2026-10-19 - City Council Special Meeting

16:44Well. Good evening everyone. We

16:46will call our October 19th

16:48special meeting to order. We

16:49thank you for your patience

16:50this morning. Uh, at this time,

16:52as we do with every meeting, we

16:54will start with the invocation.

16:55We'll ask the council member,

16:57uh, and Minister D.J. Hare, if

16:58he would give us our invocation

17:00immediately following that, if

17:01we could, uh, repeat the Pledge

17:03of Allegiance in unison.

17:04Council member Hare. Thank you,

17:07mayor. Thank you.

17:15Dear Lord Jesus. Thank you.

17:18Thank you, Heavenly Father, for

17:21just taking us all through the

17:23night. And no harm or danger.

17:27We thank you, father, and we

17:28applaud you for just letting us

17:30inhale and exhale on our arms.

17:34We thank you for that. Lord, we

17:36thank you for our men and women

17:38that not only work for the city

17:41of Fayetteville, but our men

17:42and women and our first

17:44responders, our soldiers all

17:47over the globe. Father, we ask

17:48you to protect them and take

17:50care of their families wherever

17:52they may reside. This

17:55afternoon, father, on October

18:00the 19th, as we move forward

18:02with this special meeting, we

18:05ask you, father, that our minds

18:08would be open to understand and

18:11to achieve as many goals as we

18:15can for the residents of

18:17Fayetteville. Lord is so much

18:20that I could thank you for.

18:21You've been so good to me. And

18:24we just ask you to allow us to

18:26have a positive move meeting

18:29moving forward and these things

18:31that we ask out loud and these

18:34things that we ask in our

18:35hearts, we ask them in the name

18:37of Jesus, Amen.

18:39Amen. Pledge allegiance to the

18:42flag of the United States of

18:44America and to the Republic for

18:47which it stands. One nation

18:49under God, indivisible, with

18:51liberty and justice for all.

18:56Thank you. Councilmember here.

18:57So, Council, with that, we

18:59will, uh, look for a motion to

19:01approve the agenda. All right.

19:06A motion by Council Member

19:07Green, seconded by Davis. I

19:11think we are using the share

19:12system, y'all. All right, uh,

19:14council look to you for your

19:15votes to approve the agenda.

19:21All right. Motion carries

19:23unanimous. Thank you, Madam

19:25Clerk. All right. Um, so,

19:28Council and to the listening

19:30audience, uh, we're here today

19:32with the special meeting. We

19:34have, uh, over the last several

19:36months. I think, actually, uh,

19:39staff begin conversation back

19:41in September, October of of

19:43last year, uh, discussing, uh,

19:46or preparing, uh, something in

19:49our current, uh, ordinance

19:51classification to address, um,

19:54data centers. Uh, there was a

19:55public hearing held in the

19:57Planning Commission. Um, then

19:59it was presented to council in,

20:00in February, March time frame

20:02or maybe April. Um, Council

20:04then at that time, um, chose to

20:08not take any action. Um, and to

20:11use that as a, uh, period to,

20:14to learn as much as possible

20:16over 120 days initially. Then

20:18it was another, um, motion that

20:20was presented and passed for 60

20:23days, uh, to stay and to

20:25continue to do that. And so

20:26over the last 8 or 9 months

20:28since this made it to our, uh,

20:30or 7 to 8 months since has made

20:32it to the council. Um, we have

20:34had our planning and we've had

20:36Doctor Menzel and Mister Bray

20:37boy, uh, working on this. And

20:40so today, uh, they will present

20:43their findings. We also have,

20:45uh, our attorney here and

20:46outside counsel to talk to us

20:49about, uh, some new updates and

20:51changes that have been

20:53instructed to municipalities by

20:54the state. So the school of

20:55government. So they will share,

20:57uh, what cities and local

20:59governments are able to do as

21:00well. And so with that, I'll

21:01turn it over to Doctor Menzel

21:04or Mister Braidwood.

21:17Good morning. Mayor, Council

21:19members. I'm Doctor Andrew

21:21Mansell, senior assistant to

21:22the city manager. Mr. Andy

21:24Bray. Boy here, uh, senior

21:25corporate analyst. And today we

21:27are going to go over the text

21:30amendment where the process

21:31stands. The presentation will

21:33be in four parts. Basically,

21:34we'll cover how we got here.

21:36We'll cover what the community

21:37told during the listening

21:38sessions, what we learned from

21:39that, we'll go over again what

21:41the experts have told us and

21:42directly compare that to what

21:43to 2601 currently says. And

21:46then we'll end with where does

21:48that leave us in this whole

21:49process? Here's a timeline that

21:55shows the path of how we got to

21:57where we are today. Back in

21:59February was when this text was

22:00first presented to council

22:02counsel, then held a work

22:03session in March and then in

22:04April. Rather than taking a

22:05vote, Council adopted 120 day

22:09stay in order to study this

22:10whole process. And that's

22:11exactly what council did. They

22:13began taking chores and their

22:14first trip was in June. We

22:16started right across the street

22:17here at eight and data center.

22:19That's been in operation since

22:201995. We went up to Raleigh. We

22:23visited MCMC, which runs the

22:25state's research and education

22:26network, and we ended at Tier

22:28Point, which is an eight

22:29megawatt facility. The next

22:31month, we went up to Loudoun

22:32County and we saw a lot of mega

22:34hyperscale data centers,

22:36multiple campuses. We went on a

22:37bunch of tours, uh, several

22:39council members went in the

22:40neighborhood and was able to

22:41talk with the community,

22:43discussing with them impacts of

22:44having a data center directly

22:46across their house and got to

22:47got to hear firsthand what they

22:49had to say. We also met with

22:50Mr. Michael Turner in Leesburg,

22:52and he told us all the things

22:53that he learned about data

22:55centers and how many that they

22:56had there. Um, just for scale

22:58there. And we ended we ended

23:01the tour with a private tour,

23:03um, of a hyperscale data

23:05center. After that, we brought

23:07a bunch of experts down to

23:09speak directly to council. A

23:11lot of them were able to review

23:12the 2601 that we had and come

23:15down and give their

23:17recommendations based on what

23:18we currently had. We heard from

23:20Mr. Ben Rusnak from NC state,

23:22uh, along with Mr. Briggs. Mr.

23:24Zuko came and presented PwC and

23:26the Department of Environmental

23:27Quality. Then in August 10th,

23:30uh Council voted to fold in all

23:33those recommendations based on

23:35what we heard into the 2601. So

23:38that's what this is. Uh, since

23:40then, we held multiple

23:41listening sessions. And at the

23:43end of September and we

23:45gathered a lot of cards, both

23:46online and in person, and we'll

23:48go over what we learned in the

23:49community sessions next. So we

23:52held three sessions, and on

23:55September 30th we started at

23:56College Lakes. We went to

23:57Massey Hill and we ended at

23:59Cliff Dale. The reason we did

24:00that all across the city was

24:01able to capture as many

24:03residents as possible, rather

24:04than doing it in one place all

24:05day. Uh, each of those meetings

24:08was structured the same, where

24:09we had the six categories here

24:11on the right hand side of the

24:12screen noise, power, water

24:14emissions, setbacks, and

24:15appearance. At each station, we

24:17had the proposed text, along

24:19with information that we heard

24:20from best practices, and there

24:22was a comment box there that

24:23residents were able to fill out

24:25any questions they had, any

24:27concerns, and we told them all

24:29that information. We'll get

24:30back to council. We collected

24:31all those cards and the numbers

24:34are here on the side. We also

24:36were able to do sort of a

24:38priority dot voting structure,

24:40where each person was given two

24:41dots and they could vote for

24:42any category that they liked.

24:45Um, that most impacted them. We

24:47understand that all categories

24:49matter, but this was just a way

24:50for staff to gauge sort of what

24:52comes first in the in the minds

24:53of residents. So you'll see

24:55here, uh, the voting structure

24:57water got the most votes along

24:58with a tie for noise. And, um,

25:02power. One of the biggest

25:07questions that we got from

25:08residents while we were out

25:09there is so what happens with

25:10these cards? And our answer was

25:12they will all go back to

25:14council. Council will read and

25:15they'll be able to see

25:16everything you wrote down.

25:17That's exactly what staff did.

25:18We scanned everything in and we

25:20typed them up to make sure that

25:21all handwriting wouldn't get

25:23missed out, so every word would

25:25be legible. And we gave those

25:27back to council in full.

25:28Transcript, along with sort of

25:30an analysis that we did

25:31separately from all that

25:32information we gathered. And

25:33we'll go over that on the next

25:34slide. But different subjects

25:36that everything fell into,

25:37along with the most frequently

25:39asked questions and the most

25:41frequently stated word as well.

25:43And uh, previous next couple of

25:45slides, we'll cover that. But

25:47you see at the bottom here, I

25:48have on the bottom left is the

25:51most frequently asked

25:52questions. Moratorium or pause

25:54was the biggest one. A close

25:55second was set back 1000ft or

25:57more. Um, and then studying or

26:01surveying before adoptions

26:02third, followed by the best

26:04practices, vegetation and noise.

26:10The final analysis here shows

26:12kind of a word cloud. And the

26:14way that we did this was each

26:16time a word is stated is the

26:18number of points it got. So if

26:19a sentence had the word water

26:20in it three times, got three

26:22points. So the larger it is,

26:24the bigger it was in frequency.

26:26The colors don't mean anything.

26:27It's just so you're able to see

26:28the words better. So we we

26:31coded all of the cards per

26:33subjects. And that's what's on

26:34the right here that you'll see

26:36in order of um, the most

26:38prevalent subject, the top one

26:40setbacks, the noise water

26:42moratorium, health and so on.

26:46So that's what we heard from

26:48the residents. Um, we also want

26:51to recap all of the experts

26:53that we've heard from, from

26:54beginning until now, in sort of

26:56one slide. Just a reminder, in

26:58no particular order, we did

27:00speak with Mike Turner, vice

27:02chair of Loudoun County. And

27:03they've run you know, he wrote

27:04the 15 best practices. Clarence

27:06Briggs reviewed our text

27:08amendment, came here and talked

27:10with counsel. John Zovko also

27:11reviewed our text amendment. He

27:13didn't get to meet. He didn't

27:14get to present at the expert

27:16session, but he was able to

27:17meet public forum and present

27:19his findings. Ben Rusnak also

27:21reviewed our text amendment,

27:23came here and gave advice. PWP

27:25came and talked about capacity.

27:26David Payne came from the

27:28Department of Environmental

27:29Quality, came and talked about

27:30air permitting, and we also

27:32spoke directly with people who

27:33worked at MCMC, Tier point and

27:36the hyperscale data centers up

27:38in Virginia. From all of that

27:40information that we learned

27:41from the resident comment

27:43cards, from the expert

27:44speakers, we lined it up

27:46directly to where it relates to

27:48our current draft amendment,

27:50and you'll see it side by side

27:52in category by category that

27:54Mr. Bradbury will cover next.

27:59Good morning. Council mayor,

28:00mayor pro tem. As Doctor Menzel

28:03mentioned, a lot of our work.

28:05Uh, we have it broken out per

28:07category. Noise, power, water,

28:09uh, emissions set back in

28:12appearance. So as I go through

28:13this section of the

28:14presentation, you'll see each

28:16one of those categories are

28:17listed here at the top. Um, and

28:19then it also part of this next

28:21section, as Doctor Menzel

28:23mentioned, we will look at what

28:25the experts said for that

28:26category and then what our, um,

28:29August 3rd draft ordinance says

28:31in that regard. So the current

28:34draft from August 3rd, it sets

28:36a measurable sound standard for

28:38DBA, um, and a 60 day test. Uh,

28:41the experts have asked for a

28:43DBA and a DBC, which is that

28:45low frequency home, um, that

28:48many people mentioned to be

28:49measured and a baseline to be

28:51taken before construction

28:53begins. So in this first

28:57category here, for this first

28:59column, uh, Mike turn of

29:00course, was the, uh, the expert

29:02from Loudoun County who we

29:04spent and spent time with,

29:06spoke with him and, uh, took a

29:08lot of his work back with us as

29:09we gauged our, um, research for

29:13council. So he mentions in his

29:15practice one and two, uh, a pre

29:17and post construction noise

29:18study, which measures both DBA

29:21and DBC, um, and a limit of 50

29:24DBA at the property line. Mr.

29:26Briggs in turn called the the

29:28drafts model a build test and

29:32fix sequence. Um, as he quotes,

29:35this is exactly the kind of

29:37measurement loop the city would

29:39like to have in their

29:40ordinance. And then Mr. Zucker

29:42asked for a low frequency,

29:44which is that DBC measurement

29:47and a stronger night time

29:48limits at the residential

29:49property line. Now for the

29:51August 3rd draft. The draft

29:53ties data centers to our

29:54chapter 17 commercial limits,

29:56which is 65 DBA from 6 a.m. to

30:0110 p.m. and 60dB from 10 p.m.

30:04to 6 a.m. it also requires an

30:06acoustical compliance

30:07memorandum with the site plan

30:09and a boundary sound test.

30:11Within the 60 days of

30:12continuous operation, and then,

30:14of course, routine generator

30:16testing is limited to Monday

30:18through Friday from 9 to 5

30:22p.m.. Next category for power.

30:26The draft requires a utility

30:28impact statement or uses, uh,

30:31PDQ or other utility

30:33coordination, and then also

30:36with energy centers if it

30:39permits a special use permit.

