.

City To Study Hospital Issue, Co-existence Of Faith, Fun & Law

Long meeting Tuesday night creates two study groups.

 

After some debate, the City Council formed an ad hoc committee Tuesday night to look into how officials could or should respond if Sutter Health moves ahead with plans to close San Leandro Hospital and its emergency room.

In other action at Tuesday night's regular meeting, the council heeded critics and decided to study instead of adopting a zoning change proposed by city staff that would ban recreation and entertainment in San Leandro's industrial zone.

That issue relates directly to San Leandro's long-running court battle with the Faith Fellowship Worship Center.

Possible hospital closure called a 'disaster'

Mayor Stephen Cassidy proposed the ad hoc committee to study the possible hospital closure, calling the shutdown a potential "disaster" for the community.

Councilwoman Joyce Starosciak question what such a committee could hope to accomplish and ended up voting no vote on the motion to form the study group.

Councilwoman Diana Souza, who worried that too much staff time would be devoted to the study, abstained. The measure passed with five votes.

Cassidy, Vice Mayor Michael Gregory and Councilwoman Ursula Reed will serve on the ad hoc group, which forms amid rumors of a possible deal that might keep the hospital or at least its emergency room open.

Whether there is anything to the rumors and what role the city might play remain to be seen, but Cassidy took the position that officials should at least attempt to influence the outcome.

Debate over ban on fun -- and faith? -- in the industrial zone

The crux of the city's battle with the Faith Fellowship -- a congregation that has outgrown its Manor Street location -- is that San Leandro's zoning code had allowed entertainment and recreational uses in its industrial areas while the church was not allowed to relocate there.

That triggered a lawsuit in which the Fellowship argued that it was denied a permit because it was a religious group -- which, it asserts, runs afoul of a federal law designed to help churches win such disputes with local authorities.

The case has gone all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and back with Faith Fellowship being given the upper hand in a Wall Street Journal analysis of the case in November.

What's all this got to do with the zoning change considered last night?

Plenty, according to Deborah Fox, a specialist with the Meyers Nave law firm which is representing the city in the case.

Fox said that in the next stage in the case a federal judge will examine whether the city's zoning code is unfair to Faith Fellowship.

Fox told the council that the judge will look at the code as it exists at the time of the trial, not as it existed when the case began.

"So changes today will affect the litigation," Cassidy said by way of question, and Fox agreed.

The inference would be that if San Leandro prohibits all recreational and entertainment uses in industrial zones, the city could argue that it treats religious congregations the same as other assembly.

Opposition to this CYA strategy

But the proposal before the council has met with solid opposition. The planning commission has already rejected the idea, putting city staff in the unusual position of urging the council to overrule its own advisory process.

Several speakers opposed the change at Tuesday's meeting.

They ranged from city critic Marga Lacabe, who blogged about the issue, to civic booster Dave Johnson of the Chamber of Commerce.

Lacabe and Johnson used identical arguments -- that recreation and entertainment are compatible with the high-tech the city wants to attract, because the young professionals employed by tech firms work odd hours and like to mix work and play close to their offices.

Former planning commissioner and current city council candidate Chris Crow also spoke at the meeting. He noted that the proposed changes basically vindicate the Fellowship's position that, so far as zoning goes, there is no difference between "listening to a preacher and laughing at a comedian."

Caught between a rock and a hard place, the council decided to refer the issue to its rules committee, consisting of Cassidy, Reed and Councilman Jim Prola.

Fox told the council that the clock was ticking and that the changes had to be in place before the trial began -- no date is set yet -- for the new code to be considered.

Get San Leandro Patch delivered by email. Visit http://sanleandro.patch.com/newsletters

 

 

 

 

 

Marga Lacabe February 26, 2012 at 12:38 AM
anthony, as I told the City Council on Monday, the City has to change the Zoning Code. As it stands, not only it violates RLUIPA, but it also violates the US Constitution (that's what Covenant basically said). The changes suggested by staff, originally and later, will bring the zoning code to compliance with RLUIPA and the constitution. But those changes, as I've expressed, will be negative for San Leandro. Instead, what the city can do to resolve this constitutional issue, is to amend the code to allow for Assembly use in the industrial area of town. And indeed, the fact that neither staff nor the city council addressed this issue (which I also brought up), further shows you how the "fixing the code" was never really a consideration. But they can still do it. If not, they should be honest with the community and tell us why not. I don't think this will interfere with their legal strategy. FF's lawyers have bested them before the 9th circuit and the Supreme Court, we can assume these lawyers are not idiots and they can figure out what the purpose of the city's code change is. BTW, neither of your examples constitute "entertainment" or "recreation" under the zoning code, so neither is currently permitted.
anthony February 26, 2012 at 12:41 AM
This is where we part ways. Did the city attorney deny a connection, or cite ongoing litigation as restricting a response? The exchange from the December 15th meeting has me confused, and wondering what sort of restraints staff and counsel were/are working under in presenting the zoning plans, without affecting present litigation.
Chris Crow February 26, 2012 at 02:03 AM
I like your style anthony. This would be a healthy and reasonable place for us to disagree. I was there, it was me asking the questions, it was me who told the staff and attorney that i didn't believe the motivations they were presenting to us. It is me who feels their answers amounted to a lie(s). However, in their defense they would certainly present the case you are making is how it went down. I can not speak for the minutes though because I was immediately removed from the Planning Commission following the 12/15 meeting and I was not allowed to confirm or alter my statements in the final minutes. (where did you find the minutes by the way?...they have not been posted online yet in the planning commission section...I know I have a copy from somewhere else...where did you get yours? just curious...no insinuation) Either way the fact still remains the staff framed the changes as miscellaneous (literally, Planner Livermore stated the Planning Department had extra time on their hands and decided this was a good issue to work on), and whether they were intended to be a lesson learned from Faith Fellowship, a required changed to balance the Faith Fellowship issue, or a necessary change to defend against Faith Fellowship, there was nothing miscellaneous and/or random about these changes.
anthony February 26, 2012 at 02:39 AM
http://weblink.sanleandro.org/publicweblink8/DocView.aspx?id=300755&page=1&searchid=09d2584e-8ef3-4220-b320-92e6d69cbddc&dbid=0
Chris Crow February 26, 2012 at 03:33 AM
it's great to see someone utilizing our fabulous public records database. I encourage you to use it more and more and more. I mean that in all sincerity. it is this community's greatest source of information. :) take a look at this document. this is a supplemental staff report (information it says that was inadvertanly omitted) submitted on the zoning appeals hearing for Faith Fellowship where the church lays out its arguments about why it should be allowed to move into the industrial zone because recreation and entertainment is allowed, and because the church incorporates both entertainment and recreation for its congregation. http://weblink.sanleandro.org/publicweblink8/DocView.aspx?id=208044&searchid=5c9c5462-dc85-4abf-a1cd-56a565c421b9&dbid=0

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »