2026-10-13 - City Planning Commission

00:21Welcome everyone to the regular meeting

00:23of the Minneapolis Planning Commission

00:24for October 13th, 2026. My name is Chris

00:27Meyer and I'm chair of the commission.

00:28At this time, I'll ask the clerk to call

00:30the role.

00:32>> Commissioner Baxley

00:33>> here.

00:34>> Chowry,

00:35>> present.

00:37>> Connley,

00:37>> present. Garcia

00:40>> present.

00:41>> Gordon

00:42>> present.

00:43>> Jones is absent. Sheepy is absent.

00:47Shepard

00:48>> here.

00:49>> Vice President Wagner is absent. And

00:52President Meyer

00:53>> here.

00:54>> There are seven members present.

00:56>> We have a quorum. Uh we'll go to the

00:58minutes for September 28, 2026. Is there

01:00a motion to adopt those minutes?

01:02>> So moved.

01:03>> Second.

01:03>> Is there any discussion?

01:05>> All right. All in favor say I. I.

01:06Opposed abstensions. The minutes are

01:09adopted. Uh so we have just one item on

01:13our agenda today. The zoning code text

01:15amendment for data centers. Um

01:19before I begin, I want to ask everyone

01:21if you are planning to testify, please

01:23sign up. Um you can either go outside or

01:27um can they also go to you? I don't

01:30know. Um so go outside to sign up.

01:32You'll get a number. Right now we have

01:3423 people who are signed up. Um you know

01:38after the the staff presentation is

01:40over. We're going to figure out how much

01:43time we can allocate to each speaker. We

01:46have to be completely done by 8:30 p.m.

01:49tonight because that's how long we have

01:51our captioner. Um so we want to make

01:53sure that we get everything through. So

01:56if you wanted to testify and you haven't

01:57signed up already, uh please do sign up.

02:00Uh with that, um staff is Jaden

02:03Whitenberg, uh to present the data

02:05center amendment.

02:10>> Good afternoon, commissioners. Happy to

02:12be here with you this afternoon to

02:13present a zoning code text amendment

02:15addressing data centers and a few other

02:18uh things related to the uh distribution

02:20and storage of uh electric power. Uh

02:24over the past uh several years, the uh

02:27expansion of cloud-based computing and

02:30artificial intelligence has led to rapid

02:34expansion of data centers in many

02:36communities throughout the country and

02:37communities have found that their zoning

02:39codes are not equipped to properly deal

02:42with modern data centers and we are no

02:44exception to that. Um our zoning code is

02:47three years old. that does not use the

02:49term data center.

02:54So earlier this year, the city council

02:56enacted a six-month moratorum on the

02:59establishment or expansion of data

03:01centers. Uh there was an exception

03:04written into that to allow uh somewhat

03:06smaller scale facilities uh to uh

03:09establish or expand within the downtown

03:11area bounded by the freeway ring of 35W

03:15I94 Plymouth Avenue and the Mississippi

03:18River.

03:24At that time uh an ordinance was

03:26introduced uh that's in front of you uh

03:28now uh five chapters five chapters of

03:31the zoning code were introduced. I

03:33believe we have uh nine authors who've

03:36signed on uh that's quite unusual a lot

03:39of interest in this topic and we've been

03:41working uh very closely with council

03:42member Chowdery and uh council member

03:44Schaefer to advance uh uh the

03:48regulations that are in front of you

03:49tonight.

03:55Uh this is a quick overview of the

03:57process that we've gone through. Again,

04:00in uh uh in the spring, a moratorum was

04:03uh introduced by the city council. There

04:05was a staff direction to our uh

04:08legislative research and oversight staff

04:10uh to produce a report that was sort of

04:13a landscape analysis of data centers and

04:15how cities are approaching them and what

04:17issues they're experiencing throughout

04:19the country. that report uh it's very

04:22thorough, very well done and is attached

04:23to your packets uh uh that you received

04:26for this meeting

04:29in June. Uh the the business housing and

04:32zoning committee held a public hearing

04:34on the data center moratorum that was uh

04:36adopted. Uh CPED uh presented uh

04:39recommendations uh preliminary

04:41recommendations to the city planning

04:42commission at its committee. the whole

04:44meeting in mid July.

04:47A month after that, mid August, uh we

04:49put up a a project website uh about two

04:52months, a little over two months in

04:54advance uh of this public hearing and

04:56that allowed people to uh take a look at

04:59draft recommendations and submit

05:02comments through a smart sheet.

05:06Uh also in August, our LRO staff

05:08presented its report about data centers

05:10to city council and there was a uh

05:14policy round table held where all city

05:16council members uh were invited and here

05:19we are today October 13th uh city city

05:22planning commission public hearing. You

05:24will of course be making a

05:25recommendation to the city council that

05:28goes through the uh business housing and

05:30zoning committee which is scheduled for

05:32November 6th and then on November 12th

05:35we expect the full city council to take

05:37action and publication and effective

05:40date of the ordinance would happen I

05:42believe literally the same day that the

05:44uh moratorum is uh set to expire.

05:54What is a data center? A data centers

05:57primary function is to make the internet

05:59function. Um including uh with servers,

06:03storage uh data data storage devices and

06:06networking hardware that needs an awful

06:08lot of equipment to make it function

06:10including the electrical infrastructure,

06:13the cooling systems to keep the servers

06:15uh at a temperature that uh they can

06:17function. and then uh physical and

06:20digital security systems.

06:23I'll note that uh when we are talking

06:25about data centers this evening, we're

06:27talking about principal use data centers

06:29where the storage and retrieval of data

06:32is the primary function on the property.

06:35If uh if a business or an institution

06:38has a server room or rooms with servers

06:40that serve that business's needs, that

06:43is not uh from our standpoint a data

06:45center that we're regulating through

06:47through these regulations.

06:52Again, the the uh term data center

06:54doesn't currently appear in the zoning

06:56code. They uh have historically been

06:58classified as what uh is referred to in

07:00the zoning code as communication

07:02exchanges.

07:04that use is very broadly broadly allowed

07:07in 10 of our 15 primary zoning

07:09districts. Um I I'll just note that

07:13barring adoption of new rules, these

07:15would be the rules that we would revert

07:17to uh and have that uh level of

07:19flexibility uh that would remain in our

07:22in our zoning code. Uh much more

07:24permissive than the regulations that

07:26we're uh we're bringing forward for your

07:29consideration.

07:31uh communication exchange would continue

07:33to exist as a use in the zoning code,

07:36but it would it would serve uh uh the

07:38the types of uses that it was really

07:40more intended for, which are sort of uh

07:44routing and switching of internet and

07:46telephone uh uh traffic essentially.

07:50That those uses simply don't have uh the

07:53same types of impacts that we're seeing

07:55on in uh modern-day data centers.

08:05uh proposed definition very concise a

08:08principal use where the primary function

08:10is to house computers and/or related

08:13equipment for the purpose of collection

08:15processing storage and retrieval of

08:18data. Again as I referenced this is uh

08:21regulating principal uses and not when

08:24uh a business is serving its own on-site

08:27needs.

08:30Data centers aren't new, of course. We

08:31have uh uh eight existing data centers

08:34in our downtown. This is a map uh that

08:36our assessing uh department produced

08:39that has identified eight in in our uh

08:42our downtown. We don't have a lot of

08:44information about some of these. They

08:46some of these are seem to be relatively

08:48smallcale tenants in multi-tenant

08:50buildings.

08:52Uh there were a number of years where a

08:55a a communication exchange did not

08:58require a conditional use permit uh

09:00through this body and were established

09:03administratively

09:04essentially through a building permit

09:06and electrical permit.

09:12You'll see in our draft recommendations

09:14that we are largely focused on downtown

09:17Minneapolis. There are a number of

09:19reasons for this. Uh the uh power grid

09:22has uh a lot of capacity and redundancy.

09:26There are electric substations

09:28essentially circling our downtown. There

09:30is access to high-speed fiber lines.

09:33There's a pro a great proximity to a

09:36large number of end users and there are

09:38a number of adaptable buildings many of

09:40which are underutilized in the post

09:43pandemic era.

09:49Uh to expand on that, we have roughly a

09:5230% vacancy rate in our downtown. That

09:55equates to over 8 million uh square feet

09:59of uh vacant space, roughly the

10:02equivalent of uh I believe five IDs

10:04centers worth of office space. Uh we

10:09>> [snorts]

10:09>> uh there's not a clear path to reusing

10:12much of this space. We of course have

10:14been working to clear the path for uh

10:17conversion to residential use. Uh not

10:20every building, many buildings quite

10:22frankly are not adaptable for uh

10:25residential use, especially newer

10:28buildings with large floor plates.

10:31Uh again a limited number of buildings

10:34that are suitable uh also uh to

10:36conversion to a data center. data

10:38centers have very specific specific

10:40needs as well in terms of the

10:41infrastructure that serves uh the

10:44building um and the structural capacity

10:47of the building itself. We are unlikely

10:50for example to see a 30story building

10:52get converted to uh entirely to a data

10:55center. We we can uh talk more about

10:57that if if the commission uh wishes.

11:01uh data centers are taxed at a higher

11:03rate than uh uh residential uses. Our uh

11:08decline in our downtown tax base is uh

11:12uh a significant reason why we are in

11:14the current uh budget uh situation that

11:17we're in. Uh downtown has historically

11:20uh carried a significant uh percentage

11:23of the city's uh downtown tax base.

11:28uh data centers do uh require uh a a a

11:33lot of uh skilled skilled trades people

11:35to get those up up and running uh over

11:38the longer term. However, as most people

11:40are aware, data centers do are not large

11:42job producers on the site uh it itself.

11:47Utility franchise fees are um are are

11:50paid and go directly into the city's

11:53general fund. large electricity users

11:55are big big contributors and the

11:58practice has been to uh dedicate

12:01a portion of uh of those funds uh to

12:05climate initiatives.

12:08Revenue from large water users

12:11subsidizes the cost uh of water users

12:13for the rest of us who live in the city.

12:15Of course, uh the city has an interest

12:17in ensuring that people uh use water

12:21wisely. uh but it's it's a fact that uh

12:25commercial water users uh do uh help

12:27help out the rest of us in in that way.

12:31And again, there are practical and

12:32regulatory limits u that will uh keep

12:36the scale uh of of data centers uh in

12:40the areas that we are recommending at

12:42below what we consider a hypers scale

12:44type of facility of 100 megawws or more.

12:59A little bit of uh state context. This

13:01state uh in 2025, the legislature

13:04adopted some tax changes that extend

13:07some uh tax uh credits uh for uh

13:12investment in things like software. uh

13:15the state eliminated the uh uh

13:19electricity sales tax exemption for for

13:21this use. There are some environmental

13:24standards uh when uh data centers are

13:28utilizing these tax changes.

13:32Are these slides uh advancing on their

13:35own? Okay.

13:39Uh there is some rateayer protection uh

13:41language. I will note that we have uh

13:44representatives from Excel Energy here

13:46uh who can uh answer questions about

13:49power capacity uh and uh rateayer

13:52protection if the commission is

13:53interested. The the state also adopted

13:56some prevailing wage requirements uh for

13:58those who are working on on uh data

14:02centers.

14:08a little bit about what cities uh have

14:10the ability to regulate and what they do

14:12not. Uh we can regulate which zoning

14:15districts uh the use is located in. We

14:18can require a discretionary

14:20discretionary review like a conditional

14:22use permit. We can limit the size in

14:25square feet. We uh can limit noise

14:29uh location of of generators and

14:32mechanical equipment. site design and

14:35compatibility with adjacent uses. Things

14:38that we are not able to regulate that we

14:40do not have the authority to regulate

14:42are the size of a facilities based

14:44strictly on uh the power use in

14:46megawatts for example. Uh air emissions

14:49are regulated by the state. We do not

14:51have the ability to direct directly uh

14:54regulate air emissions.

14:56uh building mechanical systems like the

14:58type of cooling uh or backup power

15:01systems

15:03uh building standards that exceed the

15:04green energy code. Essentially,

15:06Minnesota is a state where we uh are not

15:09able to um uh exceed the requirements of

15:13the of the building code.

15:16Uh cities do not have the ability to

15:18levy impact fees or other fees that

15:20exceed the co cost of providing

15:23services.

15:27There are very real concerns about data

15:30centers uh that have played out in in in

15:33communities uh throughout the country.

15:35Uh they use a lot of power. That's uh

15:38one thing a lot of people know about

15:40about data centers. Uh they require uh

15:43careful cooperation with Excel Energy uh

15:46to ensure that uh they are u uh within

15:49the the grid's capacity.

15:53There are concerns about uh uh the

15:56impacts that that electricity use has on

15:58long-term long-term renewable energy

16:00goals. The state of Minnesota has a

16:02requirement that we are uh run by

16:06carbon-f free electricity statewide by

16:08by the year 2040. Some have expressed

16:11concerns that uh the the large energy

16:14needs of this particular use will impede

16:16progress toward that goal.

16:20High water use

16:23Um

16:25uh cities need to understand the impact

16:28uh that uh that it has on the ability to

16:31distribute water depending on again on

16:33the uh on the type of cooling system

16:35being used

16:37uh by the facility.

16:40Backup generators can cause intermittent

16:42noise and pollution. They typically have

16:44to be tested monthly.

16:47uh the design of these facilities and

16:49the security needs can uh be sort of a

16:52warehouse uh type of u of uh look that

16:56is not consistent with the urban fabric

16:59that we're always going for particularly

17:01uh something that has to be mitigated in

17:02a downtown environment and the noise

17:05from the hum of servers uh has to be

17:08mitigated including preventing that uh

17:10noise violations uh really before they

17:13occur. Getting

17:19into draft recommendations in front of

17:22you. Uh we would require a conditional

17:25use permit to be reviewed by the city

17:27planning commission for all new data

17:28centers. The city planning commission

17:30makes final decisions on conditional use

17:32permits unless those unless your

17:34decision is appealed uh to the city

17:37council. Our recommendation is uh to

17:41regulate square footage based on what's

17:44referred to as whites space. That's a

17:45term that we also would define in the

17:47zoning code. This is essentially the

17:49area dedicated to IT equipment, server

17:52racks, network networking gear, and

17:54power distribution units. We think it's

17:56a better measure of the kind of resource

17:59needs of the of the facility rather than

18:02regulating the entire square footage of

18:05the facility that would include things

18:06like office spaces and loading loading

18:08docks for example.

18:11The recommendation is to allow that

18:13white space to be up to 175 square feet

18:16uh on a property in the downtown zoning

18:19districts only in the DT1 and DT2

18:23districts uh shown on that map.

18:31I'll just note that uh one

18:34difference that uh the recommendations

18:37in front of you today have between uh

18:40compared to what the what we brought you

18:42over the summer is that at that point we

18:44had uh considered allowing uh data

18:47centers to be uh established in the PR2

18:50district, our heavier of our two

18:52production industrial districts.

18:55Um, we had proposed regulating those

18:58similarly to how we do high uh high

19:00impact industrial uses uh uses requiring

19:03that they be at least a quarter mile

19:05from uh any uh district other than PR2

19:09or our transportation district and

19:11therefore ensuring that they would be uh

19:14a significant distance from districts

19:16where you could establish residential

19:18uses.

19:20We got some uh significant push back on

19:22that and that is not currently part of

19:24the recommendation. We are currently

19:25focused on the two downtown districts.

19:28There were also uh really questions

19:30about whether uh there was a likelihood

19:33that there would be the the uh uh kind

19:37of utility compa capacity to to address

19:41a sizable data center in those small

19:44areas of PR2 that were recommended.

19:53The recommendations uh and I think this

19:56uh would be somewhat unique in the

19:58country is that is that new data centers

20:00would only be allowed to be established

20:02within an existing structure. We would

20:05allow minor additions uh uh to uh to

20:08enclose equipment for example.

20:11Uh we would require disclosure of uh

20:14expected use of water electricity

20:17generators uh as well as a sound

20:19attenuation plan. Again very uh uh uh

20:23concerned about ensuring that we don't

20:25res uh see ourselves in a situation

20:27where we're having to enforce against

20:30noise violations for these facilities.

20:34We would like to ensure that there has

20:36been some coordination with Excel Energy

20:39at the time of application

20:41again given the careful coordination

20:43that's needed. Uh so we are asking for

20:45evidence that there's been some

20:47coordination with Excel Energy at the

20:50beginning of the application process.

20:55Uh also we would provide clarification

20:57in the ordinance that a data center does

20:59not uh constitute an active function uh

21:03for the purpose of complying with our

21:04ground floor active function standards

21:07uh in the zoning code.

21:19The rooms housing servers again

21:22essentially the white space uh would be

21:24required to be at least 20 feet from an

21:27exterior wall of the building. When we

21:29toured a uh existing data center in

21:31Minneapolis, they touted the fact that

21:34their uh white space was uh uh at the

21:38interior of the building and therefore

21:40their building itself captured some of

21:42the noise from that uh from that uh uh

21:45use within the building. So they gave us

21:48the idea essentially uh for for that

21:50regulation.

21:52And uh we would also require that that

21:55specific space within a data center be

21:57at least 100 ft from an uh nearby

22:00residential use on on adjacent property.

22:06Uh again, to meet our goals for uh

22:09active street life in downtown, we would

22:12not allow uh uh white space to be or or

22:16other equipment to be on the first or

22:19second floor.

22:21And newly established data centers could

22:24not be the only principal use within the

22:26downtown districts that where we're

22:28recommending that they be allowed. Uh we

22:31would prefer that entire downtown

22:33buildings, entire downtown blocks not be

22:36converted to uh such an inactive use.

22:41And then all equipment necessary for the

22:43use would have to be either enclosed

22:45within the principal building or placed

22:47on the rooftop.

22:52Just to note that uh there are existing

22:56existing city and state regulations

22:58addressing noise. Again, we are it's our

23:01hope that we uh prevent the potential

23:04violations from happening in the first

23:06place, but uh if needed, uh these are

23:09the this is the primary uh noise

23:12regulation that the city would uh

23:14enforce against these facilities if we

23:16do find uh potential violations or if

23:19there are complaints about noise

23:20emanating from them.

23:28uh that there are understandably

23:30concerns about uh water capacity and

23:33water use for these facilities. Uh

23:36Minneapolis of course gets its water

23:38from the Mississippi River. We as a city

23:42have uh the capacity to distribute

23:45roughly 100 million gallons of water per

23:48day.

23:50Water use in in the city of Minneapolis

23:52has been declining for decades uh partly

23:56due to uh improved efficiencies and

23:59Minneapolis is typically uh delivering

24:02about 55 million gallons of water per

24:05day with a peak uh in around the

24:08summertime uh going up to around 80

24:10million gallons uh a day.

24:14uh month. Uh we had our asked our water

24:17distribution folks to gather uh

24:19information about high volume water

24:21users and they pulled info about the uh

24:24top 40 commercial accounts in the city.

24:27Those range from uh using about 800,000

24:31gallons to about 5.4 million gallons per

24:34month uh with an average uh of about 1.7

24:38million gallons per month among those

24:40users.

24:43um one using one of the largest uh data

24:46centers in Minneapolis as an example. It

24:48has be it has become one of the 40

24:49largest data uh water users uh uh in the

24:53city and has typically been using uh

24:55last time we pulled data around three uh

24:583 million uh gallons per month. again,

25:02sort of in the middle of that top 40

25:06um

25:09top 40 commercial water users.

25:19>> [snorts]

25:19>> Uh as briefly noted at the beginning,

25:22there are some non-data center uh issues

25:25addressed in the proposed

25:26recommendations related to the uh

25:28distribution of electricity. Uh utility

25:31boxes like the one pictured here. Uh we

25:35would allow those in a front yard

25:37setback. Uh they are required to be

25:39screened.

25:41uh they and they would be allowed up to

25:43six feet in height in a front yard

25:44setback and we would allow them in a uh

25:47rear yard setback where adjacent to an

25:49alley. Uh the rationale uh is that these

25:53require easy access by Excel Energy. We

25:57uh get in an awful lot of fights with uh

26:00with XL and with uh with people uh

26:03proposing uh these facilities uh because

26:06they are in locations that our zoning

26:07code does not currently allow often

26:12uh battery energy storage systems. We

26:15would clarify that these systems are

26:16allowed as an accessory use subject to

26:19uh state building code and the state

26:21fire code.

26:23Uh we propose to exempt uh bas what's

26:26called basic utilities that includes

26:28things like electric substations

26:30uh from our general landscaping and

26:33screening standards and in instead of

26:35that uh require site enhancements uh

26:38like screening public arts plazas uh

26:41quasi public space and andor pedestrian

26:44realm improvements.

26:46And then stationary generators uh with

26:48internal combustion engines are uh

26:50proposed to have some restrictions that

26:52aren't currently in place um when they

26:55are placed uh on a property that is

26:57adjacent to residential property.

27:02That concludes my presentation. Be happy

27:04to stand for any questions.

27:06>> Thank you. Are there questions for staff

27:08before? Go ahead, Commissioner Shepard.

27:10>> Please. Thank you so much for the

27:12presentation, Jason. and and you I I

27:13went from seven questions down to three

27:15as a result of your presentation. And

27:17thank you again to you and staff for

27:18that really terrific uh package that we

27:20received uh for this meeting. Can you

27:24just review just touch on briefly and I

27:25know you touch on it in that package the

27:27consequences of non-approval

27:30of for tonight.

27:32>> Yes. Uh Commissioner Shepard. Uh if we

27:36were to uh not adopt new regulations and

27:40the uh interimm ordinance moratorum

27:43expires, we would go back to these

27:46facilities being classified as a

27:48communication exchange

27:50allowed in 10 of the city's uh zoning

27:53districts rather than the two zoning

27:55districts that we're proposing.

27:57>> Thank you. Another one which up came up

27:59frequently in the public comments which

28:01were just a gold mine of information at

28:03the end of that package. Many folks were

28:05concerned about non-disclosure

28:07agreements and it is my understanding

28:08and correct me if I'm mistaken that in

28:10August of this year the city council has

28:12prohibited remove the authority of of uh

28:14agencies to execute any ND NDAs on this

28:18or any other sort of project. That's my

28:20understanding also and we in CPED would

28:23not have entertained uh NDAs uh prior to

28:27that but uh I believe the city council

28:29did take action to to be clear about

28:31that. Yes.

28:32>> Great. Thank you. My last question is a

28:33is a wonky one about those transformer

28:35boxes you were just showing uh the

28:37utility boxes and a a data center even

28:40the 25 megawatt size can have a number

28:42of these like 8 10 12 um not not just

28:46one and they're they're not small. And I

28:48notice, and maybe this is just a quirk

28:49in the way this is written, that if it's

28:51in a rear yard, it's restricted to a

28:53maximum of 20% of the area of the

28:55required rear yard, but there is no such

28:57restriction on the front yard, which

29:00seems a little counterintuitive in a in

29:02a downtown district that we would not

29:05have a maximum on the frontage, which

29:07they could cover.

29:09>> Sure. Uh that's a good question, uh,

29:11Commissioner Shepard. And to be clear,

29:14uh there are no required setbacks

29:16essentially in our in our downtown

29:18zoning districts. So they are already

29:21allowed along the entire perimeter of a

29:23property subject to screening

29:25requirements. I will note though that we

29:27are requiring that equipment associated

29:30with the data center does have to be

29:32located uh within the building itself.

29:35>> Oh, within the building.

29:36>> Correct.

29:37>> Oh, thank you. So the the type of

29:39setting that we're talking about for

29:40those transformers would be, you know,

29:43not a typ typically a single family home

29:45wouldn't have one, but a small scale

29:47apartment often would have a a

29:50transformer like the one pictured. And

29:52and in those cases, they would be in

29:53often in districts that have a setback

29:55requirement.

29:56>> My concern with the quantity of

29:57equipment was that these would become a

29:59screen of the building itself,

30:02>> right? um as as written uh on page 14 of

30:06our package. But I think that's that

30:08addresses it. Thank you so much.

30:10>> Yeah,

30:11>> the commissioners.

30:16>> Thank you, Mr. Ch Mr. President. Thank

30:18you for the presentation. Very much

30:19appreciated. Lots of information. I had

30:21one question. You you showed a slide

30:23that showed challenges and concerns.

30:26Wonder if you can go back to that for a

30:28second.

30:28>> We can't hear you.

30:30>> Oh, okay. Hi, thank you for the

30:33presentation. You showed a slide that's

30:35called challenges and concerns and so I

30:38wanted to kind of go through that a

30:40little bit. If you can bring it back up.

30:44>> It's showing up on my screen there.

