2026-08-27 - Town Council Work Session

12:59Good evening. I call together us for a

13:02work session of the Morrisville Town

13:03Council August 27th, 2026. We have three

13:06items that we're going to be speaking

13:08about tonight. The first is data

13:09centers, then key to the town, and then

13:11our town council roundt. At this time,

13:13I'd like to recognize Deputy Town

13:15Manager Jel Rodriguez to uh introduce

13:18our presenters for the first item. Thank

13:20you.

13:21>> Thank you, Mayor, and good evening uh

13:24council. So, I am pleased to introduce

13:27this evening to you uh the topic of data

13:30center state and regional overview. This

13:33topic is very timely as we have seen.

13:36There's a lot of um excitement about

13:38this particular topic is significant for

13:40for our community and for the region as

13:42well as data centers continue to ch

13:45shape the um economic development

13:48infrastructure planning policy decisions

13:50all across North Carolina and across the

13:52nation as well. So tonight we are

13:54fortunate to have to I want to say to

13:57experts because they have been doing so

13:59much work in this topical in this topic.

14:02Um and we have with us Grace Berry,

14:05management analyst, and Alana Keegan, a

14:08local government services director with

14:09the Central Pines um regional council.

14:13And they have been doing some work uh

14:15particularly related to data centers

14:17across the region and working with um

14:20multiple municipalities. And we felt

14:22that this was the right time for us to

14:25uh as we have heard the topic around us.

14:28We haven't had a topic as a group and we

14:30felt it was the opportunity for us to

14:32bring you a highlevel uh information

14:35about the topic and then we can decide

14:38what's next right where do we go from

14:39here? Do we need to talk about this a

14:41little more? But the intent for tonight

14:43is to provide you a high level um

14:45information that can allow you to ask

14:48questions and be able to uh to define

14:51any additional information that we may

14:53need and at the same time it will help

14:55you be uh plugged in to what the work

14:58that is happening in the region and

15:00specifically the work that Central Pines

15:01has been doing with others. So with

15:04without further ado I would like to turn

15:06it over to uh Grace and Elena and they

15:09will guide you through the conversation.

15:11Thank you.

15:12>> Thank you. Good evening. It's great to

15:15be with you all. Um as Jazelle said, I'm

15:18Elena Keegan. the government services

15:20director and I'm just going to provide a

15:23little bit of an introduction into how

15:24we started talking about this work um

15:27and then turn it over to Grace who's um

15:30started with us as a lead forc fellow if

15:32you'd had any interaction with that

15:33program and little did she know that she

15:35would become a data center expert

15:37[laughter]

15:37and in a fellowship program and now

15:39she's a full-time staff member with us.

15:41Um so this uh work started about a year

15:45ago for our organization. We started

15:47hearing both from management level staff

15:50and from planning staff looking for

15:53resources on data centers and that's

15:56spanned a wide range of information

15:58resources, water resources, zoning

16:01resources, just best practices that we

16:04could find. And so um we heard about it

16:07enough that we decided to start putting

16:09some time into this topic. And um

16:11tonight we're going to just share some

16:13things that we've been doing to track on

16:16this topic and some resources that we've

16:18been compiling on your behalf. And we're

16:19always happy to hear other ideas of ways

16:22we can be helpful or if there's

16:24questions that we can answer um about

16:26this topic. We're more than happy to do

16:28that. So with that, I will turn it over

16:30to Grace to start walking through some

16:33overview materials that we have.

16:36>> Awesome. I want to make sure I'm not

16:38talking too loud. So, hope you guys are

16:41doing well. Oh no, I might have messed

16:43it up. Trying to

16:48see where

16:52there we go. Awesome. So, in front of

16:54you here, you can see a regional

16:57snapshot. I know the text is a little

16:59bit small, so I'm going to go through

17:01these. And so at the top you can see a

17:04legend that we've created where that

17:06dark orange is going to be a moratorum

17:08has been enacted. That navy will be

17:11reviewing. The yellow will be an

17:13ordinance update and then the gray will

17:14be no formal action. And so you can see

17:19obviously a lot of moratoriums have been

17:21enacted. You're probably aware of these

17:23just staying in the no. But Chattam

17:25County has a one-year pulse through

17:28February 2027. We can see Orange County

17:31with a one-year pause through April

17:3321st, 2027.