30:41The experts asked for written

30:43maximum load and an operating

30:45standard for energy centers for

30:48Mr. Turner's recommendations on

30:51power, the maximum power

30:53requested should be in writing,

30:55so stations should be on site

30:57or adjacent and no closer than

30:59two times the right of way to

31:00power lines. Storage should be

31:02ten hours or more, and you

31:05should emphasize microgrid

31:06design. Mr. Briggs has quoted

31:10saying that we should, in

31:13essence, coordinate with the

31:14utility. This is paramount, but

31:16this is not the same as the

31:18project will create

31:20unacceptable impacts to the

31:22residents. And what this means

31:24is you can require it, but

31:27impact is measured post

31:29construction. And this is

31:32because at hyperscale, a energy

31:35center can become a private

31:37power plant that needs its own

31:38operating standards. For Mr.

31:40Briggs, Mrs. Oka has mentioned

31:43that the existing families and

31:44small businesses should not

31:46have to subsidize

31:47infrastructure serving a new

31:49large load customer. Now for

31:51our August 3rd draft, the

31:54Utility Impact statement covers

31:56projected peak demand, the

31:57number and rating of backup

31:59generators. This is at tier

32:01four or tier two type

32:03generators, on site fuel

32:05storage and any energy storage.

32:09With the confirmation of PDQ or

32:11other utility coordination, the

32:14site plans must document that

32:16coordination. A data center

32:18with Energy Center is a special

32:20use permit in every district

32:22based on the base district. For

32:28water, again, the Utility

32:30Impact statement, which is

32:32proposed brings the water

32:34figures, the cooling method and

32:36places or other utilities

32:38coordination and with the site

32:41plan, the experts have asked

32:44for annual use in writing and

32:47existing capacity confirmed for

32:50the existing utility customers.

32:52How does it affect that utility

32:54customers capacity? For expert

32:58Mr. Turner practices seven and

33:00ten, the annual water use

33:03should be in writing, air open

33:05loop or closed loop. Cooling

33:07should be noted. Potable and

33:10reclaimed water or reclaimed

33:11water should be noted. And

33:13whether the treatment plant can

33:15process a process. The

33:16wastewater. In turn, Mr. Briggs

33:20warns that the annual averages

33:22can actually hide peak summer

33:25stress. And this is this is

33:27important when taking this into

33:29consideration. Mr. Zucker

33:31mentions that TWC should

33:32certify that adequate capacity

33:34exist without jeopardizing

33:36existing customers, and the

33:38ordinance should not prescribe

33:39a cooling technology or set a

33:42water use cap because it moves

33:44into lines with strictly

33:45regulating technology. The

33:49August 3rd draft requires that

33:50water consumption and

33:52wastewater flows by process.

33:56Portable cooling and fire

33:57reserve, plus the cooling

33:59method and public or other

34:01utility coordination all in the

34:03same submittal. The next

34:06category, emissions. The

34:09experts actually rate this the

34:11current August 3rd draft as

34:12addressing emissions very well,

34:14Mr. Turner adds that a

34:15generator equipment standard

34:18should be implemented and then

34:21for also for Mr. Turner, a part

34:23of practice seven. He mentions

34:25that the tier four generators

34:27of course that is the the the

34:29top tier generator that could

34:30be used should be implemented

34:32or a tier two with a selective

34:35catalytic reduction. Mr. Briggs

34:38mentions that the draft

34:39currently separates emergency

34:41generators from energy centers,

34:43and this is important because

34:45one runs in an outage and the

34:48other runs by design or by

34:49operation. Continuous use.

34:51Mrs.. Mr. Zucca mentions that

34:52the draft addresses um

34:54emissions fairly well, while

34:56also remaining technology

34:58neutral. The August 3rd draft

35:02defines emergency backup

35:03generators for outages and

35:06emergency testing only. Those

35:07are defined with federal and

35:09state agencies regulating air

35:11compliance as they currently

35:12do. And important to note, the

35:14worst case sound testing must

35:17also include a schedule

35:18generator test all at the same

35:19time. For setback dogs, third

35:26draft sets, distances for

35:28equipment, and Mr. Turner

35:30recommends 500 to 1000ft

35:32setback for the facility. Mr.

35:35Zucker calls the draft

35:36reasonable and notes that the

35:37blanket setbacks can actually

35:39act as a prohibition, i.e.

35:41while the School of Government

35:42calls down zoning. Mr. Turner's

35:45practice 11 mentions 500ft if

35:49near residential but 1000ft is

35:51ideal. Mr. Briggs mentions that

35:54a hyperscale campus should not

35:56be viewed like a modest server

35:58room facility, because these

36:00operate very differently. Mr..

36:02Mr. Zucca mentions that the

36:03draft takes a reasonable

36:05approach, and that large

36:06blanket setbacks can function

36:08actually as a prohibition or

36:10down zoning. He also mentions

36:13that the draft should allow

36:14setback reductions when an

36:16acoustical engineer can

36:18demonstrate equivalent

36:19protections from the nearest

36:21residential area. For our

36:24August 3rd, draft. Generators

36:26and mechanical yards should be

36:27placed at least 150ft from the

36:30residential lot line and 200ft

36:31from the energy center.

36:33Equipment should be within

36:35200ft of the lot line and must

36:38be enclosed. Any lot line

36:40within 500ft automatically

36:42triggers the acoustic. The

36:44acoustical memorandum and also

36:46the type D perimeter buffer is

36:48also required. As part of this

36:51building. Setbacks follow the

36:52city Ordinance Base District,

36:54which is listed within chapter

36:5630. For our final category

37:00appearance. The draft go. The

37:02draft governs where equipment

37:04sits and how it is screened.

37:06Currently, the draft does not

37:08include a standard for the

37:10building phase, which is your

37:12fenestration. Mr. Turner's

37:16practice 13 and 14 calls for

37:19natural screening berms and

37:20fenestration on all principal

37:22facades. He also mentions that

37:24the height and floor area

37:25ratio, or FA, should also be

37:27limited. Mr. Briggs mentions

37:29that the amendments are

37:30strongest on land use and

37:32compatibility, but less on

37:34appearance, and he also

37:36mentions that 60 to 100 foot

37:39concrete walls can mitigate

37:41some of the setbacks. Berms and

37:43greenery, and also for windows,

37:45which is that fenestration that

37:47we've seen in Loudoun County.

37:48When we did our trip. That

37:50would be an example. 30% of the

37:53building must have X amount of

37:55windows per se. Dogs, third

37:58draft places, ground mounted

38:00equipment to the side or rear

38:02of the principal building and

38:03screened slated uh, to the side

38:06or rear of the principal

38:08building and must be screened.

38:10Slated chain link fence does

38:13not qualify. Lighting also must

38:16be fully cut off, with the

38:18city's current Fort Bragg light

38:20spill protections, and the

38:22operator must maintain a 24

38:24hour compliant contact for best

38:26practices. There is no data

38:29center specific height or floor

38:31to area ratio to reference, or

38:33a facade standard. This is more

38:35of an area specific measurement.

38:45So all that information is

38:46consistent with what we

38:48presented to the community at

38:49the Community Engagement

38:50listening sessions. What we

38:51heard from the experts compared

38:53to what we currently had in the

38:54draft. So where does that leave

38:56us? Uh, council has been

38:57studying this for eight months

38:58now and has not done a vote yet

39:01at all. Looked at facilities,

39:03went on visits, starting from

39:04downtown all the way up to

39:06Loudoun County, Virginia, where

39:07we saw megawatt campuses.

39:09Council listened both to the

39:10experts, to PwC and DEQ, and to

39:13the resident comment cards have

39:14all reached your table. So we

39:16put together what we've heard

39:18compared to the draft category

39:19by category, which you just

39:21heard, and our read is that the

39:23draft is a solid foundation,

39:25but a number of points raised

39:27by the experts and by the

39:29community can be carried into

39:31it. So the next step would be

39:32to consult with an attorney who

39:34specialized in this work, who

39:35can advise you and us on on

39:38where they can be properly

39:39placed, you know, hear from him

39:40next.

39:59I was hoping you were, um.

40:02Water setting that up. I'll go

40:04to you. Madam attorney, you

40:04want to introduce, uh, the

40:06attorney that will be speaking

40:07to us?

40:08Thank you, Mayor Colvin. Good

40:10morning everyone. This is, um,

40:11attorney Nick Tosco with

40:14Pointer Spruill. He's going to

40:16give us a little more

40:16background on his experience

40:18working with data center

40:19ordinances and other

40:21municipalities in North

40:22Carolina.

40:23Right.

40:25Welcome. Attorney.

40:27Thank you, Mayor Colvin and

40:28members of the council. Uh, my

40:30name is Nick Tosco, and I'm a

40:32partner at Pointer Spruill. And

40:35it's good to be with you this

40:36morning to talk about data

40:38center regulations and the

40:39legal aspects of that. Um, I

40:42want to give you just a very

40:43brief introduction about

40:44myself. So I've been practicing

40:47in land use, zoning, local

40:48government law for over 13

40:50years. I'm the town attorney

40:52for three towns in North

40:53Carolina, so I and, um, almost

40:57all of which two of the three

40:59have adopted data center

41:01regulations. Um, so I've gone

41:04through this aspect that you're

41:06going through. And so I know

41:07kind of a little bit about

41:09what, um, this process has

41:11entailed. Um, and I also was

41:14chair of the zoning planning

41:15land use section of the North

41:17Carolina Bar. So, um, we were

41:20very much in the thick of what

41:21you're going to hear a lot

41:22about, which is what's called

41:24down zoning. And, um, when when

41:26we were tasked with trying to

41:30work with the General Assembly

41:32to the extent possible on how

41:35this legislation would impact

41:37local jurisdictions, including

41:39cities and counties. Um, so

41:40that's a little bit about

41:42myself. Um, and, um, happy to

41:44be here to present with you on,

41:47um, what you're considering and

41:50perhaps some legal limitations

41:52that you should consider when

41:54adopting this text amendment to

41:57related to data centers. So,

42:00um, I always like to just give

42:01a quick, uh, executive summary

42:04of it, um, so that you all know

42:06what's coming, which is, um, as

42:08you heard, the text amendment

42:10that's proposed for data

42:11centers really involves five

42:13ordinances. Um, a new

42:15definition section, um, adding

42:18allowable districts and youth

42:21standards is the third parking

42:23and loading requirements of the

42:24fourth and application of an

42:26airport overlay regulations.

42:29Um, the main thing that you all

42:32need to be aware of and

42:33understanding is down zoning

42:35legislation. And I'll go into

42:37that in more detail, as well as

42:39a little bit of case law. Not a

42:40lot. Um, this is going to be a

42:42law school lecture. Um, so the

42:44the main things to take away

42:46from the legal considerations

42:49as it relates to data centers,

42:50four things. One is you got to

42:53avoid decreasing development

42:54density. You have to avoid

42:57reducing the permitted of uses

42:59that were allowed before your

43:01tax amendment. So that that

43:03I'll get into that a little bit

43:04more. Uh, it's a little bit

43:06confusing, but the third is you

43:09can't create any nonconformity

43:11without getting the property

43:12owners permission. And for is

43:15more of a technical aspect,

43:16which is, um, related to how

43:18you deal with unlisted uses,

43:20which your data centers are an

43:22unlisted use. Um, and so I'll

43:25go over those in more detail.

43:27But, um, I have made several

43:30recommendations working with

43:32the great staff here. Um, on

43:34the, the data center, and I'll

43:36have some slides to explain

43:38what those revisions are to

43:40ensure that you're fully

43:41complying with, um, down zoning

43:44and case law. So, um, as was

43:47mentioned, I'm not going to go

43:49into detail that you all got a

43:50good summary of what has been

43:53proposed with the five

43:54ordinances that are making up

43:56to 2601, um, uh, you know, to,

44:01for the interest of time, I'll,

44:03I'll let you, um, see this

44:05there, but, um, I'll be

44:07referring to ordinance one,

44:09two, three and four and five,

44:10um, as separately, because I

44:12have some suggestions as it

44:13relates to each of those, which

44:14you all can do with what you

44:16will. Um, but those are I've

44:19already kind of summarized what

44:20each of the five ordinances do.

44:23Um, I did want to, um,

44:26specifically focus in on

44:28ordinance two and three. Um,

44:31again, this may be duplicative.

44:32You may have all already be

44:34well aware of what is in

44:36ordinances two and three, but

44:38essentially is made up of

44:40ordinance two is changing how

44:42where they are allowed, where

44:44data centers are allowed, and

44:45what districts, um and

44:47ordinance three relates to the

44:50specific standards for data

44:52centers. And that's involves

44:54equipment separation, buffer

44:56and screening, noise generator

44:58testing, acoustical review and

45:01utility coordination, and

45:03contacts and things of that

45:04nature. Um, and so what you can

45:07see in this table is that, um,

45:09the way staff has drafted this,

45:12you know, after all this

45:13community engagement is to

45:16separate a data center from a

45:18data center with an energy

45:19center. Um, and so you can kind

45:21of just see there what the

45:22difference is. There's a lot of

45:24it's the same for a lot, but

45:26there's a few differences. So

45:32first, before we talk about

45:33what the legal limitations are,

45:35it may be helpful to know what

45:37the legal authority is. So as

45:39you all know, chapter 160 D of

45:41the North Carolina General

45:43Statutes authorizes local

45:45governments, including

45:46municipalities such as

45:47Fayetteville, to enact zoning

45:49ordinances. And and that's what

45:51this is. That's what data

45:52center regulation is. It's it's

45:54a it's a zoning ordinance. And

45:56so there's inherent authority

45:58in the statutes for you to

46:00adopt data center regulations.