30:46>> There it is. Thank you. So, it seems

30:48like there's still quite a bit of work

30:49that needs to be done, more research,

30:51more study um in in in these several

30:55bullets here. So, I'm wondering, we're

30:56being asked to approve a couple of

30:58different things here while there's

31:00still some unknowns, still some

31:02challenges that need to be addressed,

31:04still some concerns that need to be

31:05addressed. Can you talk through kind of

31:06where we are with these in relation to

31:10how we're, you know, we're being asked

31:12to vote on something that I think still

31:13needs a little bit more research?

31:15>> Uh, Commissioner Conley, is there a

31:16particular bullet point here that you

31:18are interested in more than others?

31:20>> I would say all of them. It seems like

31:21there's quite a bit of challenges and

31:22concerns around the around this and so

31:25is there research currently underway on

31:28some of the concerns and challenges

31:29here? Is there um more staff work that

31:32needs to be done?

31:33>> Sure. Uh Commissioner Connley, the many

31:36of these were addressed in the LRO uh uh

31:39report. Um but I I can go through each

31:42of these uh bullet points. Uh in terms

31:45of high electricity use, we are limiting

31:49these to a scale that that uh at least

31:52under current technology should prevent

31:55uh data centers of that's that we would

31:58consider a hypers scale of 100 megawatts

32:00or or more.

32:02Um, Excel Energy uh has worked closely

32:06closely with us and will work closely

32:08with any proposer of a data center to

32:10ensure that uh uh the capacity needs uh

32:14will will not be affected by uh other

32:17rateayers who who need electricity.

32:20uh they can explain better than I can

32:23about um Minnesota being a state where

32:26uh electrical providers like Excel are

32:29regulated much more heavily than uh

32:33providers in states where we've seen uh

32:35real questions raised uh serious

32:38questions about uh electricity going to

32:40data centers when other people are are

32:43either going without uh power or they're

32:45they're paying more than they than they

32:48had because of the electricity demands

32:51of of some of some uses like data

32:53centers.

32:55Um concerns about uh the growing demand

32:59uh and impacts on long-term uh renewable

33:02energy goals. Excel Energy again they

33:05are here uh if you have questions they

33:07are confident that even with the

33:09establishment of data centers they will

33:12definitely meet the the 2040 uh

33:15renewable energy goal set by the state

33:17of Minnesota. they believe they are uh

33:19on track to to to meet that and will

33:21continue to be on track to meet that

33:25uh high water usage. Again, that is one

33:27reason to uh limit this the overall

33:29scale of of the use. Uh I I explained

33:33that the city is currently distributing

33:35a little over half of the water capacity

33:38that it that has the ability to

33:41distribute. So, our uh water

33:43distribution services uh folks uh are

33:47not concerned about the ability to serve

33:50the use at the scale uh and the number

33:53that we are likely talking about uh in

33:55the city of Minneapolis.

33:58Uh backup generators, we have uh

34:01proposed regulations that will keep them

34:04farther from uh from uh residential uses

34:08than they are allowed to be today. Uh

34:11that includes not just for um for data

34:14center uses but for any use that

34:16requires backup generator. City you know

34:18city buildings of course have have

34:20backup gen generators. Our new public

34:22service building has you know two

34:23generators on its rooftop. This is a an

34:26issue that is as far broader than uh

34:29just data centers.

34:32uh the warehouse-like design issues.

34:34Again, uh that this is uh uh where we

34:38clarified that data centers are not an

34:40active function along along the street

34:43and we are not allowing them uh on the

34:45first or second floor. We have window

34:48requirements above the above the second

34:51floor as well. They won't won't be able

34:52to to block up windows with with

34:55mechanical equipment.

34:57And then uh noise. Again, we are uh

35:00recommending uh a standard that I I

35:02haven't seen anywhere else in the

35:04country uh requiring white space to be

35:06at the interior of the building to to to

35:08mitigate that noise and and if it does

35:10become a problem, that's when the city

35:13will enforce its uh noise regulations

35:15that it has on the books.

35:17>> Thank you for that. So, so you think

35:18that all of the challenges and concerns

35:20around this have been met?

35:23Commissioner Connley, I believe we are

35:26we have proposed some of the strictest

35:29rules in the country to try and ensure

35:31that all of these challenges are met

35:34while still allowing

35:36that 8 million square feet of vacant

35:39space to to have a path to being

35:42utilized.

35:43>> Thank you.

35:45>> Other commissioners, uh, Commissioner

35:46Garcia, then Baxley, then Gordon.

35:50>> Um, thank you for the presentation. It

35:52was very informative and thank you for

35:53the uh summary and the packet. I just

35:56wanted to let the people in the gallery

35:59um here know that the um packet that we

36:03received totaled about 305 pages of that

36:08about 80 was the summary, the proposed

36:12language, things like that. Um and about

36:14200 and so that leaves about 220 pages

36:18uh were public commentary. um they

36:21averaged about

36:2310 to 12 public comments per page. Um I

36:28spent a lot of time over the weekend

36:29reading through them and I found I think

36:34less than 12 that were in support of

36:36data centers in Minneapolis.

36:38Um

36:40but one of the questions that came up

36:42from your presentation was um you

36:45mentioned that we have about 30% of

36:47downtown space that is vacant right now.

36:51Um but you also there it wasn't clear

36:54how much of that space was deemed

36:56suitable for data center use. Um can you

36:59speak to that?

37:01>> Yes, thanks Commissioner Garcia. Um

37:05the most recent data centers we have

37:08seen in Minneapolis that have either

37:10been established or expanded have

37:13generally been in spaces that have been

37:15used for a similar function. So they

37:17have some of that infrastructure already

37:19in place. Uh the most recent uh uh

37:22proposal that we saw which uh had has

37:25been withdrawn uh as we speak today was

37:27for the Star Tribune printing plant. uh

37:29also a you know a significant uh uh

37:33power user uh previously and not a a

37:37building type that we have many of

37:39throughout our downtown. Um

37:44so

37:45I think we could see uh a number of

37:48smaller scale data centers. I think the

37:51likelihood that we will see

37:54uh uh the scale of say say this this

37:58data center that's in the sleep number

38:00building the number of buildings that

38:02will be adaptable for that scale of data

38:04center is probably very very limited to

38:07no more than a few

38:11>> is a few two to three is a few 12 to 15

38:16>> I would say a few is two to three

38:19>> okay Um,

38:22as Commissioner Connley um brought up,

38:26it it appears that we at the city level

38:28are unable to regulate based on water

38:31usage or electric electricity

38:34consumption. That's correct. Is that

38:35correct?

38:36>> That's correct.

38:38So given that we as a municipality do

38:42not have that capability um

38:46is it staff's opinion that

38:50allowing primary use of a data center or

38:54primary use of data centers without

38:57going through additional regulatory

39:00steps is acceptable or is it the city

39:04proposing only allowing in these overlay

39:07districts um with the additional

39:10conditions of the overlay districts.

39:14>> Uh Commissioner Garcia, I'm not sure I'm

39:15following a question about for example

39:18additional regulatory steps.

39:20>> Sure. So, if the um if a data center is

39:25going to be the primary use of a

39:26building,

39:28um would that be allowed as

39:32uh or would it still require conditional

39:35use permitting or would it be allowed by

39:38right?

39:39>> Sure. Uh, as proposed, any principal use

39:42data center, regardless of how what

39:44percentage of a building, how much of a

39:45building it takes up, uh, or really the

39:47square footage of it, if it's a

39:49principal use data center, it's not

39:51serving the, uh, just the needs of the

39:55of the use on the property or that

39:57property's branch locations, for

39:59example.

40:00>> Sure.

40:00>> It will require a conditional use permit

40:02and come before this body for a public

40:04hearing.

40:05>> Okay. And then um my final question is

40:08um when staff was doing all of the work

40:12to prepare this um has there been uh

40:15meaningful discussion and collaboration

40:17with um the local indigenous communities

40:20who um we acknowledge before so many

40:24events and say we understand that we're

40:26on their land and things like that. Um,

40:29has there been an effort to collaborate

40:32and work with them on

40:35regulations or concepts behind data

40:37center usage?

40:39>> Uh, Commissioner Garcia, there was not

40:40specific outreach to that community.

40:43>> Okay. Is that not city policy or is

40:46there a reason why that isn't part of

40:48the consideration before us?

40:50>> Uh, it has not, Commissioner Garcia,

40:53been a typical practice uh for a zoning

40:55code change. Uh it may have been a

41:00consideration had we uh uh looked more

41:03broadly outside of outside of downtown

41:05Minneapolis, but as proposed, we're

41:07we're propos uh we're proposing this use

41:09be allowed in less than 4% I believe it

41:12is of the of the city land area. Uh so

41:15that that specific community was not um

41:18not contacted.

41:19>> Okay. I'd just like to point out that uh

41:21the Mississippi River, particularly

41:24around um Oamni um is

41:28um regional parkland, but it is also

41:31considered um vital and historic to

41:34Dakota people. Um so I would recommend

41:36that the city looks into that and

41:39includes

41:41those communities in further discussions

41:43about things that could potentially

41:45impact that area.

41:48>> Thank you. Commissioner Baxley.

41:52>> Thanks, Chair. Um Jason, thanks again

41:54for the presentation. Just a couple

41:56questions um maybe about where your

42:00thinking was on this. So, we're

42:01prohibiting no new construction. So, I

42:04wonder why do that uh rather than

42:07evaluate proposals against

42:09performance-based standards such as

42:11noise demand, energy demand, noise,

42:13water consumption, and land use

42:15compatibility by just existing

42:17buildings. Yeah, Commissioner Baxi,

42:18that's I think an excellent question.

42:22We acknowledge that data centers are not

42:25a great use of [snorts] downtown space.

42:29Uh and that a primary reason for

42:33allowing them in in downtown is to

42:38uh find a viable economically

42:41uh sustaining use for much of our of our

42:45space existing space that has no viable

42:51use in the foreseeable future. So,

42:54balancing those objectives led us to

42:58this being a use that we would prefer to

43:00not see within new construction in uh in

43:03downtown and really have this uh be a

43:06use that can contribute hopefully to uh

43:10some of these buildings being more

43:11economically sustaining and perhaps

43:15subsidizing the uh ability for other

43:18uses to to to use some of the same

43:20buildings. Hence the not allowing uh a

43:23data center to be the only use of the of

43:25a building in question.

43:27>> Great. Thank you. Um just a quick

43:31question about utility disclosure. Um

43:34the requirement

43:37forces disclosure around anticipated

43:39water and electricity use. Um and I'm

43:41just wondering what does the city

43:43actually do with that information?

43:45um is it creating more meaningful

43:47accountability or is it just another

43:49requirement?

43:52>> Yeah, that's a a good question because

43:53as we discussed ultimately we don't have

43:56the ability to regulate based on the

43:58proposed megawatts being used. Uh some

44:02of that information will be used in the

44:04preliminary development review process

44:06to for example to for uh when a uh user

44:10is is changing its the capacity of its

44:14water connections

44:16uh that information will be used as part

44:18of that uh process. Um a the adequacy of

44:25utilities is one of the findings in a

44:28conditional use permit. So it is

44:29relevant uh to to that analysis even if

44:33ultimately we aren't able to deny a

44:37project solely based on the the power

44:40capacity that that's more in the realm

44:43ultimately of XL Energy and the public

44:45utilities commission.

44:46>> Very good helpful. Thank you. Lastly, um

44:50just wonder thinking out in the future,

44:52you know, given how quickly this

44:54technology is changing

44:56um and infrastructure requirements are

44:58evolving, how will the city determine

45:00whether these regulations remain

45:02appropriate? What's the review cycle

45:04here? How are we going to step into

45:05that?

45:06>> Yeah, good question, Commissioner

45:07Baxley. think um the the uh if we find

45:12that we are uh seeing more of these uses

45:16than expected and they have uh uses that

45:20aren't being uh we have situations where

45:23you the impacts aren't being properly

45:25mitigated. uh we have the ability to uh

45:29revise those regulations and decide that

45:32they're they're prol we've we've become

45:34too flexible and they're proliferating

45:36more than we would like them to. Uh

45:38there isn't a specific

45:41timeline by which we plan to to u

45:44revisit regulations but as you've noted

45:47the the industry is changing relatively

45:51fast. So, um, one can imagine that

45:55within a few years we will be examining

45:57this issue again.

45:59>> Thank you very much, Commissioner

46:01Gordon.

46:02>> Thank you. Thank you. Um, so just

46:06touching back on a comment you made

46:07earlier, aside from the ground level

46:09uses that um are outlined in the

46:11language, why do you feel it's unlikely

46:13that you believe an entire office tower

46:15would be converted?

46:16>> Sure, good question. Um,

46:20essentially the structural capacity

46:22needed to stack this type of equipment

46:27on a every floor of a 30story building

46:31is not that's not going to work. uh

46:34there is a degree to which that

46:39can be solved with enough investment

46:43but um it's our understanding in talking

46:46with people with expertise about this is

46:49that that's the thing that makes it

46:51highly unlikely in addition to sort of

46:54the high ceilings that are that are

46:56needed. Uh it's really um partly the

47:00structural capacity and if you are

47:03talking about a uh a data center with

47:07that's getting up around 100 megawws as

47:09well, you're talking about needing an

47:11on-site uh substation as well. And there

47:14just isn't room to accommodate that in

47:17in a on a typical downtown Minneapolis

47:21uh office building. Not only is there

47:24not room to accommodate it, but we are

47:26forcing it to be either on the rooftop

47:28and screened or within the building as

47:31well.

47:31>> Okay. Well, then um in relationship to

47:34scale, um was that was the 175,000 ft of

47:39white space determined primarily by

47:42energy usage energy usage or what other

47:44scale factors or factors were put into

47:46that determination?

47:47>> Yeah, good question. Uh when the city

47:49council adopted uh an exemption from the

47:52moratorum of 350,000 square feet in

47:55downtown

47:57that was used as part of the rationale

48:00for 175,000 ft² because that would

48:03roughly result in that scale of of

48:06whites space. But the intent also was to

48:10again using um approximating current

48:13technology that's generally going to

48:15prevent facilities that are that are 100

48:19megawatts or more and and therefore

48:21prevent the some of the impacts that are

48:23are going to be more acute for a a

48:27facility of that size more generators

48:30um higher higher water use etc. Okay,

48:34one last question. Um, and this is in

48:36relationship to environmental standards

48:37and dubtales um with comments by

48:40commissioners Connley, Garcia, and

48:42Baxley. Um, it's a little bit of a

48:43building code question, so I know it's

48:45outside, but it's highly related. Um,

48:47it's my understanding that a lot of data

48:49centers are currently classified as a B

48:50occupancy. Um, most office spaces in

48:53downside downtown are also B

48:54occupancies. If data data centers slide

48:58into a B occupancy, it's my

48:59understanding that a change of occupancy

49:01would not occur, meaning current entry

49:02code require requirements would not

49:04apply. Is it your understanding that um

49:06data centers would remain a B occupancy?

49:09Because if this is the case, then we may

49:11be up against some other environmental

49:13issues.

49:14>> Uh Commissioner Gordon, it is my

49:17understanding that it would be the same

49:19occupancy as as an office building.

49:22>> Okay. Thank you. Anyone

49:26else?

49:29>> Commissioner John.

49:31>> Uh, thank you, Chair Meyer, and thank

49:33you, uh, Mr. Whittenberg for your

49:35presentation. You and I have had a lot

49:37of discussion about data centers since,

49:40I would say, April. Um, so some of the

49:43things that I'm asking you is just to

49:44kind of put it into the public space.

49:47Could you share what the current policy

49:51is? Should a data center developer

49:55decide to build a data center and where

49:57they would be allowed to, I think it's

49:59important to understand where we

50:01currently are so we can look at what

50:03we're trying to change.

50:05>> Uh yeah, Commissioner Chad, I do not

50:07have a map handy of the areas where um

50:11data centers are currently allowed as a

50:13communication exchange. It is a large

50:17percentage of our city uh in 10 of the

50:20city's 15 primary zoning districts. Um

50:24so it's uh it's coupled with utilities

50:28user uh uses that that have to be near

50:32the end user whereas a data center

50:35really doesn't. There may be some

50:37benefits to it being near the end user

50:39but it doesn't have to be. So that's why

50:41those utilities uses are allowed much

50:43more broadly and why a data center is

50:46not a good fit to be classified

50:49the same way as those uses.

50:51>> Yeah, thank you. I I think it's also

50:54correct me if I'm wrong, but I think

50:55it's 13 out of 15 zoning districts allow

50:59for a communications exchange. It might

51:01not fit, but it would have to go through

51:03a conditional use permit. It's a large

51:05amount of our zoning districts.

51:08>> I I may be misspeaking. I thought it was

51:1010 of the of the 15, but it's it's a

51:14majority of our existing zoning

51:16districts. Yes.

51:17>> Yeah. And I think

51:19I there's so much more for me to say. Um

51:22I want to make sure we have time for

51:24everyone that's giving a public comment

51:26to share their voice. I think the thing

51:28that I will note um in being an author

51:32in the moratorum and then now a

51:35co-author in these regulations is what

51:39we currently have in place is wholly

51:41inadequate to meet the moment as it

51:44comes to new generation data centers

51:47that are not the data centers that power

51:50hospitals, banks, universities. We're

51:53talking about the generative AI data

51:56centers, the ones involved in crypto

51:59mining, the ones that support high loads

52:03of use, very very high loads of use. And

52:06I also just want to share that 50

52:08megawatts of use is not hyper hypers

52:11scale. It's not what you're thinking of

52:13when you think of those giant campuses

52:15that have um have acres and acres and

52:19acres of land. But 50 megawws is still a

52:23lot of power. It's enough to power

52:2650,000 homes and that runs 247. And I

52:31think it's really important that the

52:33city of Minneapolis recognizes how much

52:36community has shared concerns about

52:38this. And I I believe we've had over

52:421,600

52:45public comments, more than that, from

52:47community members. and those are largely

52:50sharing concerns about energy use, the

52:52impacts to climate, the impacts to

52:55water, the impacts to just land use, and

52:58being able to build our city for the

52:59future. Um, and I think that's no small

53:02thing for us to consider as a de

53:04democratic body in terms of building out

53:08regulations that are restrictive. while

53:11the work of having a statewide

53:14regulatory framework or even a national

53:16regulatory framework is being done and

53:18is largely missing. Um, so I want to

53:21make that point and I also do want to

53:23make the point to the public the

53:25moratorum does end on November 21st. I

53:29wanted to see a year-long moratorum. I

53:32felt like that was in league with what

53:33other cities are doing across the

53:36country. I think we have over 360

53:39moratoriums active across the country

53:42right now. Um, a pure city, Denver has a

53:45moratorum for a year. Uh, but

53:48unfortunately there was not the appetite

53:50on the Minneapolis city council to pass

53:53a year-long moratorum. I do think

53:56further work and time would have been

53:58helpful. Um, but this is the place that

54:01we're at. And I really believe that it's

54:03important that we have some forms of

54:06strong regulations on the books to

54:08protect our community to have time to

54:11work through the state legislative

54:13process. Because if we don't have

54:15something on the books come November

54:1721st, we fall back to what's currently

54:20in place. And that's that either 10 or

54:2213. I'm going to air on the side of 10

54:25zoning districts allowing for a

54:27communication exchange without a

54:29definition of a data center and all of

54:31these different things that are touching

54:32here. Um so that's just an important

54:35note to make.

54:37>> Thank you. Um Jason, can you go to the

54:40PR2 map that came out of the committee

54:43of the whole because I wanted to um ask

54:45about that. So, I mean, it makes

54:49complete sense to me to be narrowing

54:51this down from the the 10 or 13 zoning

54:54areas where it's where it's currently

54:55allowed. Um, and

54:58there was an initial map that went out

55:01at some point that made a lot of people

55:03concerned because it covered a lot of

55:04areas in the city and there was a lot of

55:06opposition uh to allowing them in the

55:09north and south side green zones and

55:11that made perfect sense to me. Um but I

55:14thought it made sense to have a few

55:17small industrial zones where we could

55:19accommodate data centers. Um so can you

55:22explain more why these were taken off?

55:24So so I mean what we saw from committee

55:26the whole was that in in the downtown

55:28area

55:30um existing buildings could be adapted

55:34um and then in these industrial zones

55:36that's where new construction could

55:39happen. And with the proposal now taking

55:42out those PR2 mix zones, there would be

55:45no new construction anywhere. Correct.

55:48>> Uh that's correct. Uh President Meyer

55:51and this is the map uh that I I hope you

55:54see in front of you right now that we

55:55presented at the committee of the whole

55:56that would have also allowed data

55:59centers in the uh in the PR2 district

56:02spaced from uh districts that uh allow

56:05residential use. Um,

56:09again, we received a lot of uh feedback,

56:11a lot of push back to uh allowing the

56:13use outside of downtown.

56:16Um, and we felt like particularly in

56:20speaking with uh XL Energy that the

56:23likelihood of a of a user coming in in

56:28one of those relatively small areas in

56:30the next several years

56:33um seems small. and that uh a larger

56:38scale use probably would require some

56:41significant buildout of of the grid in

56:43order to accommodate the the use in

56:45those locations anyway. So I those are

56:47the reasons our recommendation currently

56:49doesn't reflect those areas.

56:52>> Okay. Okay. And this might be a question

56:53for Excel, but if they if they need to

56:57build out the grid in those areas, the

57:00the rate payers protection that was

57:01passed in 2025, wouldn't that make the

57:03the the people building it out have to

57:06pay for the grid?

57:07>> That's correct. The the the upgrade to

57:11the grid would be the responsibility of

57:13the user. Um, my understanding is that

57:17how that would likely work is that XL

57:19Energy would say it's going to cost X

57:23million to upgrade the grid and it'll

57:26take 5 years and there and that at that

57:29point the user would look elsewhere most

57:31likely.

57:32>> Okay. And then my other question um was

57:36there ever any discussion about

57:38permitting u data centers in basement?

57:42So, you said, you know, you probably

57:43wouldn't be likely in a a 30s story

57:46building. And to me, um, it seems like

57:50basements might make make more sense

57:51because you're not as exposed to the

57:53elements. You wouldn't have the noise

57:54concerns. Um, and it it seems like

57:58if something was built in a um a

58:01basement that could help facilitate

58:04commercial and and residential as part

58:05of a mixed use project and make that

58:07pencil out. Was there any consideration

58:08to that? Uh, Commissioner Meyer, we did

58:10give that some thought and uh ultimately

58:13didn't move forward with that

58:14recommendation, but I think that would

58:15be a a reasonable recommendation.

58:18>> Okay. Any other questions for staff

58:20before we open the public hearing?

58:23All right. And I'll just say um we do

58:25have a representative from Excel here.

58:28Um my plan is to proceed with the public

58:30hearing and then before we close it um

58:33we can bring back the Excel

58:34representative to answer any questions

58:37uh that you may have. but we're going to

58:38go with the people who signed up first.

58:39Okay, so we have um 30 people who have

58:43signed up, which is actually less than I

58:45was anticipating. So that means we've

58:47got enough time to give everyone the

58:48regular 2 minutes um that we normally

58:52do. I'm going to read out um names five

58:56in a row um so that people from the um

59:01overflow room can have a chance to to

59:02come over. Uh so the first five people

59:05that we're going to hear from number one

59:07Francis Bull, number two uh Jay Nlesny,

59:11number three Lee Amlson, number four

59:13Mags Bell, and number five Roxan uh

59:18Thrfall. And apologies if I mispronounce

59:20any of your names. I'm using the yellow

59:22sheet so the ink doesn't go all the way

59:25through on them. Um so I can't always

59:27see all of your writing. Um but first up

59:30we have Francis Pull. Is Francis here?

59:32Great.

59:33welcome and introduce yourself and you

59:34have two minutes.

59:36>> Good afternoon. My name is Francis Bull.

59:38I live in Ward 12. I'm 17 years old and

59:41I'm enrolled in the Minneapolis public

59:43school district.

59:45I love connecting with my community and

59:47spending time in nature. I also love and

59:49work with kids.

59:51It is because of these things I oppose

59:53the allowable use of 175,000 square feet

59:56of downtown for data centers as well as

59:58as well as the lack of statewide

1:00:00regulations surrounding them.

1:00:02I want to have fun envisioning a future

1:00:04for myself. But instead of thinking

1:00:06about where I want to go to school, my

1:00:08future career choices, and if I want

1:00:10kids, I'm measuring whether these dreams

1:00:11could be a reality in a world without

1:00:13access to public resources, clean water,

1:00:16and unpolluted air. Because that is my

1:00:19reality.

1:00:21Every child has so much potential,

1:00:23creativity, and love. I have a

1:00:25responsibility to protect the youth in

1:00:27my community, and so do you.

