Dozens of Blue Lakers packed into the Skinner Store last night to urge the Blue Lake City Council to shut down a controversial proposal to convert the city’s long-disused power plant into a lithium-iron-phosphate battery energy storage system (BESS). The project proposal, submitted by Texas-based energy developer PowerTransitions, has drawn criticism from many residents who fear the BESS would contaminate the nearby Mad River during a flood event or another natural catastrophe.

Following an impassioned and at times chaotic and belligerent two-hour discussion, the city council voted 3-2, with councilmembers Michelle Lewis-Lusso and Christopher G. Firor dissenting, to continue discussions with PowerTransitions and extend the project’s timeline to give the council and community members more time to consider the ins and outs of the proposal.

The city has been looking for a way to repurpose the six-acre Powers Creek District site since the Blue Lake Power Plant shut down in 2015. For the past four years, staff have worked closely with the Redwood Coast Energy Authority to develop a small-scale BESS at the site that would collect and store excess energy from the grid in rechargeable batteries for future use. In the event of a widespread power outage, the BESS could theoretically provide up to five days of power for Blue Lake residents.

The city council approved an exclusive right to negotiate with PowerTransitions last year after Jeff Goldstein, a senior advisor to the company’s CEO, approached the city with a multi-part plan to demolish some on-site infrastructure and build a 20-megawatt BESS that would repurpose the existing transformer and substation. Under the proposed agreement, PowerTransitions would pay for site clean-up and remediation, estimated between $750,000 and $1.5 million.

As residents filtered into Skinner Hall at the start of last night’s meeting, it became immediately apparent that there wouldn’t be enough chairs for the crowd of 50-plus residents, leaving many people standing in the foyer. Several others hung out on the porch and listened to the discussion on Zoom, occasionally peering through the window.

Meeting attendees struggle to open a window in an attempt to help people standing outside hear the proceedings.

Shortly after the meeting began, one attendee, who did not identify himself, urged the city council to postpone the meeting due to capacity limitations. He also asserted that the meeting was “illegal” because the city posted the agenda to its website but didn’t advertise it at the post office as it usually does. A few others echoed the sentiment, asking the city council to refrain from making any “irrevocable decisions” at the meeting.

City Attorney Ryan Plotz pushed back, noting that the meeting notice adhered to the Brown Act, which requires local  governments to advertise public meetings in a public place at least 72 hours in advance. City Manager Amanda Mager added that the meeting was posted at City Hall, the Mad River Grange, the bulletin board in front of the post office and on the city’s website.

The misunderstandings and at times hostile disruptions continued throughout the meeting. The audience talked amongst themselves, complaining that they couldn’t hear the city council or expressing concern about the people out on the porch. At one point, former Blue Lake Mayor Adelene Jones turned around and gave someone in the audience a long, stern look. When she turned back around someone loudly whispered “Bitch!” and flipped her off. 

During non-agenda public comment, an attendee began talking about the proposed BESS and was asked that she hold her comments for the agenda item. Another commenter, Andrew Orahoske, who appeared via Zoom, blasted Mayor John Sawatsky for interrupting the speaker and accused him of disparaging her comments. Orahoske disrupted the meeting on several other occasions throughout the night, prompting groans from other attendees who begged the council to put him on mute.

Mayor John Sawatsky

The fire department’s siren halted the council’s discussion shortly thereafter. People continued to express concern about the people outside. Mayor Sawatsky looked exasperated at several points throughout the meeting.

About two hours into the meeting, the council finally turned to the battery storage facility. The city’s attorney began the discussion with an overview of the project proposal and outlined the next steps for the BESS. 

The main question up for consideration at last night’s meeting, Plotz said, was whether the council should pursue an expedited timeline for the project, which would require the city council to approve a two-year option agreement (a legal contract that acts as a promise to keep an offer open to another party within a stated timeframe) in March to meet Pacific Gas & Electric Company’s application window. Alternatively, the council could hold off on the agreement until PG&E’s next application window in September.

“If we waited until September, demolition would be pushed back … and I don’t know what the appetite of the other party would be in September,” Plotz said. “Tonight, you’re not committing to anything. Basically, you’re telling staff [to] spend the time and effort to bring [forth] transactional documents that we can begin reviewing for potential approval in March. Nothing is approved until you approve the actual transactional documents, which will happen in the future.”