17:35And then Hillsboro had an initial

17:38twomonth moratoria and they decided to

17:41actually extend that all the way until

17:44May 2027, which seems to be a a

17:47preferable date. Um, and then city of

17:51Durham, uh, 60-day moratorum extended

17:55through May 2027. Then the most recent

17:58update is Durham County. They actually

18:01have a moratorum now that was enacted

18:04and so it's no longer an ordinance

18:06update. They have a 9-month moratorum on

18:09new largecale data centers also through

18:12May 2027.

18:14And then for Wake County and the town of

18:17Kerry, they're still in that reviewing

18:19process. Apex, Windowell, Holly Springs

18:24have one-year moratoriums.

18:27And then Johnston County, no formal

18:29action. Lee County and Sanford, they

18:32added data data center specifics to

18:35their UDO. And then with more county,

18:39also no formal action. and then rounding

18:42it out with you all with an ordinance

18:44update um amended in 2025 to allow data

18:47centers in different zoning districts

18:50with the approval of a special use

18:52permit.

18:54I'll just add on this chart. So Durham

18:56County, this happened this week. Um

18:58that's you may have seen that in the

19:00news and Lee County and Sanford are one

19:02of the few that has actually amended

19:05really recently. So that's the the one

19:07example that we've seen where they've

19:09not chosen to move into a moratorium and

19:12they've actually moved ahead with um

19:14updating their ordinance with data

19:15center specific language um in the past

19:18few months. Uh but most of the most of

19:20the recent activity has been um either

19:24no action or or moving into moratoriums

19:27in the region so far.

19:32>> Entering into

19:36entering into a moratorum with

19:42the expectation that they're going to

19:43update their UDO. I assume all of them.

19:47>> Correct. I believe that is the case. All

19:49of them are it. Most of them

19:51specifically clarify giving staff time

19:54>> to determine language for their UDO.

19:56>> Okay. Thank you. Y

19:59>> did you want to take questions during or

20:00wait till the end?

20:01>> We're happy to take questions um during.

20:03That's fine. It'll Yeah.

20:06>> Okay.

20:07>> We have a couple people already then.

20:10Council member Scarvy Johnson followed

20:11by Council Council Member Scar. Okay,

20:14we're good. We'll let you know if

20:16there's questions.

20:17>> Awesome.

20:20>> I just wanted you to know who I was.

20:24[laughter]

20:27So obviously what's relevant to us here

20:30today is what the key considerations are

20:34for local governments and navigating

20:36data centers and how rapidly things are

20:39approaching. And so I think we've tried

20:42to break this down into about six

20:45different categories. Obviously this is

20:47not all inclusive. So just keep that in

20:49mind. And I think starting off with

20:51infrastructure demand, as you know,

20:54hypers scale data center facilities are

20:56going to require 100 plus megawatts of

20:59energy and sometimes a million plus

21:01gallons of water per day, which is going

21:03to create a lot of new considerations

21:06for our utilities, departments, and just

21:08generally long-term infrastructure

21:10planning for different towns and cities.

21:13And then obviously that bleeds into land

21:15use and planning. At Central Pines,

21:17we've had a lot of help from our

21:19planners [snorts] navigating our data

21:20center work, which has been really

21:22important, but also our North Carolina

21:25communities are having to evaluate their

21:27zoning standards um specifically related

21:30to data center sighting, the setbacks

21:33from data centers, noise, screening,

21:35lighting, and just generally land use

21:38compatibility.