1:00:30Living in Minneapolis has given me the

1:00:32privilege to be a part of something

1:00:33bigger and taught me the value of

1:00:35community. We must defend our access to

1:00:37public resources.

1:00:39We have one grocery store downtown. My

1:00:42public school system is in a financial

1:00:44crisis.

1:00:46We need to be focused on creating

1:00:47infrastructure to support the public,

1:00:49not privatizing land that could

1:00:51otherwise be used to promote the common

1:00:52welfare.

1:00:54I urge city council to consider our

1:00:56future. We need statewide regulations on

1:00:59hypers scale data centers. Do not trade

1:01:01our futures. Do not trade my futures. My

1:01:04future

1:01:06for false promises of revenue or cave to

1:01:09large corporation.

1:01:11For council members currently working to

1:01:13defend this planet, I thank you. And for

1:01:15other council members, I ask you to

1:01:17expand your capacity for empathy. Thank

1:01:19you for your time.

1:01:21>> Thank you. Next we have Jay Nollesnney

1:01:23followed by Lee Hamilton, Mags Bell,

1:01:25Roxan Thrawal, and Gabrielle

1:01:27Clinkenberg.

1:01:30>> Hi, my name is Jay Allesn. I'm 16 and

1:01:33I'm an MPS student in Ward 13. I'm here

1:01:36to ask that the city does not support

1:01:37the building of data centers in downtown

1:01:40and create stricter regulations on data

1:01:42centers in general. As a kid, some of my

1:01:45best memories are playing on the river

1:01:46and exploring the city with my family

1:01:48and friends. And as I've grown up, it's

1:01:50been wonderful seeing little kids in my

1:01:52family and the community continue that

1:01:55tradition. Putting data centers in our

1:01:57cities and neighborhoods could directly

1:01:59threaten our children's chance to have

1:02:00outdoor experiences because of the

1:02:03amount of emissions and water use

1:02:04required in just one day of operation.

1:02:07As Commissioner Garcia said, the

1:02:09Mississippi is incredibly important to

1:02:10our indigenous communities, local

1:02:12wildlife, and general city life. It is

1:02:15also where the city draws most of its

1:02:17water from. Um, in this presentation it

1:02:21stated that we are below our capacity

1:02:24for water use and we could use more for

1:02:27data centers. I think that's amazingly

1:02:31neglectful.

1:02:33Um, it's an amazing accomplishment that

1:02:35we have our water usage below capacity

1:02:37and just because we're able to does not

1:02:39mean we should be taking more. As

1:02:42leaders in our community, this

1:02:43commission and the city council have the

1:02:45responsibility to uphold the community's

1:02:47wants and needs, not just the

1:02:48corporations. I ask that everybody

1:02:50present today truly considers and makes

1:02:53decisions according to what is best for

1:02:54our generation and future generations.

1:02:56Thank you.

1:02:57>> Thank you. Next, we have Lee Samson and

1:03:00Magpell, Rexandra Threeall, Gabrielle

1:03:02Clinkenberg, and Kevin U practice.

1:03:08Welcome.

1:03:09Yeah, Chair Meyer, members of the

1:03:11commission. Yeah, I work for a

1:03:13Minneapolis focused energy democracy

1:03:15nonprofit that follows the city's

1:03:17climate goals, but I'm speaking on

1:03:19behalf of myself. I attended at least

1:03:21four data center forums with city

1:03:23council members from both sides of the

1:03:26moratorum vote so that I could best

1:03:28inform myself and because the city's

1:03:31hands are tied in so many different ways

1:03:33such as not being able to regulate data

1:03:35centers by the megawatt without a change

1:03:38in state law. Here's my conclusion that

1:03:41um development should be limited to

1:03:43distributed smallcale data centers and

1:03:46only if necessary to meet the computing

1:03:48needs of local businesses, public

1:03:50agencies and community services. The

1:03:53data and processing must be managed by

1:03:56local companies or cooperatives rather

1:04:00than by the dominant tech firms who

1:04:02might host surveillance data. So, I'd

1:04:04recommend at least two changes to the

1:04:06city's proposed framework. The the first

1:04:09would be to limit primary zoning so that

1:04:12each individual data center project

1:04:14would have its own public hearing so

1:04:17neighbors could weigh in. And uh the

1:04:19second change would be to reduce the cap

1:04:22of 175,000 square ft of white space to

1:04:27uh weigh less than that but to but then

1:04:30to um raise the cap if the data center

1:04:34developers build offsite community solar

1:04:36and grids scale battery storage in the

1:04:39local area. And that should serve as an

1:04:42incentive for data centers to reduce

1:04:44reliance on backup diesel generators as

1:04:48one answer I have on the energy

1:04:50question. Uh given that the city can

1:04:53only regulate by square footage and

1:04:55location and I appreciate this process

1:04:58for local communities to retain the

1:05:00power to set strict conditions and

1:05:04ironclad environmental guard rails for

1:05:06how it is done. Thank you.

1:05:08>> Thank you. Uh we have next Mags Bell and

1:05:12followed by Roxan Gabriel Kevin and then

1:05:15Margaret Sullivan.

1:05:18Welcome.

1:05:20Good evening. Um my name is Mags. I'm a

1:05:23resident of W 9. I'm also a public

1:05:25health expert. I work in public health

1:05:27emergency preparedness and response.

1:05:30I'm here today because I believe that

1:05:32generative AI is known to be an

1:05:34environmental, climate, and public

1:05:37health disaster. And so adding to the

1:05:40electricity and water use for such

1:05:42problematic technology, especially in

1:05:45the climate crisis that we're in, is

1:05:46actually just completely unacceptable.

1:05:51I know that you know that there is broad

1:05:53opposition to this across the city,

1:05:54across the state, and across the globe

1:05:57at this point. Uh opposition to these

1:05:59large-scale data centers. And so while I

1:06:02understand that your hands are tied in

1:06:04many ways, I understand that the state

1:06:06cannot just have us have a ban outright.

1:06:08I understand that we need smaller

1:06:10centers that run things like the

1:06:12internet. There are ways that the

1:06:14existing proposals to regulation, which

1:06:17I think are a great start, could go a

1:06:18lot further. So first, so there are many

1:06:21ways I've shared some with some of you.

1:06:23The things that I will highlight are

1:06:25bringing down that 175,000 square

1:06:27footage to a absolute cap of 25,000

1:06:31square footage. This allows for the

1:06:33small things that exist without even

1:06:35coming close to these mega data centers.

1:06:38Additionally, 100 ft from a residential

1:06:40housing unit is not enough. At least 250

1:06:43ft distance from residences, daycarees,

1:06:46schools, and parks should be a part of

1:06:47the regulation. And the thing I really

1:06:49want to highlight is nowhere in this

1:06:51regulation is there anything that says

1:06:54that talks about public notification

1:06:56requirements. And I know that that is

1:06:58possible. So I want anyone who is within

1:07:01a 100,000 or I'm sorry a th000 ft of a

1:07:04proposed center to be notified so that

1:07:07they have the ability to respond to what

1:07:10could be coming to their neighborhood.

1:07:12This is Minneapolis. We have shown that

1:07:14we take care of our neighbors. We take

1:07:16care of our city and by if we do not

1:07:20regulate this as much as humanly

1:07:21possible, we will be failing our city in

1:07:23doing so. Thank you.

1:07:25>> Thank you. Next, we have Roxan followed

1:07:27by Gabrielle, Kevin, Margaret, and then

1:07:30Timothy Hart.

1:07:32Welcome.

1:07:34[clears throat]

1:07:36>> Hello. Uh, my name is Roxan Thal. You

1:07:40tried on my name, so good job. Thank

1:07:43you.

1:07:43>> I'm a resident that lives in the north

1:07:45side of Minneapolis and I come here

1:07:48today on behalf of Minneapolis north

1:07:50side for safeguards against dirty data

1:07:53minad.

1:07:55We are a small group of neighbors in the

1:07:57north side who are fighting back against

1:07:59data centers being in our neighborhoods.

1:08:02I'm aware we are discussing downtown

1:08:04today. However, as we said earlier, this

1:08:07can and probably will be discussed again

1:08:10in the future for further expansion.

1:08:13I'm attending this resoning meeting to

1:08:16discuss my concerns about what this

1:08:17means for our future as northsiders and

1:08:20as a Minneapolis resident.

1:08:22Reszoning to me means that you are

1:08:25wanting more data centers.

1:08:27A month ago at Open Streets Broadway, a

1:08:30small group of us were able to collect

1:08:32260 signatures within 5 hours from north

1:08:36side residents. This to me signals that

1:08:38we do not want data centers on the north

1:08:41side. A week and a half ago, we

1:08:43submitted these signatures to Ward 4 and

1:08:46five city council members. We have not

1:08:49heard back.

1:08:51Recently, a development group backed out

1:08:53of the north or out of the Star Tribune

1:08:55building. I went to the first community

1:08:57meeting at the neighborhood association.

1:09:00I was not surprised that it did not go

1:09:02through. My thought was that it would

1:09:05not go through and this was the first

1:09:07step of a long con where they would

1:09:10eventually put a data center somewhere

1:09:11on the north side. If you look at the

1:09:14McKinley neighborhood, it extends all

1:09:16the way to the river. There is a lot of

1:09:18empty space and a lot of warehouse

1:09:20buildings. a lot of buildings that are

1:09:22not used or that potentially just could

1:09:24be bought out and used for other things.

1:09:28The north side has a long history of

1:09:30environmental racism and this is just

1:09:32the logical next step.

1:09:35My thoughts were Star Tribune gets

1:09:37turned down. People forget.

1:09:41The last thing I'll say, this directly

1:09:44impacts black and brown communities.

1:09:47We do not want data centers in our

1:09:49communities. Thank you.

1:09:51Thank you. Next we have Gabrielle

1:09:52Clinkberg followed by Kevin Margaret

1:09:54Timothy and then Dan McConnell.

1:09:59>> Welcome.

1:10:00>> Hello. My name is Gabby Clinkenborg. I

1:10:03am a resident of W 12 and a teacher in

1:10:05the same district where the largest data

1:10:07center in Minnesota currently resides.

1:10:09I'm also part of a grassroots

1:10:11organization effort led by Twin Cities

1:10:13DSA to bring education around data

1:10:14centers to neighborhoods in our city.

1:10:16Because of our work, nearly a fifth of

1:10:18the neighborhood associations in the

1:10:20city of Minneapolis have passed or are

1:10:21planning to vote on a resolution to stop

1:10:23data center development. The

1:10:25neighborhood associations of Luring

1:10:26Park, Fwell, Weber, Camden, Otbond Park,

1:10:30Botnau, Marshall Terrace, Weight Park,

1:10:32and Seward have all passed a resolution

1:10:35against the development of data centers.

1:10:37Five additional neighborhood

1:10:38associations are currently considering

1:10:39this resolution and will vote on it

1:10:41later this month. seven distinct wards

1:10:44across the city and thousands of your

1:10:46constituents are represented in those

1:10:47neighborhoods. Any vote you take to open

1:10:50the door for data center development

1:10:51puts you out of step with all of them.

1:10:54As the strictest possible measure, we

1:10:56would like to see a complete ban on new

1:10:58data center development. We cannot

1:11:00separate the rapid development of data

1:11:02centers from the rise in surveillance

1:11:03tech and the use of flock, for example,

1:11:05to stalk, kidnap, and traffic our

1:11:07neighbors. As Minneapolis residents, we

1:11:10know that these issues are deeply

1:11:11interconnected and we cannot look away

1:11:13from that. We cannot and should not

1:11:15accept tech billionaires polluting our

1:11:17water, air, and earth while getting

1:11:19millions in tax cuts and offering no

1:11:21benefits to our communities. Our

1:11:22communities need food, housing, and

1:11:24healthcare. We do not need data centers,

1:11:27especially when the public and city

1:11:29council will be cut out of the

1:11:30decision-making process if we allow

1:11:32primary zoning of data centers. Primary

1:11:34zoning gives developers free reign and

1:11:36disempowers the planning commission,

1:11:38city council, and the public from saying

1:11:40no. Developers who wish to exploit our

1:11:42city should at the very least have to

1:11:45make their case before these bodies in

1:11:47order to be approved. I urge you to vote

1:11:49against any primary zoning for data

1:11:50centers and to make our city as hostile

1:11:52an environment for data center

1:11:54development as possible. Thank you for

1:11:56your time. [snorts]

1:11:57>> Thank you. Next we have Kevin Premis

1:11:59followed by Margaret Timothy Dan and

1:12:02then Gary Dukes.

1:12:06>> Hi. Uh my name is Kevin Prramis. Uh and

1:12:09I represent Lyuna. Uh we have 14,000

1:12:13members who are construction laborers

1:12:14that including many that live and work

1:12:15in Minneapolis. I live next door in St.

1:12:17Paul where I think we share similar

1:12:19values and are struggling with some of

1:12:20the same problems. The question as I

1:12:23understand it that the city's grappling

1:12:24with is how's whether data center

1:12:27development uh the urban infill

1:12:29development can be consistent with the

1:12:30sort of vision of a vibrant city with

1:12:32ample affordable housing, public green

1:12:34space and a diverse mix of businesses

1:12:35that are employers, service providers

1:12:37and sources of housing. We think that

1:12:40development of the kind of data

1:12:42infrastructure we're talking about here

1:12:43supports that vision. I think two

1:12:45reasons. One, services that make it

1:12:47attractive for businesses to invest in

1:12:48Minneapolis. And it's important to

1:12:50remember these kinds of data centers are

1:12:52designed to allow the sort of speed that

1:12:54highspeed internet is designed to

1:12:55provide to all sorts of architecture,

1:12:57engineering firms, medical research, all

1:12:59the sort of businesses that we'd like to

1:13:01have here and jobs we'd like to have in

1:13:03Minneapolis and in St. Paul where I am.

1:13:05The other is the te the fees uh taxes

1:13:08and rate revenues that fund programs and

1:13:10resources including parks, including

1:13:12schools, including our infrastructure.

1:13:14And that's an important value that this

1:13:16provides. In fact, these developments

1:13:18provide more taxes, right, per square

1:13:21foot than almost any other kind of

1:13:22development. And that's what we need. If

1:13:24we want to convert more buildings uh

1:13:26from commercial into residential, that

1:13:28takes money. That takes subsidies from

1:13:29the city, that has to come from

1:13:30somewhere. If we want better, if we want

1:13:32to keep our parks up, which our members

1:13:33do for local 363, that requires money.

1:13:36All of these are important revenues that

1:13:38these could provide. We have some

1:13:39concerns that it's overly restrictive as

1:13:42it's proposed. Now, appreciate the

1:13:43questions uh by Council President Meyer

1:13:45and uh Commissioner Baxley about whether

1:13:48their performance-based standards would

1:13:49be more effective. Ultimately, we want

1:13:51to leverage these investments to be able

1:13:54to support the development we need as

1:13:56well as the clean energy that those 50

1:13:57megawatts require. Thank you.

1:14:00>> Thank you. And next we have Margaret

1:14:02Sullivan, followed by Timothy, Dan,

1:14:04Gary, and then Suzanne Murphy.

1:14:12Hi, I live in Ward 4 in North as well.

1:14:16I'm guessing from the polling, it really

1:14:19could be that most of us here and you

1:14:22too know deep in our bones that a ban on

1:14:27AI data centers like Monterey Park has

1:14:30until the existential risks are solved

1:14:33is conservative.

1:14:37But if you can't do that, um I would

1:14:40like you to recommend extending

1:14:41moratorum.

1:14:43Uh this proposal is completely missing

1:14:45business regulations

1:14:47which we need to make sure a data

1:14:50center's compute reflects who we want to

1:14:52be as a city. And to know how much of a

1:14:56data center is controlled by a foreign

1:14:58ally or adversary, that's just sensible.

1:15:02And how great would it be if together,

1:15:05residents and city council, we could

1:15:07write limits for the uses of data center

1:15:10compute that reflect who we want to be.

1:15:13If data centers could be randomly

1:15:15inspected, site and compute to make sure

1:15:19our limits are in place like the many

1:15:21other Minneapolis businesses with city

1:15:23regulations.

1:15:25We'd also need to know uh shell

1:15:28companies, parent companies and

1:15:30collocation tenants before starting any

1:15:32work for waste heat distribution. I mean

1:15:35we only want American allies for that.

1:15:39And remember that a hypers scale is

1:15:42effectively a group of smaller data

1:15:44centers behind a boundary.

1:15:47And we really that's the proposal here

1:15:50with even less environmental review. So

1:15:54let's don't build a hypers scale

1:15:55downtown. No primary zone.

1:15:59And after the first 100 megawws are

1:16:02claimed by Minneapolis data centers.

1:16:05Hypers scale is often considered 100 and

1:16:07we're halfway there already. Require

1:16:10from the city of Minneapolis an

1:16:12environmental impact statement for every

1:16:15new data center proposal. So we don't

1:16:17build the hypers scale you say you don't

1:16:19want here. Thank you.

1:16:21>> Thank you. Next we have Timothy Hart

1:16:23followed by Dan, Gary, Suzanne, and next

1:16:25will be Casemiram.

1:16:29Welcome.

1:16:31Hello everyone. Uh my name is Timothy

1:16:33Hart. I live in Longfellow. Thank you

1:16:35all for your time this evening and for

1:16:37the work that staff has put in on this.

1:16:39U I was glad that data centers would no

1:16:41longer be lumped in together under

1:16:43communication exchanges. Uh, however, I

1:16:46want to say that I do not believe that

1:16:47they should be expressly allowed under

1:16:49any of our primary zoning designations.

1:16:52We're talking here during the week that

1:16:54we're losing our cars car share service.

1:16:56People in the city are facing the loss

1:16:58of infrastructure and support systems

1:17:00that serve the public while being asked

1:17:02to summit projects like data centers

1:17:04without being given any say in the

1:17:06matter. If we are going to speak about

1:17:08data centers coming into the city, then

1:17:10any proposal should have to justify

1:17:12itself, be subject to community

1:17:13scrutiny, and enable this body and city

1:17:16council to be able to actually speak to

1:17:18if it's a development that is wanted as

1:17:20opposed to just if a permit application

1:17:22has dotted the eyes and crossed the

1:17:24tees. Please don't allow data centers in

1:17:26a primary zoning designation. And thank

1:17:28you for your time.

1:17:30>> Thank you. Next we have Dan McConnell

1:17:32followed by Gary Suzanne Casemra and

1:17:35Mary Franchet.

1:17:38Welcome.

1:17:41[clears throat]

1:17:41>> Thank you, Chair Meer and uh members of

1:17:42the planning commission. I provide a

1:17:44letter with extensive comments. I'll

1:17:46just highlight a couple things. Uh I'm

1:17:48as they mentioned, I'm Dan McConnell. I

1:17:50live in Ward 12. I'm an electrician by

1:17:52trade and I have the honor of serving as

1:17:54the uh business manager of the

1:17:55Minneapolis Building and Construction

1:17:57Trades Council where we represent 20,000

1:17:59skilled construction workers. I just

1:18:01want to be clear, our council supports

1:18:03responsible limits on data center

1:18:05construction. We wanted to see

1:18:07development that protects workers,

1:18:09neighborhoods, and the environment and

1:18:11[snorts] utility rate payers while also

1:18:13creating family sustaining union careers

1:18:16and meaningful community benefits. We

1:18:18appreciate the council's uh proh

1:18:21prohibition on NDAs. We support a cup

1:18:24process. We would appreciate the ability

1:18:27to uh have developers be able to come in

1:18:30and review the project based on what

1:18:31they're actually proposing. Uh some of

1:18:34the um things that we want to highlight

1:18:36in the letter. Uh there's no mention in

1:18:38any of the stuff that we've seen so far

1:18:40around uh uh uh [clears throat]

1:18:45uh labor standards protections for

1:18:47workers on the projects. Uh we would

1:18:49support uh addition of uh requirements

1:18:52for job quality, registered apprentichip

1:18:55programs, prevailing wage as done in the

1:18:57in the state law, local hiring

1:18:59requirements, responsible contracting,

1:19:01and community benefits for our

1:19:02neighbors.

1:19:04uh we would actually uh suggest that we

1:19:07re regulate this based on measurable

1:19:09impacts based rather than arbitrary

1:19:11restrictions. I appreciate that the 20

1:19:14foot setback works well at Sleepnumber.

1:19:17That's great for Sleep Number. That

1:19:18doesn't mean it's going to work

1:19:19everywhere else. Uh these are design

1:19:21considerations that can be taken into

1:19:23account on the project. Uh I've actually

1:19:26worked on data centers in the in the

1:19:28city of Minneapolis. Neither uh two

1:19:29different ones. Neither one of them were

1:19:31in the downtown core. One was in Ward

1:19:33one, the other was in Ward six. Uh,

1:19:35nobody knows. None of the reports

1:19:37mention those projects. They are

1:19:40innocuous. Nobody knows that they're

1:19:42there. There have been no negative

1:19:44impacts on that. I'm done already. All

1:19:45right. Uh, read the letter, please.

1:19:47Appreciate your support or your u

1:19:49consideration of this topic. Thank you.

1:19:51>> Thank you. Next, we have Gary Dukes,

1:19:53followed by Suzanne Casemira Marie and

1:19:56then Will Reley.

1:19:59Good afternoon, members of the planning

1:20:01commission. My name is Gary Dukes, and I

1:20:04am a resident of Ward 12, Nenina.

1:20:07As you deliberate today, you must

1:20:09scrutinize the framing of these zoning

1:20:11amendments and address their

1:20:12shortcomings. The proposed framework

1:20:15risks opening the door to massive

1:20:18industrial nodes under square footage

1:20:20thresholds that are simply too large for

1:20:23our local ecosystems to safely absorb.

1:20:27Facilities drawing millions of gallons

1:20:29of water for cooling and tens of

1:20:33megawatts of power will inevitably

1:20:36strain our regional grid, lock in fossil

1:20:39fuel reliance, and threat our municipal

1:20:41climate goals. Furthermore, carving out

1:20:45exemptions or relying on basic setbacks

1:20:49does nothing to mitigate the cumulative

1:20:52ecological degradation, noise pollution,

1:20:55and environmental justice burdens

1:20:58shifted directly onto our neighborhoods.

1:21:02I urge the commission to recognize these

1:21:05serious gaps and to strengthen these

1:21:08amendments to pro to truly protect our

1:21:12ecosystems and our communities. Thank

1:21:16you very much.

1:21:18>> Thank you. Next we have Suzanne Murphy

1:21:20followed by Casemira Marie Will and then

1:21:24uh Mary Jennles.

1:21:27Welcome.

1:21:28>> Hi Chair Meyer and uh commissioners. My

1:21:31name is Suzanne Murphy and I live in the

1:21:33How neighborhood of Ward 12 and I'm the

1:21:35Minneapolis community relations manager

1:21:37for Excel Energy. Um, Excel Energy

1:21:40appreciates the city of Minneapolis's

1:21:42thoughtful approach to developing a

1:21:44long-term framework for data centers. We

1:21:47share the city's goal of supporting

1:21:49responsible economic growth, job

1:21:52creation, and adaptive reuse of existing

1:21:55buildings while protecting residents and

1:21:58businesses. Data centers can provide

1:22:00significant investment, increased tax

1:22:03base and economic activity, particularly

1:22:06in downtown areas. Importantly,

1:22:09Minnesota's regulatory framework ensures

1:22:11that data centers pay the costs of the

1:22:14infrastructure needed to serve them,

1:22:16including power lines, substations, and

1:22:19other electric system upgrades. So these

1:22:21costs are not shifted to existing

1:22:24customers. Excel Energy has the

1:22:26experience, planning processes, and

1:22:29system capabilities necessary to

1:22:31reliably serve uh projects of the size

1:22:34currently being discussed in

1:22:35Minneapolis. We support requirements

1:22:38that improve transparency and help

1:22:41decision makers understand anticipated

1:22:43energy needs while avoiding duplicative

1:22:46utility review processes that are

1:22:48already governed by Excel Energy,

1:22:51regional grid operators, and state

1:22:53regulators. Thank you.

1:22:55>> Thank you. Next we have Casemira

1:22:57followed by Marie, Will, Mary, and then

1:23:00Kai

1:23:01Caillou.

1:23:07Do we have Oh, welcome.

1:23:10Introduce yourself and you have two

1:23:12minutes.

1:23:13Hello.

1:23:16Hello. Let me just

1:23:19My name is Casemira. I live in Ward 7.

