Concerns over a proposed floating solar project at Sweetwater Reservoir dominated a recent government meeting, with multiple residents voicing their apprehensions about potential conflicts of interest, environmental impacts, and the integrity of the decision-making process.

Karen Henry, a local resident, raised alarms regarding board member Steve Castaneda's involvement in the project, citing a conflict of interest as outlined in a letter from the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). She argued that his ties to the project could compromise the board's commitment to serving the best interests of ratepayers. Henry criticized the board's push for a mitigated negative declaration instead of a comprehensive Environmental Impact Report (EIR), suggesting that this approach would bypass a thorough evaluation of alternative options that could be less harmful to the environment and more cost-effective for the community.

Another speaker, Robin de Porras, echoed these sentiments, expressing disappointment over the lack of transparency and responsiveness from the board regarding public concerns. She highlighted the need for a more integrated approach to evaluating the floating solar project alongside other initiatives, such as the aeration efforts at the reservoir.

Susan Hevelin raised aesthetic concerns, arguing that the industrialization of the reservoir could detract from its natural beauty and recreational value. She also pointed out potential maintenance issues related to wildlife interactions with the solar panels, particularly with migratory birds.

Donna Hodge emphasized health risks associated with the project, particularly regarding the potential contamination of drinking water with harmful chemicals used in solar panel maintenance. She urged the board to consider the long-term health implications for residents, especially in light of rising cancer rates linked to environmental factors.

The meeting underscored a growing community unease about the floating solar project, with residents calling for a more transparent and accountable process that prioritizes environmental integrity and public health. As discussions continue, the board faces mounting pressure to address these concerns before moving forward with the project.