06 ATTACHMENT 5 - Laserfiche WebLink

This "opened the door", literally, to the severe noise nuisance of outdoor commercial events, and "Party Central" was born. This morphed a sedate, private meeting place, where all noise was contained inside the building, to "Party Central ", including serving alcohol for a capacity of 600 people. it2: Lease their kitchen out to a commercial catering company, A Tasteful Affair, which operates at all hours of the night also creating a noise nuisance. See Attachment 112 Attachment #2 and the attached letterfrom the Millers' attorney for a summary of how these new uses for the lodge not only violated the 1977 conditions /regulations enforced on the Masons by the City, but also violated the City's General Plan, and zoning codes, including public notice, which violated the due process rights of residents. 3. The Masons are a commercial business Also, the Pleasanton Masonic Center, which is associated with the tax ID that manages the revenues of the catering company and party rentals, lost its tax gxempt status, its non - profit corporate status, and its Pleasanton business license as an exempt- non - profit, and therefore is a for -profit company managing the revenues from the catering company and banquet facility, also in violation of zoning codes, which prohibits commercial businesses in a residential zone. Furthermore, the Masons have not reported to the public or IRS the revenues from the catering company and banquet facility for 4 of the past 8 years to demonstrate the public benefit of these monies as required by non - profits. See Attachment 113 for a summary of the Mason's nonprofit status and tax returns from www.Guidestar.org —the website where the IRS posts tax retums for nonprofits. 4. How is the City allowing this? The Planning Department is overriding zoning codes and justifying these violations by calling these activities an "accessory use." Most of us would understand an accessory use to be a minor use associated with the main activity. The Planning Department's interpretation, however, allows the tail to wag the dog, with the commercial activities creating the major use — both revenues and hours of use of the building from commercial activities far outweigh those of Masonic activities. Furthermore, the City is ignoring case law precedent in Los Angeles with another Masonic lodge in which the Court decided that commercial activities in a residential zone do not constitute an allowable (accessory) use and ordered the Masons to cease and desist commercial activities. See Attachment #4 for a summary of how the City is applying the accessory use provision incorrectly and the Los Angeles case law precedent —also discussed in the attached letter from Stu Flashman, the Millers' attorney. 5. The City's Mistakes Page 4 of 18