21:39But also they have to figure out the

21:42role of planning and avoiding over

21:44interpretation of local authority which

21:47I think is really important is

21:48understanding who is allowed to do what

21:52full transparency and then obviously

21:55community impacts

21:58with technical beyond the technical

22:00considerations they're also going to be

22:02balancing how the community feels about

22:04data centers which is something that

22:06we've all probably seen within the

22:08media. recently. It's just something

22:10that's being discussed constantly and so

22:12having to navigate community questions

22:15and perceptions with a lot of new

22:17information coming in is a lot which is

22:19why we hope to be a resource for you

22:21all. And then also we wanted to speak on

22:24property tax under the community impact

22:26section. That was something specifically

22:29mentioned to us that would be important.

22:31And so Wake County has given us

22:33permission to share its experience in

22:36this regard. And so when they're looking

22:38at smaller scale data centers as an

22:40example for how property taxes are

22:43effective, they found that the taxable

22:46value of the facilities are declining

22:48very quickly. And that's because the

22:50value of the facilities is tied to the

22:52equipment in the facility like a server,

22:55the connectors, racks, and those things

22:58depreciate very quickly over time. And

23:01so I guess what we think is it's just

23:04important to take a conservative

23:05approach when looking at and estimating

23:08long-term tax revenues from data

23:10centers. Do you have any statistics or

23:14or a comparative table on the size of

23:17the data center versus the or the size

23:20of the data center and the anticipated

23:23resource consumption.

23:25So we are and it's like a fun preview

23:28for the end, but we've been drafting a

23:31ordinance for UDO amendments. And so in

23:35that we are working with different

23:37experts to put together that type of

23:41exactly what you're saying, that type of

23:43side to side comparison to create that

23:45universal level of comparison of what

23:47makes something hypers scale versus what

23:50is a another type of data center. And so

23:53those definitions will be present in the

23:55draft ordinance that we are producing.

23:58>> And I'll add that defining data center

24:01by the magnitude has been one of the

24:03most we have a very difficult process.

24:06Um not necessarily because of what's

24:08happening today, but because there's

24:10some unknowns about what they'll look

24:12like in several years. And so uniquely

24:14in North Carolina, there's, you know,

24:16the zoning you put in place right now,

24:18at least right now in North Carolina,

24:20you can't then change it in certain

24:22ways. And so there's cons there's

24:25there's questions about how the

24:26technology will change and its impact on

24:29the square footage of data centers, the

24:31water usage. So some of the ways that

24:33you would traditionally measure a type

24:36of zoning or or development are hard to

24:39predict in the future. we can make some

24:42assumptions right now. So that's been a

24:43very almost philosophical debate in our

24:46working group on ordinance language.

24:53>> Do you have any data on or comparison on

24:57number of jobs data centers create

25:01compared to the same size businesses?

25:06>> I know that we do. I don't know the

25:08numbers off the top of my head, but they

25:09are definitely not um creating as many

25:12jobs.

25:15>> I think it's actually mostly in the

25:17construction of the data center

25:19>> like the upfront in construction and

25:21then you really see that trickle off as

25:24they're maintained. Yeah. In regard to

25:26employment.

25:35>> All right. So moving on, um definitely

25:38top of mind for a lot of people would be

25:40environmental impact. And as we noted in

25:44the beginning of the presentation, data

25:46centers place a lot of demand on our

25:48energy grid, on our water supply, and

25:51other infrastructure, especially when

25:53you're looking at those hyperscale data

25:56centers. And so what we've been doing in

25:58our working group is having

26:00conversations with these providers. So

26:02water providers, utility providers to

26:05actually understand what impact we're up

26:08against and how to input that into our

26:11draft ordinance so that what we're

26:14collecting the best practices are from

26:16those that are directly involved with

26:18these different providers like utilities

26:20and water.

26:22And then avoiding UDO duplication I

26:26think has been one of the most important

26:27things that we have been wanting to

26:29stress when we have spoke to different

26:32communities about data centers.

26:34Obviously communities are already going

26:35to have some standards for lighting or

26:38landscaping um traffic building design

26:41and enforcement. And so it's really

26:43important for our communities before

26:45adding anything that's data center

26:47specific to make sure that what's in

26:49their UDO doesn't already cover what

26:52they would be adding and that the

26:54impacts are unique and specific to give

26:57some examples of things that might be

26:59[clears throat] data center specific

27:00that would a UDL would cover.

