Lawsuit may delay Alexander Crossing apartments

By CHANTAL M. LOVELL
Napa Valley Register Monday, September 18, 201

A pending lawsuit will likely delay construction of 134 new apartments in southeast Napa, but it is too soon to tell for how long.
St. Anton Partners received City Council approval in August to build the Alexander Crossing apartments at 190 Silverado Trail. The Sacramento-based developer had planned to break ground later this year or early next, depending on weather, said Robert Lawler, a project manager.
That schedule is now up in the air following the filing of a lawsuit on Aug. 31 by neighbor Debra Phairas and the Neighbors Against Alexander Crossings, an unincorporated association.
The suit asks the court to prevent St. Anton from “engaging in any physical construction or pre-construction activities” related to the apartment construction while the case is pending.
“We’re still in the process of getting our permits,” Lawler said. It’s too soon to tell how long construction could be delayed as a result of the lawsuit, he said.
Lawler said St. Anton Partners has hired a land-use attorney to help it defend against allegations that include the assertion that the site is zoned for single-family residences.
St. Anton Partners is named as a defendant in the lawsuit along with the city of Napa, the City Council and property owner ZR Gateway LLC.
City attorney Michael Barrett said the city is preparing its defense, including a record of the process by which the apartments were approved.
“In general, the court will hear the substance of each party’s position within approximately 9 to 12 months,” he wrote in an email.
In the meantime, Lawler said the developer will continue to seek permits as planned. If a judge does order them to stop all work, or prevents construction from beginning, he is unsure whether the apartments will be ready for occupancy by the spring of 2013, its original estimated date of completion.
Latinos Unidos del Valle de Napa y Solano, a group that advocates for affordable housing, said the legal challenge further delays people who need affordably- to moderately-priced housing from moving to the city in which they work.
“Alexander Crossing would provide some moderate-income units, and of those 134, 27 would be affordable to low- and very-low-income residents,” said David Grabill, a Santa Rosa attorney who represents the group. Latinos Unidos has previously sued the city and county over lack of affordable housing.
“Right now, one-third of the people who work in Napa County commute from other counties. Most of those people find housing in Napa too expensive. A lot of those people would be interested in Alexander Crossing,” Grabill said.
“Napa has a long way to go to meet its affordable housing needs,” he said. “(Alexander Crossing) is a drop in the bucket, but it’s a drop which is better than no drop. We’re sad the neighbors filed this.”
Napa’s housing manager, Jan Maurer-Watkins, said all new developments are required to make at least 10 percent of their units affordable to people who make 50 percent or less of the area’s median income or pay a fee to contribute to future affordable housing projects.
While the 27 promised affordable units at Alexander Crossing are needed, so are the market-rate apartments, she said.
“There’s more of a demand for rental housing right now because of the foreclosures that have happened over the past years,” she said. “By this project not going through, this would impact the ability of a whole range of Napa residents from finding residences that are affordable to them.”
The neighbors’ attorney, Allan C. Moore, of Danville, said the case is not about preventing apartments from being built or delaying a partially affordable housing project. He said the neighbors behind the suit just want to make sure laws are followed.
“We do not oppose any affordable units, but we do want good government,” Moore said.
The primary issue is whether zoning laws were followed, Moore said. The neighbors allege in the complaint that “a significant portion” of the project is zoned for single-family use, therefore an apartment complex may not be built there.
“I think everybody should care about this,” Moore said. “The multiple-family use was approved in a place that only allows single-family use. ... The general public should always be concerned that the city only approve uses allowed in that zoning.”
Moore equated the alleged wrongdoing with allowing a gas station to be constructed in the heart of a residential area.
The case also accuses the city and other defendants of misleading the public by listing the wrong Assessor’s Parcel Numbers in documents, and failing to do a full environmental impact report.
Grabill said he fears that this type of opposition to new housing projects will deter others from trying to build in Napa. “It’s a red flag to other developers to stay away,” he said.
“We remain committed to the project and we are going to defend it,” Lawler said.