1:23:24Um this is I'm with Neidos um climate

1:23:28and um we're showing up today just to

1:23:34um just in regard to the unregulated

1:23:37data centers and um first of all I would

1:23:42recommend extending the moratorum

1:23:45because we currently are not in line um

1:23:50with meeting our climate goals And it is

1:23:53stated in the data center report that

1:23:59with the increase of data centers we

1:24:02that like goal is likely to get pushed

1:24:05back. So, um, specific regulations do

1:24:10not allow primary zoning. Um, h have a

1:24:14neighbor agreement for each individual

1:24:16data center to not allow primary zoning.

1:24:19Zoning offer incentives for battery

1:24:21storage. So, data centers rely less on

1:24:25diesel backup generators. White space

1:24:27for data centers cannot be larger than

1:24:30170 square feet to protect small

1:24:33businesses and abate noise complaints.

1:24:36Data centers should be restricted to

1:24:38floors above the second story. Ensure

1:24:41all construction jobs uh labor and jobs

1:24:44created are local and union affiliated.

1:24:47Uh, and Minneapolis should ensure that

1:24:49the added franchise fee revenue from

1:24:51data center energy sales actually fund

1:24:54climate initiatives and clean energy

1:24:56projects.

1:24:58No data centers outside of downtown.

1:25:01Create a periodic reporting mechanism.

1:25:04Um, as well as notifying the residents

1:25:09within a,000 ft of a data center. I

1:25:11think that was a very good addition. um

1:25:14no tax breaks or financial incentives

1:25:16given to data centers and we know this

1:25:19isn't the final fight that there will be

1:25:22yes

1:25:24thank you

1:25:25>> thank you next we have Marie Franchett

1:25:28followed by Will Mary Kai and then Mike

1:25:31Arm

1:25:35welcome

1:25:37>> good afternoon my name is Marie Franchad

1:25:40uh I live in W 11 and I'm a volunteer

1:25:42with UNI working on climate change in

1:25:44the environment. So, I'm here because

1:25:46I'm concerned about the future of our

1:25:48children and the earth um and the

1:25:51increased uh emissions of fossil fuels

1:25:54that will result from data center

1:25:57development and the negative impacts

1:25:58that has on our infrastructure. So it

1:26:02sounds like under this ordinance up to

1:26:04100 megawatt facilities would be allowed

1:26:07and it or I' I understand that even a 50

1:26:10megawatt plant uses as much energy as

1:26:1350,000 homes which is like the size of a

1:26:16small city. Um so I'm concerned about

1:26:19the level of energy and the fossil fuel

1:26:22emissions. Recently, the MPCA released a

1:26:25report that says that climate change is

1:26:28going to result in state costs of 20

1:26:31billion per year by 2040.

1:26:34So, we have to do all that we can to

1:26:36meet the city's climate change goals to

1:26:39prevent um all these weather events and

1:26:42infrastructure destruction that we're

1:26:44seeing across the country. Um, and I did

1:26:47want to point out that data centers of

1:26:49course are not going to be creating

1:26:50permanent jobs or bringing vitality to

1:26:53downtown. They're essentially warehouses

1:26:55uh that use enormous amounts of water

1:26:57and energy and nuisance levels of noise

1:27:01uh that may well lead to decreased

1:27:03property values and increased energy

1:27:05costs for residents.

1:27:07um to mitigate all these concerns about

1:27:10the huge energy uses of data centers. I

1:27:14I would also support extending the

1:27:16moratorum to make sure that we have the

1:27:18proper regulations in place and that

1:27:21which could include limiting data

1:27:23centers to 25,000 square feet that they

1:27:26be located at least 250 ft from other

1:27:28residents, schools or um parks. and that

1:27:34um there be strict sound uh requirements

1:27:39potentially limited to 60 dB. Thank you.

1:27:44>> Thank you. Next we have Will Reley

1:27:46followed by Mary Kai Mike and Steven

1:27:50Johnson.

1:27:52>> Hi. Uh my name is Will Reley. I'm from

1:27:55Weber Camden in Ward for Minneapolis.

1:27:58Um, I would just like to say that

1:28:01Minopolitans are intelligent. They have

1:28:04long memories. We understand that data

1:28:09centers are necessary for a lot of uh

1:28:11modern life and technology. But we also

1:28:14know that this push for high-capacity

1:28:17data centers, this recent push for

1:28:19high-capacity data centers is not a

1:28:22quirk. It's not an accident. It's

1:28:24because large tech firms and large AI

1:28:28firms, including Google, [snorts] etc.,

1:28:30want to insert themselves into our

1:28:32communities to consume our water, our

1:28:35labor, our electricity, to line their

1:28:38own p to line their pockets for their

1:28:40own profit. Um, I would also like to

1:28:43recognize and uplift Commissioner

1:28:44Garcia's inquiries as to whether or not

1:28:47native communities have been approached

1:28:50and asked about the about this. It's

1:28:53appalling that that has not happened. Um

1:28:56it's shameful quite honestly. Um I'm

1:28:59also here with my friend Roxan um with

1:29:02Minneapolis North Cyper Safeguards

1:29:03Against Dirty Data or M MNSAD. I'm just

1:29:07going to list off a few of our demands

1:29:09uh for data centers uh that want that

1:29:13are um that want to be construct or that

1:29:16want to be constructed in Minneapolis.

1:29:18Um, data centers built in Minneapolis

1:29:21must file their own water permit per

1:29:23house file SE or 3793.

1:29:26Data centers in Minneapolis must be

1:29:28powered entirely by renewable energy

1:29:30sources. Data centers in Minneapolis

1:29:33must only contain closed loop cooling.

1:29:35Uh if North Min or if Minneapolis enters

1:29:38D1 as defined by the US drought monitor,

1:29:40data centers must suspend their

1:29:42operations in order to prior prioritize

1:29:44water access for city residents and

1:29:47local small businesses [snorts]

1:29:49and data centers must seek approval from

1:29:51city council to address how to use water

1:29:54from existing but thank you for your

1:29:56time.

1:29:57>> Thank you. Um, next we have Mary

1:30:00Dennicles, followed by Kai, Mike,

1:30:03Stephen, and then Andres.

1:30:09>> Welcome. Introduce yourself and you have

1:30:11two minutes.

1:30:13>> Mr. Chair, members, my name is Mary Joe

1:30:16Nichols. I'm representing W 8 in

1:30:18Minneapolis. I first of all want to

1:30:20thank um Commissioner Garcia for

1:30:22speaking to our indigenous communities,

1:30:24which have been totally missing from

1:30:26conversations to date. Um,

1:30:29our history tells us that we are living

1:30:31on the lands that we inherited from our

1:30:34um, from our ancestors, from our for

1:30:36forefathers, from those indigenous

1:30:39communities. They recognized, preserved,

1:30:42protected, and stewarded these lands and

1:30:44their resources for generations. We

1:30:47haven't learned well at all, and we are

1:30:50paying the consequences in myriad ways

1:30:52for those absences. data centers are are

1:30:55um consuming huge amounts of water, huge

1:30:58amounts of energy, creating heat

1:31:00islands, raising temperatures up to as

1:31:02much as 16 degrees Fahrenheit,

1:31:04along with masses increases in energy

1:31:07costs. More than 70%, probably closer to

1:31:1080% now of Americans are opposed to

1:31:13building data centers in their

1:31:14communities. Um there was mention made

1:31:17of um of building codes and zoning. I

1:31:20want to specifically say right now, I'm

1:31:22rejecting primary zoning for data

1:31:24centers. Uh, thus requiring that case by

1:31:26case decisions for data centers are made

1:31:29by elected officials. We are in a

1:31:32climate crisis which continues to be

1:31:34dismissed and disregarded. As stewards

1:31:36of our environment, we must do all that

1:31:38we can to preserve and protect our green

1:31:40zones as well as our city at large and

1:31:43communities throughout the state of

1:31:44Minnesota. legislation was produced in

1:31:47the introduced in the 2026 legislative

1:31:50session. There are companion bills that

1:31:53placed the public utilities commission

1:31:55in the lead role of um permitting and

1:31:58that included conditional use permits

1:32:01along with recording requirements that

1:32:03included some pretty stringent reporting

1:32:05um uh specifics. They also required that

1:32:10our tribal governments be included while

1:32:13they were creating the report and that

1:32:15the impacts on tribal nation treaty

1:32:17rights resources and cultural uh

1:32:20practices were included. Thank you very

1:32:22much. I have backup resources um that I

1:32:25would like included in the record if you

1:32:27can just tell me how.

1:32:28>> Yes, you can give it to the clerk right

1:32:29over here.

1:32:30>> Okay. Thank you.

1:32:33>> All right. Next we have Kai Uhara

1:32:35followed by Mike, Steven, Andres, and

1:32:38Hana.

1:32:50Hello, Planning Commission. Thanks for

1:32:52hosting this. My name is Caillou. I'm a

1:32:54teacher in MPS, also a member of Twin

1:32:56Cities DSA. Today, I'm talking to you

1:32:59all because I'm really concerned about

1:33:01the future we're building for our

1:33:02children.

1:33:03My students have shared with me their

1:33:05concerns about AI, about AI data

1:33:08centers, about the way these data

1:33:10centers are destroying environments.

1:33:12They're taking water. AI is taking jobs.

1:33:15AI is being used to create things like

1:33:17deep fakes, which are often very

1:33:19inappropriate and exploitative

1:33:21materials. And I know that this hearing

1:33:24is about data centers, but it's also

1:33:27really about AI because we know that

1:33:30these data centers are being built at

1:33:33such a pace to fuel AI's expansion.

1:33:37Something else we're also concerned

1:33:38about is expansion of flock and other

1:33:42surveillance technology which is being

1:33:45enabled because these data centers are

1:33:47being built. And there's no way for us

1:33:49to really measure or monitor what these

1:33:53data centers are being used for. We just

1:33:55know that they exist. They're serving

1:33:57some companies, some customers, but we

1:34:00don't know what those companies are. We

1:34:02don't know who those customers are. So

1:34:04until AI is better regulated, until the

1:34:07environmental impacts of AI data centers

1:34:09are better regulated, it falls upon us,

1:34:11the adults, to do whatever we can do to

1:34:15protect our kids. And so the adults on

1:34:18this planning commission, what I'm

1:34:19asking for you all is to get rid of

1:34:21primary zoning for data centers. Make

1:34:24the process for them coming into our

1:34:25city be as arduous as possible. We need

1:34:29to slow down big tech. We need to allow

1:34:32there to be a fight in the state

1:34:34capital. We need to make sure that we

1:34:37are protecting our kids. We're

1:34:39protecting our future by making sure

1:34:42that we are slowing down AI and by

1:34:45getting rid of primary zoning. That is

1:34:46something that you all can do and

1:34:48helping that fight. Thank you.

1:34:50>> Thank you. Next we have Mike Arm

1:34:52followed by Steven Andreas Hana and Ria.

1:34:56>> Mike Arm had to leave.

1:34:57>> Okay. Mike Arm had to leave. Uh so we

1:35:00have Stephen Johnson. Do we have

1:35:02Stephen?

1:35:07We'll come back to Steve. Oh, welcome.

1:35:09Introduce yourself and you have two

1:35:10minutes.

1:35:12>> Thank you. My name is Steven Johnson and

1:35:15I live in the Sheridan neighborhood of

1:35:16Northeast W 3. I live in one of the

1:35:19proposed zoning districts. I love my

1:35:21neighborhood and I do not want to live

1:35:24next to a data center. My question for

1:35:27the city council and this planning

1:35:28commission is who benefits? Who benefits

1:35:32when massive amounts of our city land is

1:35:34devoted to massive hypers scale data

1:35:36centers used for AI?

1:35:38Not me, not my neighbors. None of us, as

1:35:42far as I know, are tech bros or

1:35:43billionaires. None of us are trained for

1:35:46the minuscule number of maintenance

1:35:47positions that will be required to keep

1:35:49the data centers running. Construction

1:35:51might work might be nice for the few

1:35:53months it's available, but what's after

1:35:54that? So, who benefits? Who benefits

1:35:57when constant infrasound hums through

1:35:59our bodies at every moment of every day,

1:36:01affecting our sleep, our focus, our

1:36:03well-being? Not my wife who already

1:36:06deals with insomnia and a various a

1:36:07variable sleep schedule as a nurse. Not

1:36:10my neighbors with their toddler. Not the

1:36:12animals that live on my block. Not any

1:36:14of us who are already fighting every day

1:36:15to find some quiet and peace of mind.

1:36:18Who benefits when big tech and data

1:36:20companies get endless exemptions and

1:36:22incentives and concessions to suck up

1:36:24all our energy? Not us who are already

1:36:27facing challenges with high grocery

1:36:29prices, high gas prices, high energy

1:36:31prices. None of us are getting the

1:36:34generous handouts that these

1:36:35corporations have come to expect.

1:36:37So, please give us an answer. Who

1:36:39benefits with these data centers?

1:36:42Because it certainly isn't us, your

1:36:44neighbors. I'm asking you to do

1:36:46something that benefits your

1:36:47constituents.

1:36:49Extend the moratorum. Reject primary

1:36:51zoning for data centers. Cap data

1:36:54centers at 25,000 square ft. Require

1:36:56public notification. Do something. Do

1:36:59anything that shows that you love your

1:37:01neighbors. Thank you.

1:37:03>> Thank you. Next we have Andreas followed

1:37:05by Hana, Ria, Carmen, and Riley.

1:37:10Welcome.

1:37:11>> Hi. Um, my name is Andreas. I live in

1:37:14War 12 and I'm a organizer with Unidas

1:37:17Minnesota. I'm a climate organizer with

1:37:20Unitos Minnesota. Um today I am showing

1:37:24up to uh to urge your guys' support and

1:37:28to put a stop to these unregulated

1:37:30development of data centers. Um for me

1:37:33personally, I think that there's a huge

1:37:35risk when there's a new industry that's

1:37:37coming in unregulated. Um and it

1:37:42and we're able to see a lot of the

1:37:43effects that it's had in other areas,

1:37:46right? um we see what they are doing to

1:37:49other towns that don't have um the same

1:37:52capabilities that Minneapolis does and

1:37:54they're just steamrolling over them. And

1:37:57here in Minneapolis, they tried that and

1:37:59we're not going to let that happen.

1:38:02I have a vision where

1:38:06we can all work together, where we can

1:38:08have a city that the energy production

1:38:11is actually owned by Minneapolis and the

1:38:13residents and where people can actually

1:38:15sell the energy back and benefit. So, if

1:38:18data centers want to help contribute to

1:38:19that, you know, we'll we'll we'll

1:38:22consider it. Um, and alongside to that,

1:38:26uh, I I urge you to pass any kind of

1:38:28resolution, ordinance, or amendments

1:38:29that are needed. um to get us closer to

1:38:33that vision. Um some of those things are

1:38:35here in the Unidos neighborhood

1:38:38agreement. I don't know if you guys want

1:38:39this, but that's all I have to say.

1:38:41>> Yes, you can give it to the clerk. Thank

1:38:42you. Next, we have Hana, Ria, Carmen,

1:38:46Riley, and Quentyn.

1:38:50We have Hana.

1:38:53Welcome.

1:39:00Whoop. Um, hello. My name is Hannah. Um,

1:39:03I live right in the heart of downtown in

1:39:04Ward 7. Um, last time I stood before

1:39:07city council. I shared the mic with many

1:39:09others who felt exactly like I do that

1:39:12Minneapolis has the chance to model what

1:39:14it looks like to grow our data center

1:39:16infrastructure responsibly. But I also

1:39:18shared it with people who worry that

1:39:20these regulations will cost jobs and

1:39:22slow down progress. I've been thinking

1:39:24about this a lot because I don't think

1:39:26we're actually on opposing sides here. I

1:39:28want us to keep building, too. We'll

1:39:30need a massive amount of infrastructure

1:39:32to fight climate change, housing to help

1:39:35fight income equal inequality, and all

1:39:37the spaces like parks, rec centers,

1:39:39libraries, and shopping that make

1:39:41downtown feel like home. Airing on the

1:39:43side of causing less harm is always the

1:39:46right choice. I don't think the same can

1:39:48be said for the alternative. I hope

1:39:51you'll consider removing data centers

1:39:53from primary zoning, reducing the cap on

1:39:56square footage, and voting against the

1:39:59harm that data centers welcome into our

1:40:02community. Thank you so much for your

1:40:03time.

1:40:04>> Thank you. Next, we have Ria, then

1:40:05Carmen, Riley, Quentyn, and Daniel

1:40:08Rockcastle.

1:40:11>> Do we have Ria?

1:40:15All right, we'll come back to Ria. Do we

1:40:17have Carmen?

1:40:19Welcome. Introduce yourself and you have

1:40:21two minutes.

1:40:25>> Hello. I am Carmen. I'm from the fifth

1:40:28ward and I'm here today with SA uh

1:40:30Mallister Sunrise. We're a youth climate

1:40:32organizing group. Um as a lifelong

1:40:35Minneapolis resident, I implore the

1:40:37council to continue to tighten the

1:40:39registration regulations on data centers

1:40:41and remove them from primary zoning. Uh

1:40:44too many communities around this country

1:40:46have been struck uh been stuck dealing

1:40:49with the risks, the downsides and the

1:40:51damages of this new technology and have

1:40:53that has been shoved upon them by tech

1:40:55giants who invest nothing back into our

1:40:57cities and our communities that are

1:40:59struggling. And we are struggling with

1:41:01the very same issues brought to our

1:41:02doorstep by irresponsible land and water

1:41:05use of these private interests. We have

1:41:07the opportunity to set an example uh to

1:41:10the rest of the country by setting up a

1:41:12strong and tight framework and

1:41:13regulation around data centers making it

1:41:16so that if these environmental bllightes

1:41:18wish to exist here they must do so on

1:41:20our terms with our informed and

1:41:22continuing ascent. Um I and Mallister

1:41:27Sunrise will second all of you's

1:41:29demands. Thank you.

1:41:31>> Thank you. Next we have Riley, then

1:41:33Quentyn, Daniel Rockcastle, and Barbara

1:41:36Terat.

1:41:41>> Hello, my name is Riley. I'm glad you

1:41:43guys are all here today. I appreciate

1:41:44all the concerns and recommendations

1:41:46that have been shared thus far. Um,

1:41:48especially the honest assessment stated

1:41:49earlier that the main reason for

1:41:51consideration of data centers in

1:41:52downtown in Minneapolis is providing a

1:41:54way to use our vacant space and generate

1:41:56revenue. as there were a few other

1:41:58significant benefits mentioned of

1:41:59allowing their presence in downtown and

1:42:01many many more risks and many more

1:42:03concerns. I have very low trust in the

1:42:06promises made by developers of

1:42:07large-scale data centers around reducing

1:42:09resource use, noise pollution, etc. And

1:42:12I support the city and this council in

1:42:14setting even stricter regulations than

1:42:15what's been brought forward today um

1:42:17around the presence size and feasibility

1:42:19of these data centers in Minneapolis. I

1:42:21want a city that's financially solvent,

1:42:23but not at the expense of our previous

1:42:25resource management successes, the risk

1:42:27of devaluing downtown properties in

1:42:29favor of favor of a tax break, or at the

1:42:31expense of resident and visitor quality

1:42:33of life and quality of leisure. I urge

1:42:35this commission to pass any kind of

1:42:37resolution, ordinance, or amendment that

1:42:39can address at a minimum the following.

1:42:42Um, no new data centers constructed,

1:42:44functional bans on large-scale data

1:42:46centers anywhere in Minneapolis city

1:42:48limits. Um certainly not allowing that

1:42:50data centers are approved for primary

1:42:52zoning. Incentives for battery storage

1:42:54to reduce reliance on diesel backup

1:42:56generators. Limitations on white size or

1:42:59white space uh based on actual noise and

1:43:02energy use data versus approximations

1:43:04from previous policies which I suspect

1:43:06would be significantly below 170,000

1:43:09square feet. Strict sound requirements

1:43:11as previously shared. All franchise fee

1:43:14revenue from data center energy sales

1:43:16fund climate change initiatives and

1:43:17clean energy projects. Periodic

1:43:19reporting around resource use noise

1:43:21levels and other considerations brought

1:43:22forth by the community and um specific

1:43:24to where the data center is being built

1:43:26and no tax breaks or financial

1:43:27incentives for data centers. Thank you

1:43:29so much.

1:43:30>> Thank you. Next we have Quentyn followed

1:43:33by Daniel Barbara Kate Derekson and

1:43:36Hazel.

1:43:39>> Hello. I'm my name is Quentyn and I live

1:43:41in the Ward 12 of in South Minneapolis

1:43:45and I don't I don't want data centers in

1:43:48residential areas. There may be a place

1:43:50for them industrial parks or downtown.

1:43:53Data centers are a new type of industry

1:43:55with potential major impacts. Citizens

1:43:57deserve a careful, thoughtful, open

1:43:59process to determine what this new

1:44:02industry and how it should be regulated.

1:44:04Data data centers use lots of

1:44:06electricity and water. And this extra

1:44:09demand will drive up prices for all of

1:44:11us citizens, businesses, and government.

1:44:14Additional demand means that utilities

1:44:16will build more power plants, creating

1:44:18more pollution and consuming more of our

1:44:21rapidly dwindling resources, including

1:44:23the availability of water. Data centers

1:44:26create a lot of noise. Constant noise is

1:44:29detrimental to people's health and will

1:44:31either make people sick or drive them

1:44:33away. Both prospects erode the

1:44:35livability of Minneapolis.

1:44:38Developers of data centers receive sales

1:44:40tax exemptions from the state which

1:44:42could cost cities more than the property

1:44:44tax gained. The data centers take up

1:44:47resources which could be used to help

1:44:49folks who are struggling or encourage

1:44:51creative ventures to flourish within the

1:44:53city. This financial and creative drain

1:44:56will far outweigh small bene benefits

1:44:59created. No tax exemptions or incentives

1:45:01for this type of development.

1:45:04Local governments have the obligation to

1:45:06regulate businesses and land uses.

1:45:09Careful consideration of the impacts of

1:45:11a new industry to protect the city both

1:45:13in the present and the f and the future

1:45:16is the role of a planning committee. The

1:45:18city me of Minneapolis should strictly

1:45:20limit the size and number of data

1:45:22centers and their location. Thank you.

1:45:26>> Thank you. I'm told Ria is back. We have

1:45:29Ria. Welcome. Introduce yourself and you

1:45:32have two minutes.

1:45:37>> Hi, my name is Ria Giggera. I'm a W one

1:45:40resident from Marshall Terrace.

1:45:43>> Should I restart?

1:45:43>> Yes, please. Apologies for that.

1:45:45>> Uh, hi, my name is Ria Giggera. I'm a

1:45:47Ward One resident from Marshall Terrace.

1:45:49Our neighborhood or recently met to

1:45:51discuss what we can do about unregulated

1:45:53data centers and large tech companies

1:45:54just running rough shot on our lives and

1:45:56communities. So, I'm here today to urge

1:45:57you to include the protections which the

1:45:59Marshall Terrace Neighborhoods

1:46:00Resolution has outlined, including

1:46:02requiring a community benefits agreement

1:46:04process with meaningful representation

1:46:05from all neighborhoods and communities

1:46:07and requiring an independent,

1:46:09comprehensive, and publicly available

1:46:10assessment of operational,

1:46:12environmental, infrastructure, fiscal,

1:46:14and neighborhood impacts before any new

1:46:15data center receives final approval

1:46:17along with what others have mentioned.

1:46:19Um, the push for data center development

1:46:22driven by, as Council President Pain put

1:46:24it, the AI inertification speedrun is a

1:46:26clear threat to our community resources

1:46:28as well as to the long-term

1:46:29desiraability of living and working

1:46:30downtown and the resulting tax pace,

1:46:32which others have raised concerns about.

1:46:34state history to date with industries

1:46:37like mining and plastics doesn't give me

1:46:40confidence as to whether we had the

1:46:41tools and muscles at the ready to have

1:46:43private companies pay for the damages

1:46:45and long-term remediation that's needed

1:46:47when they wreck our resources for a

1:46:48speculative book. When I think of the

1:46:50future that I want for my family, it's

1:46:52not the ability to stream 150 movies at

1:46:544K simultaneously. It is clean water,

1:46:57clean air, safe and nutritious food, and

1:46:59an end to the rising power costs that

1:47:01are making it extremely difficult for us

1:47:02to afford to continue living here uh and

1:47:05not our data centers. Thank you very

1:47:07much.

1:47:08>> Thank you. Next, we have Daniel

1:47:10Rockcastle followed by Barbara, Kate,

1:47:13Hazel, and Britney.

1:47:16We have Daniel.

1:47:19Welcome. Introduce yourself and you have

1:47:20two minutes.

1:47:24Good evening, chair and commissioners.

