged community meetings for neighbors to learn more about the project and provide feedback in an organized manner, in addition to responding to typical email and phone inquiries. The two community meetings were held on Zoom on May 19th and May 25th. A third meeting was held between UUCPA and Stevenson House on June 1st. The safe parking program operator, MOVE MV, and City staff also attended this additional meeting. Due to timing of the June 1st meeting, staff extended the appeal period to June 11, 2021. Stevenson House, located at 455 E Charleston Road, directly abuts the UUCPA property. Stevenson House is an affordable, independent housing community for low-income seniors. Stevenson House residents, Board members, and UUCPA discussed various topics of concern and developed a draft neighbor agreement. While no final agreement was reached, the applicant incorporated some of the agreed items into their proposal. Those are reflected in the draft revised conditions of approval (Attachment F) and site plan (Attachment E) for the permit. These additional items include relocating the portable toilet facilities to the side of the parking lot further from Stevenson House, specifying MOVE MV’s existing policy regarding lot monitor checks, and allowing participants to return to the parking lot during the day to access the free meal provided by La Comida. Discussion: The Board of Stevenson House filed a timely appeal on June 11, 2021. The appellant requests that MOVE MV add “background checks” to their application process for participants in the program, as further described in the appeal request letter, Attachment B. At the time of this report, the applicant is not requiring background checks for participants. The safe parking operator, MOVE MV, is funded by Santa Clara County to operate this safe parking City of Palo Alto Page 4 lot. Santa Clara County does not support their contractors in conducting background checks at temporary shelters unless required by law. The County Executive’s staff further explained that the County applies a “housing first” approach to the supportive housing system. The supportive housing system includes homelessness prevention services, temporary shelter programs, and supportive housing programs. Housing first is an evidence-based practice and a growing body of evidence demonstrates: • Tenants can move into housing faster than programs offering a more traditional approach. • Tenants stay housed longer and more with more stability than in other programs. • Over 90% of tenants can retain housing stability. • In general, tenants using housing first programs access services more often, have a greater sense of choice and autonomy, and are far less costly to public systems than tenants of other programs. Temporary shelter programs, including Safe Parking, are intended to meet residents’ urgent basic needs. Applying a housing first approach to temporary shelter programs means that the County works with its contractors and partners to ensure that temporary shelter programs operate with as few barriers to entry as possible (i.e., low barrier shelters). Participating in a temporary shelter program can make other services (e.g., case management, medical services) more accessible and help residents obtain permanent housing more quickly. To support the health and safety of participants, staff, and community members, temporary shelter programs focus on providing services, addressing behaviors, and/or having resources in place to respond to unanticipated events. A program’s staffing mix and level are calibrated for the size of the program, its operational needs, and its setting. This overarching approach is consistent with recommendations from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the State’s Housing and Community Development Department, the County’s Lived Experience Advisory Board, and the County’s community of providers. The program’s relationship with local law enforcement also plays a role in supporting both the participants and the local community in feeling safe. The County stated that background checks are inconsistent with the housing first policy, as supported by HUD, as it would discourage homeless individuals from participating in the program and obtaining permanent housing. Therefore, the County does not support their contractors in conducting background checks. Due to the above policies, the applicant is not able to conduct background checks on participants. City of Palo Alto Page 5 UUCPA and the appellant have discussed options for compromise. MOVE MV has offered to modify their application forms to address the appellant’s concern. The application forms could include the opportunity for participants to self-report 1) if they are on parole or probation, and 2) if there are any legal restrictions on where they are allowed to reside. This approach is supported by the County. The appellant has not accepted this option. Stakeholder Engagement: Notices of the tentative decision were provided in accordance with the Municipal Code. In addition to the community meetings described above, staff has been in regular communication with the applicant and appellant. Applicant and appellant have been advised of this item being scheduled on the agenda and opportunities to provide public input. Environmental Review: This project is exempt from CEQA per Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). Attachments: Attachment A: Director's Tentative Approval Attachment B: Appeal Letter Attachment C: Applicant's Project Description Attachment D: Applicant's