A proposed marijuana retailer is now 0-for-2 in trying to find a location to sell in Fresno.

Thursday, the Fresno City Council rejected by a 7-0 vote a conditional use permit for Fresno Farms’ location across the street from the Big Fresno Fair.

Fresno Farms had issues ever since the city approved a tentative permit in 2021. Its first proposed location on what was then called Ventura Street was across the street from the future Francine and Murray Farber Educational Campus. Retailers need to be at least 800 feet away from a school.

“I wish they would have done their due diligence a little better,” Councilmember Luis Chavez said.

Councilmembers Oppose

The retailer thought it solved its problems with a location across the street from the Big Fresno Fair on Cesar Chavez Boulevard (formerly Kings Canyon Road). Chavez objected because the new location was close to the kid-friendly fair (and other activities on the fairgrounds). The retailer agreed to increase security and not engage in special promotions during the fair.

“They then again decided to get a location that, in my view, is in close proximity to a lot of sensitive needs and, places that I don’t believe is the right place for this,” Chavez said.

Chavez appealed a decision from the planning commission, which granted Fresno Farms approval on March 20. He also felt the retailer was dishonest about revealing it was once fined for selling cannabis to a minor in Colorado.

CEO Margarita Tsalyuk said it was a “very unfortunate circumstance” but a problem cannabis retailers must deal with.

Councilmember Tyler Maxwell had issues with a class action lawsuit filed against Fresno Farms’ owner, accusing the company of labor violations. Chavez also called it concerning.

“We are currently actively fighting this claim by one disgruntled employee, and we believe that it will be dismissed on the merits,” Jessica Reuven, compliance consulant with parent company Yuma Way LLC said.

Councilmember Miguel Arias said the proposed retailer should “spend more time in neighborhood.”

“It gives me a pretty clear picture that if we can’t trust an out-of-town company to do basic research to engage with neighborhoods and the community, after multiple opportunities, multiple suggestions, and multiple feedback from the neighborhoods of legitimate concerns, then they’re just going to present a lot more problems when and if they’re actually operational in our city,” Arias said.

Both Chavez and Arias chastised Fresno Farms for not knowng the street’s name change, which took place in 2023.

Business owners also objected.

“(The dispensary) will create a negative impact on more than a million that visit the Big Fresno Fair,” Jose Nino of Furniture Mattress Superstore, representing businesses in the area, told the city council. “I am worried about my children, but especially for the students.”

Fresno Farms presented a petion, signed by more than 100 people supporting the retailer. One speaker also spoke in favor.

Fresno Farms Blasts Vote, Lawsuit Possible

After the vote, Reuven sent Politics 101 a statement criticizing the vote.

“We have never encountered such an egregious misuse of power as we have seen from the city council in this instance. The council has blatantly disregarded the will of the voters, their constituents, and the planning commission, who all showed overwhelming support for our project,” Reuven said.

She criticized the city council remaining silent during the planning commission process, saying it cost her company “thousands of dollars and wasted countless hours.” The city council is restricted from engaging until it conducts a hearing.

“Their actions raise serious questions about transparency and fairness. Why did they appeal a year ago, withdraw that appeal, and then deny the project after a year of work and expenses? How can it be just for a councilman to be the ultimate arbiter of his own appeal? This process has been deeply flawed, and we are not alone in facing such injustice; others have already taken legal action against the city. We have exhausted all our administrative remedies and may have no choice but to seek justice through the courts,” Reuven said.

City Council Votes to Force Sale for Radio Park, Railroad Projects

The city council took several actions to start eminent domain, a forced sale, on two city projects.

By a 7-0 vote, the city council voted to start the process against Quick Mart, adjacent to Radio Park at the corner of First Street and Clinton Avenue. The city wants to add more amenities, perhaps parking.

Richard Conway, attorney for owner Mohamed Nasser Salem, spoke to the council by Zoom, but was unable to convince councilmembers.

He said the family made a $200,000 profit this year. He told the city their appraisal valued the land and business in the $4 million to $5 million range. The city’s appraisers valued the property in the $800,000 range.

“We encourage the council to perhaps reconsider whether or not you want to adopt a resolution of necessity at this particular time, primarily because I believe it’s going to cost the city in order to acquire both the real property, cover the relocation expenses, and compensate the family for the loss of goodwill,” Conway said.

And, in three separate votes, the city council voted to start the process of a forced sale for the McKinley-Blackstone railroad project. The city is working on a $170 million project to elevate the train crossing at one of the busier intersections in the center of town.

The city council voted 7-0 to force sales from Eddie’s Auto World, by a 6-0 vote (Esparza was absent) for Catrina Auto Detailing and Shark Auto Sales, and by a 6-0 vote (Tyler Maxwell was absent) for Taco Bell. The city would help the businesses with relocation costs.

Eddie’s Auto World’s owner Eric Honarchian said it was difficult to find an alternate location. An attorney representing the Taco Bell owners spoke to the city council objecting to the sale, criticizing the appraisal process.

The city appraised Eddie’s Auto World at $140,000; Taco Bell at $2,534,000; and Catrina Auto Detailing and Shark Auto Sales at $319,000.

Dyer on Eminent Domain

Each of the eminent domain items are subject to Mayor Jerry Dyer’s veto. He called the pracitice “always a last resort.”

“You always try to negotiate the sale of property, a fair market value. And, but there are times and there’s a public necessity to acquire property,” Dyer told Politics 101.

Dyer said the Blackstone-McKinley railroad is one of those times.

“That’s a public necessity, and it’s going to prevent people from being stuck in traffic congestion on Blackstone and McKinley, about 31 times a day,” Dyer said.

Regarding Radio Park, Dyer said “It’s an area that has very, very little green space. We received a grant that allowed us to be able to expand our park and to be able to add some amenities to the park. It just made sense at that time to be able to square off that entire area and to expand the park.”

Related Story: Fresno Wants to Expand Radio Park. Will It Force a Convenience Store to Sell?

Other Items

• The city council approved an $18 million, five-year contract with Axon for 800 body-worn cameras and Tasers. Arias did object to language that would automatically renew the contract after five years. The council agreed to not renew, and take the contract out for bidding. After questioning of Interim Chief Mindy Casto, the item passed 7-0.
• By a 6-0 vote on the consent calendar, the city council approved an $85,20 amended contract with Kleinfelder, Inc. to continue soil testing at the Maxie L. Parks Community Center. The city found benzene in the soil, initially thought to be from the Imperial Laundry that occupied that site in the 1960s. However, testing disproved that conclusion. More testing is needed to find the answer. The center closed for several months in 2020, and is currently open. The benzene levels are below residential environmental screening limits.

Zoom Comments Return for One Meeting Only

The city council meeting still offered remote participation from the public by Zoom, even though that was supposed to stop starting Thursday.

Last month, the city council voted 4-3 to end Zoom comments with one exception — if a city councilmember used Zoom, so could the public.

Councilmember Nelson Esparza, citing an illness, Zoomed into the meeting. In pre-pandemic open meeting laws, Esparza would need to disclose his location, and allow members of the public to participate from there.

The post-pandemic law removed the disclosure requirement, but does require the councilmember to use video and audio for the entire meeting, and limits the reasons — generally illness or away on official business — and times a member can use it during the year.

A provision of the law (Government Code 54953 (f)(2)(C)) requires “the member shall participate through both audio and visual technology.” Esparza appeared by video during his councilmember comments, but his video did not appear any other time during the first 90 minutes of the meeting. His video did appear on the main video feed afterward.