Residents urge National City to release records tied to Polanco lawsuit; council moves to closed session

At a special meeting, residents and business owners pressed the National City Council to release public records tied to a disputed development project and a pending lawsuit, then the council recessed for a closed‑session conference with legal counsel about the litigation.

Ashley Morrison, a Lincoln Acres resident participating by Zoom, told the council: “Please release our public records,” and asked the mayor and council members to direct city staff to comply with the California Public Records Act so the public could review documents related to the project.

Several in‑person speakers repeated that call. Michael Aguirre, introduced by the dais as the first in‑person speaker, said the group had compiled records to show how the project reached the planning commission despite what he described as an irregular process and a planning‑commission rejection on public‑nuisance grounds. The group told council members they prefer mediation but said they need the records to assess next steps.

Francisco Rivera, a licensed civil engineer and traffic engineer, cited technical concerns about the project’s scale and traffic impacts, saying the proposal would generate “approximately 2,000 daily increase in traffic,” and that the residential portion appeared underrepresented compared with the commercial component. He said planning‑commission members raised concerns about health, congestion, noise and safety.

Malika Polanco, who has been active in the challenge to the project, said the proposal advanced despite repeated incomplete submissions, multiple discretionary requests and requests for variances; she urged the council to investigate how the project was pushed forward and whether staff followed proper procedures.

Other speakers echoed those themes. Louisa McCarthy said some records have been released only in part and supported the lawsuit seeking full disclosure. Maria Severson pointed to the California Constitution (Article I, Section 3) and the California Public Records Act, asked why potentially CEQA‑triggering issues were not resolved before the project advanced, and asked the council to ensure full compliance.

Local business representatives also spoke. Ernesto Esqueda, manager of the 7‑Eleven on Sweetwater Road, said nearby businesses were not notified about the project and asked the council to avoid spending taxpayers’ dollars on litigation if the records can be released instead. Helen Chisholm, a 7‑Eleven employee and former member of an ethics commission in Nevada, said she had not received a satisfactory explanation for why businesses were not notified.

After the public‑comment period the mayor announced the council would go into closed session. The city attorney told the council the closed‑session item was a conference with legal counsel regarding existing litigation named Polanco v. City of National City. No vote or formal council action on the records issue was reported in the public portion of the meeting; the mayor said the council would report out any closed‑session action at the end of the city council meeting.

The council recessed five minutes to prepare for the regular meeting and indicated it would return later to report any closed‑session outcomes.