Agreement with MOVE Mountain View Attachment E: Project Plans Attachment F: Draft Revised Approval Letter Attached: Findings and Conditions of Approval May 12, 2021 Christopher Kan 505 E Charleston Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Ckan91@gmail.com Subject: 505 E Charleston Road, 21PLN-00068, Safe Parking Dear Mr. Kan: The Safe Parking application for the project referenced below was conditionally approved by planning staff on behalf of the Director of Planning and Development Services, as it was found to meet the applicable Findings set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.42.160(d). PROJECT: Request for a Safe Parking Program permit to allow overnight parking of up to four (4) vehicles as incidental to the existing religious institution. Environmental Assessment: Exempt per CEQA Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). Zoning District: R-1 (7,000). This Director’s decision shall become final fourteen (14) calendar days from the postmark date of this mailing (or on the next business day if it falls on a weekend or holiday) unless a written appeal is filed with the City Clerk pursuant to PAMC Section 18.42.160(d)(3). If a hearing is not requested, the use may begin on the fifteenth (15) day after the post date of this letter. The project approval shall be effective for eighteen months and may be extended as noted in the conditions of approval. Application for renewal must be made prior to expiration. If you have any questions regarding this determination, please do not hesitate to contact me at emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org. Sincerely, Emily Foley, AICP Project Planner DocuSign Envelope ID: FAE5A304-2C0E-44B7-AB35-D7C70AED3260 21PLN-00068 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: As set forth in PAMC 18.42.160(d), The director has found the subject safe parking permit is in conformance with the following findings: 1. The proposed safe parking use complies with the standards listed in subsection (f) of this Section 18.42.160. 2. The proposed safe parking use at the location requested will not adversely affect the health, safety, or welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding area. 3. The proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the safe parking use. The approval of this project shall be subject to the following conditions of approval. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Planning Division 1. CONFORMANCE WITH PLANS. Safe Parking Operations shall conform to the approved plans entitled, "C2_505ECharlston_PLAN.pdf,” and project description entitled, “C2_505ECharlston_DOC” submitted electronically on March 26, 2021 and on file with the Planning Department, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California except as modified by these conditions of approval. 2. QUALIFYING SITE. Safe parking must be operated with an existing, legal church or religious institution use. 3. NUMBER OF VEHICLES. At no time shall more than four (4) vehicles be used for safe parking. 4. HOURS OF OPERATION. A safe parking use may only occur between the hours of 6:00 pm and 8:00 am. 5. NOISE. Audio, video, generator, or other amplified sound that is audible outside the vehicles parked in the safe parking program is prohibited. 6. IDLING OF VEHICLES. Additional idling is allowed if necessary to provide heat to an occupied vehicle if the outside ambient temperature is below 40 degrees Fahrenheit, or idling is necessary to provide cooling to an occupied vehicle if the outside temperature is more than 85 degrees Fahrenheit. 7. SHELTER IN VEHICLES. All persons receiving safe parking shall shelter within the vehicles. No person shall be housed in tents, lean-tos, or other temporary facilities. 8. REQUIRED FACILITIES. Accessible restroom facilities, including a toilet and handwashing sink, shall be available to persons utilizing the site for safe parking at all times during the DocuSign Envelope ID: FAE5A304-2C0E-44B7-AB35-D7C70AED3260 21PLN-00068 hours of operation. These facilities may be the existing onsite facilities or mobile facilities brought onsite on a temporary basis to serve persons utilizing safe parking. 9. CONTACT INFORMATION. The following emergency contact information shall be posted on site in a place readily visible to persons utilizing safe parking: (i) a contact phone number for the safe parking program operator; (ii) the police non-emergency phone number; (iii) 911, (iv) a representative for the church, and (v) a representative for the City of Palo Alto (i.e. the Assistant Director of Planning and Development Services). The safe parking program operator shall be available at all hours of operation at the posted phone number and shall be the first contact for non-emergency matters. 10. CONNECTION TO COUNTY CASE MANGEMENT SYSTEM. The safe parking use shall be managed and operated by a safe parking program operator that participates in the federal Homeless Management Information System with Santa Clara County or other county. 11. SAFE, CLEAN, ORDERLY PREMISES. The safe parking area and other onsite areas accessed by persons utilizing safe parking shall be maintained in a safe, clean and orderly condition and manner. Litter shall be picked up on a regular basis. 12. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. The safe parking use shall be operated in a manner that is fully in conformance with all state and local laws including regulations and permit requirements. 