1:47:26My name is Daniel. I live in Ward 12. I

1:47:29work in software development and I'm

1:47:31here because of my interest in

1:47:32technology, not on behalf of any company

1:47:35or group. I support advancing this

1:47:37ordinance as written. Like railroads and

1:47:40the electricity grid, data centers,

1:47:43including generative AI ones, are

1:47:45essential infrastructure. They support

1:47:48finance, medicine, government services,

1:47:50and the internet itself. Though data

1:47:53centers tailored towards generative AI

1:47:55are new, in the future, they will be

1:47:58just as economically essential as the

1:48:00data centers of old. Data centers can

1:48:03have negative effects on nearby

1:48:05communities and the environment. It's

1:48:07reasonable to limit those effects, and

1:48:09the proposed ordinance would do that. It

1:48:12would allow new data centers only in

1:48:15existing buildings and certain downtown

1:48:17districts cap server space, require

1:48:20disclosure of expect expected energy and

1:48:22water use and subject every project to

1:48:25individual city approval.

1:48:27Some have called for lowering the square

1:48:29foot cap on server space to reduce

1:48:31electricity consumption. However, square

1:48:34footage is a poor measure of power use.

1:48:36A smaller facility with denser equipment

1:48:38can use more electricity than a larger

1:48:40one. And because developers would

1:48:43already disclose their energy use and

1:48:44seek individual approval, lowering the

1:48:47cap would exclude potential projects

1:48:49before their actual impacts were

1:48:51considered. There are also calls for

1:48:53mandatory waste heat recovery and clean

1:48:55energy. Both can be valuable, but

1:48:58universal requirements introduce

1:49:00technical costs and complications that

1:49:02could eliminate otherwise viable

1:49:04projects.

1:49:05If anything, I'm concerned this proposal

1:49:08is too restrictive. But seeing as the

1:49:10public has already spoken in opposition

1:49:12to data centers in general, I support

1:49:14advancing the ordinance as written

1:49:16without further further restrictions.

1:49:18Thank you.

1:49:21>> Thank you. Next, we have Barbara Ter

1:49:24followed by Kate, Hazel, Brittney, and

1:49:27Fernando.

1:49:29>> Welcome.

1:49:29>> Hi, I'm Barbara Tarant. Um, thank you

1:49:32for Orene for um, putting this being a

1:49:36part of this, putting it together and

1:49:38Jason for um, also speaking about the

1:49:41indigenous people's voices and then for

1:49:43everybody else being here. Um, I live in

1:49:47the Standish neighborhood and um, I have

1:49:50a butterfly garden and I feel like being

1:49:53out there um, raising the butterflies

1:49:56and I've seen some go into crystals,

1:49:58come out of crystals, all that detail

1:50:01and [snorts] that we are at a climate

1:50:02crisis. We are, you know, at the point

1:50:05of we could kill off bees and

1:50:08butterflies. I find this horror

1:50:11and we need to prioritize the

1:50:14environmental impact of these data

1:50:16centers which is um actually quite

1:50:19terrible. The water, the energy use, the

1:50:22fossil fuels, the the noise. I know that

1:50:26I would not be able to live with that

1:50:27noise. Animals would not be able to and

1:50:30other people as well. Um, and I think we

1:50:33need to all realize that we are

1:50:34basically just Lego pieces in this game

1:50:36with the tech bros, billionaires

1:50:39just using us as pawns to carry out

1:50:42their little fantasy world and that

1:50:44corporations are going to benefit from

1:50:46this and some other people here and

1:50:47there and that we need to restrict this.

1:50:50There may be some benefits from this. We

1:50:53do not know what they are for regular

1:50:55people. Um, but we do see that the

1:50:59downside is horrendous. And I do feel

1:51:02for the younger generations

1:51:04that have been growing up with this fear

1:51:07of this climate change and the horrors

1:51:10that we're seeing all the time. And so I

1:51:13propose um no absolutely no data centers

1:51:16in any Minneapolis neighborhoods.

1:51:19100% transparency. the neighborhoods

1:51:22must have advanced notice if there's a

1:51:25possibility they would be in their

1:51:27neighborhood. Um, only renewable energy,

1:51:31no fossil fuels, no tax breaks or incent

1:51:34uh incentives,

1:51:36no extra cost to the residents. Um,

1:51:39thank you.

1:51:42>> Thank you. Next, we have Kate Derekson,

1:51:44followed by Hazel, Brittany Fernando,

1:51:47and Council Member Ros Robin Wley.

1:51:50Um, good afternoon. I'm Dr. Kate

1:51:52Derekson. I'm a professor of geography

1:51:54and I direct an urban studies program at

1:51:56a local research university. But I'm

1:51:58here today speaking on my own behalf as

1:52:01a resident of Minneapolis and a

1:52:03concerned citizen of Ward 12. I'm here

1:52:05because I'm deeply concerned about the

1:52:08impact of data centers on our downtown.

1:52:10Specifically, we need creative solutions

1:52:13to make downtown Minneapolis a vibrant

1:52:16place for people to live, work, and

1:52:18recreate. And I know from teaching

1:52:20future planners and young urbanists that

1:52:23there are no shortage of ideas about how

1:52:25we can realize that vision. The

1:52:28proliferation of data centers will

1:52:29mortgage the future of our downtown and

1:52:32it sends the signal that we're giving up

1:52:34on it. We're turning it over to uses

1:52:36that are so disliked the nationwide that

1:52:40there's a massive movement to stop them

1:52:42everywhere. And what message does it

1:52:43send if our downtown is where we're uh

1:52:46encouraging those uses? Um,

1:52:50a central principle of urbanism is that

1:52:53a vibrant city needs what Jane Jacobs

1:52:55calls eyes on the street. People going

1:52:57about their day-to-day lives, uh, making

1:53:00the city more compelling, safer, and the

1:53:02kind of places people want to live,

1:53:03work, and shop. Minneapolis has a lot of

1:53:06work yet to do to reimagine our

1:53:08downtown, but please don't sell it out

1:53:11to tech infrastructure that won't create

1:53:13jobs beyond the sugar rush of

1:53:15construction, won't create eyes on the

1:53:17street, and won't promote a healthy

1:53:19downtown um for the future. I also want

1:53:22to mention that I'm the mother of a

1:53:24teenaged urban fisherman. He's the

1:53:26co-founder of the Southwest High School

1:53:27bass fishing team and he works for the

1:53:29Minneapolis Park Board teaching you

1:53:31youth to fish every summer. And it

1:53:34breaks my heart to think about um the

1:53:37the river where he and his friends and

1:53:39the kids that he teaches uh you know

1:53:41play and fish every day being used to

1:53:44cool down data centers that are

1:53:46throttling development in our downtown.

1:53:48So I want to encourage you um to uh I

1:53:51want to say that I'm in favor of a total

1:53:53ban, but I want to encourage you to

1:53:54remove primary zoning for these projects

1:53:56and force them to go through a more

1:53:58robust process.

1:54:00>> Thank you, Kate. And next we have Hazel,

1:54:02Brittany, Fernando, Council Member Robin

1:54:04Monsley, and then Emily Martin.

1:54:14Hi everyone. My my name is Hazel. I'm a

1:54:17resident of the Whittier neighborhood in

1:54:19Ward 10. Um I'm not a great public

1:54:21speaker, so I'll attempt to keep this

1:54:23short.

1:54:25As laid out before you, I support the

1:54:29current uh proposal for data center

1:54:32regulation. However, I do wish that it

1:54:33was more stringent, including the

1:54:35removal of primary uh zone planning and

1:54:38the um bringing down of total size from

1:54:44175,000 ft² down to 25,000 square ft. As

1:54:48we see the full impact of the climate

1:54:51disaster that we're in right now and as

1:54:54that continues

1:54:57data centers as they're bring spending

1:55:00their billions we we and the residents

1:55:03will be the ones left holding the bag at

1:55:04the end of the day if they do continue

1:55:07to expand not not the companies behind

1:55:09data centers that's all I have thank you

1:55:12>> thank you Hazel next we have Britney

1:55:15followed by Fernando Robin Wanley Emily

1:55:17Martin and Rebecca Stack.

1:55:22>> Hi,

1:55:27>> good evening commission members. Uh, my

1:55:29name is Britney Dennis. I live in W 8.

1:55:31I'm an organizational strategy and

1:55:33equity consultant with experience

1:55:35helping public sector organizations in

1:55:37Minnesota translate equity principles

1:55:39into policies and decisions that affect

1:55:41people's lives. I urge you to vote no on

1:55:44allowing data centers as a primary use.

1:55:46Allowing a land use and mitigating its

1:55:48harms are two different things. Making

1:55:51data centers allowable does not make

1:55:53them safer or less resource intensive.

1:55:55It changes the framework for future

1:55:57decisions and may limit the city's

1:55:58ability to reject a proposal even when

1:56:01residents oppose it. [clears throat] I

1:56:03ask you to consider four areas of

1:56:05impact. First, water. US data centers

1:56:08directly consumed an estimated 17

1:56:10billion gallons in 2023, excluding water

1:56:13used to generate their electricity. The

1:56:15city should evaluate projected water

1:56:17use, peak demand, and water resources,

1:56:19and excuse me, water sources before

1:56:22permitting this use. Second, noise.

1:56:24Cooling systems and backup generators

1:56:26can produce persistent noise, including

1:56:28at night 247. This city should require

1:56:31independent assessment assessments and

1:56:33enforceable noise limits that protect

1:56:35nearby residents. Third, environmental

1:56:37racism. Environmental justice research

1:56:40shows why existing environmental burdens

1:56:41matter when evaluating new development.

1:56:43The city should assess cumulative

1:56:45environmental impacts, identify the most

1:56:48vulnerable communities, and use that

1:56:50evidence to determine whether the

1:56:51proposed land use would compound

1:56:53existing inequities. Fourth, electricity

1:56:55and infrastructure. Data centers use an

1:56:57estimated 4.4% of US electricity in

1:57:002023. Um, with projections reaching as

1:57:03high as 12% by 2028. The city must

1:57:06evaluate infrastructure capacity,

1:57:07necessary upgrades, and potential

1:57:09effects on existing rateayers rather

1:57:11than allow the public to bear costs that

1:57:13have not been adequately assessed. These

1:57:15are foreseeable concerns. The city has a

1:57:17responsibility to prevent avoidable harm

1:57:19before it occurs, not wait for residents

1:57:21to bear the consequences and attempt to

1:57:23remedy them afterward. Economic

1:57:25development is not a success if it cost

1:57:27if its costs fall on the public, its

1:57:29burdens disproportionately affect

1:57:30vulnerable communities, and its

1:57:32consequences compromise future

1:57:33generations. Please vote no on allowing

1:57:35data centers as a primary use. Thank

1:57:37you.

1:57:38>> Thank you. Next, we have Fernando,

1:57:41followed by Council Member Robin

1:57:42Monsley, Emily Martin, Rebecca Stack,

1:57:44and Sophie uh Sophie S. Do we have

1:57:48Fernando? I might have read it wrong.

1:57:51Um, last name is uh B U.

1:57:57No. Okay, we'll come to that back to

1:57:59that person. Uh, next we have Council

1:58:01Member Robin Hsley. Welcome.

1:58:09>> Good evening everyone. I am Council

1:58:12Member Robin Wsley. I also serve as the

1:58:15city council's minority leader and

1:58:17represent W um specifically. So, shout

1:58:20out to y'all. Um at a time of deep uh

1:58:23political division, opposition to data

1:58:25centers is been bringing Americans all

1:58:28across the country together.

1:58:30Specifically, 70% of Americans oppose

1:58:32data centers in their communities. And

1:58:34when there's such overwhelming

1:58:36opposition, yet we're seeing city hall

1:58:39continue to advance policies that

1:58:41accommodate these facilities. And that

1:58:43really should cause us to pause and

1:58:45question who are data centers actually

1:58:47serving? And let's be clear, data

1:58:49centers exist to generate enormous

1:58:51profits for big tech billionaires while

1:58:54our communities are left to bear the

1:58:56environmental and infrastructure costs

1:58:58um that you heard from many of the

1:58:59testifiers before me. Um you also heard

1:59:02this in the more than a thousand public

1:59:04comments submitted to you all that made

1:59:05it abundantly clear that Minneapolis

1:59:07residents overwhelmingly oppose data

1:59:09centers in our city. And I want to know

1:59:11for the record, so do I. I oppose them

1:59:14heavily. Um, but unfortunately the myth

1:59:16of trickle down economics continues to

1:59:18influence decision-making at city hall.

1:59:21So once again, we're being asked to

1:59:22prioritize corporate profits under the

1:59:24promise of economic development despite

1:59:26overwhelming public opposition. And as

1:59:28an elected official, it's my

1:59:30responsibility uh to protect the public

1:59:33interest, not facilitate opportunities

1:59:35for predatory big tech companies to

1:59:36extract more wealth and resources from

1:59:39our communities. So with that, my call

1:59:41to action to you all is if a outright

1:59:43ban is not legally viable or politically

1:59:45viable, then our number one priority

1:59:48should be eliminating all primary zoning

1:59:50permissions for data centers. Make them

1:59:52go through a robust process as we saw

1:59:54many of our communities want, especially

1:59:56with the Star Tribute site where North

1:59:58Loop residents said, "Why not a grocery

2:00:00store? Why not housing? Why not

2:00:01playgrounds instead of a data center?"

2:00:04So, commissioners, I urge you to stand

2:00:06with our residents and recommend

2:00:07eliminating all primary zoning for data

2:00:09centers. Our residents have spoken and

2:00:11now it's time for us as elected

2:00:13officials to listen. Thank you.

2:00:15>> Thank you. Next, we have Emily Martin,

2:00:18followed by Rebecca, Sophie S., Sophie,

2:00:21Sophie Opich, and Lonnie uh Proust.

2:00:25Do we have Emily Martin?

2:00:28Not seeing Emily, so we'll come back to

2:00:30that. Uh, do we have Rebecca? Rebecca

2:00:32Stack.

2:00:37Not seeing Rebecca. Um Sophie S. Sophie

2:00:42maybe.

2:00:44>> Great. Welcome. You have two minutes.

2:00:49>> Hi,

2:00:51my name is Sophie Schmurer. I live in

2:00:54St. Paul, but I'm here because I know

2:00:56that whatever we decide on today will

2:00:58have ramifications in St. Paul as well.

2:01:02I want to be realistic about what the

2:01:04city is capable of regulating and I

2:01:06think we are being realistic when we ask

2:01:08that no tax breaks be given to data

2:01:10centers and no financial incentives be

2:01:12received by city council members. I also

2:01:15think it's realistic to ask that we to

2:01:18ask data centers to provide the public

2:01:20with periodic accurate data about their

2:01:22water and electricity usage. Thank you.

2:01:26>> Thank you Sophie. Next we have Sophie

2:01:28Opich. and Sophie opener. Great.

2:01:36>> Hi, my name is Sophie. I live in Seward.

2:01:39Um, and I traveled this year for the

2:01:41first time to Rochester as a state DFL

2:01:44delegate and I saw some of the

2:01:45commissioners there. Um, and that's

2:01:47where I got my butt in. Um, and

2:01:52um, at the state convention, we passed

2:01:54two resolutions related to data centers.

2:01:56one was in support of a proper full

2:01:58moratorum which in a more ideal

2:02:00situation the city council would extend

2:02:04um I'm in favor of a total ban um but I

2:02:07I want to speak to the other data center

2:02:09res resolution which was in support of

2:02:13strong regulatory framework for data

2:02:14centers including comprehensive

2:02:17environmental review water and energy

2:02:19protections local government authority

2:02:21public transparency requirements and

2:02:23safeguards ensuring infrastructure and

2:02:25utility costs are not shifted to

2:02:27taxpayers, rateayers or natural

2:02:30resources. That resolution passed as one

2:02:32of the most popular resolutions at the

2:02:34convention at 76%.

2:02:37And I bring this to your attention to

2:02:39point out that this is not something

2:02:41that centrist DFLers

2:02:43can pat off some leftistonly concept.

2:02:46Um, regulating data centers is literally

2:02:48a part of the DFL platform. Thank you.

2:02:52>> Thank you, Sophie. Next we have Lonnie

2:02:54Provost. Um followed by Sam um Green,

2:02:59Joshua Gonzalez, Becca David, and Rachel

2:03:02C.

2:03:05>> Welcome. Introduce yourself and you have

2:03:06two minutes.

2:03:07>> Uh hi, commissioners. Uh Lonni Provos,

2:03:09Imacha Pidau. Uh uh Dakota.

2:03:14Uh my name is Lonnie Provost. Uh I'm

2:03:17Hank Dakota and I'm a resident here in

2:03:20uh Minneapolis recently. And uh I would

2:03:23I would like to recommend uh an

2:03:25extension of the moratorum because there

2:03:27is uh significant data that that says

2:03:30that you know there's there's a lot of

2:03:32issues that we need to continue to

2:03:34compile to really make an informed

2:03:37decision on on what we're going to do

2:03:39that's going to impact our next seven

2:03:41generations. And um you know um some of

2:03:44those things that that we haven't

2:03:46haven't addressed here you know is is

2:03:48you know and well uh our commissioner

2:03:51Garcia has mentioned you know um we

2:03:53haven't mentioned or consulted with any

2:03:55of the tribal nations around here

2:03:56because there is a lot of areas around

2:03:58here that have a lot of sign uh cultural

2:04:01significant uh impact that would that

2:04:03would happen with all these uh with the

2:04:05usage of the water usage that's

2:04:07happening to these uh data centers. um

2:04:10the these these data centers um the

2:04:13issues when it comes to water and energy

2:04:16they they they don't have boundaries you

2:04:18know those boundaries extend past

2:04:20Minneapolis so we need to start thinking

2:04:22about more more of the people that it's

2:04:24going to impact to as well and I think

2:04:25if it's not in your policies you know to

2:04:29really start reaching out to the native

2:04:31communities out there I think you should

2:04:33add those into your policies and also

2:04:35add into having annual cultural

2:04:37competency training too as Well, because

2:04:40I I think to really start thinking about

2:04:42a lot of these areas, these are we are

2:04:44on native lands. You know, I I I live

2:04:47right here down downtown and I see these

2:04:50these uh signs up on up in the signs and

2:04:52I think, wow, this is great. you know,

2:04:54we're acknowledging we're on native

2:04:55lands, but if we're not actively

2:04:57engaging with those native communities

2:04:59and and having them be have a seat at

2:05:01the table and have decision making

2:05:03authority and power and and recognizing

2:05:05what that they are, the first people of

2:05:07these lands, we're we're doing a

2:05:09disservice to to our people and our

2:05:11community and our neighbors. Thank you.

2:05:12[clears throat]

2:05:13>> Thank you.

2:05:15We have five speakers left and then

2:05:17three that we skipped. Just want to

2:05:19remind everyone if you haven't signed up

2:05:20yet, please do because when we finish

2:05:22the end of the list, we're going to um

2:05:24be done with it. So, if you haven't

2:05:26signed up, you still wanted to speak,

2:05:27sign up now, please. All right. Next, we

2:05:30have Sam G. I couldn't quite read the

2:05:31whole thing, but

2:05:38>> welcome. Introduce yourself when you

2:05:39have two minutes.

2:05:44My name is Sam Greenstein and I'm a W 10

2:05:46resident in Whittier, a proud member and

2:05:48officer of ASKME 2822 and I am here

2:05:50today to demand that data centers be

2:05:52removed from primary zoning um and the

2:05:54current moratorium be extended and

2:05:56include downtown.

2:05:58When I think about what our community

2:06:00needs right now, I think of affordable

2:06:02health care, good union jobs, renewable

2:06:04energy, fast and free public

2:06:06transportation, and more cultural and

2:06:08recreation opportunities. Instead,

2:06:10rather than revitalize our historic

2:06:12downtown, big tech and fry are pushing

2:06:14us to accept data centers in our

2:06:16high-rise buildings. No one who actually

2:06:18lives here is asking for this. This is

2:06:20just big tech ruining our city in the

2:06:22relentless quest for more profit while

2:06:24many well, many of us sleep on the

2:06:26street and more of us are are graveling

2:06:29our right up poverty level. During our

2:06:32climate crisis, these data centers will

2:06:34use more electricity and water. Let's

2:06:37regulate these data centers as much as

2:06:38possible to give our communities power

2:06:41to continue to fight data centers here.

2:06:43Removing data centers from primary

2:06:45zoning and extending the moratorum are

2:06:47minimum demands. Second, as our city and

2:06:50county leaders, I call on you to

2:06:52urgently prioritize the things that we

2:06:54all demanding. Instead of these data

2:06:56center projects, we could be um building

2:06:58public renewable energy that would

2:07:00create union jobs and um and actually

2:07:03solve the climate crisis. We could be

2:07:05creating more art institutions that will

2:07:07draw people through downtown. We could

2:07:09be creating public playgrounds. There

2:07:11are so many. We could be creating

2:07:12affordable housing to end the

2:07:13homelessness crisis here in Henipin

2:07:15County. There is so much we could be

2:07:17doing. Instead, we're just coming up

2:07:19with pet projects for tech bros.

2:07:23>> Thank you. Next, we have Joshua

2:07:25Gonzalez.

2:07:29>> Be followed by Becca, Rachel, and

2:07:30Bonnie.

2:07:32>> Thank you, council. My name is Joshua

2:07:34Gonzalez. I am a constituent of W 5 and

2:07:36I'm here with Unidos Minnesota. Um I'm

2:07:40not sure about y'all. I tend to make a

2:07:41lot of mistakes when I rush. So I

2:07:43encourage you to extend the moratorum so

2:07:45that we have time to fully flush out

2:07:47regulation that is going to stop data

2:07:50centers from continuing not just data

2:07:53centers but corporations from continuing

2:07:55to take advantage of our communities.

2:07:58Um, I'm here today because the future

2:08:00that I want to see is one where the

2:08:04focus, the priority is on our people, is

2:08:07on our cultures, on our arts, and not on

2:08:10profits. So, I encourage you all to

2:08:13pass, I urge you all to pass any

2:08:15ordinance, any resolution that is going

2:08:18to hinder [snorts] data centers from

2:08:20being developed to the full extent of

2:08:22your power, such as not allowing them in

2:08:25primary zoning, such as requiring them

2:08:28to have community input and say on if

2:08:33they get developed um as well as a

2:08:36variety of other things that my fellow

2:08:37neighbors have brought up to you. So

2:08:39once again, I encourage you all to do

2:08:41everything to your power to make sure

2:08:43that we aren't continuing to get abused

2:08:45by corporations. Thank you for your

2:08:48time.

2:08:50>> Thank you. And next we have Becca David.

2:08:56Welcome.

2:08:58>> Hi.

2:09:00>> So, my name is Becca David and I just

2:09:03want to start by saying 10 years ago

2:09:05that I could have been anywhere in the

2:09:06United States and I chose Minneapolis

2:09:10partially because of its commitment to

2:09:13climate.

2:09:14And the fact that I am standing here

2:09:17right now concerns me. I'm urging you to

2:09:22take a look at the impact of our

2:09:24environment,

2:09:26on our future, our children, and our

2:09:28climate equity plan if data centers are

2:09:31allowed to come in as unregulated

2:09:34businesses.

2:09:36There are so many many better things

2:09:40that we could put downtown. Housing,

2:09:43creative industries, live work studios.

2:09:46Look at look at Main Street at the use

2:09:48of those historical

2:09:51industrial buildings.

2:09:54I live in Powder Horn in Ward 9 and I'm

2:09:58proud of the fact that I'm a Minneapolis

2:10:00and a Minnesota resident now and I am

2:10:03asking you to think forward.

2:10:06No matter what your stance was a day

2:10:08ago, think forward and vote against

2:10:12primary zoning and for the future of our

2:10:15community.

2:10:17>> Thank you. And next we have Rachel C.

2:10:20We have Rachel. Welcome. Introduce

2:10:22yourself and you have two minutes.

2:10:28>> Hi, I'm Rachel. I live in Ward 3 in

2:10:31North Loop area. Um, we just had

2:10:34obviously the Star Tribune tried to um

2:10:37become a data center. I mean, it's

2:10:39obviously still possible, but that

2:10:41developer backed out. Um, and the entire

2:10:45community pretty much organized against

2:10:48it in a pretty crazy way. At one point,

2:10:50I was at five meetings in a week and

2:10:52they were all different. So, pretty

2:10:54intense um, rebuttal against it. Um, I

2:10:58think what I would like to see is just

2:11:00an extension on the moratorum. At this

2:11:04point, there's too much that we do not

2:11:06know. Okay, we do not know the health

2:11:09impacts. There's a lot of air pollution

2:11:11from data centers right now. We're also

2:11:14trying to get the herk to shut down and

2:11:16so it would be like one step forward and

2:11:19two to three steps back for our climate

2:11:22goals. It doesn't make sense. Um and

2:11:26then obviously environmental aspect and

2:11:28then as well you have to look at um is

2:11:32what they say true like are they really

2:11:35only using this much energy? Are they

2:11:37really going to pay for it? The amount

2:11:40of calls and emails I got from Excel

2:11:43about reducing my energy this summer.

