Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents raise shuttle, policing and health concerns during Plainfield council public comment
Summary
Public commenters asked whether the developer‑funded shuttle will be accessible and limited to Plainfield residents, complained about police visits tied to development disputes, and reported an alleged EMF health emergency in an apartment that the speaker says has prompted withheld rent.
During the public‑comment portion of the May 12 meeting, residents raised operational questions and complaints tied to agenda items and broader community concerns.
On the developer‑funded shuttle tied to the Center of Excellence, a resident asked who would pay for the service, whether the shuttle would be fully accessible, and whether riders would be required to show Plainfield residency ID. Economic Development staff said the developer will fund the demonstration shuttle, that vehicles and operators for the demonstration phase are expected to be hired by the developer with city input, and that the program is intended to be free for Plainfield residents with some form of identification under consideration. Staff also identified the parking lot intended for shuttle staging as 114 E. Seventh St.
Sal Carano raised a separate concern: after previous public comments about a nearby development, three police officers visited his home early in the morning to question him about allegations from a developer. He said the visit felt like overreach and warned officials that residents should be treated fairly. City staff reminded the public comment rules (that some periods are limited to resolutions and ordinances) and suggested procedural avenues for airing broader complaints.
Another resident, Robert Edwards, said he had withheld rent citing an alleged health emergency from electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure in his apartment, described repeated hospital visits and displayed an EMF detector as evidence. He asked the council for immediate help, saying the condition affected his ability to sleep and his health.
Council and staff responses during the session identified where follow‑up would be required: administration promised to confirm shuttle details (accessibility, identification requirements and vehicle selection) and clarified the shuttle lot and the developer’s role. Other complaints (police contact and the EMF allegation) were recorded for follow‑up but no formal city action was announced on the record that evening.