27:05>> Noise would be one of the larger ones

27:07that's come up specific to data centers.

27:09They have a unique noise concern.

27:12um that I believe comes from their

27:14equipment. They often have a lot of

27:16generators on site that can make noise

27:18and then there's this I don't know

27:20exactly the technology but high

27:22frequency or or low fre one that you

27:24kind of almost can't hear. Um and so

27:27that has been a large consideration

27:30um as well as general um look of the

27:34facility because at least at the hypers

27:36scale level they are large.

27:38Noise would be one of the most unique

27:40ones.

27:43Thank you. That was really helpful

27:44explanation. And obviously evolving

27:47state and federal policy, state and

27:50federal policy surrounding data centers

27:52is moving. It's still taking shape. We

27:55don't necessarily know what's going to

27:57happen. And so as communities are

27:59considering local standards, it's just

28:01important to stay updated in in the know

28:04of what needs to be addressed locally

28:07and then also what needs to be addressed

28:09specifically at the state level. And I

28:11think that leads us into talking a

28:13little bit more about those impacts.

28:19>> Yeah. So I'm going to share just a

28:21little bit about what's happening at the

28:22federal and state levels. Um the the

28:26high level at the federal level is there

28:28has not been any notable legislation on

28:31data centers. Um there have been

28:33proposals, none have gone through. Um

28:36none that would impact local zoning or

28:38land use conversations that you might be

28:40having. Um there are some executive

28:43level actions looking at speeding up

28:46permitting. None of that has taken place

28:48in a way that is a mandate to local

28:50governments. And there's been some

28:52pledges that are not necessarily binding

28:54by large companies that may be

28:56interested in that they will cover their

28:59own power costs. So these are the the

29:01large seven major tech companies made a

29:03pledge with the White House to do that.

29:05Um since that's very much a concern that

29:08comes up in the public conversation

29:09about data centers.

29:11>> When you say they cover their own cost,

29:13they have to cover their cost, right? So

29:16they're not getting free.

29:17>> Well, that they I think the Yes, I think

29:20the I'm not sure how it would work in

29:23practice, but the pledge was that it

29:25wouldn't be put into the larger system

29:27and that residential customers would be

29:29paying an increased rate because of the

29:31demand. The infrastructure that goes

29:33into adding that capacity might increase

29:36the cost. Do you see in the future? Um I

29:41just read an article like Fort Bragg has

29:43own nuclear reactor kind of a thing. So

29:45I'm I can think these

29:49all these people will start doing the

29:51same thing and be independent.

29:54>> Yes. And informally, I I don't have a

29:56great number of data points to this, but

29:58when we've had some conversations with

30:00folks at the state level, um it sounds

30:04like companies are beginning to try and

30:05provide their own power on site because

30:07the timeline

30:09>> of waiting for the infrastructure to be

30:11built through Duke would be so long. So,

30:13that is definitely um if not already

30:16happening on the horizon. Yeah.

30:18>> Got a question on that. So when they're

30:21saying cover their own power costs

30:22rather than shift them onto residential

30:24customers, is that effectively saying

30:26that they will you you're just saying

30:28that generating power on site but have

30:30generators that burn fossil fuel that

30:33then pollute the air?

30:34>> That's definitely a possibility. Um I

30:38think there's less there's less

30:39awareness of what that would look like

30:41since they would be building it on their

30:42own. But um it does get to another piece

30:46of the conversation that you know some

30:47of that would trigger state regulations

30:49around air quality and and other

30:51elements of the environmental impact

30:54piece of it. Um so we don't really know

30:58how they will we don't know maybe

31:01someone knows. Um but yes it's very

31:04possible.