2:11:45Make it make sense. So that's just what

2:11:49I'm saying. So thanks.

2:11:54>> Thank you. Thank you. Next we have

2:11:55Bonnie Beckl followed by Trent Weisner.

2:11:58And then after that we'll go back to the

2:11:59three names that we skipped over which

2:12:00were Fernando, Emily, and Rebecca.

2:12:02[snorts]

2:12:07Welcome.

2:12:10>> Hello. My name is Bonnie Beckl and I

2:12:13live in W 9 and I'm a volunteer with

2:12:15Unidos Minnesota.

2:12:18So um when I first started hearing about

2:12:22a moratorum on data centers, I a lot of

2:12:27uh feelings of confusion and uh

2:12:30powerlessness in the face of

2:12:33corporations uh running over us um came

2:12:36up and I

2:12:39feel like minimally hopeful that we're

2:12:43talking to you about setting some

2:12:46serious boundaries. based on what they

2:12:48are allowed to do. Um so we're in a

2:12:52climate crisis and that means that um

2:12:57the excessive use of energy and water by

2:13:02data centers will mean unless unless we

2:13:06do something to stop it will mean that

2:13:08all of our utility bills are going to go

2:13:10up. Um, [snorts]

2:13:12so I love the idea of requiring them to

2:13:17um

2:13:19create their own energy through

2:13:21batteries, through renewable energy

2:13:24energy sources. Um the Minnesota

2:13:28Pollution Control Agency did a study um

2:13:30that said that uh if we don't address

2:13:34the climate crisis in a timely way like

2:13:37now, these costs over the next 20 years

2:13:41are going to go up to um 20 billion

2:13:44dollar per year for Minnesota. And if we

2:13:48address it now, it will be like1 to2

2:13:51billion dollars for Minneapolis. um not

2:13:55the whole state but our portion of it.

2:13:58Um so we need to make sure um that we

2:14:03get an ordinance that requires that the

2:14:05franchise fees that come from data

2:14:08centers are used to address um clean

2:14:11energy home upgrades and weatherization

2:14:14and give these people no tax breaks.

2:14:18>> Thank you Bonnie. Uh next we have Trent

2:14:20Weisner.

2:14:22Is Trent here?

2:14:25Welcome. Introduce yourself and you have

2:14:26two minutes.

2:14:30>> Hello. My name is Trent Weezner. I live

2:14:32in Ward 2 in the Co neighborhood. Hi,

2:14:34Robin. Um the um I like a lot of this

2:14:38ordinance. Um I think that and I do also

2:14:41apologize for my attire. I didn't

2:14:42realize I was going to be talking today.

2:14:44I like uh a lot of this ordinance. I

2:14:46don't think it goes quite far enough. Um

2:14:48the uh proposed cap on square footage is

2:14:51gigantic at 175,000 ft². It's just

2:14:54that's I can't even imagine a building

2:14:56that big. Um it needs to be kept at

2:14:59probably more like 25,000 and um to also

2:15:02remove primary zoning uh would be a

2:15:04really good step. Um I do uh urge the

2:15:08that something get adopted. Uh even if

2:15:10it's just in its current form, that's

2:15:12better than nothing. uh but we can't uh

2:15:15go back to the extremely permissive um

2:15:18zoning code that uh existed uh before

2:15:22that the moratorum did. Also I think it

2:15:25would be a very good idea to extend that

2:15:27moratorum because of the uh so far

2:15:29extremely fast changing nature of AI the

2:15:33uh sort of cycle of reinvestment of fake

2:15:37money into it. Um, for all we know, an

2:15:41additional 6 months the bubble could pop

2:15:43and we won't even need to have this

2:15:44conversation. So, um, I would like, uh,

2:15:48those three things. A extension, the

2:15:50moratorum, a cap on square footage

2:15:52that's much lower than it is, and an end

2:15:54to primary zoning for data centers.

2:15:56Thank you.

2:15:57>> Thank you. We're going to go back to the

2:15:59names that we skipped over before. And I

2:16:02I think this says Fernando, but I'm not

2:16:04sure. Starts with an FE. Last name

2:16:06starts with a B.

2:16:08We have that person. All right. Do we

2:16:10have Emily Martin?

2:16:13Do we have Emily Stack?

2:16:15All right. Was there anyone here who

2:16:18wanted to speak but didn't get to?

2:16:21All right. So, um I still want to hear

2:16:24from Excel. So, what I'm going to

2:16:26suggest is um we um give a chance to ask

2:16:30questions uh from Excel. Then we'll

2:16:33close the hearing and I'm going to

2:16:34suggest a fivem minute recess and then

2:16:36we can come back because it looks like

2:16:37we have time okay with that.

2:16:41All right. Um

2:16:44so uh

2:16:48John Marshall are you here? Great. And I

2:16:50don't know if Suzanne was also did you

2:16:52want to ask? Okay.

2:16:55Um I have some questions but I'll open

2:16:56up other commissioners first. Other

2:16:58commissioners have questions for Excel.

2:17:02>> All right. algorithm.

2:17:03>> Um can you um walk us through some of

2:17:06the details of how the 2040 uh clean

2:17:10energy standard works because you know

2:17:12we know that it's 100% by 2040 but there

2:17:14are increments before then. Can you walk

2:17:17us through those the 2030 and 2035

2:17:21standards?

2:17:21>> Um I could say good evening

2:17:23[clears throat] commission. Um John

2:17:25Marshall with XL Energy. With respect to

2:17:27the 2040 legislation of Minnesota, um we

2:17:30are currently as a utility with our

2:17:32energy mix at about 70% carbon-f free

2:17:34electricity have made significant

2:17:36progress in in prior years. Um current

2:17:39plans that have been approved by the

2:17:40utility commission uh via our recent

2:17:42integrated resource plan. We are

2:17:44tracking close to 85% carbon-f free

2:17:46electricity by 2030. Uh so we continue

2:17:49to make specific uh uh progress on those

2:17:52goals. Um we do not foresee that um uh

2:17:55any load growth be it from a data center

2:17:57or a mixeduse commercial or residential

2:17:58or any incoming customer uh truly that

2:18:01we are agnostic towards the customer use

2:18:04will impact us achieving that 2040 goal

2:18:06by uh by the state law.

2:18:08>> Okay.

2:18:09>> Mhm.

2:18:10>> And then so but the law requires for

2:18:122030 is it 80% is the requirement like

2:18:15you're you're exceeding that right but

2:18:17>> uh we are yes correct. We are right now

2:18:19currently forecast to achieve about 85%

2:18:22carbon-f free by 2030 with the

2:18:23investments that we have approved um

2:18:25including significant additional

2:18:27investments in wind energy. Uh

2:18:28significant investments in solar energy.

2:18:30We're actively building one of the

2:18:32larger solar arrays in the country right

2:18:34now up in Becker, Minnesota. About 5,000

2:18:36acres of solar. Uh we have plans for

2:18:38long duration storage as well and then

2:18:40upwards of 200 megawatts of distributed

2:18:43capacity uh storage on our distribution

2:18:46system peppered around our our footprint

2:18:48here in Minnesota.

2:18:49>> Okay.

2:18:49>> Mhm.

2:18:50>> And then we heard people talk about the

2:18:53increase in cost of electricity and that

2:18:55being passed on. So So can you explain

2:18:56how the the rateayer act works? Like is

2:18:59that going to prevent

2:19:01you know higher costs from coming out of

2:19:03a new data center?

2:19:04>> Uh that is correct. when when we add

2:19:06load or add sales if you will and and

2:19:09see that increased sales growth. Um

2:19:11portions of everybody's bills include

2:19:12fixed costs which means the existing

2:19:14infrastructure in the system the

2:19:16existing poles wires transformers are

2:19:18all called fixed costs. um when you

2:19:20increase uh like bring on a larger user

2:19:23again whether it's a data center or a

2:19:24manufacturer etc they do absorb

2:19:27significantly more portions of those

2:19:28fixed costs which do bring downward

2:19:30pressure on rates and actually provide

2:19:32um rate savings for customers um for

2:19:34specific projects and again this goes

2:19:36for a data center or any other new

2:19:38customer that comes in uh when we intake

2:19:40that customer um we are looking at what

2:19:43infrastructure is needed to serve you uh

2:19:45this is going to cost you x amount of

2:19:47money for you to be served uh there are

2:19:49also So clawback provisions in the

2:19:51agreements that we have with customers,

2:19:53data centers included, if where if they

2:19:55don't achieve a certain amount of

2:19:56electricity that they have stated for

2:19:58which we've built that infrastructure,

2:20:00we claw back those dollars and protect

2:20:02our customers um thereby putting that

2:20:04entire cost burden on that customer.

2:20:06Again, be it a data center or a

2:20:07different uh type of customer use.

2:20:09>> Great.

2:20:10>> Any other questions?

2:20:13>> Not seeing any. Thank you.

2:20:14>> Great. Um, with that, we will close the

2:20:16hearing

2:20:17>> and I'm going to put us in recess until

2:20:217 p.m.

2:20:22>> So, come back at 7. Thank you.

2:26:38I'm going to bring the commission back

2:26:39to order.

2:26:42All right.

2:26:46Uh so, commissioners, we have the staff

2:26:48recommendation for the

2:26:50um ordinance. Are there any comments or

2:26:54amendments or any other discussion?

2:26:56We'll start with Commissioner Baxley.

2:27:00Um, I think maybe a a easy proposed

2:27:03amendment would be for us to consider

2:27:06um allowing below grade use for this.

2:27:11Maybe somebody can help wordsmith that.

2:27:14Can you Oh, and so in general for

2:27:17amendments, one suggestion that I'll

2:27:19make if you don't have the exact

2:27:21language, we can give a staff direction

2:27:25to say, you know, create an amendment in

2:27:28this this direction. So you you could do

2:27:31that. So can you clarify? Um I think cuz

2:27:34currently it reads that um

2:27:37data centers could not be if given all

2:27:40the other regulations proposed here that

2:27:43they are not allowed below grade. And I

2:27:45think if we could write an amendment

2:27:47staff could write an amendment allowing

2:27:51as part of this same framework below

2:27:53grade

2:27:55use. Okay.

2:27:58Um, so that would

2:28:01apply to just the downtown zones and it

2:28:04would apply to

2:28:04>> all the other requirements of this

2:28:07issue. This would apply to. Correct.

2:28:09>> So you would allow it for new

2:28:10construction though, right?

2:28:11>> There's no new construction allowed in

2:28:13this proposal.

2:28:14>> Okay. That's what I wanted

2:28:15clarification.

2:28:15>> Yeah.

2:28:16>> Okay.

2:28:18Um,

2:28:18>> so maybe existing below grade space

2:28:22should be considered for use, data

2:28:24center use as part of this.

2:28:26>> I see. Okay. Um,

2:28:29as I had indicated earlier, I think we

2:28:32should be thinking about basements and I

2:28:34was also thinking that for new

2:28:35construction downtown. Um, so that I

2:28:39don't know how that would interplay with

2:28:42yours. I guess it'd be I think um I mean

2:28:46just so I'm clear, I don't think new

2:28:48construction is provided for in this

2:28:51current amendment. So that would have to

2:28:53be an additional nuance to that. this

2:28:55seemed easier.

2:28:57>> Okay.

2:28:58>> Um, so let's go through, how about we go

2:29:02through each commissioner and each

2:29:03commissioner can give your your thoughts

2:29:05and any amendments that that you might

2:29:07have and then we'll come back and

2:29:09consider potential amendments one by

2:29:11one.

2:29:11>> Sounds good.

2:29:12>> Did you have any more comments that you

2:29:13wanted to say, Commissioner Beckley?

2:29:14>> That's it. Thanks.

2:29:15>> All right,

2:29:17Commissioner Shri.

2:29:19>> Thank you, Chair Meyer. I want to first

2:29:21off start off by thanking every single

2:29:24person who came down to the public

2:29:27service center to come and testify. Um,

2:29:30and all of the people in the city of

2:29:32Minneapolis who reached out and gave

2:29:35public comment. There's been just an

2:29:38unprecedented amount of public comment,

2:29:40I would say, um, on a specific zoning

2:29:43ordinance. maybe our 2040 plan

2:29:47uh rivals that that and I think that

2:29:50just goes to show how much this

2:29:53community, this city cares deeply about

2:29:56shaping our future and we we really have

2:30:01to ensure that their voice is reflected

2:30:04in what we're moving forward as a city.

2:30:07And I'll just share I think I want to

2:30:09first say thank you to the staff who

2:30:11spent a lot of time working on this and

2:30:14um talking to me about what are our

2:30:17options here. I think it's no secret to

2:30:19the staff that I've worked with and my

2:30:22colleagues on the city council how I

2:30:24feel about AI generative data centers. I

2:30:27have really tried and really strained to

2:30:30see what the benefit is that exists

2:30:34beyond

2:30:36maybe some temporary construction jobs,

2:30:39which construction jobs are important,

2:30:42but the question that always comes back

2:30:43is why don't we build things that we see

2:30:46popular support for that our communities

2:30:48want to see? And I think it's really

2:30:52hard um to be in the position that I'm

2:30:55in as someone who is trying to push for

2:30:59the strongest regulations possible on

2:31:03these new generation data centers. um

2:31:07someone that's pushed for the moratorum

2:31:10at the city council level and has seen

2:31:12the limits in which there was political

2:31:15appetite for a year-long moratorum and

2:31:18the carveout that we got for downtown. I

2:31:21would say the policy that's in front of

2:31:22us right now is actually stronger than

2:31:25the moratorum that we have in place. Um

2:31:29but I don't I don't think we should

2:31:31count out the voices of our community. I

2:31:33mean, my responsibility in this role

2:31:35first and foremost is to represent the

2:31:37people of the 12th ward. And what I

2:31:41worry the most about in our present day

2:31:43is that we are seeing over and over that

2:31:48cities,

2:31:50governments, states, they're

2:31:52prioritizing the interests of big techs

2:31:55profiting over the needs of community

2:31:58over what our job is, which is

2:32:01democratically representing people and

2:32:02their and their interests. Um

2:32:06I believe and there is so much evidence

2:32:09to support that this AI boom is

2:32:12speculative.

2:32:14It has huge ties to the fossil fuel

2:32:16industry, the military and defense

2:32:20industries and crypto mining and

2:32:23contract contrary to any of the claims

2:32:25from big tech there is a lack of

2:32:28evidence of benefits to everyday people.

2:32:31um there is a lot of evidence to support

2:32:34that right now there's an overbuild of

2:32:36data centers

2:32:38um

2:32:40to show profitability when there isn't

2:32:42de demand and the thing that I really am

2:32:46struggling with here today is does this

2:32:49policy before us go far enough and I'll

2:32:53I'll just say I don't think it does I

2:32:57think the place in which our [snorts]

2:33:00community really highlighted is

2:33:04the impact in the future and the facts

2:33:07are the facts. We do not have 100% clean

2:33:09energy right now in the state of

2:33:11Minnesota and we don't have 100% clean

2:33:13energy in the city of Minneapolis. We're

2:33:15at about 70%

2:33:18carbon-f free and that means 50

2:33:20megawatts, 60 megawatts, 70 megawatts,

2:33:2280 megawatts. If you add them together,

2:33:25we're only multiplying our contribution

2:33:27to

2:33:29unclean energy, greenhouse gas

2:33:31emissions. And that's contrary to what

2:33:34we have set out as policy for the city

2:33:36of Minneapolis and our clean energy

2:33:38partnership where we have several goals

2:33:41that we aren't meeting. We're not

2:33:42meeting our goals to have um net zero as

2:33:45it comes to the net zero greenhouse gas

2:33:48emissions as it comes to our industrial

2:33:50and commercial industry citywide. Um we

2:33:55aren't even close uh communitywide. And

2:33:58I think this is something that puts us

2:34:00behind. And the last thing I'll just

2:34:02note is

2:34:05while I think this policy is a good

2:34:07start and it puts puts restrictions in

2:34:10place, I do think there is a huge risk

2:34:12that it becomes obsolete into the

2:34:14future. And I think it puts in important

2:34:18safeguards that we do need if there

2:34:20isn't any policy.

2:34:23But we need the state to act.

2:34:26We don't have the ability in the city of

2:34:27Minneapolis to regulate by megawatt. We

2:34:30aren't able to regulate the type of

2:34:33cooling system that a data center has.

2:34:36We aren't able to say no tax breaks to

2:34:39data centers. Um we aren't able to

2:34:44require different community benefits or

2:34:47say 100% clean energy. And so I think if

2:34:51there are steps to move this forward um

2:34:54further in respect to what the community

2:34:56has said, this testimony was very

2:34:59compelling. I would be interested to

2:35:01hearing more in terms of what this body

2:35:04has to share. And I have other comments

2:35:07um that I might chime in on later on as

2:35:09I hear from my fellow commissioners. But

2:35:11I kind of wanted to start there. And

2:35:13also apologies. Uh it's been a long day

2:35:16for me. I have been in committee since

2:35:1810:00 a.m. So, if it's not all linear,

2:35:21that's exactly why I've been sitting

2:35:22here in front of a camera um since early

2:35:25morning, but I'm glad to be here in

2:35:27community and with you all today.

2:35:30>> Thank you, Commissioner Towry. We

2:35:31appreciate your hard work. Um before I

2:35:34forget, I want to um read a statement

2:35:38from Commissioner Wagner. Um,

2:35:40Commissioner Wagner is in Italy on a

2:35:43vacation that was planned six months ago

2:35:44and really regretted uh that he couldn't

2:35:47be here, but I told him if he wanted to

2:35:49say something that I would read it for

2:35:50him. Uh, so this is what he sent. Um, he

2:35:53says, "I'm extremely sad not to be at

2:35:55the meeting today and appreciate Chairs

2:35:57Meyer's suggestion that I still provide

2:35:58a few comments. I also appreciate the

2:36:01public's engagement on this important

2:36:02issue for our city. I think it is

2:36:05important to acknowledge the context for

2:36:06today's discussion. We are not the

2:36:09federal federal government. We are

2:36:10planning commissioners for the city of

2:36:12Minneapolis. Our charter is to guide the

2:36:14long-range planning, development, and

2:36:15land use for the city. For that reason,

2:36:17I don't believe this meeting's purpose

2:36:19should be to litigate the morality of

2:36:20AI. Instead, we should center the

2:36:22conversation on whether it makes sense

2:36:24for data centers to exist specifically

2:36:26in Minneapolis and consider how building

2:36:28them will impact our city. I will also

2:36:31share one more thought. I welcome a

2:36:32correction from staff on these figures.

2:36:34Uh but I believe the Sleep Number data

2:36:36center increased the building's

2:36:38valuation approximately eight times

2:36:41versus the prior value and now it

2:36:43generates roughly 5 to7 million in tax

2:36:46revenue per year. That is impactful for

2:36:48our city and for that reason I support

2:36:50the ordinance as proposed. Thank you.

2:36:53All right, other commissioners.

2:36:58>> Commissioner Conley.

2:36:59>> Thank you, President Meyer. I actually

2:37:01have an amendment, so I'm going to talk

2:37:02a little bit through it. Um, so, uh, I

2:37:06heard loud and clear from folks tonight

2:37:08and and something that I was thinking

2:37:09about too is the primary zoning piece,

2:37:11right? So, primary zoning pretty much

2:37:14means that um, city staff, us, the

2:37:18planning commission, the city council,

2:37:20we're all kind of um, giving away our

2:37:23authority, so to speak, right? Um, in in

2:37:26terms of like evaluating proposals that

2:37:28come in, determining if they advance

2:37:29city goals, serve the purpose of of

2:37:32community, etc. And so I want us to

2:37:35think about overlay zoning as opposed to

2:37:37primary zoning. And I'll give you a

2:37:39reason why. So overlay zoning empowers

2:37:42us as the planning commission and the

2:37:44city to actually evaluate each proposal

2:37:46on a case-byase basis, which we

2:37:48typically do. This means that thing

2:37:51we're looking at things like which

2:37:52building is being proposed to be

2:37:53converted, the energy water use

2:37:55projections, what kind of mixed use is

2:37:57being proposed, um just what advances

2:37:59the city the city's goals, which is our

2:38:01charge here. Um and so another thing

2:38:04about overlay zoning and is that it

2:38:06allows the city to build data centers,

2:38:09but that um they have to make a good

2:38:11case. They have to make um a good case.

2:38:13They have to prove that they're going to

2:38:15serve the public good. And so based on

2:38:18this, what I'd like to propose as an

2:38:19amendment is that data centers should

2:38:21only be through overlay districts in the

2:38:24DT1 and DT2 districts. No primary zoning

2:38:27with or without conditional use anywhere

2:38:29in the city. And [snorts] I'll move

2:38:31that. And and what I'd also like to do

2:38:33is move to direct staff to draft

2:38:35appropriate language in time for

2:38:37consideration by the BIS committee of

2:38:38the city council.

2:38:41>> All right, we have a motion. Second.

2:38:44There's a second.

2:38:45>> All right. discussion.

2:38:48[snorts]

2:38:49>> I want to

2:38:50>> Commissioner Baxley. Um, I wonder if we

2:38:52could just ask uh Jason uh to provide

2:38:56comment about overlay usage um in in

2:39:01contrast or in is it compatible with

2:39:03conditional use and and uh just some

2:39:07counsel on that

2:39:09>> that commissioners as I understand the

2:39:11the proposal

2:39:14we would develop a new overlay district

2:39:16and any proposal for a new principal use

2:39:19data center would require

2:39:21be required to file a resoning

2:39:23application in order to um facilitate

2:39:27the review of that that proposal. Uh a

2:39:32an idea that staff had put out there on

2:39:35the project website was to have a

2:39:38similar concept but outside of the

2:39:40downtown districts and allow as we're

2:39:43now proposing uh data centers to proceed

2:39:45with a conditional use permit in the

2:39:48downtown zoning districts.

2:39:50>> Um

2:39:52I I think there are a lot of things to

2:39:55uh balance.

2:39:57I think the idea of having some level of

2:40:00predictability with stringent standards

2:40:02in place uh makes sense and that's where

2:40:05staff landed to allow this with very

2:40:08strict standards through a conditional

2:40:10use process that does involve public

2:40:13notice to um area residents the

2:40:17neighborhood group published in a

2:40:18newspaper posted on the property. So

2:40:21that notice does happen and uh

2:40:23opportunities for feedback are are

2:40:26present. The the uh overlay district

2:40:29concept certainly does give the city

2:40:31more uh discretion to evaluate

2:40:34individual proposals. Um

2:40:40I from staff's perspective we put an a

2:40:44lot of safeguards in place in the in the

2:40:47draft recommendations and there may be

2:40:49conditions of approval that can be

2:40:51evaluated on a case-bycase basis. There

2:40:54will be conditions of approval that

2:40:55would be evaluated on a case-bycase

2:40:57basis through the conditional use

2:40:59process. Uh so we feel like there's uh

2:41:03sufficient discretion uh as proposed but

2:41:06um you certainly have the uh ability to

2:41:09to recommend that we we choose the path

2:41:11of a of developing a new overlay

2:41:13district. That would that would be uh

2:41:15something that applicants would have to

2:41:17apply for through a resoning every time

2:41:20one is proposed

2:41:21>> through resoning. And who would write

2:41:23the uh parameters of that overlay

2:41:26district? How does that work?

2:41:28So staff would draft that uh per the

2:41:32direction of the planning commission and

2:41:34and city council if they were to accept

2:41:36that recommendation of the planning

2:41:37commission. Uh, I think maybe something

2:41:41that um I would like more feedback from

2:41:44the commission about is if we would in

2:41:47this overlay district have the same

2:41:50standards that we are recommending that

2:41:53be uh generally applicable in the DT1

2:41:55and DT2 district and then just have it

2:41:58also be a reasonzoning application which

2:42:00has its own set legal findings based on

2:42:03state statute and and city ordinance.

2:42:06And how does this uh deployment of this

2:42:10um instrument fit in with the current

2:42:13schedule um of review?

2:42:18[snorts] Uh commissioners, it would be a

2:42:20uh not an easy lift to pull that

2:42:23together in before the uh business

2:42:27housing and zoning committee, but we we

2:42:29would do that. we would do that in a

2:42:32manner that kept us on the schedule and

2:42:34and prevents us from reverting to

2:42:37calling these communication exchanges

2:42:39allowed in 10 of the 15 zoning

2:42:41districts. Great.