Read more: http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/lawsuit-may-delay-alexander-crossing-apartments/article_4bafbbfe-e271-11e0-8e4a-001cc4c002e0.html#ixzz1YMwpcFF3

WSJ - Suit Stirs Napa County Housing Fight

By BOBBY WHITE
WALL STREET JOURNAL - AUGUST 11, 2011

NAPA—A lawsuit claiming Napa County discriminates against minorities in its housing policies is set to come to trial next week, putting a spotlight on migrant workers who flock to the region's vineyards for jobs but have few places to live.

The civil case in state Superior Court involves delayed plans by Napa County to build affordable housing. The suit claims, in part, that the slow pace of such
construction amounts to discrimination by the county against low-income workers. Napa County officials say the claims are unfounded.

The lawsuit was filed in 2009, and later divided into two elements: one involving the specifics of where the county wanted to build low-income housing and another alleging discrimination in the county's overall approach. After a trial, Napa Superior Court Judge Raymond Guadagni sided in June with Napa County on the specifics of its housing plans.

Next up is the part of the case involving alleged discrimination. The plaintiffs—Latinos Unidos, a migrant-labor group funded by member donations, and three individuals—claim the county's stalled efforts at developing affordable housing are a
form of discrimination because Hispanics and African-Americans make up a disproportionately large percentage of the Bay Area's economically disadvantaged.

Such discrimination cases aren't unusual, and the attorney behind the current case—David Grabill, who represents Latinos Unidos—has been successful at forcing counties to build more affordable housing, including prior victories in Napa and
Sonoma counties.

"The county benefits from low-income laborers in their hotels and fields but when it's time for these workers to find somewhere to live the county seems to be saying, no thank you," Mr. Grabill said.

Napa housing officials say the county doesn't discriminate. "The county feels that it's currently in compliance with state law and has worked to improve our affordable housing stock," said Hillary Gitleman, director of conservation, development and planning for Napa County. "Instead of working collaboratively we are now involved in litigation. It's a disappointment."

Ms. Gitleman says the county has designated more than 200 second units, small apartments similar to mother-in-law quarters, for low-income housing. She says the county also operates three farm-worker centers and a housing trust fund that has contributed millions of dollars to producing affordable housing over the past 20
years.

The conflict highlights tensions between housing advocates and some of the Bay Area's affluent communities over accommodating low-income residents.

There are about 1,100 units of affordable housing in Napa County. Annually, about 7,000 farm laborers pick grapes and other farm products in the county, with about 4,000 of them staying year-round, according to a study by the University of California, Davis.

Cathy Creswell, acting director of the California Department of Housing and Community Development, said the state's affordable-housing mandate places a responsibility on municipalities to identify existing and projected low-price-housing needs and make a plan for how they will address them. Ms. Creswell said the state gives local government leeway to meet the mandates.

Residents in North Bay counties are staunchly against sprawl, passing numerous ordinances and ballot measures to limit growth and protect agricultural land. Such measures can rub against moves to expand low-cost housing. Advocates contend that some immigrant workers have been forced to sleep under bridges, in their cars and on the steps of local churches.

"It was pretty bad when I first arrived," said the Rev. John Brenkle, pastor of St. Helena Catholic Church, who came to Napa County in 1986. "They slept near the entrance of the Carmelite Monestary. For a while we had a tent city there."

Since 1991, Mr. Brenkle said his organization, Napa Valley Community Housing, has helped build about 900 units of housing for low-income and very low-income workers, an effort that costs about $1.2 million a year to operate. The county and vineyards in the area pay the operating expenses.

In 2003, Mr. Grabill filed his first suit against Napa County, arguing it didn't provide enough affordable housing to comply with state law. In 2004, Napa County Superior Court Judge Scott Snowden sided with Mr. Grabill and as part of the settlement the county agreed to set aside land in unincorporated areas and contribute
more funds to an affordable-housing fund created by the county. The fund now stands at $20 million.

In 2007 Napa County leaders scuttled plans to build near a golf course, just outside the city limits of Napa and instead designated locations in a desolate stretch of land in the northeast section of the county. When state regulators examined the locations they judged them inadequate. The locations lacked access to public
transportation and were miles away from shopping districts. The move prompted Mr. Grabill to sue the city.

But after Judge Guadagni's June ruling, the county can move ahead with those plans.