46:02And I've listed them here. I'm

46:04not going to go through all of

46:05them. But um, the the statute

46:07allows you to regulate the size,

46:10the street yards, the location

46:12and use of land. Um, it allows

46:14you to, you know, do things

46:16like utility impact statements

46:18and, and district permissions,

46:20um, lighting and noise

46:22standards. These are inherent

46:24authority that you have, um,

46:26through chapter 160, you also

46:29have a specific statute that

46:31allows you to enact airport

46:33zoning regulations. So the of

46:38the five ordinances that you

46:40saw, you you have inherent

46:42zoning authority for most, um,

46:45of of those regulations, um,

46:48you can define data centers,

46:50you can add them as permitted

46:51use. Again, as long as and I'll

46:53get into this, as long as you

46:54are not decreasing the number

46:57of permitted uses, you've got

46:59an authority for screening and

47:00lighting and noise and testing

47:02hours and acoustical submission

47:04requirements. Um, and, and and

47:06things of that nature that you

47:08have the authority to do that

47:10um, under state statute. A

47:13couple of important legal

47:15limitations. Like I mentioned,

47:16there is a case law, the

47:18Franklin County case that has

47:22essentially said in the School

47:23of Government, UNC School of

47:25Government has advised on this

47:26that you can't just have a

47:28reject or a rejection or a

47:31blanket ban on unlisted uses.

47:35Um, so you can spell out a

47:37process which you have in your

47:38youdo for what you do when you

47:41have an unlisted use, but you

47:43can't just say no, you know, if

47:45it's not listed, it's

47:47prohibited. Um, and so I have a

47:49weak suggestion for that. Um,

47:52and then for down zoning, um,

47:55you know, I'm not going to go

47:58into, um, the, the history, the

48:00legislative history of that,

48:01but essentially it was put into

48:03a to a 2024 budget bill. It

48:06was, um, kind of tucked away at

48:09the end of a very long

48:10legislation. And what it, what

48:12it requires is, um, is three

48:15main things. And I've got the,

48:17the down zoning statute right

48:19here for you to look at. Um,

48:21essentially, you can't adopt a

48:23text amendment to your youdo

48:26without the written consent of

48:28all property owners, which, of

48:29course, would be impossible in

48:30a city of this size. Um, if it

48:33does, one of the three things

48:36one, decreased development

48:38density to reduce the permitted

48:41uses of land that were

48:42specified in the Udo um, to

48:44fewer than we're allowed under

48:46before it was adopted, and

48:49three, by creating any type of

48:51nonconformity. So those are the

48:53three like down zoning

48:55parameters that you all should

48:56be aware of. And, um, it's

48:59important to note that there

49:01are no cases on this. So there

49:03is there's no appellate case

49:04law that says what does

49:05decreasing development density

49:07mean? There's no case law to

49:09say what is reducing permitted

49:11uses. Is it a numbers game? Is

49:12it, you know, just you got ten

49:15uses in this district. You've

49:16got to have ten uses after the

49:18text amendment. These are

49:20things that are unknowns. And

49:22so, um, this is uh something

49:26that all the jurisdictions that

49:28are are adopting data center

49:31regulations that didn't have it

49:33already are dealing with. Um,

49:38so, um, I have, um, set forth

49:42some adjusted adjustments or

49:45revisions to the five

49:47ordinances that I think would

49:49be helpful. Um, in terms of

49:52ensuring legal compliance.

49:54Number one is like as stated in

49:57the Byrd case, to just strike

49:59that one sentence in the Udo

50:01related to uses that are

50:03unlisted, um, being prohibited.

50:05Um, number two is to ensure

50:08that you're allowing

50:09development density instead of

50:11decreasing it by, um, doing one

50:14of two things. You can either,

50:17uh, incorporate data centers

50:20into an existing use that you

50:23already got in your Udo. So you

50:25are not, um, setting new

50:28regulations that could be

50:30determined to decrease

50:31development density, or you

50:33could just remove the the

50:35setbacks and the buffer

50:36requirements and the things in

50:38there that would be considered

50:42decreasing development density.

50:45Um, the second thing is that,

50:47you know, in terms of reducing

50:49permitted uses, uh, again, if

50:52you incorporate data centers

50:55into an existing use, you're

50:57not decreasing the permitted

50:59uses of land. So in other

51:00words, wherever that existing

51:02use is allowed, you are simply

51:05saying that's where data

51:06centers would be allowed. So

51:07you are not decreasing or

51:09increasing the permitted uses.

51:11Um, and so that's another way

51:15you can do it. You could also,

51:17um, decide to change it to

51:19conditional rezoning or special

51:21use permits within those

51:23districts. Um, but um, you

51:27know, in terms of ensuring down

51:30zoning compliance, I think the

51:32best bet is to ensure that you

51:34are incorporating data centers

51:37into an existing use. And the

51:39final thing is to just avoid

51:41creating nonconformity. And

51:43that's a pretty straightforward

51:44way of doing that, which is to

51:45just say this applies to any

51:48data centers going forward. And

51:50so you're not creating any

51:52nonconforming because you're

51:53not trying to apply it to any

51:54existing data centers. And

51:56there's legal language that we

51:59can include in the text

52:00amendment to do that. Um, so

52:04these are, these are this is

52:06what the adjustments or the

52:07revisions would look like to

52:09it. And um, you know, if you

52:11have questions about these, you

52:13know, happy to to answer those.

52:15Like I said, this is what the

52:17current ordinance says as it

52:19relates to unlisted uses. Um,

52:21the process involves the city

52:23manager determining whether an

52:24unlisted use is part of it. Uh,

52:27you know, a certain existing

52:28use or not. Um, and seeing what

52:30is, quote, substantially

52:32similar. That's the process

52:34that is currently done. And so

52:36all this change would do is you

52:37see the red strikethrough is,

52:39would just strike the part that

52:40says uses that are not

52:42substantially similar to an

52:43existing use are prohibited.

52:45And that's to comply with the

52:47case law. Um, and then as it

52:51relates to um, the suggestion

52:54in working with staff, what we

52:56did is we looked at, okay, all

52:58of the uses in the, um, in the

53:00Udo. What which one do data

53:03centers most closely resemble?

53:05And if you look at it, the

53:07warehouse, uh, storage use

53:11definition aligns the most

53:13with, uh, data centers. And so,

53:16uh, what the suggestion there

53:19is, what's an underlying, which

53:20is just essentially including

53:22data centers. As an example of

53:25a warehouse storage use. I

53:27mean, that's what they're

53:28doing. They're storing large

53:30data equipment. Um, and so, um,

53:33they, they have some of the

53:34same, a lot of the same impacts

53:36as some types of warehouse

53:38storage and other things. So,

53:41um, that's.

53:43Uh, can can we keep it down,

53:45please? Um, we're trying to

53:47trying to hit a presentation.

53:48All right. Attorney.

53:49Okay. Uh, so that's the the

53:53first suggested revision, and

53:55then you can see here what by

53:58doing that, by incorporating

54:00data centers into the warehouse

54:02storage units, you would be

54:03prohibiting it in every single

54:05zoning district aside from the

54:08I and H. I, you know, the light

54:10industrial, heavy industrial.

54:12Um, and then, you know, a

54:14master plan in the PDC

54:17district. Uh, so that again,

54:20would seem to align well with

54:22where you want to be able to

54:23allow data centers versus not

54:26allow, um, if you did that, if

54:30you incorporated it in like,

54:31like I suggest, then you would

54:33have these buffers, um, and

54:36what you could see is, um, if

54:38you go all the way down to the

54:39bottom, HHI is probably where a

54:41lot of these would go or lie.

54:43Um, you would be getting the

54:45maximum buffers, you'd be

54:47getting class D or I'm sorry,

54:49type D buffers. Um, for the

54:52most part in, in in everywhere.

54:55Um, if you're adjoining those

54:58districts, um, and I know I'm

55:02moving quickly, but I'm trying

55:03to get through to be able to

55:05answer questions and, and then,

55:06um, let you all discuss

55:08yourself, but, um, so there are

55:12for every use, there are or not

55:15every use, but a lot of the

55:16uses there are specific

55:19standards for that use. And as

55:21you can see here, there are

55:23specific standards for the

55:25warehouse, um, storage use. One

55:27is it has to be at least 500ft

55:29from any residential district,

55:31school or childcare center. Um,

55:32it needs to be the the storage

55:35areas, which that's mostly

55:37everything in a data center,

55:39um, is going to need to, um,

55:42ensure that they're not located

55:44within any of the setbacks or

55:46the perimeter buffers like the

55:47type D buffers that I was just

55:49going through. Um, and then

55:52requirements about where the

55:53outdoor storage areas are

55:55located as it relates to the

55:56principal structure, and then

55:58ensuring that the site has, um,

56:01adequate vehicle circulation,

56:04turning, movement, stacking,

56:05etc., and then, um, ensuring

56:07that there's direct access onto

56:09an arterial or major collector

56:11street. Um, so again, that

56:14seems to make sense. You don't

56:15want these tucked away back in,

56:18you know, minor roads and

56:21arterial streets. Um, and then

56:24finally, the the last

56:26recommendation is what I was

56:27mentioning to ensure that we

56:28don't have a nonconformity

56:30situation. Um, this is kind of

56:33boilerplate standard language

56:34to include in the text

56:35amendment, um, to ensure that,

56:40um, a court or anybody looking

56:42at this will understand that it

56:44is not intended, intended to,

56:47um, constitute a down zoning.

56:50And so to the extent that

56:51something could be considered a

56:53down zoning, you would be

56:54saying it doesn't apply to that

56:56property. Um, and that, um, it

56:59also has a savings clause in

57:00there at the end of the, the

57:02middle section there that says

57:04that if down zoning legislation

57:07is changed and the legislature

57:10or the General Assembly, um,

57:12you know, doesn't make this a

57:13requirement anymore, that you

57:15could then, uh, enforce this to

57:18the maximum possible meaning

57:19you could change it. Um, and

57:22and then finally, and perhaps

57:25most importantly, the language

57:27at the very bottom, which is

57:29that this will only apply to

57:30new development, and it doesn't

57:32try to go backwards and apply

57:34retroactively. So the key

57:37takeaway is we start with the

57:38summary. But, um, you have a

57:40lot of inherent authority,

57:42zoning authority, most of the

57:44regulations that are proposed

57:45at the five ordinances, there

57:47is authority for it. Um, there

57:49are some important case law and

57:51down zoning legislation, legal

57:54limitations to be aware of. Um,

57:56and so that's why I'm

57:58suggesting or recommending

58:00making some adjustments or

58:02revisions to ensure that you're

58:03complying with those. And to

58:05continue to monitor the legal

58:07and, uh, legislative landscape

58:09and best practice and amend in

58:12the future should you decide

58:13it. So that's my presentation.

58:17Happy to, um, further discuss

58:20with you or let you all

58:21discuss.

58:22All right. Thank you. Attorney

58:23um, did have a couple questions

58:25for you before you go. Okay.

58:27Um, you mentioned it a couple

58:28of times. The down zoning. Um,

58:31so I know you briefly kind of

58:33told us what that was, just to

58:35make sure that we're clear on

58:37it. Basically, you're saying in

58:392024, the legislator, uh,

58:41legislature put into law, uh,

58:44some specific triggers that

58:47that would be considered down

58:49zoning, that that limit local

58:50government's ability, like so,

58:52for instance, in this, you

58:55showed um, one is I think what

58:57the way I understood it is, you

58:58said that, uh, it needed to fit

59:01into a classification that that

59:04existed already, or it's

59:05closely aligned to something

59:06like that. So in other words,

59:08you can't create its own class,

59:12uh, of restrictions. And then

59:15the, the setbacks in, in the

59:17event that a council or a

59:19commission, I know the county

59:20is working on, uh, doing this

59:23as well, um, wanted to increase

59:25the setbacks. You're saying you

59:27believe that triggers, uh, then

59:30the the down zoning triggered

59:31it, that the legislature said

59:33in place. Did I hear that?

59:34Right?

59:34Um, well, it, um, like, all

59:37good legal answers, it depends

59:39a little bit. So, um, yes, the

59:42the idea in incorporating data

59:45centers into an existing use

59:47and using the setbacks and the,

59:50the buffer that's in those

59:51already, is that by doing that

59:54you are not quote you know, I

59:56have the slide up here. You are

59:58not decreasing the development

59:59density. There's a, I guess, an

1:00:01argument to be made that when

1:00:03you put setbacks In and you and

1:00:06they're new and you put buffers

1:00:08in that are new. You're

1:00:10decreasing the amount of

1:00:11development density that's

1:00:13allowed. And so this is a way

1:00:16to ensure that you are not

1:00:17decreasing the development

1:00:18density because nothing is

1:00:20changing. The only thing you're

1:00:21doing is assigning an unlisted

1:00:23use to an existing use. Does

1:00:25that answer the question?

1:00:26Okay. Yeah. So basically you

1:00:28wouldn't be able to take it in

1:00:30and increase it if it didn't

1:00:32already exist.

1:00:33In my words, yes.

1:00:34In your opinion. And then the

1:00:35last thing I had, you said

1:00:37something about because

1:00:39something is not listed that

1:00:42that is, that is not a basis

1:00:44for being able to deny it. Can

1:00:46you touch that a little bit? So

1:00:47in other words, if if you know,

1:00:50um, data centers or, you know,

1:00:53space centers, whatever doesn't

1:00:55exist, you can't deny it based

1:00:56on the fact it's not in there.

1:00:57It's what you're saying.

1:00:58Correct? Yeah. If you if you

1:00:59look at this slide here, um, I

1:01:02it deals with what do you do as

1:01:06a city when you have an

1:01:07unlimited use. Um, meaning a

1:01:10use that is not defined and you

1:01:12can't, you know, find out.