31:06Um other activity at the federal level

31:08has mostly uh that we've really not seen

31:11go through focused on just grid concerns

31:14and grid interconnections. Um so that's

31:17much a larger scale conversation on

31:20energy. The state level has had still

31:24not a ton of formal action but

31:26definitely more relevant action for the

31:28day-to-day work that the the the town

31:30may be considering. Um so there's two

31:32different pieces to what's been

31:33happening at the state level. the

31:35governor and the the agency level. Um

31:38the governor has taken two actions. The

31:41first was last year to establish an

31:44energy policy task force which one of

31:46their main recommendations was to remove

31:49the exemption on electricity purchases

31:52for data centers um which was included

31:55in the state budget that the governor

31:57has signed. So um specifically state uh

32:01tax exemption for electricity purchases

32:03has been removed but equipment

32:05incentives have not been. Um that's the

32:08only formal action that has been taken

32:10at the state level on data centers.

32:13There's a lot of agencies talking about

32:14it. We've had some great conversation

32:16with DQ and some others who have

32:19regulatory roles in things like air

32:21quality. Um the one other bill that was

32:24formally proposed that we were

32:26monitoring really closely because it did

32:27pass through both chambers but never got

32:31a final vote was a bill called the

32:33rateayer protection act. Um and some

32:35notable things that were included in

32:37this that we just used to kind of guide

32:40our ordinance conversation and other

32:42conversations about water usage. the um

32:45bill really focused on um noise and

32:51water. And so just as a tea leaf of

32:55where the state may decide that they

32:57want to have a role, we're taking that

32:58as a sign. Um they specifically focus on

33:02data centers that we call hyper scale,

33:05so the 100 megawatt or greater. Um

33:07obviously there might be impacts from a

33:10smaller size than that. Um but that's

33:12where they really focused. And so this

33:14legislation, which is not law, but was

33:17moving, um would require closed loop

33:21water systems for all data centers in

33:22the state, would require applicants to

33:25provide um an assessment of their noise

33:27to any local government that they're

33:28applying to develop in, and would

33:31require DEQ to establish water use

33:33standards for data centers by this fall.

33:35Obviously, we're almost there, so

33:36they're not going to do that by

33:37September 1st. Um so there really hasn't

33:40been any impact at the state level. um

33:44especially on the zoning side,

33:46but we assume that there is something

33:49coming and so we're continuing to

33:50monitor that especially on the water use

33:52side for our utilities purpose um to

33:55make sure that we can be proactive on

33:57those impacts.

34:04We've kind of spoken to this a little

34:06bit and apologies it's cut off a bit at

34:08the top, but I'm just going to talk a

34:11little bit about what Central Pines has

34:13been doing in our regional response. And

34:16so the first thing that I think we

34:18really started off with was just having

34:20open regional discussions. I know we

34:22heard from a couple of different avenues

34:24that we were one of the first places to

34:26just kind of start convening to talk

34:28about data centers and then as we move

34:31forward we really leverage the expertise

34:34of the people in our community and and

34:36that we're able to contact with being a

34:38council of governments. So we were able

34:40to engage with Bruce Venal at the town

34:42of Apex. He's put together some

34:44incredible research and resources and is

34:47helping us navigate creating a tier

34:49system to identify the different mega

34:52wattage for each type of data center as

34:55well as helping us compile together the

34:58best definitions for each of these

35:00things which has been very helpful. And

35:02then as Elena mentioned, we've had

35:04conversations with DEEQ's leadership,

35:06which has been really helpful to just

35:08kind of understand genuinely what is

35:11going on in regard to decommissioning,

35:13wastewater, and then air quality

35:15concerns.

35:16And as well as that, we partnered with

35:19Wake County to host a regional zoning

35:21working group to support just general

35:24peer learning about data centers. But as

35:26we've mentioned, it was really created

35:28to begin drafting and developing a data

35:32center ordinance and that is really in

35:36progress right now. Then we things that

35:38we've already completed. We've created a

35:41resource hub which is accessible on our

35:43website. We'll have a QR code later.

35:45We've created a defining data centers

35:47white paper which is kind of a really

35:50deep dive overview into the basics of if

35:53you were just diving into understanding

35:55the arena in general. And then we also

35:58have created a moratory tracker for our

36:00member communities which we provided a

36:02snapshot for at the beginning of our

36:04presentation.