13. ACCESS FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE. Access for Emergency Response vehicles shall be maintained at all times, to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. 14. INDEMNITY: To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside or void, any permit or approval authorized hereby for the Project, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City for its actual attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its own choice. 15. PERMIT EXPIRATION. The project approval shall be valid for a period of eighteen month from the original date of approval, unless suspended or revoked sooner as set forth in the PAMC. In the event the use has not commenced within the time limit specified above, the approval shall expire and be of no further force or effect. In no event shall a permit be valid beyond the expiration date of interim Ordinance No. 5490. 16. PERMIT EXPIRATION EXTENSION. If the director does not find any violation of the permit conditions or PAMC Section 18.42.160 during the initial 90-day period, the permit shall be automatically extended for up to an additional 270 calendar days. DocuSign Envelope ID: FAE5A304-2C0E-44B7-AB35-D7C70AED3260 21PLN-00068 17. PERMIT EXPIRATION RENEWAL. If the director does not find any violation of the permit conditions or PAMC Section 18.42.160 during the 270-day extension period, the permit shall be renewed and be valid for a period of up to one year or the expiration of this interim Ordinance No. 5490, whichever is earlier. This renewal shall take the form of an Over-the-counter (OTC) permit and be reviewed by the Director of Planning or his designee. DocuSign Envelope ID: FAE5A304-2C0E-44B7-AB35-D7C70AED3260 June 11, 2021 To Whom It May Concern: This is a letter to appeal the Unitarian Universalist Church of Palo Alto’s (UUCPA’s) Safe Parking Program (SPP) permit application, filed by Grace H. Mah on behalf of the Stevenson House Board of Directors and residents. Stevenson House is a low-income senior housing project with 160 residents at 455 E Charleston Road, Palo Alto, CA 94306. Stevenson House is next door to UUCPA, separated by Adobe Creek, and within 600 feet of the location designated for the SPP. The concerns stated in this letter are shared by residents of Stevenson House and the Stevenson House Board of Directors. BACKGROUND Stevenson House Board President Grace Mah first became aware of the City’s Director’s tentative approval of UUCPA’s SPP permit on May 13, 2021. A community zoom meeting was scheduled for May 19, 2021. The meeting notice was not mailed to Stevenson House, nor the two neighboring schools, Hoover Elementary School and Challenger School. In anticipation of participating in the meeting, Stevenson House scrambled to have residents and board members attend the zoom meeting, and President Mah contacted the headmaster at Challenger School and the principal at Hoover Elementary. Unfortunately, the original mailing list for the May 19 meeting notice was sent to the wrong mailing addresses, so another mailing was made on May 18 with a new community zoom meeting set for May 25, 2021. Stevenson House residents, board members, and staff members of John Stewart Company (Stevenson House’s property management company) attended the two zoom meetings on May 19 and May 25 and expressed their concerns about the SPP program, mainly in regard to safety for the residents, community neighbors, and children in the immediate vicinity who walk to school in the neighborhood. A question came up of whether criminal background checks would be conducted, and screening would be done to exclude violent felons and sexual offenders from the SPP program at UUCPA. This question was referred to Move Mountain View, and the Palo Alto City Planning Department representatives at both May 19 and May 25 meetings. Although the May 25 community zoom meeting was arranged with Mandarin translation for the Stevenson House residents, and held in a Stevenson House meeting room to facilitate 45 resident participants, that was the first time the residents were informed about the SPP program, and the zoom audio and meeting format were difficult for our residents to understand the background and full scope of the program. UUCPA and Move Mountain View representatives offered to attend an in-person community meeting hosted at Stevenson House outdoors on the lawn on June 1, 2021. Residents were given time to absorb the information from the recording and presentation of the zoom meetings and about 40 residents and some community members expressed concerns and asked questions about the SPP program in general and UUCPA’s planned program. Again, safety concerns were of highest priority for the residents and the question of criminal background checks was asked again but not definitively answered. A meeting was held with UUCPA to discuss a neighborhood agreement which would take into consideration a number of Stevenson House residents’ concerns, and the agreement addressed placement of the outdoor toilet, confirmation of security checks every evening, and access to the La Comida lunch program to vehicle dwellers. The agreement did not include a requirement for criminal background checks because UUCPA and Move Mountain View were going to get confirmation from the Santa Clara County Office of Supportive Housing on background checks. The appeal deadline was postponed to June 11, 2021, and there is still no answer regarding the legality of criminal background checks for vehicle dwellers applying to the SPP program. While the Stevenson House residents and Board Members support the efforts to help