Residents urge council to reject fuel transfer project, raise records and health concerns over Sweetwater Road site

Dozens of public speakers used the council’s public-comment period to press elected officials to oppose a planned fuel transfer station and to demand production of public records tied to a controversial Sweetwater Road gas station project.

Multiple speakers representing neighborhood groups, environmental health coalitions and residents said the proposed USDG fuels transfer facility — described in public comments as a rail-to-truck transfer station on West 18th Street — would concentrate diesel particulate emissions near homes and schools. “This Texas based company's project would concentrate diesel particulate matter emissions from truck trips in Westside National City, where there is already a significant pollution burden,” Claire Gubner, associate director at Olive Gardens and Learning Center and representative of the National City Healthy Culturas Coalition, told the council. She said the site would sit “less than 600 feet from residential homes and within 0.3 miles from Kimball Elementary” and argued the project would worsen cancer risk and respiratory illness.

Cynthia Fuller Quinones and several other residents repeated similar concerns, saying the facility would generate 24/7 truck traffic carrying hazardous fuels and increase fire and air-pollution risks near schools and homes. Speakers cited the city’s 2024 Climate Action Plan and land-use goals, arguing the proposal would conflict with the city’s stated move toward cleaner freight and electrification.

Comments also revisited the long-running Sweetwater Road gas station controversy. Public speakers said the Planning Commission denied the Sweetwater and Orange Street project on Dec. 2, 2024, and accused city staff and officials of inconsistently handling public-records requests and depositions tied to that project. “There has been sworn testimony that the city manager turned in a city-issued phone before checking for records requested in a public records request,” one speaker told the council, urging officials to produce phones and other records for forensic review. Others said the applicant had withdrawn or put the project on hold in December and that legal and procedural questions remain unresolved.

Council did not take action on the USDG fuels or Sweetwater items during the meeting; these matters were discussed in the public-comment period and flagged for future agenda or planning-commission review. Speakers asked the council to direct staff to oppose the transfer station at future land-use hearings and to produce records relating to the Sweetwater Road matter.

Context and clarifications: speakers referenced a Planning Commission denial (Dec. 2, 2024), a December email from the applicant stating the project was on hold, and repeated calls for transparency under the California Public Records Act. The council did not vote on land-use approvals or on any directive about the fuel transfer project at this meeting.

The city clerk’s office and planning staff will retain public comments in the official record; any formal land-use applications for either project would return to planning staff and the council (or planning commission) for review, environmental assessment and potential vote.