36:05We've hosted a lot of speakers that have

36:08spoken about data centers. Specifically

36:10during our regional day event, we had

36:12Michael Turner from Lowden County,

36:15Virginia to share their lessons learned,

36:17which is I think called data center

36:19alley is what they call it. So that was

36:21really cool to have him come and speak

36:23to our member communities even if we

36:25aren't looking at the exact same thing.

36:28It was nice to learn from what he had

36:31seen. And then recently we had our

36:35executive director Lee Worsley host at

36:38the North Carolina Teachers Association

36:40panel on data center growth. And so that

36:43was really awesome to get to be a part

36:45of. And then next month we will be in

36:47Holly Springs presenting to their land

36:50use advisory committee on some of these

36:53same things here but also some different

36:55research interests that they have.

37:10All right. So, moving on to a little bit

37:13more in the weeds about the draft

37:15ordinance. So, the model ordinance is

37:18going to be a starting point for

37:20communities that are reviewing existing

37:23regulations that address data center

37:25development. It is not supposed to

37:27replace a community's UDO or supposed to

37:30be adopted as a catchall ordinance and

37:32that's something we really wanted to

37:34communicate. So communities should be

37:36reviewing the UDO first what's addressed

37:39in their own and then other local

37:41regulations and where those adequate

37:43standards exist. Those should continue

37:46instead of creating a duplicate data

37:48center specific requirement if it were

37:51to be the same exact requirement. So,

37:53our model is supposed to help fill

37:55different gaps and just provide language

37:58and best practices that communities can

38:00adapt that are going to be traditionally

38:03what's going to need to be addressed for

38:05data centers. And so, it's not

38:08necessarily our stance or our opinion on

38:11things, but just best practices and

38:13convening experts in the region and

38:16research that we've been able to dive

38:18into. And so the ordinance is organized

38:22into eight main sections. You can see

38:24here. I'm not going to read everything

38:26off, but the first section is authority,

38:30purpose, and intent. It addresses legal

38:32basis of the ordinance. We have

38:34different definitions which will include

38:36that kind of tiered scale that we spoke

38:40about. Section three is use

38:42classification and zoning. So where

38:45things might be permitted or not

38:47permitted. Obviously, we know that this

38:49is going to be very community specific

38:51and we have context throughout the

38:53ordinance that make sure that

38:55communities are guided to check their

38:58UDO first. Section four would be

39:00application requirements. So,

39:02pre-review, postre, noise studies,

39:05things of that nature. Section five,

39:08supplemental use standards. Then we have

39:10monitoring and reporting.

39:13Section seven is enforcement. And then

39:15section eight would be administration.

39:18And so it kind of just walks through

39:20each of these different sections.

