Residents press board for data and allege Brown Act and environmental review gaps

A series of public commenters told the Los Lagos board they were not satisfied with the information provided and urged the board to pause before committing to a specific, binding project description.

Michelle Duarte said she had asked Supervisor Hartman for the isotopic studies the supervisor had cited and received no response: "If this data exists, produce it to the public," she said, adding that adopting a large regional solution without verified evidence would be a failure of transparency. Other speakers, including Alvaro and Ann Marie, argued the board’s current path could trigger environmental‑review requirements. "You have passed that tipping point for CEQA purposes, and you need a full environmental review," Alvaro said, urging the board to study alignments, technologies and siting alternatives before adopting a binding project description.

Several commenters called out the mailer/brochure distributed to district residents as promotional or misleading, and some requested parcel‑level monitoring data and the calculations behind proposed assessments. Ann Marie pressed on legal process and public‑notice obligations and asked the board to remove Resolution 26‑04 from the agenda until both alternatives could be evaluated side‑by‑side. The board did not produce the specific isotopic studies during the meeting and noted further technical and environmental work would continue as design advances.