Key Issues

• The Mayor’s own Executive Directive 1 precludes the development of the Midvale project
  • ED1 states “and in no instance shall the project be located in a single family or more restrictive zone.” (referring to affordable housing and shelters.) 2377 Midvale is single-family.
• The Mayor’s emergency declaration even if valid, which it isn’t, has expired for four separate reasons.  
  • The council did not ratify the declaration within seven days as required by state law.
  • No resolution was prepared for and presented to the council as required by city law.
  • The council did not renew/ratify the declaration within as required by state law.
  • The council did not renew the declaration within 90 days as required under city law and confirmed by the City Clerk. 
• Approval of the Project conflicts with state law
  • The 2377 Midvale site fails to qualify as a valid site for a low-barrier homeless shelter as it is on a single-family lot in a single-family neighborhood.
  • 2377 Midvale is not eligible for a permit under state law, is not a valid location under state law, does not meet the definition of “Emergency Shelters” under state law, does not qualify as a “homeless shelter” under state law,  and is being conducted by BOE which is not an eligible public agency under state law
  • State law requires that emergencies relate to a “sudden and unexpected” occurrence as opposed to the chronic and tragic condition of homelessness.
• Approval of the Project violated City financial policies.
  • • The full cost of the Project was not known or disclosed at the time of approval.
    • The council was not informed that “CD5 shall be responsible for the restoration of Lot No. 707 back to its existing condition as a parking lot” and in the alternative, “CD5 shall compensate the SPRF for costs associated with restoring the parking lot” 
    • The council was not informed that , “The operation and maintenance of Lot No. 707 while used for the MIHF will be the sole responsibility of CD5”
    • The council was not informed that the estimated loss to the Special Parking Revenue Fund is $530,000.
• Severe neighborhood impacts were ignored.
  • The elimination of a vital parking lot that represents the only parking for small, local businesses will have a severe impact on customer’s ability to visit the businesses after 4pm.
  • The elimination of Lot 707 also eliminates the only street-level ADA parking facility.
  • Local small businesses face damage due to parking loss.
  • Placing a “low-barrier” homeless shelter in a single-family neighborhood creates unnecessary risk of harm to families.
• The “process” used to select the site, select the vendor and select the service provider was fatally flawed, violated the public’s trust and violated city and state law
  • The Project has no application and there was no motion to initiate the project.
  • The project violates the Expo Specific Plan which provides rules, procedures, processes and zoning for the site.
  • CD5 selected the site without any input from the public or even informing the public that the site was being considered.
  • CD5 selected the vendor without competitive bidding, in secret and without making sure the vendor was a registered lobbyist and bidder..
  • CD5 selected the service provider without competitive bidding, in secret, without making sure the vendor was a registered lobbyist and bidder and while including a former employee of the service provider in the deliberative process.
  • The project has not followed any known rule, process or procedure for securing entitlements to build the Project.
  • The local neighborhood council, after being informed only after the project was a “done deal”  has overwhelmingly voted against the project.
  • False information from the council office concerning 41.18 confuses the public. (41.18 enforcement is restricted by the Street Engagement rules)
  • Serious ethics issues have yet to be resolved including the involvement of a CD5 staffer, use of unregistered lobbyists and unregistered bidders.