LAKE COUNTY, Calif. — What is believed to be the first eminent domain action in the city of Clearlake’s history, which officials said is necessary due to a landslide repair project, has received approval to move forward.

The Clearlake City Council voted Thursday night to approve the eminent domain acquisition of a small portion of a property located at 12105 San Joaquin Ave., over the objection of the owners, Bailey and Andrew Hulett.

City leadership brought the item forward as part of the Gooseneck Landslide Emergency Repair Project, which was necessitated by a February 2024 storm that caused a landslide that threatened the integrity of Lakeshore Drive, a major city roadway for thousands of residents.

Lake County Superior Court records show that the Huletts filed a lawsuit against the city over the eminent domain action on Feb. 5.

“This is a procedurally required step in the eminent domain process,” City Attorney Dean Pucci told the council.

Pucci said that the city received a letter from the Huletts’ attorney, Robert Riggs, at 4:37 p.m. Thursday and at 4:47 p.m. that document was forwarded to the council and later added to the city website. The meeting started at 6 p.m.

Riggs’ letter had three primary requests: A continuance, which Pucci said staff recommended not granting because they believed the request lacked reasonable grounds; making the letter a part of the record; and giving the Huletts an opportunity to speak.

As part of the hearing, Public Works staff gave a report on the landslide repair project, describing the installation of two soil nail walls, a new guardrail on Lakeshore Drive, hydroseeding fo disturbed soil and restoration to as close as possible to the area’s original condition.

Staff said a large portion of the landslide was in the city right of way, but it was impossible to repair only the area of the landslide in the city right of way and not encroach onto private property.

They said the property acquisition is necessary to ensure the landslide area was fully repaired and to prevent future incidents.

The city wants to acquire 790 square feet from the Huletts’ property. The staff report showed the city offered the Huletts $990 for that portion of land.

The staff report showed that the city already has acquired 2,695 square feet from an adjacent parcel at 12115 San Joaquin Ave., owned by Mark and Renee Cooper, for $3,370.

Last week, the Huletts requested staking on the property that the city is looking to acquire, which was completed by a surveyor on Tuesday, city staff reported.

The Huletts spoke during the hearing, with Bailey Hulett reading from the letter from their attorney.

“We do not question the necessity of the project itself,” however they question the need to take their property for the project and the extent of the taking, she said.

They asked that the item be removed from the agenda, explaining that the city hadn’t yet provided them with a plot map or adequately identified the property portion they were seeking. The information they had received, she added, had raised more questions.

They requested to walk the property with a city representative, and objected to any determination that the take of their property as configured is necessary on several grounds, including it not being compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury, and the amount of property being taken.

The Huletts also said the boundaries of the property to be taken were still not understood, but that as presented, it would cause them to lose parts of their property with standing structures. One boundary line will be immediately adjacent to their home.

There was no other public comment before the council briefly discussed the proposal.

Councilmember Tara Downey said she had a lot of questions and felt there needed to be more information discussed.

As a homeowner herself, she said she understood needing additional time, adding that, from the city’s perspective and safety of people, she understood why the city was trying to get eminent domain for the property.

She said she planned to vote no if the council proceeded.

Vice Mayor DIrk Slooten said there should be some more communication with homeowners about the property survey. “There seems to be some misunderstanding.”

Slooten said it was the state, not the city, requiring the taking of the property because, if the city fails to do so, it will be out a significant amount of money — basically the cost of the landslide repairs.

He moved to approve the resolution, with Councilmember Jessica Hooten seconding.

Before the vote, City Manager Alan Flora told the council, “We have had correspondence over the year of this project with the property owners.”

He said city staff are happy to do additional communication with the Huletts and help them understand the area but still recommended moving forward with the eminent domain action.

Pucci said that any conversations during a walk-through such as the Hulets requested would have to be guarded due to the active litigation between the Huletts and the city. He said he will consult with staff on how to do that.

The council voted 4-1, with Downey the lone dissenter. As it received the fourth-fifths vote Pucci said was required, the motion passed.

City Clerk Melissa Swanson told Lake County News that, after reviewing city resolutions back to incorporation in 1980, she didn’t find anything stating the city has used the eminent domain process before.

Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, and on Bluesky, @erlarson.bsky.social. Find Lake County News on the following platforms: Facebook, @LakeCoNews; X, @LakeCoNews; Threads, @lakeconews, and on Bluesky, @lakeconews.bsky.social.