Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Storage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge moratorium on proposed battery energy storage project, citing safety and outreach gaps
Summary
During public comment, residents asked the City Council to pause or ban proposed battery energy storage systems in Covina, arguing environmental-review documents omit nearby students, raise fire-safety concerns and that outreach to affected neighborhoods was insufficient.
At the City Council meeting on April 21, 2026, a public commenter urged the council to declare a moratorium or ban on proposed battery energy storage systems (BESS) in Covina, saying the city's environmental review was incomplete and that residents had not been properly informed.
Romina, speaking during public comment, said the mitigated negative declaration associated with the proposal was “not accurate,” and alleged that roughly 100 Transitional Kindergarten–6th grade students at Tri Community Adult Ed had been omitted from the document and lie within a quarter-mile of the proposed site. “Therefore, this document is inaccurate and should not be used in making a decision on a conditional use permit,” she said, and urged the council to require a full environmental-impact report under CEQA rather than rely on a mitigated negative declaration.
Romina also cited safety concerns raised by other jurisdictions and emergency responders, telling the council that the El Monte firefighters’ local union issued a cease-and-desist letter on similar projects because of fire and safety risks. She said other California cities including Moorpark, Escondido and San Juan Capistrano have issued bans or moratoriums on some BESS projects and asked Covina to follow suit.
Dr. Baris Serrano, who spoke later in the public-comments period, reiterated objections to the BESS proposal and added procedural concerns. He noted that the city and planning commission previously approved a zoning amendment adding a definition for "battery energy storage system" and said residents followed council guidance by attending the planning commission hearing on April 14. Serrano said a planning commissioner interrupted and discouraged a resident giving public comment, and he asked the council to clarify when residents should speak to both planning bodies and how interruptions are handled.
The council did not take immediate action on the BESS matter at this meeting. Several speakers asked for broader community notification and for the city to treat safety and proximity to schools as factors that warrant a more thorough environmental review before any conditional-use permit is issued.
Next steps: speakers urged the council and planning staff to provide clearer public notices, confirm whether any nearby schools or student-populated programs were excluded from the environmental analysis, and consider whether to require an environmental-impact report rather than a mitigated negative declaration before permitting.