2:42:43>> Thank you.

2:42:44>> Okay. So, it's been pointed out to me

2:42:45that uh the motion was premature because

2:42:48there needs to be a motion on the main

2:42:50ordinance before we can consider an

2:42:52amendment. What I'm going to propose is

2:42:53we let each commissioner give their

2:42:55overall thoughts and then I'll come to

2:42:56Commissioner Connley um after we've had

2:42:58the main motion for the first amendment.

2:43:00Before Jason steps down, did anyone else

2:43:02have other questions for Jason?

2:43:06>> Commissioner Shepard, were this to come

2:43:08up again tonight, does a U if we

2:43:11establish a new build form overlay

2:43:13district for data centers or

2:43:14environmental overlay district, does

2:43:16that preclude the necessity for public

2:43:18notification?

2:43:21Commissioner Shepard, it does not. Uh, a

2:43:23resoning would go through a a similar

2:43:26process requiring public hearing in

2:43:28front of this body. Uh, one key

2:43:30difference between the resoning and a

2:43:32conditional use permit is that your

2:43:35action on a resoning is advisory and it

2:43:37it goes on to the city council. Whereas

2:43:39a conditional use permit, this body has

2:43:42the the final say unless appealed.

2:43:44>> Is there any difference in the distance

2:43:46involved of a public notification? I

2:43:48think for COP it's 350 ft. Uh, same

2:43:50distance.

2:43:51>> Same distance.

2:43:52>> Okay. Thank you.

2:43:56>> All right. Not seeing any other

2:43:57questions for Mr. Whittenberg. Um, so

2:43:59commissioners, want to give your general

2:44:01thoughts for those who haven't yet.

2:44:05Commissioner Gorton.

2:44:08>> Well, thank you all for uh taking the

2:44:11time to be here this evening and the

2:44:12intention you put into um your comments.

2:44:15I share many of the concerns uh you guys

2:44:18expressed and uh appreciate the

2:44:19specificity.

2:44:21So, thank you. Um I am

2:44:25just before I jump into some other

2:44:28things, I do support um the overlay

2:44:30amendment mentioned by Commissioner

2:44:32Connley. Um

2:44:35I am skeptical of the 175,000 ft allowed

2:44:39rather than prescriptive

2:44:40performance-based requirements. um

2:44:42primarily due to environmental concerns.

2:44:45Um you know for context and this is

2:44:47helpful for me because this is the way I

2:44:49think and imagine things is 1775,000 ft

2:44:52of just the white space is more than the

2:44:55average size of a Costco. It's greater

2:44:57than the average 150 unit apartment

2:44:59building. All the new apartment

2:45:01buildings we see around. It's greater

2:45:03than that on average. Um it's

2:45:06[clears throat] just over 17 floor 17

2:45:08floors of 10,000 square feet floors

2:45:11each. So that's fairly significant and

2:45:13that's just the white space. I have as I

2:45:16mentioned earlier in um my question for

2:45:19staffenberg was um my concern regarding

2:45:21the occupancy though it is building

2:45:23code. If these data centers are a be

2:45:26occupancy

2:45:28and the existing floors are be occupancy

2:45:31they will be able to go in there without

2:45:33a change of occupancy. working on

2:45:35projects as an architect, change of

2:45:36occupancy is what allows us to raise the

2:45:38bar whether it's ADA, energy code, and

2:45:40other other things of that nature. So if

2:45:43the data center is a B occupy, it goes

2:45:45in. My concern is that it won't need to

2:45:47meet energy code. It will be just kind

2:45:49of grandfathered into those existing

2:45:50spaces, all of which in these office

2:45:52conversions are currently B occupancy,

2:45:55the majority of them. Um, I would like

2:45:57to hear from [sighs] my fellow

2:46:01commissioners their appetite for

2:46:03considering a reduction in this overall

2:46:06square footage. Um, I would propose an

2:46:09amendment to reduce that. Um,

2:46:12I think five floors, 50,000 square feet

2:46:16hypothetically would be a good cap, but

2:46:18I would like to hear from other

2:46:19commissioners.

2:46:22>> Commissioner Garcia.

2:46:25Thank you, President Meyer. Um, I again

2:46:29would echo the sentiments of the fellow

2:46:31commissioners. Thank you all for being

2:46:33here. Thank you for taking your time to

2:46:35come and speak to this. Um, thank you to

2:46:38staff again for all of the work that you

2:46:40put into this. It's a tremendous

2:46:42document and something that um I can

2:46:45tell everybody worked really hard on.

2:46:47Um,

2:46:50so I I would also support um

2:46:54Commissioner Connley's proposed

2:46:56amendment. Um, and I agree um with

2:47:01Commissioner Gordon regarding the size

2:47:05limitations

2:47:06um

2:47:08when you were mentioning the

2:47:11um footprint of 175,000 square ft and

2:47:16just the sheer size that that is in

2:47:18terms of larger than a Costco and 17

2:47:22floors of an of a um office building or

2:47:27something like that. Um it really does

2:47:30drive home the scale of what we're

2:47:33talking about and as we look at the

2:47:36technology that goes into data centers

2:47:39um there will be more and more servers

2:47:41that are allowed to fit into that space

2:47:43as um it's like every 3 years everything

2:47:48reduces in size again and again and

2:47:50again. So, um I would also support a

2:47:56reduction in maximum size to um that

2:48:0150,000 square foot range. 50,000 to

2:48:06potentially 75,000 square ft at the

2:48:10absolute outside limit that I would be

2:48:12comfortable with. Um thank you.

2:48:16>> Thank you, Commissioner Garcia.

2:48:17Commissioner Shepard.

2:48:19>> Thank you. Thank you, Chair Meyer. Um,

2:48:23Mr. Raw Castle, I hear you. I too

2:48:26support this this amendment as written.

2:48:28I also think that if you my guess is

2:48:31that if you were to take a poll of us

2:48:32here, the idea of extending a moratorum

2:48:35would be like a slam dunk that it it

2:48:38ought to be extended. That is, however,

2:48:40not our prerogative. And um I don't know

2:48:43that there's a motion we could even make

2:48:45to send that on to to the city council

2:48:48other than the message that you know

2:48:50more time to cook this would be just a

2:48:52would be a great idea. I'm a little

2:48:54unclear on the there's a there's a

2:48:56rubric on page uh 80 of our material

2:49:00which kind of compares square footage to

2:49:03to megawatts of of the data center. And

2:49:05at current technology, we're at 25

2:49:09with 175,000 square feet of of white

2:49:12space, which does not seem um large to

2:49:15me. It's much smaller than a than a than

2:49:17a hypers scale data center. So, we're

2:49:19not talking about enormous enormous

2:49:21generative AI data centers. Is that not

2:49:23correct? I'm happy to be wrong on this.

2:49:26>> Yeah, Commissioner Shepard, I would uh

2:49:28honestly ask uh Mr. Wittenberg about

2:49:31this. We've had lots of discussion about

2:49:33what square footage equates to megawatt

2:49:37and

2:49:39>> and and before he does, may I clarify my

2:49:41question?

2:49:42>> Yeah.

2:49:42>> I note that the city of Nashville

2:49:44regulates on both square footage and and

2:49:47power capacity and and yet we cannot for

2:49:51some reason which which confuses me and

2:49:55that is really my question.

2:49:56>> Sure. Uh, Commissioner Shepard, uh, I

2:49:59don't have that rubric in front of me,

2:50:00but, uh, we did set out to create

2:50:03estimates of the range of likely data

2:50:07center power capacity that would fit

2:50:09within different sizes in terms of

2:50:12square footage. Uh

2:50:18our best estimate based on as you noted

2:50:21currently available technology is that

2:50:24we could see 90 megawatt data centers

2:50:28within the space that's recommended.

2:50:30We're unlikely to see based on current

2:50:32technology 100 plus, but uh a a 50 to 60

2:50:40watt megawatt facility would

2:50:44definitely be something that was is

2:50:46within the expectation of uh current

2:50:49technology and 175,000 square feet of

2:50:52white space.

2:50:54>> Thank you. I mean that addresses my

2:50:56question. I concede I concede that that

2:50:58point. Um my my biggest concern, this is

2:51:01your my general comments. I'm sorry. I

2:51:03have no further questions for you, Mr.

2:51:04Whittenberg. I'm sorry. Um is that we

2:51:07adopt this is a I see this as a movement

2:51:09toward regulation, not away from it. And

2:51:12which which is a great thing. I'm just

2:51:14concerned that we not let the moratorum

2:51:16expire no matter what we do.

2:51:19Hence,

2:51:21if all else fails, I'm in favor of the

2:51:23ordinance as written. Thank you. I

2:51:26realized didn't I didn't respond to your

2:51:28second question about uh a community in

2:51:30in another state. Some states have

2:51:33different uh rules about communities

2:51:36ability to regulate beyond the building

2:51:38code or regulate in ways that uh that

2:51:41Minnesota is not able to do. Most states

2:51:44are are are like ours um in that regard.

2:51:48However, but I don't know the specific

2:51:50uh framework within which you know

2:51:52Tennessee addresses this issue. I will

2:51:55note that uh communities uh a community

2:52:00in Minnesota has placed a moratorum in

2:52:02place

2:52:04has put a moratorium in place and has

2:52:07used megawws as a measure of restriction

2:52:10and they have faced um legal action for

2:52:13for taking that step. I don't I don't

2:52:15believe we have an out outcome yet on

2:52:16that legal action. Good.

2:52:19>> Thank you.

2:52:21>> Did anyone else have general thoughts

2:52:22before I give mine? Sure. Commissioner

2:52:24Baxley.

2:52:26>> Thank you, Chair. Um,

2:52:30I think, uh, just for reference, I think

2:52:32the Sleep Number data center is about

2:52:35180,000 square feet, produces about 21

2:52:39megawatts currently.

2:52:45>> I just wonder how much of that is white

2:52:47space versus the entire footprint.

2:52:51>> Agreed. I think it's the entire

2:52:52footprint. So

2:52:53>> yeah, and I think

2:52:54>> just as a reference,

2:52:55>> right? And I think they're trying to

2:52:56expand to 60 megawatts.

2:52:58>> Yep.

2:52:59>> Right.

2:53:00>> I think

2:53:02my experience has been within that

2:53:03footprint that's easily achievable with

2:53:06today's technology. So that being said,

2:53:08I I I think the um [snorts]

2:53:11I think it's important to get something

2:53:14done and uh so I really appreciate the

2:53:16staff's effort um to establish a clear

2:53:20regulatory framework. I mean this is in

2:53:22a rapidly evolving land use and data

2:53:24centers are important infrastructure

2:53:27but is their impacts and contribute

2:53:29contributions to the urban environment

2:53:31are different from traditional

2:53:32commercial and employment uses. I

2:53:35believe the proposed emphasis on

2:53:36adaptive reuse neighborhood

2:53:38compatibility and a public review

2:53:40process

2:53:42gives me enough a reasonable bias for

2:53:44moving forward. Um certainly the overlay

2:53:47district I think is also interesting and

2:53:49entertain but I support the

2:53:51proposal as written. Thank you.

2:53:57Commissioner Connley, did you have more

2:53:58that you wanted to say generally because

2:54:00you just made your amendment? Okay. Um

2:54:02so uh my thoughts on this um

2:54:07you know first I want to thank the staff

2:54:09and um all of the people who made

2:54:12comments more than 300 pages worth. I

2:54:14read the whole thing. um and 10 council

2:54:17members uh involved in drafting this. I

2:54:19don't think I've ever seen that before.

2:54:21Um I support the large majority of this

2:54:25ordinance regulating um data centers.

2:54:28You know, whether it was 10 or 13 zoning

2:54:30districts. I think that was way too

2:54:31many. We shouldn't have it in in the

2:54:33residential neighborhoods. Um I support

2:54:36a lot of the aspects in here. I think

2:54:37it's really important. Um someone

2:54:38mentioned in the testimony about eyes on

2:54:40the street. I talk about that a lot.

2:54:41That's why I think it's important to

2:54:43have active use on the the first uh and

2:54:47second floors. Um I think there are a

2:54:50lot of things that people really want to

2:54:52see that need to be done by the state.

2:54:56Uh thankfully we have the chair of the

2:54:57intergovernmental committee with us and

2:54:59I'm sure she's going to be at the

2:55:00capital a lot advocating for some of

2:55:02these things. Um, you know, we have uh

2:55:06the clean energy standard at the state

2:55:08which requires 100% clean energy um by

2:55:112040 and increments um in 2030 and and

2:55:152035. But it would be even better if we

2:55:17could require that any new data center

2:55:20had to be fully powered by clean energy

2:55:22uh from the start.

2:55:24um a lot of the other uh things that

2:55:26that people talked about um are are

2:55:29things that we don't have the ability to

2:55:32control here. Um, but I I do think that

2:55:37there are some benefits to having data

2:55:40centers and we do need some of them just

2:55:42for everyday things like

2:55:43telecommunications for powering the

2:55:45internet and and having highspeed

2:55:46internet. And the main benefit uh from

2:55:50to me of having them in Minneapolis

2:55:52instead of, you know, getting um our

2:55:55data needs from a different city are the

2:55:56property tax revenue and the franchise

2:55:58fee revenue. Um and just walking through

2:56:01the context of the property tax revenue,

2:56:03you know, um the BET just approved an

2:56:0711.87%

2:56:09um property tax increase, which is very

2:56:11large. Um it would have needed to be 19%

2:56:16in order to prevent budget cuts. So,

2:56:17we're getting almost a 12% property tax

2:56:20levy increase at the same time that

2:56:22we're also going to have budget cuts.

2:56:24And the the main reason why um is

2:56:28because we're losing so much revenue

2:56:30from downtown. Um the Amir Prize

2:56:33Financial Center, I think, is probably

2:56:34the the best example. Um it was sold at

2:56:39$200 million in in 2016. Um and it was

2:56:43just sold uh for 6.25 million. Um so

2:56:47just a couple percent of what it had

2:56:50been previously valued at that. So that

2:56:53means that everyone else in the city has

2:56:55to pay higher property taxes to make up

2:56:58for the lost value um from downtown with

2:57:01the the 30% vacancy rate. And we you

2:57:04know on the planning commission we've

2:57:06done a lot to try to make it easier um

2:57:08to convert to residential. Um but a lot

2:57:11of the buildings aren't aren't suited

2:57:13for that. um when a data center can go

2:57:15in like the Sleep Number building had a

2:57:17had a massive property value increase

2:57:20when they when they got one. Um it was

2:57:22previously assessed at at 30 million um

2:57:25then was sold um for 235 million um when

2:57:29it got the the data center in it and the

2:57:33commercial tax rate is is about 2%. So

2:57:36my back of the envelope math was that

2:57:37that's about $4 million a year every

2:57:41year year after year. And that's a lot

2:57:44that can pay for a lot of the priorities

2:57:45that people talked about today. You

2:57:47know, I think about like the public

2:57:49housing levy. That's 5 million a year.

2:57:52Um, someone mentioned our car. Uh,

2:57:56they're they're closing because they

2:57:58have a $625,000 deficit and it's a $1.1

2:58:02million structural deficit.

2:58:04Uh, the park board um their increase um

2:58:09five uh something% uh was $5.6 $.6

2:58:12million. Um, you know, there was, you

2:58:15know, a big push to make sure that that

2:58:17they got that uh full amount that they

2:58:19they had requested. Um, so $4 million

2:58:22was just from one facility. And

2:58:27I I think that, you know, that can make

2:58:30a really big difference um for a lot of

2:58:33the things that we care about the most.

2:58:36Um, I care really deeply about climate

2:58:38change. Anyone who knows me knows that.

2:58:39A lot of people around here, you you

2:58:41won't know me, but you know, I've I've

2:58:42never driven a car in my life. I moved

2:58:44here from South Dakota, so I wouldn't

2:58:45have to. I bike everywhere. So, I I

2:58:47really deeply care about climate, but um

2:58:49to me, some of um the aspects of the way

2:58:52has been written, you know, are really

2:58:53thoughtful about that because we want to

2:58:56adaptively reuse some of these buildings

2:58:58instead of, you know, tearing them down,

2:59:01which I think some of them might end up

2:59:03being torn down because there just

2:59:04hasn't been a use for them. A lot of

2:59:05them have been um vacant for years. So

2:59:07if you can find a use I I want to u

2:59:10welcome that.

2:59:12Um

2:59:15so

2:59:17the two amendments that I um cont

2:59:20contemplated coming in um were um first

2:59:24to allow

2:59:26um data centers and basements as I said

2:59:28I think that makes sense because you

2:59:30don't have the noise issues um for those

2:59:32and I'm talking basement in downtown um

2:59:36and I think that can help make a a

2:59:39project pencil out like the way I kind

2:59:41of look at these data centers is whether

2:59:43they're competing with or complementing

2:59:47housing production. You know, that's one

2:59:48of my most important things is to see

2:59:50more housing built so that more people

2:59:51can be enabled to live in Minneapolis.

2:59:53Um I think if it was, you know, a big

2:59:55hypers scale data center in a

2:59:57neighborhood that would take up space

2:59:58that could otherwise go to housing. Um

3:00:01but if it's you know downtown then and

3:00:05um there's you know active use on the

3:00:07first and second floors like we require

3:00:09and there was residential as part of it

3:00:11that that could complement it and as I

3:00:13said before you know the the $4 million

3:00:15from one project you know that goes

3:00:16towards like you know go a long way um

3:00:19for for paying for affordable housing.

3:00:21Um so I I see that benefit there as

3:00:24well. Um,

3:00:26and as I also stated, I thought it made

3:00:29sense to have a limited space in the

3:00:32industrial uses quarter mile away from

3:00:34any residential or any other type of

3:00:36zoning um where where new construction

3:00:39could be allowed. Um, as as written,

3:00:42this won't allow for any new

3:00:44construction at all. So, if we have some

3:00:47some business that needs a new kind of

3:00:50setup for whatever reason and the

3:00:52existing

3:00:54um buildings don't work for them, they

3:00:56just can't be in Minneapolis. So, then

3:00:58they're going to go to other cities. And

3:01:01I don't necessarily think it it's

3:01:04helpful if we just push it to other

3:01:07places. Like the the the demand for data

3:01:10is going to be there either way, I would

3:01:13think. And in general, I would prefer um

3:01:17that it come in in Minnesota where, you

3:01:22know, the temperatures are cooler, they

3:01:23don't have as much energy. We have a a

3:01:25strong um clean energy mandate and in

3:01:29Minneapolis where they have to play by

3:01:30our rules, follow our labor laws, pay

3:01:32our franchise fees. I think there's um

3:01:34there's a benefit to that. My my sense

3:01:37is probably the majority of the

3:01:39commissions in the other direction. So I

3:01:40won't propose my amendments unless um I

3:01:44hear otherwise from commissioners um to

3:01:49um commissioner and so so for Baxley's

3:01:51amendment, you know, that is similar to

3:01:53what I my proposal would go a little

3:01:56further than that um

3:01:59to Commissioner Conley's amendment. Um,

3:02:04so in general, I I think it's

3:02:09really good if we can set out the rules

3:02:12and you either meet them or or you

3:02:13don't. Um, with with the 2040 plan,

3:02:16that's one of the main things that we

3:02:17accomplished. We reduce the number of of

3:02:20variances

3:02:22massively. Um,

3:02:24I'd kind of like to see the planning

3:02:26commission be as irrelevant as possible.

3:02:29like we should be involved in in setting

3:02:30the rules but on once the the rules are

3:02:34set I think it's better um if you know

3:02:38you you you have a an understanding

3:02:41going in whether it's something that's

3:02:42going to get approved or not and my

3:02:46concern is that with with more

3:02:48discretion um like a problem you see in

3:02:51other cities is when there's a lot of

3:02:52discretion you see higher rates of of

3:02:54corruption like especially when there's

3:02:56just a lot of money involved like like

3:02:58Chicago's one example where you see a

3:03:01lot of corruption when there's more

3:03:02discretion. When you have a more

3:03:03rules-based system, you see less of it.

3:03:05Um, so I'm I'm open to precision on

3:03:08this, but I I think

3:03:11my my default on it is probably to vote

3:03:14no on that amendment. Um, so

3:03:16Commissioner Chowry,

3:03:20>> thank you. Um, Commissioner Meyer, I

3:03:22said I would probably have some more

3:03:24thoughts as our discussion unfolded. I

3:03:27think it's really important um to root

3:03:30ourselves in the reality of what the

3:03:33actual fiscal benefit of data centers

3:03:36are. And to that it I would point you to

3:03:40the legislative

3:03:42um research oversight department's

3:03:44research on this question that we asked

3:03:46them to do. And they also work directly

3:03:50with our city assessors department. um

3:03:53it's on page 26 of their report and you

3:03:56can you can find that. I think it's uh a

3:04:00part of the packet. But the few things

3:04:02that I would caution in terms of trying

3:04:05to convert estimated property value

3:04:08market value into direct revenue is that

3:04:11our assessor's department shared that in

3:04:16determining how these investments

3:04:18translate into municipal revenue. It's

3:04:20more complex than simply estimating a

3:04:23property's market value. And they also

3:04:25share that unlike conventional office,

3:04:27retail or multifamily buildings,

3:04:29dedicated data centers represent a

3:04:32highly specialized property type.

3:04:36um making uh making the estimation of

3:04:41the value of data centers particularly

3:04:43difficult um because many facilities

3:04:47occupy only a portion of a large

3:04:49commercial building.

3:04:51And ultimately it shares that although

3:04:56data centers may increase assessed

3:04:57values of individual properties,

3:04:59increases in assessed value do not

3:05:01necessarily produce propo proportional

3:05:04increases in municipal revenue. So, our

3:05:07city assessors department and very clear

3:05:11um

3:05:13language through our uh LRO department

3:05:16essent essentially said that we do not

3:05:18have enough information to be conclusive

3:05:21about the fiscal benefit. And the other

3:05:23thing that I'll point to that's within

3:05:24the LRO report is that um we've actually

3:05:29lost tax revenue to data centers due to

3:05:33the exemptions on the hypers scale tax

3:05:36exemptions on the hypers scale data

3:05:38centers. So they showed us given the

3:05:412025

3:05:43um policy they p that was passed and

3:05:49that approximately 7.4 4 million

3:05:54dollars of tax dollars were refunded

3:05:57under the qualified data center

3:05:59exemption in add in addition to refunds

3:06:02associated with Henipin County and

3:06:04regional sales tax. And so that's the

3:06:07direct fiscal impact that Minneapolis

3:06:09faces. And that's why I've strained to

3:06:13say that there is a benefit beyond

3:06:15creating a trades job. I don't think

3:06:18that it's a golden. We cannot say with

3:06:20any real certainty with the data that's

3:06:23before us and the information that we

3:06:25have from our city assessors department

3:06:26that this is a golden goose for

3:06:28municipal revenue. And I think this is a

3:06:30case of us having to make big tech and

3:06:33this industry prove itself before we say

3:06:35that that's it's going to do the thing

3:06:37that it's going to do. So I deeply

3:06:38caution the fiscal argument on this

3:06:42um because because of the research that

3:06:45has been done over it. And then also I

3:06:48would also caution an argument to say

3:06:50that there is enduser demand. Um more

3:06:53and more as recent today there is

3:06:57indicators that

3:06:59there are more data centers that are

3:07:01being built out than actual demand.

3:07:04Goldman Sachs estimates that only about

3:07:06half the scheduled data center capacity

3:07:08will come online due to cancellations

3:07:11and delays. And I think that's something

3:07:12that we have to be mindful of because

3:07:15we're allowing for this infrastructure

3:07:16to be created in our downtown.

3:07:19And we we have a question on how it will

3:07:21be utilized. I mean, even with the Sleep

3:07:23Number building, there's commitments

3:07:25that it's going to expand to 60 megawws.

3:07:29That hasn't happened yet. I will also

3:07:30say in all of this, there's just a genu

3:07:34genuine lack of transparency.

3:07:37And while I agree in in most of our

3:07:40planning protocols, especially as it

3:07:42comes to the things that we regularly

3:07:45zone for that aren't emerging and

3:07:47everchanging industries, it makes sense

3:07:50to have set rules. But these set rules

3:07:52are going to change. Like they're going

3:07:54to be obsolete within a year's time. And

3:07:57it's proven by the fact that we know

3:07:59that compute power is only going to have

3:08:01less of a less footprint. and we're

3:08:03going to need to get state authority to

3:08:05say we want to regulate bu building

3:08:07components on data centers otherwise

3:08:08local government doesn't have control.

3:08:10So I think I at this juncture I would I

3:08:14I I will heir on the side of more

3:08:17transparency in this industry than less.

