Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Industrial Permitting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Heated public hearing in Rohnert Park over Reynergy demonstration plant as residents press council to act
Summary
More than 50 speakers packed Rohnert Park’s Sept. 9 meeting to debate Reynergy’s microwave pyrolysis demonstration facility at SOMO Village; supporters called it a safe recycling innovation while opponents demanded revocation of an administrative permit and raised health, notice and school‑proximity concerns.
Supporters and opponents of a demonstration plastics‑to‑oil facility clashed for hours at the Rohnert Park City Council meeting on Sept. 9, with the council allowing an extended public‑comment period so 53 speakers could address a company that has split the neighborhood.
Brad Baker, founder and CEO of SOMO Village, opened the public‑comment period by describing Reynergy as the kind of innovation his development sought to attract and saying, “Let's be clear, I don't want that in our town, and that's not what Reynergy is.” Brian Bower, Reynergy’s co‑founder and CEO, told the council the project has undergone extensive third‑party review and BAAQMD oversight and said, “what we're building together here has the potential to be something truly global.”
Reynergy representatives, including Sasha Kosak, identified in the record as the company’s head chemist, repeatedly rejected comparisons to conventional incinerators. “Zero plastic is burned in our process,” Kosak told the council, adding that the company subjects its pilot system to ongoing third‑party emissions testing and district review.
But many parents, neighbors and area residents urged caution and formal city action. Omar Figueroa, a Credo High parent, said the proximity of the facility to Credo High and nearby homes was unacceptable: “The children in Rohnert Park deserve clean air to breathe, safe schools to attend, and a community that puts their health ahead of private profit,” he said, and urged the council to begin proceedings to revoke the permit. Other speakers echoed concerns about permitting and public notice, saying the project was approved through an administrative route rather than a conditional‑use process that would have required a public hearing.
Speakers on both sides cited the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s review. Supporters urged council members to rely on that technical oversight and encouraged skeptics to tour the Reynergy demonstration unit; opponents pointed to past notices of violation and disputed whether the company’s prototype runs were properly permitted and publicly disclosed. Several parents warned that local enrollment at Credo High could drop and estimated potential financial impacts to the school if families withdraw because of the project.
The meeting produced a procedural vote earlier in the night when the council approved, 5‑0, a motion to allow 2.5 minutes per public speaker to accommodate the large docket of speakers. Mayor Joe Judich recused himself later from a separate consent item relating to SOMO Village; the council approved that item by roll call with four members voting in favor and the mayor abstaining.
No formal revocation vote or new hearing date was announced at the meeting. Council members heard repeated calls from residents for either a full public hearing, an Environmental Impact Report or for the council to begin a revocation process; others asked the city to insist on additional independent testing and more transparent public notice going forward.
What’s next: residents on both sides said they will continue to press the council and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District for more information and possible remedies. Council staff did not set a new hearing date by the end of the meeting.