Councilmember Elise Scafani said she was worried that moving forward with the agreement would obligate the city to move forward with the project, adding that it felt like “too much too soon.” Plotz reiterated that the agreement would allow for “total discretion” in the negotiation process. 

The vast majority of the two dozen residents who spoke up during public comment urged the city council to scrap the BESS entirely, though a few speakers expressed interest in at least continuing the conversation. Most of their concerns focused on potential environmental impacts associated with the project, including contamination of the county’s water supply, some of which comes from wells beneath the Mad River. 

“I don’t know if the County of Humboldt has been brought in on this conversation … but I don’t personally think that Blue Lake has the right to make a decision about what happens to the water for the rest of the county without talking to them about it first,” said longtime Blue Lake resident Jamie Boltzen. “I also have serious concerns about pollution. … It’s so beautiful here. Why would we risk it?”

Boltzen and others also expressed concern about PowerTransitions’ intentions and whether the company has the county’s best interest at heart. Some expressed concern about the company’s CEO Sean T. Long, who headed Enron’s African investment division before the company declared bankruptcy. One attendee called Goldstein a liar, prompting Mayor Sawatsky to call for a point of order and bang his gavel.

Others expressed concern about the lithium iron phosphate batteries that would be used in the BESS, with some drawing a link to the lithium-ion battery fire that broke out at the Moss Landing Vistra Power Plant in Monterey County last month. Lithium iron phosphate batteries are generally considered safer than lithium-ion batteries and have a lower risk of overheating. Blue Lake resident Jennifer Corse underscored the importance of evidence-based research, adding that “safer does not equal zero risk.”

“I have had a really difficult time finding evidence-based research that proves that this [project] is safe,” she said. “You should be proving to us with research that this is safe.”

Blue Lake resident Juniper Summers spoke in favor of the project but agreed with other speakers that the city council should do more research before moving forward with the agreement, urging the council to opt for the extended timeline.

As the meeting approached the four-hour mark, the city council began deliberation. Speaking to concerns about potential contamination of the Mad River, the city manager said she recently learned that the Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District had its own BESS at the Essex Pump Station right on the river. She added that the Blue Lake Rancheria, Cal Poly Humboldt, City of Eureka and Providence St. Joseph Hospital have similar systems.

City Manager Amanda Mager

“I just want to reiterate that this might be a quick timeline to start a process, but it’s not a quick timeline to get to an end result,” Mager said. “There’s a lot of process, a lot of time and a lot of questions that will get answered through that process, and CEQA [the California Environmental Quality Act] is there to protect.”

Councilmember Firor spoke in favor of the project, emphasizing the need to get the process moving sooner rather than later. “Anything we could do to fast-track the demolition of that dangerous eyesore over there is paramount to me,” he said. 

Councilmember Scafani said she couldn’t help but wonder how the community would have received the project if the city had held a town hall at the beginning of the process rather than waiting until there was an agreement on the table.

“I am stuck feeling like we’re doing this backwards,” she said. “We didn’t decide that we wanted a battery storage project and then put our heads together to figure out how to get that accomplished. That’s very concerning to me because there’s the whole issue of added pressure of the timeline.  … How do we get off this path if things start to work wrong to us? Can we really get out? … I don’t really want to take that next step. This feels wrong to me.”

Councilmember Lewis-Lusso said she was disappointed in the “misinformation and propaganda” about the project that she had seen floating around in the community She also underscored the issue of trust and called for more research. “Unfortunately, because of some trust issues, I fear that this [project] is not going to be possible.”

Councilmember Kat Napier echoed her concerns about trust and said she was conflicted about how the council should move forward with the project. 

“I’m not elected to run this [city] as a business and to impose my personal views,” she said. “I have heard the largest element here is we don’t, at this time, have trust. … As so many have mentioned tonight, whether it was the potluck or how many people have been here and care about our neighbors, we are all Blue Lakers, and we can work on this together. … I think that we have to build trust before we leave this kind of decision on others.”

After a bit of additional discussion, Councilmember Scafani made a motion to reject the accelerated timeline. Councilmember Napier seconded the motion, asking if the motion would allow staff to continue with the extended timeline. The city attorney confirmed that it would, noting that staff would get in touch with PowerTransitions staff to see if they’re still interested in moving forward. 

The motion passed 3-2 with Firor and Lewis-Lusso dissenting. The city council will revisit the item at its next regular meeting in March.

RELATED: 

• POLL! Power Struggle! Should the City of Blue Lake Pursue Proposed Plans to Build a Battery Energy Storage Facility?

###