National City residents press council over Sweetwater gas‑station project, alleging improper mayoral contacts

A large crowd of National City residents on May 6 pressed the City Council over a proposed gas‑station and retail complex at Sweetwater and Orange Streets, accusing the mayor’s office of informal contacts with the applicant and urging the council to rezone the 0.8‑acre parcel back to residential.

The meeting’s assistant director of community development, Martin Reeder, told the council he had published an updated staff report responding to questions about findings, recommendations and CEQA and noted a typographical date error in the report. Reeder said there was no new substantive change in staff analysis and that the applicant had withdrawn an earlier project in December 2024, but the discretionary‑process item was returned to the council for filing and public review.

Public commenters made the strongest claims. A speaker who identified themself as Truth criticized staff for allowing incomplete notices and urged opponents to stop repeating ‘‘baseless accusations’’ if the project no longer existed; other residents and attorneys took the opposite view and said they had documentary evidence. Michael Aguirre told the council it had seen repeated ‘‘behest payments’’ in the form of giveaways and argued the applicant and mayor had exchanged text messages and meetings suggesting favorable treatment. ‘‘When the applicant said they let the prior conditional use permit expire because they had support from the city,’’ a resident said, ‘‘how did they have that support before the application was even filed?’’

Engineers and neighborhood residents pressed technical concerns as well: a licensed traffic engineer said the traffic study relied on noncomparable sites and under‑estimated queuing needs for a layout that included up to 12 fueling pumps and multiple drive‑through businesses. Multiple speakers asked the council to restore the parcel’s general plan and zoning to a low‑medium‑density residential designation.

Mayor Morrison denied telling the applicant to let any permit lapse and repeatedly urged speakers and staff to stick to verified facts. City staff said the record shows a complex timeline of communications and that ex‑parte contacts would have been disclosed if there had been a formal hearing; staff filed the report and labeled it as a discretionary process review. The council received and filed the staff report and did not take a final land‑use vote on the project during the meeting.

The council’s next procedural steps are to keep the matter on the record for potential future hearings and to evaluate any documented ex‑parte communications or process errors if a new application is filed. Several residents asked the council to consider rezoning and to demand fuller disclosure on communications between applicants and city officials.

The report was filed for the record; no final project approvals were made and no zoning change occurred at this meeting.