the less fortunate in our area, this lack of criminal background checks is of serious concern and seems to be inconsistent with the best practices established by other, successful SPP programs. While we promote the compassionate goals of helping those in need, we still need to ensure that any proposed SPP can be implemented in a responsible way and in a way that is safe for the community and vehicle dwellers themselves. SPP DOES NOT SCREEN FOR CONVICTED SEX OFFENDERS OR INDIVIDUALS CONVICTED OF RECENT, VIOLENT FELONIES Move MV has stated that it will not check to see if applicants are convicted sex offenders or have recently committed a violent felony. Failure to screen for sex offenders or recent violent felons is inconsistent with the best practices set by other cities. See examples from other SPP programs across Santa Clara County and the State: 1. Cupertino (guidelines suggest screening by experienced service provider, including Megan’s law check)1; 2. Culver City (the only people eligible for the program are “[i]ndividuals who are 18 years and older, [drive] an operational vehicle, and [complete and pass] a background check”)2; 3. Fullerton (“[a]ll participants will be required to pass a background check to be eligible to enter the program. Registered sex offenders, a history of criminal arrests, or a conviction for a violent crime are disqualifiers for the program… Each participant will be vetted by the City of Fullerton and Fullerton PD”)3; 4. Los Angeles (the SafeParking LA website states that “[a]ll adults are also screened in the National Sex Offender database”)4; 5. Monterey (participants must be alcohol and drug free, free of police warrants, and the program will not accept applicants with severe mental illness)5; 6. Morgan Hill (applicants are vetted through the Morgan Hill PD and must pass a background check)6; 1 Safe Parking Guidelines provided by the Winter Faith program. 2 https://www.culvercity.org/Services/Housing-Health-Human-Services/Safe-Park-Program 3 https://www.cityoffullerton.com/documents/Safe%20Parking%20FAQ.pdf 4 https://www.safeparkingla.org 5 http://www.onestarfishsafeparking.org/program-requirements.html 6 FOCUS Program: http://ca-morganhill.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/23469/Focus-Safe-Parking- Program_PDNewsletter_Fall2017. 7. Redwood City/San Jose (Life Moves excludes violent felons and sex offenders)7; 8. San Diego ("[a]ll adults are run through the Megan’s Law database and the National Sex Offender Registry. They are also asked if they have been convicted of a violent crime which disqualifies them for enrollment." Also, "[the operator’s] case managers will work with the Sheriff’s Department...”)8; 9. San Luis Obispo (background check required)9; 10. Santa Barbara (City of Lompoc) (resolution of the City Council requires that “participants shall submit to a criminal history background check)10; 11. Santa Cruz (the Safe Spaces Parking Program will “[d]etermine criminal background to exclude those that have a record for sexual predation, violent crime or criminal behavior associated with substance abuse.”)11; and 12. Walnut Creek (background checks for violent crimes, sexual assaults or open warrants by the police).12 In fact, the Homeless Policy Research Institute released a study of safe parking programs and noted that “[m]ost programs… screen out sex offenders and recent violent felons using a background check system” (emphasis added).13 Much like landlords presently conduct background checks for their prospective tenants, these other programs recognize the importance of screening. John Stewart Company, Stevenson House’s property manager, screens all of our housing applicants at Stevenson House. John Stewart Company’s management reports that housing providers are not prohibited from running criminal background checks in Santa Clara County. 7 https://www.211ca.org/detail/?idServiceAtLocation=211santacl- 70563584&location=santa%20cruz%20county%20ca&user= 8 https://www.jfssd.org/our-services/adults-families/safe-parking-program/safe-parking-north-county/ 9 This is required by ordinance. https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=2540 10 https://www.cityoflompoc.com/home/showpublisheddocument?id=27025 (Section I.D(2)). 11 https://www.afcsantacruz.org/safespaces-program.html (under procedures link) 12 https://trinitycenterwc.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Safe-Parking-Program-Description.pdf. This program appears to currently be on pause, possibly due to funding, but was operational for nine months. 13 https://socialinnovation.usc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Safe-Parking-Literature-Review.pdf The new FEHA law just prohibits providers from issuing blanket bans for criminal records and limits allowable denial to crimes that could have a direct impact on the community, such as violent crimes, sexual offenses, etc. I’ve attached an FAQ regarding this law for reference as Appendix A. Such a requirement would not be onerous. In order to participate in the SPP program, the Guests must have a valid license, car insurance and registration. Thus, applicants to the program should already have the documentation required in order to apply. Additionally, the ultimate goal of the program is to transition participants to stable housing and find a job. A quote from a 2018 Mercury News article about Move MV/Lots of Love states that "[t]he goal is not to merely give them a safe space, but to get them out of their vehicles and into permanent homes. Everyone who participates