1:01:14Okay. Well, what use is this?

1:01:15And the way you do that is the

1:01:17city manager determines what

1:01:20is, quote, substantially

1:01:21similar. And so there's a

1:01:23there's a process. And that

1:01:25provision there. Section 30.4

1:01:30point B1D tells you what you

1:01:33kind of do to determine whether

1:01:35a use is substantially similar

1:01:37or not. Um, and so that's the

1:01:39process you go through. And

1:01:40that's all staying the same.

1:01:42Nothing's changing there. What

1:01:44what I'm recommending, based on

1:01:45the case law, is to remove that

1:01:47last sentence which says that,

1:01:49okay, if you can't find

1:01:51anything that's substantially

1:01:53similar, it's prohibited. Um,

1:01:56because because courts in North

1:01:58Carolina, they favor the free

1:02:00use of land and property owner

1:02:02rights. And so to just say,

1:02:05well, we can't find something

1:02:06that's substantially similar.

1:02:07So therefore we're prohibiting

1:02:08it is been said by courts to

1:02:10not be allowed. So this is a

1:02:12recommendation. All right.

1:02:14All right. Uh, Councilmember

1:02:15here.

1:02:16Thank you, mayor. And thank you

1:02:19all for coming forward with, um,

1:02:24your presentation. Um, I've got

1:02:29you know, I've got a number of

1:02:30questions I'm asking for

1:02:33leniency here. Um, let's stick

1:02:37with the thousand feet setback.

1:02:41And I know that you had the

1:02:43different zones that you

1:02:44thought this would set in, and

1:02:46and data centers, probably more

1:02:49so in the, um, storage room.

1:02:53Large storage facilities, type

1:02:56zoning. And did I understand

1:02:59correctly, sir, that you're

1:03:02saying that the 1000 foot

1:03:06setback. Well, let me let me

1:03:09propose that again. I like the

1:03:121000 foot setback. Especially

1:03:19from from residential area.

1:03:24Explain to me what was just

1:03:27presented about the thousand

1:03:30foot setback. And then you you

1:03:33had that, uh, five you had here

1:03:37that you had the 500 distance

1:03:41from schools. Uh, in one part

1:03:44of the ordinance. Are we

1:03:47changing something if we want,

1:03:50or is that triggering something

1:03:51if we want the thousand period.

1:03:55Um.

1:03:56The 1000 foot period.

1:03:59Okay. So I, I, I'm I'll try to

1:04:02answer that as best as I can.

1:04:03Um, the by taking data centers

1:04:07and incorporate them into the

1:04:09warehouse storage existing use

1:04:10you're using all the same

1:04:13setbacks, buffers, etc. that

1:04:16that is allowed because what

1:04:17what happens is when somebody

1:04:19goes to determine whether or

1:04:21not they want to put a data

1:04:22center somewhere, they have to

1:04:23go look at what is the setback

1:04:26for the warehouse storage use.

1:04:27What is the buffer, etc.. And I

1:04:29showed you some of the buffer

1:04:30there. Um, you will also in

1:04:33addition to that, you also have

1:04:34to make sure and I don't know

1:04:36if you can see my slide that's

1:04:37pulled up or you can't.

1:04:38Well, not while you're talking.

1:04:40Oh, okay. Um, well.

1:04:42There's a there's a slide on

1:04:44page 11 that explains what

1:04:47additional standards apply to a

1:04:51warehouse storage. Um, and

1:04:52that's the 500ft from a

1:04:55residential school or childcare

1:04:56center. And so what what I'm

1:04:59recommending is that you go

1:05:01with that because that's what's

1:05:02existing already. You're not

1:05:05putting in a new setback that

1:05:07could constitute possibly a

1:05:11down zoning.

1:05:12Which you were saying that the

1:05:13thousand feet could if you

1:05:15changed it.

1:05:16Yeah.

1:05:17Yeah, yeah, I mean, I, I

1:05:18understood that. I was just

1:05:19wondering if that could be, um.

1:05:28Okay. You stated, uh, our staff

1:05:31stated that, um, it can be put

1:05:36in writing and you all tell me

1:05:40if you did it. Not a doctor

1:05:41zone. I'm in my zone that they

1:05:45put in writing. If about the

1:05:49use of water, the amount, use

1:05:52of water, the amount, use of

1:05:56electricity or proposed. Come

1:05:59up, come up. Doc. Um, that is

1:06:02something that could be a part

1:06:06of it. That's in this proposal.

1:06:12Yes, sir. That ties.

1:06:13And then that and.

1:06:14That there would not be an

1:06:16impact on the residential

1:06:19surroundings, the business

1:06:21surroundings, you know, just

1:06:22period.

1:06:23The utility impact statement

1:06:24requires the data center to

1:06:26coordinate with park or

1:06:27whomever the utility is to

1:06:30ensure capability and capacity

1:06:32and all of that's in writing in

1:06:34in the utility impact statement.

1:06:37For both, for both water and

1:06:39power. So they're both so both

1:06:42be the same.

1:06:43And that's what is in these

1:06:46proposals. If they are are

1:06:48accepted.

1:06:49Yes sir.

1:06:50This right. And what we're

1:06:52talking.

1:06:52About.

1:06:52Until the impact statement.

1:06:53Yes, sir.

1:06:53Okay.

1:06:55Explain to me once more. And I

1:06:59wish we had this where we could

1:07:00have had it ourselves.

1:07:02Explained to me once more about

1:07:06what is done between 8 and 5.

1:07:10That time frame that.

1:07:12You gave us.

1:07:12You're talking about the noise?

1:07:13Yes, sir. It's just different

1:07:16levels of noise limitations. So

1:07:18currently it references

1:07:20whatever's the commercial use

1:07:21in chapter 17. So daytime hours

1:07:24would be, you know, business

1:07:26hours 65dB is the limit. And

1:07:29then at nighttime it switches

1:07:30to 60.

1:07:31Okay. Then what I didn't hear

1:07:35on that was and that was a

1:07:38conversation that came from our

1:07:41speakers at one time. And even

1:07:43among ourselves. I didn't hear

1:07:47anything about how the water

1:07:50would be returned back. Um, to

1:07:55our basins. I didn't hear

1:07:56anything about how it'd be

1:07:58filtered. Uh, what what it

1:08:01would go through to try to put

1:08:03it back cleaner than it. Once

1:08:08it goes through the system. Did

1:08:09I over overlook hearing that

1:08:11today?

1:08:12So the utility impact statement

1:08:15includes, uh, peak water

1:08:17usages, cooling methods, um. I

1:08:22have it in writing. There's

1:08:23more water, waste, waste water

1:08:26flows by process. And the

1:08:27cooling method, um, it doesn't

1:08:30cover how it returns to the

1:08:31basin. And the utility impact

1:08:33statement. Now, that is an

1:08:34agreement that the data center

1:08:36would have to, you know,

1:08:38discuss with the utility. And

1:08:40the utility could potentially,

1:08:43you know, have that writing

1:08:44with them. But that's not.

1:08:45From I.

1:08:46Thought that was one of the I

1:08:48thought that was one of the

1:08:51concerns or one of the issues

1:08:53that we had discussed on, uh,

1:08:55any water. And I know they said

1:08:56it wouldn't be much that would

1:08:57be going back, but I thought it

1:08:59was something that we had

1:09:00discussed about the how that

1:09:03water would return back to the

1:09:05basin. Um, during that cycle

1:09:07period of time when they are

1:09:08filtering and cleaning. Uh,

1:09:10thank you, mayor.

1:09:12All right. Councilman Davis.

1:09:14Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh, this

1:09:15is my question is for the

1:09:16attorney. So I get everything

1:09:18about the, um, storage and all

1:09:20that. The warehouse storage

1:09:22and, um, make sure the data

1:09:24centers are reflective of that.

1:09:26But this down zoning amendment

1:09:29says, uh, where is it that it

1:09:32says it cannot be an active or

1:09:33enforce without written consent

1:09:35of all property owners. So,

1:09:37council this council do have

1:09:38the right to maybe put

1:09:40conditional zoning and the

1:09:42owners could agree to it.

1:09:43Correct. For the thousand feet.

1:09:45Uh, yes. Okay.

1:09:46Yeah.

1:09:47All right.

1:09:47Thank you.

1:09:48Yeah. And, uh, I should add to

1:09:50that, um, if you see, um, the

1:09:54use table where it has in the.

1:09:57I'm sorry, I'm blinking on the

1:09:58name of the district, but

1:10:00there's one that has a master

1:10:02plan that would need to be

1:10:03submitted. That and that would

1:10:05be that back and forth, like a

1:10:06conditional zoning that the

1:10:07property owner would work with

1:10:09and they would consent to it.

1:10:11So yes.

1:10:11We want.

1:10:11To make sure that the council

1:10:12does have jurisdiction to put

1:10:15conditions on the zoning

1:10:18because like I said, it says

1:10:19that if it would written

1:10:20consent, that it could be okay

1:10:22just to make sure.

1:10:23Right? Yeah.

1:10:24Thank you.

1:10:25Clarify something attorney,

1:10:26because you said you said

1:10:28something earlier that said

1:10:30with a city this size now. So

1:10:33to his point, is that specific

1:10:36only to uh, the people in the,

1:10:38in the noticed area or, or if

1:10:41you, if you make a change to a

1:10:43clarification, are you saying

1:10:45every business in that city in

1:10:47that classification has to sign

1:10:48off, which is the two.

1:10:50Yeah. So I believe what your

1:10:52question was, is could a data

1:10:54center have a conditional

1:10:55rezoning and voluntarily

1:10:57consent to having 1000 foot

1:11:00setback? That is, yes, they can

1:11:02do that. Could could you put a

1:11:041000 foot setback on the whole

1:11:08city? You know, that is what I,

1:11:11we don't know.

1:11:12Okay. All right.

1:11:14All right. Uh, Councilman

1:11:15Hondros.

1:11:16Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, Mr.

1:11:19attorney, thank you for your

1:11:20presentation. Can you, um, tell

1:11:23us for my edification and for

1:11:24those listening, what state law

1:11:27or laws prohibit an outright

1:11:29ban on a specific type of use

1:11:30is in the Constitution, general

1:11:32statute, case law.

1:11:33Case law. And that was the, um,

1:11:35case that I referenced there,

1:11:37the Byrd v Franklin County

1:11:38case.

1:11:39Because there's a couple

1:11:40counties, I think that, uh, I

1:11:42think Clay and or Buncombe

1:11:44County that have outright bans

1:11:47on data centers. Can you speak

1:11:48to that?

1:11:49Graham Murphy?

1:11:51Um, I cannot speak on that. I'm

1:11:54I'm I have to see kind of what

1:11:56that is. I, I don't, um, I

1:11:59mean, this is all kind of

1:12:00uncharted territory. There's

1:12:02again, there's no case law on

1:12:03whether you can just outright

1:12:06ban it. But I would think based

1:12:08off that, uh, case law and the

1:12:10uncW School of Government

1:12:11guidance on banning unlisted

1:12:13uses, that that would be

1:12:15subject to legal challenge.

1:12:17So then the verdict is still

1:12:19out. If it was challenged

1:12:20legally, if that would

1:12:22withstand.

1:12:23Correct.

1:12:23The trial. Um, next question is

1:12:25on moratoria. We've heard a lot

1:12:26of, um, um, folks that that,

1:12:31um, really wanted a moratorium.

1:12:33Can you speak to the guardrails

1:12:34or the guidelines? Um, that

1:12:37state law puts on, um, how

1:12:40counties and municipalities,

1:12:42um, can enact a moratoria and

1:12:44what they can be used for.

1:12:45Sure. I mean, I, um, that's a

1:12:50that's a different thing than

1:12:51what we're looking at today.

1:12:52But there is a statute that

1:12:54provides a process for enacting

1:12:57a development moratorium. Um,

1:12:59and there's certain notice

1:13:02requirements. There's I mean, I

1:13:03don't I have I don't have the

1:13:04statute in front of me or have

1:13:06it memorized, but, um, there is

1:13:08a process for doing that. And

1:13:10that's what a lot of

1:13:11jurisdictions have done.

1:13:12And then, um, we mentioned

1:13:14conditional zoning, uh, earlier.

1:13:18Does North Carolina law allow

1:13:20for counties, municipalities to

1:13:22require, uh, conditional zoning

1:13:24for specific type of uses?

1:13:29Okay. So the answer to your

1:13:31question is yes. But if you're

1:13:33talking about it as it relates

1:13:35to a use that is unlisted, like

1:13:39data centers or not currently

1:13:41defined, that is an open

1:13:44question. Um, because same

1:13:48thing for um, for a special use

1:13:52permit that would be required.

1:13:55It's unknown whether or not

1:13:57requiring a data center to get

1:13:59a special use permit is

1:14:01considered changing the amount

1:14:03of permitted uses. UNC School

1:14:05of Government has argued or not

1:14:07argued. They have said that

1:14:08there is at least an argument

1:14:11to be made that that is,

1:14:13reducing the number of

1:14:14permitted uses because it was.

1:14:16There's an argument to be made,

1:14:18it was permitted, and then now

1:14:21you're requiring a special use

1:14:22permit, a special use permit.

1:14:23And so therefore you're it's

1:14:25not, um, the same as it was

1:14:28before. And so, um, now

1:14:31conditional rezoning to answer

1:14:33your specific question again,

1:14:35that goes back to Councilmember

1:14:37Davis's question, which is you

1:14:39can always get the property

1:14:40owner consent for that

1:14:42specific, um, setback or that

1:14:44specific conditional rezoning.