For Maria Serrano, finding affordable housing has become a pressing issue. Ms. Serrano, 32 years old, lives with her parents, three siblings and her 3-year-old daughter in a two bedroom mobile home in Napa City. She says all of her family members work in the vineyards or wineries and it has been difficult to find housing in the county she can afford.

"There are a lot of people like me who work really hard and just want to live somewhere they can afford," she said.

Register says Lawsuit led to better housing plan

Decade-old lawsuit led to better housing plan

Napa Valley Register editorial | Posted: Sunday, July 3, 2011 12:00 am

The bedrock principle on which the Napa Valley has flourished both economically and culturally in the last half-century has centered on protecting its agriculture. But safeguarding land against development doesn’t excuse the county or its cities from state-mandated housing obligations.

That delicate balance between ag preservation and new housing requirements makes for some difficult planning challenges. Every choice is thoroughly scrutinized not just locally, but by litigious affordable housing advocates.

When Napa Superior Court Judge Ray Guadagni ruled in June that the county’s housing plan complied with California state law — in response to a challenge by attorney David Grabill, representing Latinos Unidos del Valle de Napa y Solano — it showed that the county is, in fact, balancing its goals well.

“We were relieved,” County Planning Director Hillary Gitelman said. “One of the frustrating things for me is that we spent all this time and energy and money debating the finer points of the law when we could have been spending all of that time, energy and money on providing affordable housing.”

Litigation may be the enemy of progress now, but it was also likely the original catalyst for the county’s current, more progressive, look at its housing needs.

Almost a decade ago, Latinos Unidos and Grabill first sued the county over its housing plans after the county’s Housing Element lost units to the incorporation of American Canyon. Expensive deals between the county and the cities of Napa and American Canyon — but not much housing — were the result.

That lawsuit may have been the foundation for the county’s subregional housing alliance, which has brought the county and its municipalities together to share future housing allocations from the Association of Bay Area Governments. Housing numbers will now be given to Napa County and its municipalities  to distribute in a way that makes more planning sense for the entire region.

“It would be fair to say that there was sort of a head-in-the-sand attitude toward housing in the county prior to that first lawsuit,” said Larry Florin, the county’s housing director. “It certainly has evolved into us thinking more proactively about how we deal with it.”

That evolution has grown to include consideration for state legislation like Senate Bill 375 and Assembly Bill 32, which called for future development to be near a city’s transportation network  to cut down on greenhouse gas emissions.

And development dollars can go a lot further when, for example, affordable housing incentives come from both county and city sources, as evidenced with the recent contributions to the Alexander Crossing proposal in the city of Napa.

Napa County has righted its housing plans in the last decade and made a real attempt at meeting our ever-changing housing needs.

The county’s actions have demonstrated an interest in doing more than just meeting a planning obligation.

Hopefully, livable affordable housing units will follow soon.

For some Napans, “ag preserve” will forever mean “no more houses anywhere in Napa County.”

But that’s not the law, and that’s not the county’s approach to the future.

Fight for Affordable Housing- Press Release June 5,2011

Luchando por viviendas esequibles- Comunicado de prensa
*Cada parrafo es seguido por su traduccion en espanol
*Este blog no permite acentos ortograficos


By Hector Olvera, Chair
Latinos Unidos del Valle de Napa y Solano

...We are fighting for the farmworkers who pick the grapes that make the winery owners very wealthy, and for the housekeepers who clean the hotel rooms for the tourists in the luxury hotels, for the workers who was the dishes in the fancy restaurants, and clean the houses of those lucky enough to own a home in Napa County. Our labor keeps this County economically properous. But city and county officials marginalize us. Thousands of us who work in Napa County cannot afford to live here...

Estamos luchando por los trabajadores agricolas que cosechcan las uvas que hacen los duenos de bodega muy ricos, y para las amas de casa que limpian las habitaciones para los turistas en los hoteles de lujo, para los trabajadores que lavan los platos en los restaurantes de lujo, y limpan las casas de aquellos que tienen la suerte de ser duenos de una casa en el condado de Napa. Nuestro trabajo sostiene la prosperidad economicaeste de este Condado. Pero funcionarios de la ciudad y el conado nos marginan. Miles de nosotros que trabajan en el conado de Napa no pueden permitirse el lujo de vivir aqui...