will have to sign up for housing and demonstrate they are serious about the task."14 Participants also need to show a willingness to work with case workers to find permanent housing. Accordingly, the Palo Alto SPP program should be finding participants who are willing to provide the information for a background check, as it demonstrates "seriousness about the task" and is an indicator of greater likelihood of their success in the program. This is especially true since background checks will often be required by landlords and employers as participants work to transition to more permanent housing (see, e.g., a survey by HR.com shows 96% of employers require background checks).15 Further, as UUCPA, along with a significant number of nearby churches who are participating in the SPP, are in close proximity to a number of homes with young children, local elementary schools and parks, the failure to check for sex offenders is of particular concern and may adversely affect the health and safety of the surrounding area. The City of Palo Alto and Move Mountain View are essentially gathering a group of unscreened individuals, placing a large number of them in close proximity to each other (and to residential 14 https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/06/12/mountain-view-nonprofit-kicking-off-2-year-trial-to-get-car-dwellers-off- streets/ 15 https://www.hr.com/en/resources/free_research_white_papers/hrcom-background-screening-june-2019- research_jwvmqi89.html homes/schools), and not safeguarding the community by running criminal background checks of these vehicle dwellers. The community members are entitled to a proactive approach to safety, with criminal background screening provided before problems occur. CONCLUSION For the reasons detailed above, the Stevenson House Board of Directors respectfully request that the approval of the UUCPA SPP program be revoked. We note that if criminal background checks are included in the vetting process, we would withdraw this appeal and support the UUCPA SPP permit and program. Sincerely, Grace H. Mah Stevenson House Board President APPENDIX A Fair Housing and Criminal History FAQ, Department of Fair Employment and Housing, April 30, 2020 THE DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING THE MISSION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING IS TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE OF CALIFORNIA FROM UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT, HOUSING AND PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS, AND FROM THE PERPETRATION OF ACTS OF HATE VIOLENCE AND HUMAN TRAFFICKING. Fair Housing And Criminal History The Fair Employment and Housing Act prohibits discrimination against tenants or homeowners based on various protected characteristics, such as race, national origin, ancestry, disability, sexual orientation, marital status, and gender identity. Housing providers sometimes check whether a person has a criminal history when making a housing decision, such as whether to rent to an individual. While providers have legitimate interests in screening potential tenants to determine if they can fulfill their obligations as tenants, individuals with criminal histories face barriers to housing even when their history bears no relationship to their ability to be responsible tenants. New regulations from the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) address when and how housing providers may lawfully consider criminal histories, in order to protect against unlawful discrimination. DFEH is providing this guidance concerning the use of criminal history by providers or operators of housing. Which California laws apply to the use of criminal history by housing providers? California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) protects people from housing discrimination based on protected characteristics including race, color, national origin, religion, disability, gender, gender identity, familial status, veteran/military status, sexual orientation, and source of income. Most housing providers are also covered by the Unruh Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of immigration status, citizenship, and primary language, among others. Having a criminal history is not in itself a protected characteristic under FEHA or the Unruh Act. However, regulations that went into effect on January 1, 2020 implement FEHA with respect to the use of criminal history in housing (California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Sections 12264-12271). When does a housing provider violate California law if they consider someone’s criminal history? A housing provider’s policy or practice regarding criminal history will violate California law when it has an unjustified discriminatory effect on members of a protected class, even when the provider had no intent to discriminate. In California as in the rest of the nation, African Americans, Hispanics (or Latinos), and certain other groups face higher rates of arrest, conviction, and incarceration than the general population. The use of criminal history information in housing decisions can therefore have a disproportionate negative affect on these protected groups. In addition, a housing provider’s policy or practice regarding criminal history will violate California law if it constitutes intentional discrimination on the basis of a protected characteristic. For example, it is unlawful for housing providers to: use criminal history screenings to intentionally exclude individuals because of their race, only run criminal history screenings on certain racial groups, or treat individuals in different racial groups differently based on comparable criminal history information. Additional information relevant to this question are provided in the FAQs below and the regulations. 1 2 PAGE 1 OF 4 APRIL 30, 2020 / DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING Fair Housing And Criminal History Who must comply with California’s fair housing laws? • Landlords • Property management companies • Homeowners associations • Public housing authorities • Real estate agents • Home sellers • Property insurers • Builders • Mortgage lenders • Tenant screening companies • Consumer reporting agencies • Others Can a housing provider advertise or indicate a blanket ban against applicants with criminal records? No. Housing providers cannot make any statement indicating a blanket ban on renting to anyone with a criminal record. The law prohibits advertisements, screening policies (oral or written), or statements with blanket bans such as “No Felons” or “We Don’t Allow Criminals Here.” However, it is not unlawful for a housing provider to advertise or state that it will run a lawful criminal history check. May a housing provider lawfully check an applicant’s criminal history? Yes. Generally, a housing provider may check the criminal history of an applicant, although there are some types of criminal history information that providers may not seek or consider (see FAQ 6 below). If a housing provider intends to deny someone housing (or otherwise take an adverse action against someone) it must be based on a past criminal conviction. And, the law requires the provider to follow certain guidelines, which are set forth in the regulations (see FAQ 7 below). Most importantly, the conviction the provider is concerned about must be a “directly-related conviction.” This means a criminal conviction that has a direct and specific negative bearing on a substantial, legitimate, and nondiscriminatory interest or purpose of the housing provider, such as the safety of other residents, the housing provider’s employees, or the property. In determining whether a criminal conviction is directly-related, a housing provider should consider the nature and severity of the crime and the amount of time that has passed since the criminal conduct occurred. For example, a ten-year-old misdemeanor conviction for a driving offense would not likely be directly-related to fulfilling financial obligations because there is no rational relationship between the violation and the identified business interest. In contrast, a recent criminal conviction for residential arson could be directly-related to the risk that an individual may injure other residents or property because there is a rational relationship between recently committing residential arson and injuring residents or property. 3 4 5 PAGE 2 OF 4 APRIL 30, 2020 / DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING Fair Housing And Criminal History 6 What types of criminal history information are a housing provider prohibited from considering? It is unlawful for a housing provider to seek or consider the following: • Arrests that did not lead to a conviction; • Information indicating that an individual has been questioned, apprehended, taken into custody, detained, or held for investigation by law enforcement; • Infractions; • Referral to or participation in a pre-trial or post-trial diversion program or a deferred entry of judgment program, unless the applicant offered this information as mitigating information (see FAQ 8 below); • Criminal convictions that have been sealed, dismissed, expunged, or otherwise rendered legally inoperative, unless the applicant offered this information as mitigating information (see FAQ 8 below); or • Adjudications or matters processed in the juvenile justice system, unless pursuant to an applicable court order or unless the applicant offered this information as mitigating information (see FAQ 8 below). If a housing provider would like to consider criminal history information (aside from the prohibited information detailed in FAQ 6 above), what should the provider’s policy or practice look like? A housing provider may consider certain criminal history, but the provider’s policy or practice should: • Be narrowly tailored and focus on whether any criminal conviction is “directly- related” (see FAQ 5 above); • Provide an opportunity for applicants to present individualized, mitigating information either in writing or in person if the housing provider is concerned about an applicant’s past conviction; • Provide written notice of the opportunity to all applicants to present mitigating information if a housing provider is concerned about a past conviction; • Consider the factual accuracy of the criminal history information of the applicant, meaning the background report does not contain outdated, incorrect, or falsified information or information that is erroneously attributed to the individual being considered; • Delay seeking, considering, or using a third-party report of criminal history information until after an individual’s financial and other qualifications are verified; • Provide a copy or description of the criminal history background check policy to an applicant upon request; and • Consider mitigating information in determining whether to rent to an applicant with a past criminal conviction. 