Oildale resident sues Kern County over 'Tiney Oaks' homes

Feb. 3—An Oildale resident is suing Kern County in the latest charge in a communal resistance to the Tiney Oaks Supportive Services Village.

The suit contends that the county-run project, a fully-fenced 50-cabin shelter set for a 2.89-acre stretch at 201 E. Roberts Lane in Oildale, violates zoning laws and was approved without any legally-required public notice or hearings.

Michelle Louviere, an Oildale resident who in 2018 protested in support of the long-stalled Covey Cottages project, filed the suit and deferred to her lawyer Brandon Martin for comment.

"Typically when there's a controversial county project like this, you'd like to see some community outreach of some kind — like community meetings," Martin said. "We didn't see that for Tiney Oaks. In fact, the rollout was incredibly secretive, at least in my opinion."

Martin said the earliest public document he could find was the site plan, which was filed "sometime in October of 2022" and the Notice of Exemption from California Environmental Quality Act filed on Oct. 27. State laws explain that CEQA allows 180 days for the public to challenge a project, unless the corresponding government files and posts a Notice of Exemption, which shortens the period to 30 days.

The suit said a "vague" notice of exemption was posted on Halloween with an "incomplete, defective and misleading description" of its zoning. Martin believes that by the way this exemption notice is phrased, it was never actually filed for a project approval. The posting also read that the first public hearing would be held at a 2 p.m. Nov. 8 meeting.

"When people's attention is elsewhere," Martin said. "Nov. 8 is a big news day, but for the general election — not this."

But by that time, the lawsuit read, the project had already been fully permitted.

As the previous campaign manager for District 3 Board of Supervisors candidate Brian Smith, who lost to Jeff Flores in the November election for supervisor, Martin said he and others "were really surprised" county staff didn't mention the shelter, despite homelessness being "the hot-button issue during the campaign."

"Jeff Flores, who worked in Mike Maggard's office as the District 3 chief of staff, was the person who was supposed to be doing the outreach for Oildale," Martin said. "(He) neglected to (make) any mention of the project until Nov. 8 at 2 p.m. — when it's too late and everybody's been voting for weeks and weeks."

Flores sees it differently.

"Brandon Martin clearly doesn't understand my role or the role of the District 3 supervisor," Flores said in response. "The item did come before me now that I'm the supervisor and we're moving forward with this much-needed project to alleviate the homeless issue in Oildale proper."

Flores explained that there was not a public hearing held specifically for Tiney Oaks on Nov. 8, but that it was on the agenda and was presented to the board and before the public that day.

Martin also believes the site doesn't qualify in the zoning that the county designated it, saying "the homes in Tiney Oaks are too small, don't have plumbing or various other requirements."

Each cabin would come equipped with heating, air conditioning, lighting, electricity, storage and a fire extinguisher. They would not have running water or kitchen utilities, which are instead to be inside the communal facilities within the grounds.

"The idea is that the legislature wants to stop developers from being worried about litigation threats," Martin said. "You don't get to say something that's not true on your notice of exemption and in this case they misstated or incorrectly stated the zoning requirements for the property."

Martin said that his client does not want the project to be abandoned but rather for residents to have "equal treatment" in that they be allowed to attend and comment in a public hearing they said wasn't properly offered to them.

"That's our legal claim, that there should be this hearing," Martin said. "The problem was this was concealed."

In contrast, he thinks the county's best defense is that they're now claiming the site is a low-barrier navigation center, which itself can access exemptions to zoning laws. This distinction is not made on their approved site map or notice of exemption.

"The state basically says we want these low-barrier facilities so much that you can just disregard (zoning) and it would be by right no matter what zone it's in," Martin said. "Yet they don't mention low-barrier anywhere at all."

"I don't think it was their original intention to do a low-barrier center," he added. "I think we sued them and they came up with a post-hoc explanation as to what's going on."

Kendra Graham, assistant to the county counsel for the county, declined to comment on the suit, saying it is pending litigation and she had not had an opportunity to review it. She did note that a Kern County Superior Court judge on Friday denied requests by the plaintiffs to halt construction on the site.

At the Kern County Board of Supervisors' January meeting, Kern County's Chief Operations Officer James Zervis explained that the board approved in June 2021 roughly $15 million in federal American Rescue Plan Act funds to "combat homelessness" and in October that same year it submitted a strategic action plan to open the Tiney Oaks Supportive Services Village at the intersection of Hart Street and East Roberts Lane.

"This site was selected after evaluating underutilized county-owned properties, the concentration of homeless individuals throughout the community, proximity to public transportation and vital services, zoning and land use regulations, and other factors," Zervis said at the meeting.

Zervis touted the success of shelters in Kern and similar projects across the state, including two Hope of The Valley-operated shelters he and staff toured in Los Angeles.

"The Oildale facility builds upon the successful track record of the M Street Navigation Center, safe camping facilities, and safe parking sites," Zervis said. "Statistics show that without projects like this and others throughout our community, the homeless population — and particularly in the Bakersfield metro area — would be much greater than it is today."

In prior meetings, staff has long limned that the referral-only shelter would corral pre-existing homeless in the community under 24-hour security, a strict curfew and extensive "wrap-around services" for its residents — an antidote to Oildale's transient problem.

Martin believes the county chose this location as a matter of convenience, in that the county already owned the land. The plot was purchased by the county in 2015, but for a new county fire station, which was included on the purchase agreement.

"They need a new, modern fire station for the Oildale area," Martin said. "There's probably a greater need for an upgraded fire service for that area — they should probably stick to it."

Residents are equally skeptical. The plaintiffs believe a public hearing is the only redeemable way forward.

"The intention of the lawsuit is because nobody pays attention to Oildale and it often gets run over on things," Martin said. "There are people like my client who live in Oildale who would like to have the same legal protections and due process rights to appear at a hearing and give their input on how they can make the project better."