1:14:46And, and, and go about it that

1:14:48way.

1:14:48So on a specific, um, project,

1:14:52if it requires rezoning, if

1:14:54that applicant chose to do the

1:14:55conditional zoning is what

1:14:56you're saying, but you can't

1:14:57just make it a blanket

1:14:58requirement. Incorrect. In your

1:15:00opinion. Okay. Thank you..

1:15:03All right. Council member

1:15:05McMillan.

1:15:05Yeah.

1:15:06Thank you, Mr..

1:15:06Mayor.

1:15:07Uh, first question before.

1:15:09I do have some questions for

1:15:10you, and I appreciate your

1:15:11time. I have a question first

1:15:12for City clerk. If you could

1:15:15let us know. Um, when the

1:15:19agenda packet, uh, containing

1:15:21these briefs, this information

1:15:24will be provided to the public

1:15:25and to the council. And I would

1:15:28love to understand why we

1:15:31didn't have the advanced

1:15:33materials, uh, both in text and

1:15:36in PowerPoint form prior to

1:15:39this meeting. I would like to

1:15:45know who made that call as well.

1:15:55Who probably made the call is

1:15:56not here today. Who could

1:15:58answer that best? But I don't

1:16:00know. Uh, Jody, I'll probably,

1:16:02I guess.

1:16:03I'm sorry. The city clerk was

1:16:06out of the office last week,

1:16:07and I just got here this

1:16:08morning, so I was just. I don't

1:16:12have this presentation that the

1:16:14attorney's presenting. Um, the

1:16:16other presentation was just

1:16:17uploaded about an hour before

1:16:19the meeting, so I did not have

1:16:21it.

1:16:21Miss Jody.

1:16:23We can certainly make sure that

1:16:25it's available to the public

1:16:26and to everyone.

1:16:27But I think to to that point

1:16:29that y'all want to talk about

1:16:31that. Did you get some

1:16:32information from, uh, School of

1:16:34Government somewhere today or

1:16:37recently or something? You were

1:16:38saying?

1:16:38Yeah.

1:16:39Yes, sir. The school

1:16:40government, um, posted their

1:16:43findings a couple of weeks ago,

1:16:44and this presentation has

1:16:46changed. Um, kind of and been

1:16:50shaped by those findings over

1:16:51the, over the past couple of

1:16:53weeks to what's the final

1:16:54product being presented to you

1:16:56all today? Um, and that's what

1:16:59you all.

1:16:59Saw. Okay.

1:17:01All right, all right.

1:17:02Councilmember.

1:17:03Yeah. So obviously, uh,

1:17:07disappointed with that. Uh,

1:17:09there's a lapse in process

1:17:10there. Uh, we've we've talked

1:17:11in the past about, uh,

1:17:14transparency. This is very

1:17:17obviously a subject or a topic

1:17:20that's of high interest to the

1:17:21public. If you don't think so,

1:17:23look at the fact that a room

1:17:24was filled at 11 a.m. on a

1:17:27Monday. If I could see by show

1:17:29of hands how many people that

1:17:30showed up today knew about this

1:17:31a week ago.

1:17:32Yeah, yeah.

1:17:34How many of you have just found

1:17:35out within the last 4 or 5 days?

1:17:40You okay?

1:17:42So there's a couple of lapses

1:17:44in transparency, and I think

1:17:46that's something the council

1:17:47and the staff could address.

1:17:49One, the materials were not

1:17:50provided. So if y'all could

1:17:52imagine this, a lot of

1:17:52information to receive the

1:17:54morning of and make a decision

1:17:56on uh, two, you were not

1:17:58properly, uh, noticed and

1:18:00advised, and you all should

1:18:02have these materials and be

1:18:03able to make decisions for

1:18:04yourself and be able to respond

1:18:06to your representatives so that

1:18:08we can make the right decisions

1:18:09for the public, and wanted to

1:18:10make sure that that was clear

1:18:11before I asked the rest of the

1:18:13questions that I have. Um, for

1:18:15the lawyer. We miss them. If he

1:18:17could come back up. Yeah. We

1:18:20didn't get a proper

1:18:21introduction. Can you tell us

1:18:23what towns you represent? And

1:18:25I'm very interested to know of

1:18:27the towns that you represent.

1:18:28Have any of them had a

1:18:29moratorium process or have any

1:18:32data center projects currently

1:18:33in the works?

1:18:35Um, I can tell you where I'm

1:18:36the town attorney. I cannot

1:18:38tell you who my clients are.

1:18:39Uh, that's, um, that,

1:18:42unfortunately, is confidential

1:18:43information that I'd have to

1:18:44get their permission before I

1:18:46say who I've worked with. What

1:18:48else? That's a that's a rules

1:18:49of professional conduct. But I

1:18:50am the town attorney for the

1:18:52town of Highlands. I'm the town

1:18:53attorney for the town of

1:18:54Rancho. And I'm the town

1:18:55attorney for the town of Ellon.

1:18:57Okay.

1:18:57Thank you for letting us know

1:18:58that that much. Uh, I have

1:19:01questions. I have one of my

1:19:02colleagues already asked a

1:19:03question about, um, what? You

1:19:06knew, uh, in terms of, uh, what

1:19:08the process was for protective

1:19:11ordinance. And I think this is

1:19:13something the staff has to work

1:19:14through in the city as well.

1:19:15But in both, uh, Clay County in

1:19:18North Carolina and in Murphy,

1:19:19North Carolina, there are

1:19:20protective ordinances that are

1:19:22in place that do, uh, allow us

1:19:25to have a greater latitude as a

1:19:26city to put in protections.

1:19:28We're very interested in that.

1:19:30But what the what the citizenry

1:19:33has already asked for was a

1:19:34moratorium. I want to also

1:19:36correct, uh, Doctor Manziel,

1:19:38that timeline. Uh, it did talk

1:19:40about how we got here in terms

1:19:42of looking at the, amendments.

1:19:44What it omitted was the dates

1:19:46of April 13th and April 27th.

1:19:48April 13th was the first time

1:19:50that this council got from our

1:19:51city attorney and her able

1:19:53staff. The directions for what

1:19:55fits into a moratorium. And

1:19:57then April 27th, uh, for for

1:20:00anybody that's that's new to

1:20:01the room is the date this this

1:20:04council made a decision not to

1:20:06move forwards, towards a

1:20:07moratorium, but instead put 120

1:20:09day pause on a moratorium

1:20:11itself. So I want to I want to

1:20:13ask to you, Mr. Attorney, if

1:20:15you could let us know what your

1:20:17experience is, not only with,

1:20:18uh, putting in place a

1:20:20moratorium, uh, your legal

1:20:22experience moratorium, but also

1:20:24protective ordinance, like, was

1:20:26mentioned by my colleague.

1:20:27Also, things like a citizen

1:20:28task force, uh, and other ways

1:20:31that allow the public to have

1:20:32input on the process.

1:20:34I'm sure. Yeah, I have, um,

1:20:37assisted municipalities with

1:20:39adopting a development

1:20:41moratorium and going through

1:20:43that process, as I mentioned,

1:20:45is laid out in statute. Um, and

1:20:47I have, um, assisted, um,

1:20:50creating committees to look at

1:20:53this committees of city

1:20:54councils, committee, public

1:20:55facing city, um, uh, public

1:20:59facing task force or

1:21:00committees, um, to address

1:21:02this. And so that that is

1:21:04definitely something that is

1:21:05able to be done.

1:21:06Okay.

1:21:06I appreciate that. I have

1:21:08something that's very much in

1:21:09line with that, and I

1:21:09appreciate the time that I've

1:21:11been given to say this. Uh,

1:21:12there is by right language and

1:21:14this morning's presentation and

1:21:17one of the earliest signals we

1:21:18got from the public is that

1:21:20this should not be a process

1:21:22that includes, by right, or

1:21:23privileges or action. Uh, one

1:21:25of my colleagues already

1:21:26brought up conditional zoning.

1:21:28And how, if anything, uh, an

1:21:31issue like this that is of high

1:21:32public interest should have

1:21:34conditional zoning application

1:21:37rules applied. What did you, if

1:21:39you could, to let us know what

1:21:40the differences are or what we

1:21:42would give up by having

1:21:43conditional zoning versus BI,

1:21:45right. Which is unfortunately

1:21:47still being mentioned, uh, in

1:21:48this process, despite the

1:21:49public saying that they're not

1:21:50going to stand for that.

1:21:54Um, so I think if if I'm

1:21:57understanding the question

1:21:58correctly, you're wanting to

1:21:59know. So, um, are you able to

1:22:02see the slide if I pull up a

1:22:03slide because I think it would

1:22:04be helpful.

1:22:05Fortunately.

1:22:05You know, if it was my in my

1:22:07email, like normal or, you

1:22:08know, up on I would. But right

1:22:09now our screens aren't even

1:22:11working.

1:22:11Oh, okay. Um, well, if if you

1:22:14remember the slide as it

1:22:15relates to the use table, um,

1:22:17it would the difference is that

1:22:21right now you don't have the

1:22:24the use table says if you're in

1:22:27a district and you're using

1:22:28that use. So in this case a

1:22:30warehouse storage use if you're

1:22:31in that district it's either

1:22:33it's a P for permitted which is

1:22:35by right what you're referring

1:22:36to an S for special use, or an

1:22:39MP, which is a planned

1:22:41development master plan. And

1:22:43then that slash is what is

1:22:46prohibited. And so if you were

1:22:49to incorporate data centers

1:22:50into the warehouse storage use,

1:22:52you would be using that table

1:22:57area of what is allowed and not

1:22:59allowed and how it's allowed.

1:23:01And so as I mentioned that it

1:23:05slashes everywhere a backslash

1:23:07for everything. Uh, unless

1:23:09you're in an industrial

1:23:10district. And that's because

1:23:12that's where you all have

1:23:15determined warehouse storage

1:23:17uses should be allowed. It's in

1:23:18the light industrial and the

1:23:21high industrial, um, districts

1:23:22in the, in the BP district, the

1:23:24business park. And so, um,

1:23:28there you all could, if you

1:23:31wanted to change that P to a C

1:23:35or D C's to make it a

1:23:37conditional zoning. But you

1:23:38would need to rewrite, you

1:23:41know, your because you, you

1:23:42don't currently have that as an

1:23:44option right now in your Udo.

1:23:46And so to no fault of your own

1:23:49that's something we're slow on.

1:23:50You know, as a city, we've been

1:23:52we've gotten the message loud

1:23:53and clear. And thank you to

1:23:54everybody that showed up today.

1:23:56The in terms of our write that

1:23:58language should not be in

1:24:00anything we're looking at at

1:24:01this point. After all, we've

1:24:02heard from the public and all

1:24:03the concern we've had

1:24:04conditional zoning, uh, as my

1:24:06colleague, uh, Councilmember

1:24:08Davis said, is where we should

1:24:10head. And I'll pass it back to

1:24:12you, Mr. Mayor, those are the

1:24:13questions for now.

1:24:14All right. Thank you,

1:24:15Councilman Hondros.

1:24:16Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, I

1:24:18agree with my colleague. Uh,

1:24:20and I've said it many times

1:24:21before for different topics.

1:24:23Any presentation we're being

1:24:24presented should be in our in

1:24:26our cecum. But, um, if Doctor

1:24:28Menzel could come up for a

1:24:29moment if you could put the

1:24:30first. I think it was the very

1:24:32first slide of your

1:24:33presentation, um, which had the

1:24:35timeline, because I've been

1:24:37looking through our, our

1:24:40timeline. Um, I think the first

1:24:43date was February, but February

1:24:4626th is when the Planning

1:24:47Commission got this

1:24:48presentation, not city council.

1:24:50It's not on any of our February

1:24:52agendas. It didn't come to

1:24:56council until the April work

1:24:58session.

1:25:02Um.

1:25:10Yes, sir. My apologies. It was

1:25:12first presented in February and

1:25:14that was to that.

1:25:15To to the Planning Commission?

1:25:16Yes, sir. Correct. Then it went

1:25:18to the work session and then.

1:25:19So then normally when the

1:25:22Planning Commission hears, uh,

1:25:24proposed revisions, they have

1:25:25their public hearing or the

1:25:26zoning Commission has a public

1:25:28hearing on a rezoning case. It

1:25:31comes to council the very next

1:25:34meeting, uh, the very next

1:25:35month at our second regularly

1:25:38scheduled meeting of the month,

1:25:39which is the fourth Monday. So

1:25:40if that was presented to the

1:25:41Planning Commission in

1:25:43February, should have come to

1:25:45us the fourth Monday, the

1:25:46second regularly scheduled

1:25:47meeting of March. So why didn't

1:25:50that happen?

1:25:51I don't have an answer, sir.

1:25:53And then, um, council had to

1:25:56take action to receive the

1:25:58presentation. Um, so it was put

1:26:01on the, uh, April work session.

1:26:04We took action that day to

1:26:05receive the, um, presentation,

1:26:08and it came to us not as a

1:26:10public hearing, but instead

1:26:12just just as a informative

1:26:14presentation. So that's kind of

1:26:16the timeline of how we got to

1:26:18where we are today. And I

1:26:19think, um, the discussion could

1:26:21have gone differently if the

1:26:22motion that was made in April

1:26:25wasn't an in lieu of motion,

1:26:27um, that was made. So thank

1:26:29you, sir.

1:26:30And Councilman Hondros, uh,

1:26:31before I go to Mayor Pro tem,

1:26:33you know, the the agenda is

1:26:35prepared by the manager,

1:26:36correct. Who's not here? So a

1:26:38lot of those questions we have

1:26:39asked and and but don't want to

1:26:42redirect, redirect your

1:26:45questions to them. You know, it

1:26:47starts with his preparation of

1:26:48it. So that's something that we

1:26:50can we can address. All right.

