Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press council for transparency and a new EIR on the Esmeralda proposal
Summary
Multiple residents told the Cloverdale City Council the proposed Esmeralda development lacks transparency and may sit on contaminated land; speakers urged a full environmental review (new EIR), ballot referral, and stronger public processes.
Cloverdale — Public comment at the June 24 city council meeting centered on the proposed Esmeralda development and neighborhood safety concerns.
Several residents used the three‑minute public‑comment period to press the council for more transparency and legal protections. Adina Flores told the council she had tracked emails and alleged a targeted campaign to silence critics, including by the Chamber of Commerce. Lance Via, a property owner adjacent to the project site, told the council that family history and local testimony suggested the former wood‑treatment site at the project location might contain toxins and asked the city to require a new Environmental Impact Report before permitting any disturbance.
"I believe a new EIR should be mandated to go forward with this process," Lance Via said during public comment, citing family accounts of buried contamination at the industrial site.
Other speakers said private, invitation‑only meetings had increased suspicion among residents and asked the council to consider placing the question before voters or otherwise increase public participation. Speakers also raised perceived conflicts involving local chambers and planning commissioners; some asked for recusal or review where impartiality could be questioned.
City staff did not take action on these public comments during the meeting; rather, the council acknowledged the concerns and accepted the written record. The public comment period is part of the Brown Act process, and residents were reminded that council cannot act on items not on the posted agenda but can refer items to staff for follow up.
Speakers quoted: Adina Flores (public commenter), who described alleged targeting and exclusion; Lance Via, who asked for a new EIR citing contamination concerns; Diana Dotson, who urged traffic‑calming measures on East First Street.
What comes next: Concerned residents and council members said the council should ensure all environmental and public‑process questions are fully addressed in any pending or future staff analyses. The Esmeralda project review and any associated environmental documentation will remain part of subsequent planning items or hearings where the council or staff can respond formally.
Evidence provenance: multiple public comment segments during the D1 public‑comment block (see transcript entries SEG 374–609).