...The law prohibits cities and counties from discriminating against low income families and racial minorities in zoning and land use policies. But Napa County has not approved a single affordable housing unit for farmworkers and their families or other low wage workers in many years...
... La ley prohibe a ciudades y condando discriminar contra las familias de bajos ingresos y los minorias raciales en las politicas de zonificacion y uso de la tierra. Pero el condado de Napa no ha aprobado una sola unidad de vivienda asequible para los trabajadores agricolas y sus famlies u otros trabajadores con salarios bajos en mucho tiempo...


...Many farmworkers must leave their families for weeks or months in far away cities while they work in Napa vineyards. That is why we have filed a lawsuit against the County. We want to stop this discrimination against low income and Latino families.
...Muchos trabajadores agricolas deben dejar a sus familias durante semanas o meses en ciudades lejanas mientras trabajan en los vinedos de Napa. Por eso hemos presentado una demanda contra el condado. Queremos poner fin a esta discriminacion en contra de familias de bajos ingresos y latinas.


The Court has tentatively decided that the County's General Plan Housing Element meets the requirements of state law. We believe that the law requires our County to approve more than zero units of housing for workers in the County...
El Tribunal de Justicia ha decidido provisionalmente que el Plan General de Vivienda en el Condado cumple con los requisitos de lal ley estatal. Creemos que la ley exige que nuestro condado apruebe mas de cero unidadesde vivienda para los trabajadores en el conado...

...We believe in preserving the County's open spaces, but we also believe that all person who work in Napa County should be able to live here if they choose- in decent affordable housing. Not in some bunkhouse homeless shelter for $10/night, but with their family in a home; with their children in our Napa County schools.
...Creemos en la preservacion de espacios abiertos del condado, pero tambien creemos que todas las personas que trabajan en el conado de Napa deberian ser capaz de vivir aqui si asi lo desan, en materia de vivienda asquible decente. No en un barracon de refugio para personas sin hogar a $10 por noche, pero con su familia en una casa, con sus hijos en nuestras escuelas del condado de Napa.

Almost one third of all the people who work in Napa County live outside the County and drive long distances to work each day...The County and its cities need to allow housing to be built so that people who work here can also live here.
Casi un tercio de todas las personas que trabajan en el conado de Napa viven fuera del condado y conducen largas distancias para trabajar cada dia...El condado y sus ciudades necesitan permitir que las viviendas se construyan para que la gente que trabaja aqui tambien puedan vivir aqui.



To view the complete press release click on the image above
Para ver el comunicado de prensa completo, haga 'click' en la seguna imagen

LUNA Letter to Sheriff re Vehicle Impoundments

February 12, 2011
Via Fax and Mail

Sheriff Douglas Koford
County Sheriff Building
1535 Airport Boulevard
Napa, CA 94558
Fax: 707 253 4193

Dear Sheriff Koford,

Latinos Unidos del Valle de Napa y Solano is a public benefit corporation which has been representing, informing and assisting Latinos in Napa and Solano Counties for more than ten years.

We have received complaints from residents of Napa County concerning police seizures
of vehicles because drivers do not have a valid drivers license. As you know, losing a car or truck is a devastating economic loss to a lower income family. That car or truck is crucial to getting to work, and without work, the family will be homeless and destitute.

We understand that Sheriffs Deputies have an obligation to enforce state and local laws, including those which prohibit persons who do not have licenses from driving. But it does not follow that cars and trucks operated by persons who do not have licenses must be impounded.

Many law enforcement agencies recognize the extreme hardship which impounding these
vehicles entails and have developed policies which allow friends or family members who have valid licenses to retrieve the vehicles. We would appreciate hearing about the policies which the Sheriff's Department has concerning impoundment of vehicles.
Please consider this letter to be a request pursuant to the California Public Records Act to review documents concerning any poicies which the Sheriffs Department currently has in place relating to impoundment of vehicles where the driver does not have a valid drivers license.

We would also welcome an opportunity to meet with you to discuss this issue and others that affect Latinos in Napa County.

Sincerely,
/s/
Hector Olvera, President
Latinos Unidos del Valle de Napa y Solano