1:26:52Mayor Pro tem.

1:26:53Uh, thank you, mayor. Uh, and

1:26:54thank you for clearing that up,

1:26:55because I was going to add the

1:26:56doctor. Manzella. I don't even

1:26:57know if he was here during that

1:26:58time. I don't think he's been

1:26:59with us for less than a year or

1:27:01so, but I wanted to ask some

1:27:02questions in reference to how

1:27:03we got here. And, uh, we talked

1:27:07about adding it to an existing

1:27:10ordinance in the stories you

1:27:11mentioned, Lee and I, what was

1:27:13the other zoning that was

1:27:14mentioned? Because I'm not

1:27:15familiar with that.

1:27:21The business park. business

1:27:23park, BP.

1:27:24BP, and you talked about site

1:27:27plans. Where do site plans go

1:27:28first when you want to have

1:27:29somebody that want to come

1:27:30here, did that go to TRC?

1:27:32So. Yes.

1:27:36And when TRC reviews it, as my

1:27:39colleague was talking about

1:27:40energy and water before they

1:27:42approve it or disapprove it,

1:27:43did that come to council?

1:27:45I've been to as far as I know.

1:27:48I'm waiting for Doctor

1:27:49Manzella, Doctor Newton.

1:28:00And Doctor Newton and I'm

1:28:02Doctor Newton. And I'll ask you

1:28:04to ask a question. I'm sorry. I

1:28:06did not hear it. I was looking

1:28:07to see about coming up.

1:28:09A lot of people have the

1:28:10impression that we council is

1:28:14familiar with people with

1:28:15projects that come to the city,

1:28:17but most of them are just in

1:28:19the planning phase. And it goes

1:28:20to TRC. When does council get

1:28:22aware of it?

1:28:25If the answer to that is if you

1:28:28have an item that requires a

1:28:30council action. So there are

1:28:32projects that you never

1:28:34directly see or take action on.

1:28:36For example, a subdivision that

1:28:38meets all the standards

1:28:39doesn't, but it will still go

1:28:40through a technical review. Uh,

1:28:42we have the list, a very large

1:28:45list of people who are notified

1:28:46of all technical review

1:28:48committee actions.

1:28:50So if our ordinance is if they

1:28:53don't want to come for a

1:28:56reconditioned, I'm sorry, a

1:28:58conditional rezoning or an Sup,

1:29:00we would never see it correct.

1:29:05If if it's an item that's also

1:29:08coming, being considered for

1:29:10annexation.

1:29:10Annexation.

1:29:11Right.

1:29:12Um, since we are talking about

1:29:15unclassified uses, if it was to

1:29:18come as an Sup, we would never

1:29:20be able to disapprove it

1:29:21because we can't disapprove

1:29:22something. A special use

1:29:24permit. I'm sorry. We would

1:29:26never be able to disapprove it,

1:29:28because this is something that

1:29:28we have never done before.

1:29:30Correct.

1:29:33When we put the standard of

1:29:35special use permit, they have

1:29:37standards that are very

1:29:38specific, that are in our

1:29:40ordinance, that have to be met

1:29:43if they meet those, then it

1:29:46needs to be approved.

1:29:48Gotcha. State standards. Well,

1:29:51let me rephrase it. Uh, I'm

1:29:55sorry, Mr. Tazewell, can you

1:29:56come back up real quick? You

1:29:58put out you reviewed our UDL,

1:30:02and you made some required

1:30:03recommendations. Those

1:30:05recommendations are to keep us

1:30:09from being litigated against in

1:30:12the future. I would presume.

1:30:13Yes. The goal is to ensure that

1:30:16you somebody doesn't legally

1:30:18challenge your UDL.

1:30:19And have you given those

1:30:20recommendations to our staff

1:30:22for us to delete and to approve

1:30:25what you have? You have, yes.

1:30:27So that would be our motion

1:30:29tonight. I would presume.

1:30:31Yes.

1:30:32Thank you sir. Thank you, Mr.

1:30:34Mayor.

1:30:34All right.

1:30:35Uh, Councilmember Jones, uh,

1:30:38since he hasn't spoken. And

1:30:39then I'll go to the second

1:30:40rounds of McMillan.

1:30:41And thank.

1:30:41You, Mr. Mayor. Just have

1:30:43several questions. Um, one key

1:30:45word that keeps popping in my

1:30:47mind is unbalanced. Um, just

1:30:51unbalanced perspectives. Um, I

1:30:54appreciate everything that's

1:30:56been going on. I know we've

1:30:56been working extremely hard on

1:30:58this. Uh, and when I say

1:30:59imbalanced, it's it's just that

1:31:01if you can imagine a scale and

1:31:03you, you're presented with

1:31:05information and it's really

1:31:07tilted. It's really, really

1:31:09tilted. And, uh, I tried my I

1:31:11tried my best to be very, very

1:31:12objective and, uh, in

1:31:14everything, uh, but it's just

1:31:16challenging when it comes to

1:31:18this because it really seems

1:31:20unbalanced. Uh, it just really

1:31:22seems unbalanced. We've heard

1:31:24from, uh, several attorneys

1:31:25today. We were hearing from

1:31:26one, uh, I believe that was

1:31:28mentioned that could, you know,

1:31:30could we hear from an attorney

1:31:33that has also dealt with some

1:31:36of the possible challenges of

1:31:38data centers? And that was

1:31:39pretty much shot down, uh, as

1:31:42well. So I want I want to leave

1:31:44with my two questions with

1:31:46this, uh, one for my district.

1:31:48A lot of the individuals that I

1:31:49have spoke with, uh, when they

1:31:51speak of supporting, uh, a

1:31:54moratorium, from my

1:31:56perspective, it's not a ban at

1:31:58all. So I know that may have

1:31:59been some of the cases for, for

1:32:01some of us up here, but that

1:32:03that was not my case. They're

1:32:04like, you're moving too fast. I

1:32:06don't know much about it. The

1:32:07information is is just is

1:32:09coming forth. Uh, but man, it's

1:32:11just a lot of missing pieces

1:32:13and again, unbalanced there. So

1:32:15when I hear it from my end,

1:32:17it's not a we want a total ban.

1:32:19It's can we get this right the

1:32:21first time. So I want to make

1:32:22that clear for the ones I've

1:32:24been, uh, listening to uh, as

1:32:26well. So I, I need to ask a

1:32:28question. Factual questions

1:32:30have come up. This has come up

1:32:31within the, uh, within my my

1:32:33district. So I need I need to

1:32:35ask a question. When you say,

1:32:37uh, residents, whoever it is,

1:32:39can I ask questions? You will

1:32:40answer factual questions.

1:32:44Please give me a quick example

1:32:45of what is a factual question.

1:32:47What would you deem a non

1:32:48factual question? And what

1:32:50basis is that? Uh, considered?

1:32:53Because that was one of the

1:32:55caveats as far as when we had

1:32:56this, uh, when the public, uh,

1:32:59meeting went out September,

1:33:02whenever it was the two, the

1:33:04six hour, it was noted you all

1:33:06were only answer factual

1:33:08questions. What is a factual

1:33:11question? What is a non factual

1:33:13question. And again, by what

1:33:14basis are you determining that.

1:33:18Who is that question for.

1:33:20That's for staff.

1:33:22What are you talking about. The

1:33:23committee.

1:33:24It was stated yes for the

1:33:25public hearing. And I I've

1:33:26heard this before, but even for

1:33:28the listening session it was

1:33:31stated, you know, you have to

1:33:32you all were answer factual

1:33:35questions. What is a factual

1:33:39question? What is deemed not a

1:33:41factual question? And how would

1:33:43you determine that? Because if

1:33:44you're out there, if resident

1:33:46actual question, how are you

1:33:47going to determine what's a

1:33:48factual question?

1:33:55Sir, um, I can speak with the

1:33:58community engagement session

1:34:00that was staff's listening to

1:34:02what the community had to say.

1:34:04So that was us capturing those

1:34:06questions and bringing them

1:34:08back to to council to review,

1:34:10uh, several residents put their

1:34:13contact information on there

1:34:14and requested a follow up to

1:34:16answer their question. We will

1:34:18absolutely do that once we've

1:34:20been.

1:34:20Legally.

1:34:20With all due respect, that's

1:34:22going a totally different

1:34:23direction. I I'll summarize it

1:34:25for the sake of time because I

1:34:26want a factual question. That's

1:34:28that's, uh, very familiar with

1:34:30those, those those are pretty

1:34:31much a, a it's a corporate com,

1:34:33uh, tactic. It's a strategy

1:34:35that's used for the most part,

1:34:37where you want to narrowly

1:34:39define what a fact is. And part

1:34:42of that, what it does, it will

1:34:45potentially it can discourage

1:34:47someone from asking a question

1:34:48because there's no basis

1:34:50because it doesn't align with

1:34:52what we're trying to say.

1:34:53Right. And so when you do that

1:34:56and this is just me. So when

1:34:57you do that, uh, one, it does

1:35:00discourage it will discourage

1:35:01anyone from asking a question

1:35:03because it's like, man, do I

1:35:05have proof, do I don't? So the

1:35:07second part of that is, uh,

1:35:09most of the concerns I'm not

1:35:11here to, to refute any of my

1:35:12colleagues perspective. We're

1:35:13ten different individuals

1:35:15representing people. I'm not

1:35:16here for that. I'm not here to

1:35:17just to to discount. Definitely

1:35:20not the the public's, uh,

1:35:21concerns and things of that

1:35:23nature. But I want to put some

1:35:24things in context for me. So

1:35:25still sticking in line with

1:35:27that factual questioning thing,

1:35:28we're going to answer factual

1:35:29questions. I've heard that time

1:35:31and time again. Uh, and so for

1:35:33me, some of the concerns even

1:35:35that the community has have

1:35:36brought up, they're not

1:35:38unfounded. There are very they

1:35:41are nonpartisan. There are

1:35:43Harvards, there are mites,

1:35:45there are a ton of reputable

1:35:47and credible, uh, organizations

1:35:49that do research, whether it's

1:35:50on water, noise, etcetera,

1:35:52etcetera. So what I'm getting

1:35:53at is if they bring concern, if

1:35:55the constituents, the public

1:35:57brings concerns, we can't just

1:36:00discount them and say, well,

1:36:00they're not factual, they're

1:36:01unpaid. They don't have any

1:36:03basis to it. There's research

1:36:04supporting that. Just like you

1:36:07all are giving us what you're

1:36:08giving us. A lot of that is

1:36:10supported by, uh, research as

1:36:12well. So I did I did have a

1:36:14concern with that. And then

1:36:15lastly, I just want to speak to

1:36:17very quickly. I just had to to

1:36:19write some notes.

1:36:21Um.

1:36:23The fact that a lot of what I

1:36:26heard, I even today you, uh, we

1:36:28have some work to do. It's not

1:36:29discounting what you all have

1:36:31done. Uh, I heard something

1:36:33that was said, and there was no

1:36:34intent, uh, from the attorney.

1:36:35I mean, no ill intent, but it

1:36:37was there was a lot of

1:36:38community engagement, and have

1:36:40to respectfully disagree with

1:36:42that. Uh, even I tried to put

1:36:44it out for the listening

1:36:45sessions. It was put out, I

1:36:46think, on a Thursday we had

1:36:47some vegetables going on that

1:36:50weekend, and then we had a

1:36:51council meeting Monday. And

1:36:53even though it we know it was

1:36:54attended by some, I just think

1:36:56that was another opportunity.

1:36:57We could have done a lot

1:36:59better. And that gives the

1:37:00impression not say, I'm not

1:37:01knocking. It gives the

1:37:02impression that we were just

1:37:03going through the motion to

1:37:04check off a box to keep things

1:37:07going. And again, this is

1:37:08perception. This is not a not

1:37:10so. I just really want to make

1:37:12sure again, I have I have a lot

1:37:14of confidence in our staff and

1:37:16what we've done. But again, I

1:37:17go back and I'll leave. Leave

1:37:18with this. It's just been very

1:37:21unbalanced. We we've been

1:37:22hearing from individuals. So

1:37:24it's not a for me, it's not a

1:37:25pro or con for that. Just

1:37:27because of someone like my

1:37:28community made it very clear.

1:37:29Just because we're asking for a

1:37:31moratorium doesn't mean we want

1:37:32an outright ban. That has not

1:37:34been my experience. They're

1:37:35just saying, look, a lot of

1:37:37moving parts and the fact that

1:37:38we didn't have the information

1:37:39today, it took me literally

1:37:41right back to April, when we

1:37:43were sitting here in a work

1:37:44session, and we were presented

1:37:46with data center information

1:37:48without having it. So I just

1:37:50want to say we have some

1:37:51opportunities to do better. I

1:37:52appreciate the work that's

1:37:53being done, but if we can, we

1:37:56can help balance. And when I

1:37:57say balance again, it simply

1:37:58means if we can hear from

1:38:00attorneys that are going to,

1:38:01you know, help us line up these

1:38:03videos and what we can and

1:38:05cannot do, I think it's only

1:38:06fair for you all that staff as

1:38:07well. City manager's office,

1:38:09etc. whoever is over it to

1:38:11really can we balance that out

1:38:13just a little and say, okay,

1:38:15there are some valid concerns

1:38:17and it's not talking points,

1:38:18it's researched and it's by

1:38:20again, nonpartisan, uh, very

1:38:22respected individuals, uh,

1:38:24around the world. And so just

1:38:26to bring that in, uh, I think

1:38:28we, we need to be a little bit

1:38:29more balanced. Thank you, Mr.