7 PAGE 3 OF 4 APRIL 30, 2020 / DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING Fair Housing And Criminal History 8 9 What is mitigating information? Housing providers should consider mitigating information when considering an applicant’s criminal history. Mitigating information means credible information about the applicant that suggests that the applicant is not likely to pose a demonstrable risk to the health and safety of others, the property, or other substantial, legitimate, and non-discriminatory interest or purpose of the housing provider. Mitigating information must be credible information that a reasonable person would believe is true based on the source and content of the information. Mitigation information includes but is not limited to: • The age of the individual when the criminal conduct occurred; • The amount of time that has passed since the date of conviction; • Whether the conduct arose as a result of a disability; • Whether the conduct arose from status as a survivor of domestic violence; • Whether the individual has maintained a good tenant history before and/or after the conviction; • Whether there is evidence of rehabilitation efforts, including satisfactory compliance with all terms and conditions of parole and/or probation; successful completion of parole, probation, mandatory supervision, or post release community supervision; and • Other conduct demonstrating rehabilitation, such as maintenance of steady employment. May a housing provider rely on third parties to perform criminal history checks? Yes. However, it is not a defense for a housing provider to have relied on a third party’s criminal history report if the use of the criminal history violates fair housing laws, and such third parties are also subject to California’s fair housing laws. Housing providers that rely on criminal histories prepared by third parties, such as consumer reporting agencies, may wish to seek from the third party details on any criminal records discovered so that the housing provider can make a lawful, individualized assessment. Furthermore, other laws limit the extent to which consumer reporting agencies can report such information. It is unlawful for these agencies to report records of an applicant’s arrest, indictment, information, misdemeanor complaint, or conviction of a crime that, from the date of disposition, release, or parole, are more than seven years old (California Civil Code section 1785.13). Where can I obtain more information? Please see our website at www.dfeh.ca.gov for more information and resources. PAGE 4 OF 4 APRIL 30, 2020 / DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING February 17, 2021 Dear City of Palo Alto Planning Department, We at the Unitarian Universalist Church of Palo Alto (UUCPA) are writing to apply for a Safe Parking program permit. We have signed a contract with the operator Move MV. We will comply with all requirements set forth in PAMC §18.42.160. We intend to operate the program from 6 PM to 7:30 AM. Please see below for emergency contacts for the program. Thank you for your consideration, Christopher Kan UUCPA Safe Parking Chair Emergency Contacts: Move MV Office 650-861-0181 Move MV Lot Monitor 650-935-1141 Christopher Kan UUCPA Safe Parking Chair 626-840-0088 UUCPA Office 650-494-0541 Parking Area Temporary Porta- ble toilets Ch a r l e s t o n R o a d Trash Cans Driveway Driveway 6 ft chain link fence W/O privacy fabric 6 ft chain link fence with privacy fabric 6 ft chain link fence W/O privacy fabric Attached: Findings and Conditions of Approval August 9, 2021 Christopher Kan 505 E Charleston Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Ckan91@gmail.com Subject: 505 E Charleston Road, 21PLN-00068, Safe Parking - REVISED Dear Mr. Kan: The Safe Parking application for the project referenced below was conditionally approved by planning staff on behalf of the Director of Planning and Development Services, as it was found to meet the applicable Findings set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.42.160(d). PROJECT: Request for a Safe Parking Program permit to allow overnight parking of up to four (4) vehicles as incidental to the existing religious institution. Environmental Assessment: Exempt per CEQA Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). Zoning District: R-1 (7,000). This Director’s decision shall become final fourteen (14) calendar days from the postmark date of this mailing (or on the next business day if it falls on a weekend or holiday) unless a written appeal is filed with the City Clerk pursuant to PAMC Section 18.42.160(d)(3). If a hearing is not requested, the use may begin on the fifteenth (15) day after the post date of this letter. The project approval shall be effective for eighteen months and may be extended as noted in the conditions of approval. Application for renewal must be made prior to expiration. If you have any questions regarding this determination, please do not hesitate to contact me at emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org. Sincerely, Emily Foley, AICP Project Planner 21PLN-00068 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: As set forth in PAMC 18.42.160(d), The director has found the subject safe parking permit is in conformance with the following findings: 1. The proposed safe parking use complies with the standards listed in subsection (f) of this Section 18.42.160. 2. The proposed safe parking use at the location requested will not adversely affect the health, safety, or welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding area. 3. The proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the safe parking use. The approval of this project shall be subject to the following conditions of approval. