Headline News, News

A Refuge Chapel by any other name …

“We have a moral obligation as a church to do what we are doing. We help relieve crime. We’re not a homeless shelter – each person is charged a nightly fee. We help them get jobs and we pay taxes.”
– Pastor Darren Williams, Refuge Chapel

• Citizen litigant calls it a shelter; owners say it’s a paying establishment

By Naomi Klouda
Homer Tribune
Off the backroom of the Refuge Chapel in downtown Homer is a place where men down on their luck can stay. The dormitory style segment of the building used to be a garage when Bay Realty operated there, but now it holds showers, a kitchen where the men can cook food and a safe drug-free environment where they can regroup with a plan toward finding a new, more productive life.
Up to 10 people can stay there, and they are each charged $10 per night.
So is it a homeless shelter or a rooming house?
How to label Refuge Chapel’s place for men has been a bone of contention for more than two years, tying up hundreds of hours of time for the City of Homer by citizen litigant Frank Griswold, who calls it a homeless shelter.
After a lengthy hearing Monday night, the Homer City Council, acting as the Board of Adjustment, heard Griswold’s appeal of City Planner Rick Abboud’s decision that the establishment fits a “rooming house” designation in city code.
The council is being asked to decide whether to classify it as a shelter or rooming house.

“Shelter for the homeless is clearly the most suitable classification for the Refuge Room,” Griswold argued in his appeal brief. “The Refuge Room provides kitchen facilities that in turn provide for on-site meals. This satisfies the on-site meal requirement of (the city code). A homeless shelter is not required by (code) to provide meals to clients per se. The fact that haircuts are not provided does not mean that the Refuge Room cannot be classified as a homeless shelter. ‘Shelter for the homeless’ is defined as a building used primarily to provide… secondary personal services such as showers and haircuts…”
Why does it matter what name the city calls it?
If it’s a shelter, then the owners will need a conditional-use permit, which means it would need to go through the public hearing process in order to operate.
Rev. Darren Williams, operating the Refuge Room, said he didn’t have any intention of setting up a homeless shelter. He had worked in shelters in Los Angeles and when he founded the Refuge Room, his philosophy was to provide a service, to function as a business that also has a ministry.
The hearing started at 5:30 p.m. Monday night, but no one was able to discuss the case for an hour and half while Griswold challenged four members of the council as having a conflict of interest in the matter. Mayor James Hornaday, a retired Alaska District Court judge, decided to not sit for the hearing after Griswold accused him of bias. Hornaday had argued that though he feels capable of hearing the case with an unbiased ear and has extensive experience as a former judge ruling on cases, it bothered him that two council members voted that he was biased.
Mayor Pro Tem Beth Wythe was challenged by Griswold because her husband’s stepfather is Ray Kranich, a member of the Homer Planning Advisory Commission.
Councilman Kevin Hogan was challenged because Griswold sells his halibut catch to Hogan’s company, the Auction Block, from a boat called the Still Water. And Councilman Bryan Zak was challenged for conflict of interest because he formerly sat on the Planning Commission. After deciding each case separately and questioning the members, all remained to hear the appeal.
Williams, when his turn to talk came, started out with a prayer, asking God to guide the council in its decision-making. He prayed for Frank Griswold as well, saying that the contentiousness “wasn’t good for Griswold’s well-being.”
“I always wanted to operate (the Refuge Room) in a legal way. We have a moral obligation as a church to do what we are doing. Whether we are a shelter or a rooming house, Frank will continue to tie up your decision,” Williams said. “Don’t let Frank bully you. He has contested almost every decision you have made and he told me he will continue. He will tie up everything with the minutia of the law.”
The Refuge Room provides a service to the community through its low-cost housing, Williams told the council.
“Please rule on behalf of the people who need the Refuge Room,” he said.
City Attorney Tom Klinkner, who agreed that planner Abboud had classified the Refuge Room rightly as a rooming house, cited the specific language in the code that defines it.
“Zoning has its list of what is permissible choices to name – it’s what that activity is defined in the zoning code. It’s not asking about personal opinion of that activity, but rather what is defined in city code,” Klinkner said. “It is a matter of law.”
The Refuge Room is a rooming house because it allows for less than 15 people; it has kitchen and shower facilities, and it charges a nightly rate, Klinkner said.
When it came time for Griswold’s rebuttal, he countered that “rooming house” is a “ridiculous” misreading of the law. He added that the teen center that operates out of the top of the Refuge Chapel building, called “Armageddon,” makes the establishment an odd mix.
“They are not supposed to have people occupying the structure without a conditional-use permit. To call it a five-star hotel would have the same credence,” Griswold said.
He also objected that Williams had offered a prayer in the council chambers because it is a “government building.” Griswold said he considered being prayed for a “personal assault.”
Williams said he is weary of the battle, which has been going on since 2005. He considers Griswold’s challenges as an assault on people of faith and on “oppressed” people who need the services of the Refuge.
“If I had to pay an attorney to argue this case, it would have cost me thousands and thousands of dollars by now,” Williams said.
Since Klinkner was representing Abboud in the appeal, City Manager Walt Wrede needed to hire a second attorney to advise the Board of Adjustment. Municipal Attorney Joe Levensque sat in on the appeal hearing and advised councilmembers on each stage of the process. The meeting ended at 10 p.m. Monday night.
Now the question of whether the Refuge Room is a shelter or a rooming house is before councilmembers, who will continue to deliberate the matter until they reach a decision. If they decide the establishment is a shelter, the case goes back to the planning department. If they decide to uphold Abboud’s zoning classification, then the chapel can keep operating as it does now.

Contact the writer
Posted by Newsroom on Dec 2nd, 2009 and filed under Headline News, News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Subscribe via RSS

Subscribe via email