1:38:30Mayor.

1:38:30Yes, sir.

1:38:31All right. So so two.

1:38:32Things, all right?

1:38:36Two. Two things. One, um, you

1:38:38know, council and council

1:38:40member Jones in particular. Um,

1:38:42these guys work for the city

1:38:43manager's office. So some of

1:38:45those questions have and need

1:38:48to be directed to them and and

1:38:49not to them. They're just

1:38:50presenting it. And so we see

1:38:52staff up here every day that's

1:38:53asked to present things. And so

1:38:55we need to show that now let me

1:38:59say this. Uh, I would prefer

1:39:02not to be dealing with this

1:39:04period. Right. And so if you go

1:39:06back to the timeline that you

1:39:08described, when the council got

1:39:11this in April, it had already

1:39:13been presented in February. As

1:39:16to council member Hondros, to

1:39:17the Planning Commission. Right.

1:39:19And so a fact based question

1:39:22is, uh, which keeps them out of

1:39:25it. You know, some of the non

1:39:28factual things that have been

1:39:29put out there to the council

1:39:30sign NDAs. The council is

1:39:32making money off of this.

1:39:34That's the kind of stuff that

1:39:35I'm assuming that they were not

1:39:36getting into. If you went to

1:39:38the listening sections and you

1:39:39read the questions, they had a

1:39:41section set up for water

1:39:43concerns, for power, concerns,

1:39:45for noise concerns, and for

1:39:47environmental concerns. And I

1:39:48may be missing one. And so

1:39:50their job was to ask and talk

1:39:53about things related to those

1:39:55things, not to talk about and

1:39:57chase down some of these, these

1:39:58rumors that that have have been

1:40:00put out here. And so, you know,

1:40:03I think Doctor Hewitt can

1:40:05probably answer a lot of that

1:40:06better. But it's not it's not

1:40:08really fair to, to to pin those

1:40:10guys down on that because, um,

1:40:12but we understand that because

1:40:13this is not our first day

1:40:14talking about this. So whether

1:40:16we took the moratorium or we

1:40:17didn't take the moratorium,

1:40:19nothing has been passed since

1:40:21February, and we're now in

1:40:22October. And I think the

1:40:23council is still doing the best

1:40:25we can with what we got. We're

1:40:26not choosing to be here, but

1:40:28the county is doing the exact

1:40:29same thing because

1:40:30jurisdictions are having to

1:40:31answer this question. And at

1:40:33some point, the federal and the

1:40:34state are going to have to say

1:40:35something about it, because

1:40:38this is something new that's

1:40:39been sprung on all of us. But

1:40:40right now, it's in our world.

1:40:42And I think that they're doing

1:40:43their best we can with that. So

1:40:45I don't I don't want to make

1:40:46sure that we're not putting

1:40:47them in an unfair situation.

1:40:49All right. Uh, Council McMillan

1:40:51and then Hondros. Second

1:40:52rounds, both.

1:40:53Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh,

1:40:56so the public is demanding that

1:40:58we simply move at the speed of

1:41:00trust. Our authority to adopt a

1:41:02data center moratorium is

1:41:03written plainly in state law,

1:41:06and a general statute. 160,

1:41:08Delta Dash 107. We know we knew

1:41:11that on April 13th, that was

1:41:13190 days ago. And more than 50

1:41:18North Carolina communities,

1:41:20including Cumberland County,

1:41:21right next door, have already

1:41:23used this general statute in

1:41:24that moratorium. So the

1:41:26question is no longer how we

1:41:28can whether or not we can

1:41:30execute a moratorium. And so

1:41:32when we will. So since late

1:41:35last year, our residents have

1:41:37been asking us a few things

1:41:38repeatedly. They ask about our

1:41:40water. They ask about our grid.

1:41:42They ask who benefits and who

1:41:44pays the amendments in front of

1:41:46us were not informed by any

1:41:49specific analysis of our water,

1:41:52our grid, or our communities.

1:41:54Return. In fact, no

1:42:00Fayetteville specific

1:42:01environmental impact analysis

1:42:03has been done. So this text

1:42:08amendment, however well

1:42:09drafted, does not answer those

1:42:11questions. A moratorium could

1:42:13give us things like a data

1:42:15center task force made of of

1:42:17people who live here, and the

1:42:18experts who know the field.

1:42:19It's like.

1:42:20Charlotte Westin.

1:42:22To give us time to have

1:42:23environmental impact studies on

1:42:25our water and our grid, which

1:42:27is exactly what Raleigh

1:42:29policies do. Just this month.

1:42:30Yes.

1:42:31It could also yield a community

1:42:33benefits ordinance and a

1:42:34protective ordinance for our

1:42:36city. Things that UDL text

1:42:38amendments never can. They're

1:42:41not designed to do that our

1:42:43residents deserve the whole

1:42:45answer, and not half of one. A

1:42:48moratorium is risk mitigation.

1:42:50It's the kind of solid

1:42:52leadership that we need to

1:42:54provide and the kind that our

1:42:56citizens, our residents, should

1:42:58expect. Uh, the authority is

1:43:00settled and the need is

1:43:01absolutely clear at this point,

1:43:04even by admission of the staff

1:43:05this morning during the

1:43:07feedback sessions from the

1:43:08public, moratorium was one of

1:43:09the top mentioned suggestions

1:43:12by the public. So let's take

1:43:15our time as a council. Let us

1:43:19commit to lead on this issue

1:43:20with wisdom and discernment.

1:43:23And with that, Mr. Mayor, I am

1:43:25prepared to make a motion.

1:43:26All right, so let me circle

1:43:27back to you. Have, uh,

1:43:28Councilmember Hondros and then

1:43:29Mayor Pro Tem Louisville. All

1:43:31right.

1:43:31Councilman Hunter.

1:43:31Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Attorney.

1:43:33Um, Tosca, if you would,

1:43:35please. Um, what statutory

1:43:39authority do counties and

1:43:40municipalities have in North

1:43:42Carolina, per North Carolina

1:43:43laws with regards to

1:43:45environmental protections, air

1:43:47quality, water quality?

1:43:48Oh, there's there's a host of

1:43:49those. I couldn't list them all

1:43:51for you. There's a lot of.

1:43:52As they directly pertain to

1:43:54data centers.

1:43:56Mm.

1:43:57I mean yeah, there's a lot of

1:44:00different statutes that depends

1:44:02on what the data center

1:44:03regulation is. It depends on.

1:44:05Yeah. There's there's, um,

1:44:07there's a lot of.

1:44:08So in your professional opinion

1:44:10on your review of the proposed

1:44:11ordinances, are they, are they,

1:44:14um, adequately addressed in the

1:44:16proposed EDA revisions?

1:44:18I'm not sure I'm. What do you

1:44:19mean by adequately addressed.

1:44:22In the proposed EDA revisions

1:44:23we're talking about today? Are

1:44:25the environmental protections

1:44:27that we have. The city of

1:44:28Fayetteville has statutory

1:44:30authority to put those

1:44:32protections in place. So they

1:44:33adequately addressed in the

1:44:35proposed revisions.

1:44:37Um, if you're talking about the,

1:44:40uh, PwC utility statement, um,

1:44:44yes, there is there is

1:44:45authority for that. And that

1:44:47was, um, in the slide there.

1:44:49Um, but I'm not sure exactly

1:44:51which regulation you're

1:44:53speaking to. But if you're

1:44:54talking about that one, yes, I

1:44:55do think there is legal

1:44:56authority for that.

1:44:57Okay. So previously we spoke

1:44:59about conditional zoning and or

1:45:01special use permits. Right. We

1:45:03talked about the 2 or 3 times.

1:45:04So I just want to make sure

1:45:07because um, telecommunication

1:45:10and data storage facilities or

1:45:11data centers are not in our

1:45:13current use table. Right.

1:45:15Correct. So can we require them

1:45:19to, uh, all data center

1:45:21developments to have either a

1:45:22special use permit and or a

1:45:24conditional zoning?

1:45:27Okay. So, uh, as I was

1:45:28mentioned, we don't know the

1:45:30answer to that. We do not know.

1:45:32No, courts have said by

1:45:35requiring something to have a

1:45:37special use permit or a

1:45:38conditional rezoning, you are

1:45:40violating the down zoning

1:45:41statute. We don't have that. We

1:45:42don't know that I am, in my

1:45:45legal opinion, at requiring a

1:45:50data center to get a

1:45:52conditional rezoning. Is the

1:45:55more legally compliant method

1:45:58than the special use permit.

1:45:59And the reason for that is

1:46:01because when you go through a

1:46:03conditional rezoning process,

1:46:04you have to get the property

1:46:06owner consent. And so therefore

1:46:09it, it it ameliorate that

1:46:13concern that you are somehow

1:46:14doing it without property owner

1:46:16consent especially use permit.

1:46:18Of course that's not required.

1:46:20And especially use permit is a

1:46:21quasi judicial process like a

1:46:23court hearing where they have

1:46:24to go through. And I think as

1:46:25Doctor Newton stated, they have

1:46:27to put on evidence and show why

1:46:29they meet the certain

1:46:30standards. Does that answer the

1:46:32question?

1:46:32It does. Thank you. And my

1:46:34colleague to my right here, um,

1:46:36mentioned unbalanced that um,

1:46:39you know, it feels like this is

1:46:41unbalanced. Would it be safe to

1:46:42say that what's unbalancing

1:46:45this is our state legislature?

1:46:48I will not comment.

1:46:49On that. I wouldn't advise you

1:46:51to. Thank you sir. All right.

1:46:54Um.

1:46:55Back, Councilmember.

1:46:57Councilmember McMillan. Um.

1:46:59Yes, sir.

1:46:59Yeah. Prior to making this

1:47:00motion, I do want to thank our

1:47:02neighbors from Eastover, uh,

1:47:03who showed up. And one of the

1:47:05things we can do during a

1:47:07moratorium period is how it's

1:47:09come to terms on a no

1:47:10annexation agreement. The

1:47:12reason Tara Nexus reached out

1:47:13to the city of Fayetteville is

1:47:15because they intend on us

1:47:17opening up for annexation in

1:47:19your in your neighborhood. And

1:47:20we understand that. So part of

1:47:22this process should be, uh,

1:47:24talks with, uh, with you all in

1:47:26your community about no

1:47:28annexation, what that means for

1:47:29us. So thank you for coming.

1:47:33Thank you sir.

1:47:35Mr. mayor, I'd like to move

1:47:36that the council schedule

1:47:37public hearing under General

1:47:38Statute 160, Delta dash 107 to

1:47:42consider a temporary moratorium

1:47:45on on data center development

1:47:46applications and to direct

1:47:49staff to prepare the draft

1:47:50ordinance for that hearing.

1:47:52All right. Motion by

1:47:53Councilmember. Uh, McMillan. Is

1:47:56there a second?

1:47:58I'll. Second.

1:47:59Second by Jones. Okay. All

1:48:01right. All right. Any

1:48:03discussion on that? All right.

1:48:05Council look to you for your

1:48:06votes on that. You vote. Now

1:48:10you have a question on that.

1:48:11Oh okay.

1:48:23Oh, we miss. All right, Madam

1:48:31Clerk. Motion carries. So, uh,

1:48:33six for those voting. Our

1:48:36screens are black. This is for

1:48:42the public hearing. I can't see

1:48:45who the.

1:48:47Holding here.

1:48:50Did it just change?

1:48:52No.

1:48:53It changed in front of me.

1:48:54I'm looking at it. Yeah, it was

1:48:556497.

1:48:57Okay.

1:48:59My. I saw it, Chappie.

1:49:01Yeah, it went from 6 to 7.

1:49:04That's not right.

1:49:06Yeah. Miss Paula, how did that

1:49:08number change.

1:49:10My change?

1:49:11Okay. All right.

1:49:12So we vote. Just redo it.

1:49:15We do it again. I didn't touch

1:49:17it. I mean.

1:49:19But I changed.

1:49:21It. at me.

1:49:24And me. I was in opposition.

1:49:27All right. Reshuffle it. All

1:49:29right. Council look to you for

1:49:31your votes on that. Now clear.

1:49:34Council you're going to vote

1:49:35one time. Please.

1:49:38All right.

1:49:43Yes, ma'am.

1:49:47All right.

1:49:51I'm a no.

1:49:52All you need to be ready. I

1:49:53mean, yeah okay. All right.

1:49:56Six, four. All right. Madam

1:49:57clerk, can you read that?

1:50:01Here. Opposition. Holding the

1:50:04opposition. Thompson and..

1:50:05All right, all right. So,

1:50:08public hearing schedule.

1:50:09All right.

1:50:09So question.

1:50:11Mayor Pro tem your head. Yes,

1:50:13yes.

1:50:13Thank you.

1:50:13All right.

1:50:15Uh. Mr. Tosco, I wanted to ask

1:50:20you some questions in reference

1:50:21to what my colleague said. Uh,

1:50:24in reference to the draft

1:50:26ordinance. I asked you earlier

1:50:30that you give your

1:50:31recommendations to staff. So if

1:50:32we were to remove items two,

1:50:35four, and five from our

1:50:36ordinance and add your

1:50:38recommendations for one and

1:50:41three, that would suffice us

1:50:42for now. When it comes to a

1:50:44draft ordinance, correct?

1:50:46Um, I think yes, you could, you

1:50:48could. And that is a motion you

1:50:51could make. And then we could,

1:50:52um, incorporate that those

1:50:54revisions into a draft text

1:50:56amendment.