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Planning Division 1. CONFORMANCE WITH PLANS. Safe Parking Operations shall conform to the approved plans entitled, "C2_505ECharlston_PLAN.pdf,” and project description entitled, “C2_505ECharlston_DOC” submitted electronically on March 26, 2021 and on file with the Planning Department, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California except as modified by these conditions of approval. 2. QUALIFYING SITE. Safe parking must be operated with an existing, legal church or religious institution use. 3. NUMBER OF VEHICLES. At no time shall more than four (4) vehicles be used for safe parking. 4. HOURS OF OPERATION. A safe parking use may only occur between the hours of 6:00 pm and 8:00 am. 5. NOISE. Audio, video, generator, or other amplified sound that is audible outside the vehicles parked in the safe parking program is prohibited. 6. IDLING OF VEHICLES. Additional idling is allowed if necessary to provide heat to an occupied vehicle if the outside ambient temperature is below 40 degrees Fahrenheit, or idling is necessary to provide cooling to an occupied vehicle if the outside temperature is more than 85 degrees Fahrenheit. 7. SHELTER IN VEHICLES. All persons receiving safe parking shall shelter within the vehicles. No person shall be housed in tents, lean-tos, or other temporary facilities. 8. REQUIRED FACILITIES. Accessible restroom facilities, including a toilet and handwashing sink, shall be available to persons utilizing the site for safe parking at all times during the 21PLN-00068 hours of operation. These facilities may be the existing onsite facilities or mobile facilities brought onsite on a temporary basis to serve persons utilizing safe parking. 9. CONTACT INFORMATION. The following emergency contact information shall be posted on site in a place readily visible to persons utilizing safe parking: (i) a contact phone number for the safe parking program operator; (ii) the police non-emergency phone number; (iii) 911, (iv) a representative for the church, and (v) a representative for the City of Palo Alto (i.e. the Assistant Director of Planning and Development Services). The safe parking program operator shall be available at all hours of operation at the posted phone number and shall be the first contact for non-emergency matters. 10. CONNECTION TO COUNTY CASE MANGEMENT SYSTEM. The safe parking use shall be managed and operated by a safe parking program operator that participates in the federal Homeless Management Information System with Santa Clara County or other county. 11. SAFE, CLEAN, ORDERLY PREMISES. The safe parking area and other onsite areas accessed by persons utilizing safe parking shall be maintained in a safe, clean and orderly condition and manner. Litter shall be picked up on a regular basis. 12. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. The safe parking use shall be operated in a manner that is fully in conformance with all state and local laws including regulations and permit requirements. 13. ACCESS FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE. Access for Emergency Response vehicles shall be maintained at all times, to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. 14. INDEMNITY: To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside or void, any permit or approval authorized hereby for the Project, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City for its actual attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its own choice. 15. PERMIT EXPIRATION. The project approval shall be valid for a period of eighteen month from the original date of approval, unless suspended or revoked sooner as set forth in the PAMC. In the event the use has not commenced within the time limit specified above, the approval shall expire and be of no further force or effect. In no event shall a permit be valid beyond the expiration date of interim Ordinance No. 5490. 16. PERMIT EXPIRATION EXTENSION. If the director does not find any violation of the permit conditions or PAMC Section 18.42.160 during the initial 90-day period, the permit shall be automatically extended for up to an additional 270 calendar days. 21PLN-00068 17. PERMIT EXPIRATION RENEWAL. If the director does not find any violation of the permit conditions or PAMC Section 18.42.160 during the 270-day extension period, the permit shall be renewed and be valid for a period of up to one year or the expiration of this interim Ordinance No. 5490, whichever is earlier. This renewal shall take the form of an Over-the-counter (OTC) permit and be reviewed by the Director of Planning or his designee. Neighbor Agreement Conditions The following conditions have been voluntarily agreed upon between the neighbors and the Unitarian Universalist Church of Palo Alto, and as modified by the City to ensure implementation: 18. LOT MONITORS. Move MV shall ensure that a lot monitor checks in at least three times per evening while the program is operating. These check ins will happen when clients arrive in the evening, in the middle of the night, and when clients leave in the morning. 19. MEALS AT LA COMIDA. Safe parking guests are allowed to access meal services from La Comida at Stevenson House. Safe parking guests will be advised on the operating hours of the La Comida program and will be allowed to park during the day at UUCPA to access meals. The time shall not exceed a window between 30 mins before and 30 min after the operating hours of the La Comida program.