3:08:20And I think it's hard to treat it as the

3:08:22same as

3:08:24what a a housing development or

3:08:28honestly I would say for our um

3:08:32emergency shelters, we might even we put

3:08:34maybe a little bit extra scrutiny on

3:08:36them more than we're talking about um a

3:08:40data center development currently. So

3:08:43those are the things that I'll just kind

3:08:44of bring into the fold. I think it's an

3:08:46interesting question about um the

3:08:49primary eliminating primary zoning. I've

3:08:52only really heard about this in the last

3:08:54week. Uh while we've been steeped in our

3:08:57policy conversations at city hall about

3:08:59what's the best way forward, I I don't

3:09:03uh imagine to speak for the rest of my

3:09:06colleagues in terms of what they will

3:09:08support or won't support, but I think

3:09:09what this body does sends a message. Um,

3:09:13I also will just like point to the high

3:09:17level of community engagement and the

3:09:18direct ask for transparency as one of

3:09:20the top priorities. And I think

3:09:24there is work that state states need to

3:09:26do. And in the meantime, while they put

3:09:28the comprehensive regulatory framework,

3:09:31local governments should safeguard as

3:09:35much as possible and allow community

3:09:36members to have a say and have more

3:09:38oversight. So, those are a couple things

3:09:40I wanted to add into it. I'll also share

3:09:43I've shared before to my colleagues um

3:09:47to staff. I've also shared it on my

3:09:49newsletter. I am concerned about the

3:09:51175,000 square feet. I do think that is

3:09:55really large. And I also think it's hard

3:09:59to get past one

3:10:03one

3:10:05downtown data center being at 70 megawws

3:10:07and then down the street or just like

3:10:10five minutes over you have another data

3:10:13center that's at the same size and

3:10:15you're at 140 megawws of use that you

3:10:19didn't have before. It's like it's not

3:10:21one campus but it still amounts to a

3:10:24hypers scale. So those are some of the

3:10:27things that I'll bring forward. Um I do

3:10:30think it is very likely that we come

3:10:32back to this policy and changes are made

3:10:34given how everything is changing really

3:10:37fast like things are already way

3:10:39different than they were when we started

3:10:41in May and when we placed the moratorum.

3:10:44Um the political reality that's one

3:10:46we'll have to see. But I think the thing

3:10:49that's before us is what is the best

3:10:52thing that we can do out of this

3:10:54discussion with the tools that we have.

3:10:58>> Commissioner Connley.

3:11:00>> Thank you, Mr. President. A couple of

3:11:02things I that I just wanted to mention

3:11:03is, you know, the amendment that that I

3:11:06would like to bring forward really is

3:11:07about maintaining local control. I'll

3:11:09say that in the staff's recommendation,

3:11:11they highlight that there's a very

3:11:13limited ability for cities to regulate

3:11:16data centers due to state preeemption.

3:11:18So since we are preempted from doing the

3:11:20kind of regulation that we know really

3:11:22is needed here, it's even more important

3:11:24that we just retain our ability to say

3:11:26no to proposals that could potentially

3:11:28hurt our communities. So for me, that's

3:11:30local control. I'll also say that we do

3:11:32kind of have a role in setting the

3:11:34rules. uh staff is getting our uh our

3:11:38feedback, our recommendations on what

3:11:40the 2050 plan could could look like and

3:11:42and that's rule setting. I think that we

3:11:44have a piece of that to consider. And

3:11:47then I also think that this the

3:11:48conversation around revenue and revenue

3:11:50desperation is real and it's happening

3:11:52all over the country. But I want to

3:11:54really just be clear that the reason why

3:11:57so many communities are desperate for

3:11:59revenue right now is because of the

3:12:01devastating impacts of the federal

3:12:03government and what HR1 has done to

3:12:05counties and cities which has stripped

3:12:07us our ability to um maintain revenue

3:12:11outside of property tax. So, I I'm

3:12:14co-chair of the county's

3:12:15intergovernmental relations committee

3:12:16and we're going to the capital to get

3:12:18rid of things like preeemption. Um

3:12:20because we need to be able to bring in

3:12:22new sources of revenue and we can get

3:12:24creative with that. Um data centers come

3:12:26in and they really sell to communities

3:12:30this idea of lots and lots and lots of

3:12:32revenue. Lowden County, Virginia is a

3:12:35really good example of that. They are

3:12:37swimming in riches because they are the

3:12:39data center capital of the world. Um

3:12:42[snorts] what you don't hear about

3:12:43though when you hear about the revenue

3:12:44that comes into Lowden County, Virginia

3:12:46is um the water usage, the the water

3:12:51restrictions for communities, mostly

3:12:53communities of color. Um [snorts] the

3:12:55the sound, the the all of the things

3:12:58that that we've heard from from

3:12:59residents tonight and that we are kind

3:13:01of talking about are are things that

3:13:04there are communities, cities that have

3:13:06chosen the revenue over um over the

3:13:10risk. And it's because we are all

3:13:12desperate for it. Um we can't rely on

3:13:14property tax in a way that we used to

3:13:16before. Um I think you mentioned it,

3:13:18President Meyer, we keep going up in

3:13:20terms of our property tax levy and

3:13:22that's not sustainable. So we do have to

3:13:24look at new sources of revenue, but it

3:13:26doesn't have to necessarily be one

3:13:28source, right? We could be very

3:13:29creative. we could use our legislative

3:13:31muscle to to fight back against or or um

3:13:35for for the direction that we need on

3:13:37more um stringent regulations around

3:13:40state statewide around data centers. Um

3:13:42but for this proposal or for for the

3:13:45amendment honestly it really boils down

3:13:47to what we can and cannot control and it

3:13:50doesn't necessarily um stop any data

3:13:53center build. I mean I would be

3:13:54supportive of a smaller footprint. I

3:13:56think it was mentioned that there's a

3:13:57potential amendment around reducing the

3:13:59footprint to maybe 50 to 75,000 square

3:14:02feet. I would be okay with that. For me,

3:14:04it's just if there's overlay overlay

3:14:07zoning as opposed to um as opposed to

3:14:11primary zoning that gives um more

3:14:14control to the local government, the

3:14:16local entity that's making the final

3:14:18decision. I just think that's important.

3:14:20>> Thank you.

3:14:21>> Let's take up your amendment now. First,

3:14:23um, is there a motion to adopt the staff

3:14:26recommendation? Put that on the floor

3:14:28first.

3:14:28>> So moved.

3:14:29>> Second.

3:14:30>> All right. Now you can propose an

3:14:32amendment, Commissioner Connley, if you

3:14:33can repeat it.

3:14:34>> I will repeat it. Thank you, Mr.

3:14:35President. So my proposal is

3:14:38uh my proposed amendment would be that

3:14:41um data centers should only be through

3:14:43overlay districts through overlay

3:14:46district in DT1 and DT2 districts. no

3:14:49primary zoning with a re without

3:14:51conditional use anywhere in the city and

3:14:54I would move the recommendation and move

3:14:56to direct staff to draft the appropriate

3:14:58language in time for consideration for

3:15:01the uh by the bis committee of the city

3:15:02council.

3:15:04>> I'm looking to staff to see if that's

3:15:06sufficient direction.

3:15:08>> Me and Jason

3:15:13I think that is sufficient direction.

3:15:15Maybe the uh one additional question I

3:15:18would have is that should this overlay

3:15:21district have all of the same standards

3:15:24the staff has recommended be applicable

3:15:26to the DT1 DT2 zoning district? Is that

3:15:31part of the intent as well?

3:15:33>> Commissioner Conley, can you clarify?

3:15:39In other words, I'm I'm sorry to

3:15:40interrupt, but the no first and second

3:15:42floor, the must be in an existing

3:15:44building, those types of

3:15:45>> I think everything stays the same. It's

3:15:47just we're creating an overlay district.

3:15:48Thank you,

3:15:51>> Commissioner Shepard.

3:15:51>> Chair Meer, are there there are also

3:15:53suggested modifications to maximum area,

3:15:55suggested modifications to where in the

3:15:57building it can be located such as below

3:15:59grade? Should we get that done first?

3:16:03>> In other words, that would all were that

3:16:05to pass, that would also be part of the

3:16:07overly district. is my point.

3:16:11>> Yes.

3:16:12>> Is there a sequence

3:16:14>> mic? Sorry.

3:16:15>> Is there a sequence to that which we

3:16:16have to worry about or is that

3:16:18>> I would defer to staff but I would say

3:16:19if this you if this amendment passes

3:16:23then the other amendments would align

3:16:25with what this is doing.

3:16:27>> Yeah. So I mean it's a directive to

3:16:28staff. So staff would be able to

3:16:30incorporate any subsequent amendments

3:16:32and make them match I think.

3:16:36>> Okay. Did we get a second on that?

3:16:38Second.

3:16:39>> All right. Um, further discussion on

3:16:42Commissioner Connley's amendment.

3:16:47>> All right. Not seeing any. So, sorry.

3:16:49>> Sorry, Commissioner Trey.

3:16:50>> I just want to be clear on what this is.

3:16:53So it would be a reasonzoning that would

3:16:57come back come before the planning

3:16:59commission

3:17:01and then it would be everything that's

3:17:03within

3:17:05the current proposed policy and then it

3:17:07would have to go before the city

3:17:09council. Is that right? It goes between

3:17:11both bodies.

3:17:14Commissioner Chowy, that's correct that

3:17:16uh the the planning commission would

3:17:18make an advisory recommendation on the

3:17:20resoning for to apply the overlay

3:17:22district or to deny the overlay district

3:17:25as the case may be and that would move

3:17:27through the city council.

3:17:28>> Okay.

3:17:30I'm sorry I'm so confused between the

3:17:32two. Is this a quasi judicial would it

3:17:35still be a quasi judicial action?

3:17:37>> It would be a legislative decision

3:17:39whether to apply the overlay district.

3:17:42>> Okay. All right. Thank you. That helps.

3:17:45Again, I'm gonna hit 12 hours of being

3:17:48on committee in just a couple hours.

3:17:51[laughter]

3:17:52[panting]

3:17:55>> Commissioner Conley.

3:17:56>> Thank you, Mr. President. Just to add,

3:17:58so primary zoning is quasi judicial and

3:18:01that means that there's only legal basis

3:18:04to deny an application based on it being

3:18:05incomplete or inaccurate.

3:18:08Um, so what we would be doing with

3:18:10primary zoning is giving us less due

3:18:13diligence, whereas overlay zoning

3:18:15empowers the planning commission and the

3:18:17city council to evaluate each proposal

3:18:19on a case- by case basis

3:18:22to add some help.

3:18:24>> Thank you. Other thoughts?

3:18:28>> I'm going to be voting no at this time.

3:18:30Um, I I think the ordinance is pretty

3:18:32good as written and it's it's going to

3:18:34be a lot of work for for staff to re

3:18:38rewrite that and

3:18:40I I I just think we should try to lay

3:18:42out the rules as clearly as we as we

3:18:44can. Um, any other comments? All right,

3:18:47clerk, please call the RO.

3:18:50>> Commissioner Baxley,

3:18:52>> just to be clear, this is on the

3:18:53proposed amendment's

3:18:55amendment.

3:18:56>> The amendment.

3:18:57>> Uh, yay.

3:18:59Chry

3:19:00>> I

3:19:02>> Connley

3:19:03>> I

3:19:04>> Garcia

3:19:05>> I

3:19:06>> Gordon

3:19:07>> I

3:19:09>> Sheepard

3:19:09>> I

3:19:11>> and President Meyer

3:19:12>> no

3:19:14>> there are six I's and one N

3:19:16>> that is adopted. Are there additional

3:19:19amendments?

3:19:22Uh

3:19:24>> I would like to

3:19:27uh move an amendment to direct staff to

3:19:30um

3:19:32forward forward a um recommendation

3:19:37that the size [clears throat] the square

3:19:40footage size be capped at 50,000 square

3:19:43ft as opposed to 175,000 square ft.

3:19:50>> Is there a second?

3:19:50>> Second.

3:19:51>> All right. It has been seconded.

3:19:53Discussion to Commissioner Garcia's

3:19:54amendment.

3:19:59>> Commissioner Chowry.

3:20:03>> Um,

3:20:04I think it would be helpful to

3:20:06understand

3:20:08the amount of megawattage that this

3:20:10would allow for because I've kind of I

3:20:12want to be consistent in asking that

3:20:15question as we make square footage

3:20:16discussions. And I will also say that

3:20:19like the square footage

3:20:22decision

3:20:23or the square footage to megawatt math

3:20:27is not an actual

3:20:30there's not an actual strong methodology

3:20:32in that. I think there's like some

3:20:34assumptions based off of existing data

3:20:37centers and their square square footage

3:20:39that staff is making. They've done a

3:20:41really good job of trying to put

3:20:43together a key, but I think that's

3:20:45always an important asterisk to put on

3:20:47the square footage conversation. And

3:20:49that's why we need to get authority to

3:20:50regulate by megawatt because industry

3:20:52doesn't talk in square footage. It talks

3:20:54in megawatt.

3:20:57>> Other commissioners,

3:20:59>> that's Oh, I had a that was a question

3:21:00to

3:21:00>> Oh, sorry. Okay. Go ahead.

3:21:03I'm not sure I followed the specific

3:21:05question there, but I um I 100% agree

3:21:08with you that there is not a direct

3:21:11linear correlation between square

3:21:12footage and megawws. It's uh that's why

3:21:15in our in that matrix that was referred

3:21:17to earlier, there's a there's a big

3:21:19range within which um a data center is

3:21:23going to fall in terms of its megawatt

3:21:25usage within a certain square footage uh

3:21:29within a sorry the motion was uh what

3:21:32[snorts] size?

3:21:33>> 50,000

3:21:34>> 50,000. So we're looking at um

3:21:39uh you know 20 25 megawatt facilities

3:21:42most likely that but that again that's a

3:21:45that's a estimate.

3:21:52Anything further, Commissioner Chry?

3:21:55>> That's helpful. Um,

3:22:00I

3:22:01I think that there is a conversation to

3:22:04be had in terms of incentivizing higher

3:22:08square footage if they agree to battery

3:22:12storage. I think that's a way to get a

3:22:15community benefit.

3:22:18And I know that that's something

3:22:19[clears throat] that we've discussed. I

3:22:21don't know if that's something we could

3:22:22hold for the city council level, but

3:22:25that's where my mind goes.

3:22:30Uh, commissioners, I think, um,

3:22:33we would have some discussions with the

3:22:35city attorney's office, but I think it

3:22:38is likely within our authority, the

3:22:42city's authority to

3:22:45cap the square footage, but allow

3:22:47greater square footage if there's a

3:22:50certain degree of battery energy storage

3:22:52associated with the with the use. um how

3:22:57we would say what capacity that that

3:23:01battery energy storage has to have. Um

3:23:04I'm I'm not certain yet, but um I think

3:23:07they're that again that may be within

3:23:10our authority.

3:23:14>> That's it for me.

3:23:15>> Okay.

3:23:18Commissioner Bley,

3:23:20>> sorry. Jason, could you uh just talk to

3:23:23us one more time about how you guys

3:23:25landed on 175

3:23:28175,000 square feet?

3:23:30>> Sure. We uh commissioners took some

3:23:32direction from the city council's action

3:23:35to exempt facilities of a certain size

3:23:39from the interim ordinance moratorum and

3:23:43uh equated that to what would roughly be

3:23:47the white space in a facility of that

3:23:50size. And [snorts] there was also an

3:23:52intent to

3:23:55uh generally prevent

3:23:58uh hypers scale type of facilities of

3:24:01you know more than 100 megawws.

3:24:06>> Thank you.

3:24:09>> All right. Anyone else to Commissioner

3:24:11Garcia's motion?

3:24:16>> Commissioner Baxley,

3:24:17>> can we restate the motion again? Sorry.

3:24:19Commissioner Garcia, can you restate the

3:24:21motion?

3:24:22>> No, no problem. Um, the motion would be

3:24:26to um direct staff to create an

3:24:29amendment capping the square footage at

3:24:3350,000 square ft as opposed to 175,000

3:24:37square ft.

3:24:41>> Everyone clear on that?

3:24:44Commissioner Todd,

3:24:46>> I will just say this is not me saying

3:24:49that I don't support lowering the square

3:24:51footage. I do support lowering the

3:24:53square footage. I think where it is is

3:24:55too high. I think 50,000 is like I

3:25:00haven't spent enough time with that

3:25:01number to understand what that means.

3:25:05Um so I'm struggling with that. Um, I am

3:25:09supportive of moving this through and

3:25:12moving it forward, but I want to just be

3:25:14really tr transparent with that. I've

3:25:16been really consistent with the fact

3:25:19that the way that we have decided square

3:25:22footage has been very arbitrary both in

3:25:25the 350,000 square foot carveout that

3:25:27was in the moratorum that was decided

3:25:30between council members at a number that

3:25:32they could agree to. I think the 175,000

3:25:36is getting more to a reality, but now

3:25:38we're setting another arbitrary number.

3:25:41I'm I'll vote for this today to say that

3:25:44I support lowering it, but I think uh I

3:25:49would work towards getting us into

3:25:52more of a reality place with the square

3:25:56footage. So, that's what I'm going to

3:25:57say about that.

3:26:00>> Commissioner Gordon.

3:26:01>> Yes. I when originally proposing the

3:26:04amendment agree too that it's arbitrary

3:26:06and that's why I'm struggling with it

3:26:07rather rather than performance-based

3:26:09metrics. Um my points have been made

3:26:13purely on scale. If we're talking about

3:26:15eyes on the street, invigorating

3:26:16downtown, maintaining a sense of

3:26:18livability, all the comments that people

3:26:21presented, if you just take it, you say,

3:26:24"Okay, we can allow something around 17

3:26:25floors out of one building to

3:26:27potentially be a data center." I mean,

3:26:29that's what we're saying, right? I mean,

3:26:31that's the math. So, five floors, that

3:26:34opens it up to a boutique environment.

3:26:36If you want to have smaller companies

3:26:37with data centers in there, they could

3:26:39still occupy several floors. Again, that

3:26:41is just white space, too. There's going

3:26:43to be other circulation space. There's

3:26:44going to be bathrooms. There's going to

3:26:45be storage. There's going to be loading

3:26:46docks. There's going to be everything

3:26:47else that supports this. So, 50,000

3:26:50could easily transform into 100,000.

3:26:52175,000 could easily transform into

3:26:54350,000. That's why this arbitrary

3:26:56number is really difficult to wrestle

3:26:58with when we don't have metrics. I know

3:27:00we're not in control of that, but that's

3:27:01where I'm coming from.

3:27:04>> Other commissioners,

3:27:06I guess my thoughts, I mean, this is for

3:27:09it's only going to be allowed as

3:27:11currently proposed for existing

3:27:14buildings, adaptive reuse of them. And

3:27:16if an applicant came to me and said they

3:27:19they needed this in order to be able to

3:27:21put a vacant unit, vacant building to

3:27:24use, I'm going to be receptive to what

3:27:27they need to do that. Um, I agree that

3:27:29the number is is arbitrary, but um I I

3:27:34think with all the other restrictions

3:27:35that we have, I'm okay with having some

3:27:38more flexibility on it. So, I'm going to

3:27:40vote no on the amendment at this time.

3:27:42Any other commissioners? All right.

3:27:45Clerk, please call the role on

3:27:46Commissioner Garcia's amendment.

3:27:49>> Commissioner Baxley.

3:27:50>> Nay.

3:27:52>> Chowry.

3:27:53>> I.

3:27:55Connley.

3:27:55>> I.

3:27:57>> Garcia. I

3:27:59>> Gordon

3:28:00>> I

3:28:02>> Sheepard

3:28:03>> I

3:28:04>> and President Meyer

3:28:05>> no.

3:28:06>> There are five I's and two NAZs.

3:28:08>> That is adopted.

3:28:11Any other amendments or discussion

3:28:12before we go to the main motion?

3:28:16>> Below grade.

3:28:18>> Would you like to do the below grade

3:28:20proposal? Commissioner Beexling. We

3:28:21>> would actually. Yeah. Um, if we could

3:28:24direct staff to draft uh an amendment

3:28:26allowing

3:28:28um subgrade or below grade

3:28:32use uh data center use as part of the

3:28:34proposal.

3:28:36>> Is there enough clarity on that?

3:28:38>> Commissioners, I'm actually not aware of

3:28:40which rule we're thinking will would

3:28:42prevent them in subterranean levels. I I

3:28:45think it's a great idea for them to go

3:28:47into basements and I don't think the the

3:28:49draft prevents it that the the one thing

3:28:53that I did hear uh from President Meyer

3:28:56was that

3:28:57>> perhaps we would allow them in

3:28:59subterranean levels of new construction.

3:29:01That of course would not be

3:29:02>> okay

3:29:03>> uh authorized within the staff

3:29:05recommendation. But um

3:29:07>> well if you think it's uh allowed in the

3:29:09current proposal then I I'll withdraw

3:29:11the proposal.

3:29:13Can we reference the language of the

3:29:16current proposal?

3:29:18>> Does it use the word above?

3:29:22>> I'm not sure what you're asking.

3:29:24>> How is it worded in the current

3:29:25proposal?

3:29:28>> Oh. Um Jason, do you have an answer to

3:29:30that? Because you're you're not seeing

3:29:32anything in there that restricts it.

3:29:34>> I I can't think of anything,

3:29:36commissioners, that restricts the uh

3:29:39below grade levels, the the the first

3:29:41and second floors. Uh we are only

3:29:43allowing kind of conduit and and water

3:29:45pipes to go uh through the first and

3:29:47second floors to get up to the above

3:29:49ground levels. Uh but u there there

3:29:53shouldn't be anything that uh restricts

3:29:57uh below grade

3:29:58>> okay

3:29:58>> facilities.

3:29:59>> Um so you're already going to have an

3:30:01opportunity to rewrite it with

3:30:03Commissioner Conley's

3:30:05amendment. So if you so the staff's

3:30:06intent is that you're not restricting

3:30:08anything below grade. If you find that

3:30:10there is, you can adjust it consistent

3:30:12with Commissioner Connley's amendment.

3:30:15Um, my proposal would be allowed to

3:30:17allow in basement for new construction.

3:30:19I don't know if any other commissioner

3:30:21shared that.

3:30:23Not seeing any, so I won't make that

3:30:24motion.

3:30:26Any other motions or discussion?

3:30:34All right, then we're back to the main

3:30:36motion.

3:30:38Are people ready for a vote on it? As

3:30:41amended by Commissioner Garcia and

3:30:42Connley's amendments.

3:30:46>> All right. Clerk, please call the role

3:30:48on the main motion.

3:30:49>> Commissioner Baxley.

3:30:51>> Yay.

3:30:53>> Chry.

3:30:55>> I.

3:30:57>> Connley.

3:30:57>> I.

3:30:59>> Garcia.

3:31:00>> I

3:31:01>> Gordon.

3:31:01>> I

3:31:03>> Shepard.

3:31:04>> Hi.

3:31:05>> And President Meyer.

3:31:06>> I. There are seven eyes.

3:31:09>> All right, that concludes our business.

3:31:11Um,

3:31:12>> just make sure we're clear about what

3:31:14happens now.

3:31:15>> Yes, please.

3:31:16>> Since zoning code text amendments aren't

3:31:18something that's in front of you as

3:31:19frequently as other types of uh actions,

3:31:22the the staff recommendation moves

3:31:24forward to the uh business, housing, and

3:31:26zoning committee of the city council.

3:31:27That's what is before them. your

3:31:30recommendations will be drafted up by

3:31:31staff and will be attached to that uh to

3:31:35the city council's packet and summarized

3:31:38uh in the presentation to the business

3:31:40housing and zoning committee. So they

3:31:41will have they will have both of those

3:31:43things in front of them and they will

3:31:45they will choose from that menu of

3:31:47options.

3:31:48>> All right.

3:31:51>> Right. So thank you for everyone. That

3:31:53concludes our business for the day. Uh

3:31:56we do have committee of the whole on

3:31:57Thursday and then our next regular

3:31:59meeting um will be on October 26th. Are

3:32:03there any other updates from staff or

3:32:05commissioners?

3:32:09>> Uh chair mayor just the uh resoning um

3:32:1344th of Chowan was appealed and so

3:32:15that'll go to the biz committee at their

3:32:16next uh regular event meeting.

3:32:19>> Okay. It was it was a resoning so the

3:32:22legislative portion would have moved

3:32:23forward uh regardless but uh the site

3:32:26plan review was appealed.

3:32:27>> Okay.

3:32:29>> Anyone else?

3:32:32>> All right. We are a journ with time to

3:32:34spare.

3:32:35>> Okay.