1:50:56And those revisions will still

1:50:57be open for future items that

1:50:59needed to be added to the

1:51:00ordinance. Doctor Menzel.

1:51:09Yes, sir. It will.

1:51:10Be so. Mr. mayor, if I may, I

1:51:11would like to move that into a

1:51:14motion so we can have some

1:51:15protections for now.

1:51:17All right. I got a question.

1:51:18All right.

1:51:19Well, we want to restate what

1:51:21you're saying.

1:51:21For us to remove items two,

1:51:23four and five from our current

1:51:24ordinance and add the

1:51:26recommendations from Doctor

1:51:27Tosco on Ordinances one and

1:51:30three.

1:51:30Can I?

1:51:31All right. Yes, sir.

1:51:32Go ahead.

1:51:32Question.

1:51:33Uh, hold on a minute. I got a I

1:51:35gotta dispose of that. That's a

1:51:37motion. Is there a second to.

1:51:38It?

1:51:41No, I can't.

1:51:42See it. You can't see what?

1:51:44Nobody can't.

1:51:45That's why.

1:51:45He's doing it verbally.

1:51:46So I want to know what. What

1:51:48did they say?

1:51:48Oh, well, repeat your most.

1:51:50Part of this presentation. Of

1:51:51what? He gave us the items that

1:51:52he said, the line out. Those

1:51:53are the items. Well.

1:51:57What is it?

1:51:57We don't have it in front of

1:51:58us, is what they're saying.

1:52:00So I need to I need to make

1:52:01sure we clear on a motion. No,

1:52:03I got to dispose of it because

1:52:04of questions.

1:52:04So go ahead.

1:52:05Can I clarify?

1:52:06Yes, sir.

1:52:06Something for a second. I if I,

1:52:09if I pull up, it might be

1:52:10easier to see it. If I pull up

1:52:12the actual.

1:52:14It. It's the.

1:52:15Same thing. Ordinances. Um and

1:52:18when you said existing I think

1:52:19I think you meant remove

1:52:22ordinances two, four and five.

1:52:25from the proposed text

1:52:27amendment. Correct. What you're

1:52:28referring to. Are you able to

1:52:29see this or. No.

1:52:29You can't because.

1:52:30Our screens is down.

1:52:31Oh.

1:52:31And to revise items one and

1:52:33three.

1:52:33And two, various ordinances one

1:52:35and three.

1:52:35Yes. One, three. Okay.

1:52:37This is working with ours is

1:52:39not.

1:52:41Okay. I'm I'm going to second

1:52:43that for discussion because I

1:52:44have a question and I can't see

1:52:46it. It's not on our monitor.

1:52:48Yeah.

1:52:48I'll second that. But I do have

1:52:50a question.

1:52:52Alright.

1:52:53So let me let me spells it it.

1:52:55Yeah. All our screens are black

1:52:58okay. All right. So there's a

1:52:59motion by council by Mayor pro

1:53:01tem uh, to uh, as stated the

1:53:05second by here. We've got

1:53:06questions. And I guess

1:53:07Councilman Harris trying to

1:53:08read whatever he needs.

1:53:09To read.

1:53:11That's the strike the unlisted

1:53:13uses for those.

1:53:14Who haven't seen that one.

1:53:16Three. That was two for

1:53:18information. That's what he's

1:53:19saying.

1:53:20And take his recommendations to

1:53:22revise one and three.

1:53:27All right. So yeah. So I guess,

1:53:31uh, Mayor pro tem is part of

1:53:33what the confusion is somewhat

1:53:36as it was a long presentation,

1:53:37but there were some things in

1:53:39there that you had reviewed it

1:53:40and made recommendations for

1:53:41it. That's that's what the

1:53:42council needs to see.

1:53:43To.

1:53:45To vote on the motion.

1:53:46I don't know how I can help

1:53:47them because our screens are

1:53:47not working.

1:53:48I asked my questions. Yeah.

1:53:51All right. Yes, sir. You had a

1:53:53question.

1:53:53Okay. This was my question. I

1:53:54want to go back to what, uh,

1:53:56Councilmember Hondros was

1:53:57saying. He stated, um, and I

1:54:01think the the attorney said it

1:54:03gave us a little bit more

1:54:04control. If we could put this

1:54:07into a conditional zoning,

1:54:09wasn't that your, um, your

1:54:14thought, uh, Dina or

1:54:16Councilmember Hondros.

1:54:19If that's consistent with state

1:54:20law?

1:54:21Yes.

1:54:25It was Davis. Okay.

1:54:27Well, I tell you what. Can I

1:54:29revise my motion? Madam

1:54:32attorney, can you get with the

1:54:35attorney to make these

1:54:36revisions and bring it back to

1:54:38us for approval or disapproval

1:54:40at the next council meeting and

1:54:42put it on the agenda for

1:54:44Wednesday.

1:54:46Wednesday or Monday?

1:54:47The agenda for Wednesday. But

1:54:49for the meeting for Monday. Oh,

1:54:50yes. So that way everybody will

1:54:51have it in advance.

1:54:52Yes, sir.

1:54:53And these are just revisions

1:54:54from Doctor Tosca.

1:54:56I'm not a doctor, but.

1:54:57I'm sorry.

1:54:59All right? Just an attorney.

1:55:01All right.

1:55:01All right, settle down, settle

1:55:03down. All right, so the motion,

1:55:04just to make sure I'm clear.

1:55:06Yes, uh, is Mayor Pro Tem your

1:55:09motion or your amended motion

1:55:10is to ask the attorney to work

1:55:12with Attorney Tosco, uh, to get

1:55:16those items back to staff that

1:55:17were mentioned today. Uh, in

1:55:19terms of adjustments to our.

1:55:21That's for.

1:55:21The unlisted uses for two, four

1:55:23and five. Right. To revise one

1:55:25and three. Okay. That was part

1:55:26of his recommendation in his

1:55:28presentation.

1:55:29All right. So the presentation

1:55:30you received tonight would

1:55:31those those edits that you had

1:55:33marked on there, um, is what

1:55:35the motion is instructing legal

1:55:37to work with. Uh, Doctor Manzo

1:55:39and Mr. Bright Boy to bring

1:55:41back to the next council

1:55:43meeting. But you're saying

1:55:44you'll have it published,

1:55:45available publicly to review on

1:55:47Monday, on.

1:55:47Wednesday or Wednesday.

1:55:48Which is for.

1:55:49The agenda on Monday.

1:55:51Okay.

1:55:51The items that we don't have

1:55:53currently in our, um, question.

1:55:56All right.

1:55:56So I'll audience.

1:55:58This is not the public speaking

1:55:59time. Hold on a second. All

1:56:00right. So we got a motion

1:56:02amended motion by council by

1:56:03Mayor pro tem. Is that did you

1:56:04accept the amendment,

1:56:06Councilman Harris.

1:56:06You made? I still have a

1:56:08question.

1:56:08All right. Yes, sir.

1:56:09Your question. I want to make

1:56:10sure I'm understanding

1:56:11correctly about the conditional

1:56:12zoning piece. Uh, and I know

1:56:14what you said about what the

1:56:15state said. I thought, well,

1:56:17not you, but, um, Councilmember

1:56:20Jones, did that give us more

1:56:26jurisdiction? If we could use

1:56:29that within attaching that as a

1:56:32conditional zoning? That was

1:56:34what my my question.

1:56:35Is that that would need to be a

1:56:37part of the motion, because

1:56:38that was not in my presentation

1:56:40to add a conditional rezoning

1:56:42requirement to it. Again, my

1:56:46presentation or my suggestion

1:56:48is to fold this into the

1:56:49warehouse storage unit use. And

1:56:51all of the same requirements.

1:56:52And right now you do not need

1:56:54to get a conditional rezoning

1:56:55approval for a warehouse

1:56:57storage. So if that's the will

1:57:00of of the council, then then

1:57:02that would need to be a part of

1:57:03the motion.

1:57:05All right. Thank you mayor.

1:57:06All right.

1:57:08All right. So council has a

1:57:09motion by Mayor pro tem,

1:57:11seconded by hair. Uh, the

1:57:13amended motion that was stated,

1:57:15uh, this is discussion phase.

1:57:16Councilmember McMillan.

1:57:17Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So

1:57:20what's what's about to happen?

1:57:21Will we just said in motion is

1:57:22a moratorium, uh, hearing, a

1:57:25public hearing, uh, where we

1:57:26will put a moratorium in place

1:57:28that will pause all data center

1:57:30development until the that the

1:57:33term period or the time period

1:57:35that we decide upon for the

1:57:36moratorium is ended. So for us

1:57:39to make changes tonight. Excuse

1:57:41me this morning, uh, based on

1:57:43information that we just got

1:57:45less than two hours ago would

1:57:47kind of be, I think, in my

1:57:48opinion, foolish. Uh.

1:57:50Thank you.

1:57:54That's that's not a

1:57:55characterization of you, Mayor

1:57:56pro tem at all. And I say that

1:57:58very, very respectfully. But

1:58:00what we just voted to do was to

1:58:03give ourselves some time to

1:58:04make all of these changes, uh,

1:58:06that are going to be tighter,

1:58:09more thorough with analysis.

1:58:12And there's no need to rush to

1:58:13do anything today based on what

1:58:15we just voted to do together.

1:58:17So all right, just put that to

1:58:19to the body.

1:58:20Yeah. And and Councilmember

1:58:22McMillan, just to clarify, your

1:58:25motion to pass was to set the

1:58:26public hearing and they would

1:58:28then present a read, a draft

1:58:30moratorium. So it was not to

1:58:31put the moratorium. So there's

1:58:33another you're right. Right. So

1:58:34that's.

1:58:34What we put in motion today.

1:58:35Gets us Mayor Pro tem to what

1:58:37you're getting towards without

1:58:38rushing us in.

1:58:40This hour.

1:58:40We're not rushing. We're

1:58:42putting provisions on something

1:58:43that we don't have.

1:58:44Well, gentlemen.

1:58:44Gentlemen, what are we doing?

1:58:45All right.

1:58:46All right.

1:58:47Please. We almost, almost do

1:58:48it. So basically, there will be

1:58:51two, two parallel tracks with

1:58:53the two motions, right, that

1:58:55you are doing both. There was a

1:58:56public hearing held to hear

1:58:58this ordinance. There was a

1:58:59draft ordinance that we heard

1:59:00tonight and have been hearing

1:59:01for the last 4 or 5 months.

1:59:03That was what was presented

1:59:04tonight. That's what's being

1:59:05revised. It's always been two

1:59:07parallel tracks. Now there's a

1:59:09motion to bring a public

1:59:10hearing and a draft ordinance

1:59:12for the moratorium. That's what

1:59:13passed in the previous vote. So

1:59:15no need to conflate not to

1:59:17debate it. There are two

1:59:18motions, uh, and if they pass,

1:59:20then you have two different

1:59:21instructions for staff. If they

1:59:22don't.

1:59:23Then we'll stick.

1:59:23With the one that passed. Yes,

1:59:24sir. Real quick. Second round.

1:59:26Final round.

1:59:26Yes, sir. Second second round.

1:59:28Yes, sir. You made a motion

1:59:30that if you think about the

1:59:31context of your motion, doesn't

1:59:33make sense.

1:59:34Correct.

1:59:35We just gave our ourselves

1:59:37space to make youdo amendments

1:59:39that have analysis behind them.

1:59:40They have public input behind

1:59:42them. We just created that

1:59:44space. Why would you then rush

1:59:47into a process that you just

1:59:49voted to give your space for?

1:59:51Uh, that's that's what I'm

1:59:52trying to say. And I hope my

1:59:53colleagues on the, on the dais

1:59:55understand that.

1:59:56All right.

1:59:56All right, Council, look. Mayor

1:59:58pro.

1:59:58Tem, I was going to say call

1:59:59for the vote.

1:59:59Yeah. All right, all right.

2:00:00Councillor, look to you for

2:00:01your vote.

2:00:02No. What have you made?

2:00:08Are we missing?

2:00:11All right.

2:00:12All right. So motion six four.

2:00:14Madam clerk, can you read it?

2:00:16My screen is black.

2:00:18Jones, green, McMillan and

2:00:20Ferguson in opposition.

2:00:22All right, all right, so with

2:00:24that motion carries. So there

2:00:26will be two directions to

2:00:28staff. Staff members. Are you

2:00:29clear? One is, uh, your work

2:00:31with the attorney to continue

2:00:33the revisions and the update

2:00:36and the compliance of the

2:00:37things that we've talked about

2:00:38today. Right now, there is

2:00:40nothing in place. So, uh, even

2:00:42the stay, uh, has expired. So

2:00:44what you're saying and what we

2:00:45heard today, you'll work with

2:00:47the legal to get that to have

2:00:49back for presentation on

2:00:50Monday. In addition to that,

2:00:51there was a motion that was

2:00:53also passed that asked for a

2:00:56moratorium, uh, public hearing

2:00:58to be set, uh, which will also

2:01:00have a draft ordinance of that

2:01:02to be presented at the public

2:01:04hearing. You had a question,

2:01:06Madam Attorney?

2:01:09Um, before the public hearing

2:01:12can be scheduled, we have to

2:01:14bring the ordinance. And I

2:01:15imagine council would want to

2:01:17work on that. So we would bring

2:01:18that to a work session or two.

2:01:21Or I guess it just depends on

2:01:23how quickly y'all can turn it

2:01:25around. I guess you can work

2:01:26with the manager's office and

2:01:27get it. Get it before us as

2:01:28quickly as you can, okay. All

2:01:30right, all right. So. All

2:01:32right, let's do adjourns.

2:01:34All right.

```*