39:32So, how crafted the ordinance is, it was

39:37kind of all over the place, but it

39:39really started with combining kind of

39:43national evidence. So, national

39:45research, it started with a lot of

39:46webinars, lift serves, emerging

39:49research, and different examples across

39:52the country and [clears throat] not just

39:54in our community. We really looked

39:55pretty wide. And so our ordinance

39:58specifically draws a lot from Apex's

40:002026 research and also the York County,

40:04South Carolina model ordinance as well

40:06as different ordinances from North

40:08Carolina and Virginia. And we've

40:11provided the specific North Carolina

40:13state statutes and regulations. And

40:16Central Pines is also obviously going to

40:18continue to see what is developing and

40:20what would need to be amended in this

40:22draft. And so we're looking at North

40:26Carolina requirements very specifically,

40:28DEEQ's requirements, North Carolina

40:30building and fire codes because really

40:32our goal with this is not to just

40:34recreate and regurgitate standards that

40:36already exist. We actually want this to

40:38be helpful. And so speaking about that

40:41working group input I think has been the

40:44most helpful having planning staff from

40:46across the region to dive through each

40:49section of this draft compare it to what

40:51they're seeing at their local standards

40:53and provide us um areas where more

40:58research and technical input is going to

41:00be important. So letting us know where

41:02we might need to do a little bit of

41:04outreach to figure out something in the

41:07most professional way. And so I'll add

41:10on the working group. Um so this was

41:12specifically a invite of communities

41:16that we knew were working on their

41:17ordinance language um specifically on

41:20this topic. So there I think there's 10

41:23communities maybe across our seven

41:25counties um and they represent a very

41:28wide range of communities. So the hope

41:30is that it reflects every community's

41:33general needs um and also got ahead of

41:36some communities who we knew were

41:37actively making changes um so that they

41:40could be a part of the process instead

41:41of getting really far down the road and

41:43then discovering that they would have

41:45appreciated being a part of the

41:47conversation before they adopted

41:48something. We know everyone is trying

41:50their best to put together the most

41:52useful zoning language on this topic.

41:54So, um it's a it's a smaller subset of

41:57our 50 communities, but it hopefully um

42:01reflects the dynamic of our region and

42:04all the different types of communities

42:05that are involved.

42:08>> Thank you. So,

42:13looking at conversations with experts, I

42:15think the most recent thing that we've

42:18had come up is Apex has shared its input

42:20from a noise consultant. And so that

42:22will be something that we will input

42:24into that section of the draft UDO and

42:27something that we really wanted to push

42:29forward with our working group is having

42:32expert knowledge and then bringing it

42:34back so that we can inform this

42:35ordinance. And then you'll see going

42:38forward we have here that section five

42:41really contains the bulk of what the

42:43data center specific standards are going

42:45to be. You can see here they're listed

42:47out from site and land use all the way

42:50down to long-term operations. These are

42:53going to be all of the specific topics

42:54that are tackled in this draft ordinance

42:57that have also had input from planners

42:59and experts across the region as well as

43:02just best practice research in general.

43:10When you say data centers, I think

43:12that's pretty loosely used word um to be

43:15honest because I build six data centers

43:20from my hand you know literally hand

43:22like two in Phoenix

43:24uh two in Kansas City and two here and I

43:29understand the uh

43:33how much noise it makes because um the

43:36Chinage road um has the AT&T data center

43:40and I worked for AT for 20 years. It has

43:43pretty much the fans of almost I would

43:46say two floors is if you have seen the

43:48Guns of Never on like movie that's the

43:51kind of thing that it and just turn it

43:53on once in a while. Um but I want to be

43:57very clear the data centers you're

44:00talking about is more hypers scale data

44:03centers and GPU centers not

44:07the regular data centers because both

44:10are two different beasts and that's the

44:13reason when people keep saying data

44:15centers there is hypers scales are like

44:18100 acres and 300 megawatt of usage. Um

44:24but that is not

44:26we're talking about. So I the word is

44:30very loosely used.

44:34>> Yeah. And I know we've um that's been

44:36part of the definition process is

44:37figuring out how to make sure that

44:39because there are already operating data

44:41centers

44:42>> like you're saying in our region um that

44:45are often much smaller scale or are not

44:48um having the impacts that people are

44:50concerned about with hypers scale. So

44:51being mindful of um the different scale

44:55sizes has been really important in this

44:57process um because obviously the smaller

45:00ones don't have the impacts that

45:02everyone's concerned about. So

45:04>> and our goal in the draft ordinance as

45:07per recommended by some of the members

45:09of our working group similarly to you

45:12were asking us to be sure that we

45:14include definitions for everything that

45:17might be a question. So, every single

45:19type of data center and any type of

45:21specific definition that may not be

45:23explained within the ordinance. Um, that

45:26was a really good recommendation for us

45:28to be sure that we're addressing

45:31everything that someone might be

45:33concerned about or thinking about. So,

45:35thank you so much for your comment.

45:50So as turn my microphone on. So for our

45:55regional response just moving forward we

45:57are in the process of finalizing our

46:00model ordinance draft by the end of

46:02September. I almost said this month but

46:04it's not September yet. And so that is

46:07what's coming up next. And then also we

46:09just wanted to mention that alongside

46:12the draft ordinance they will there will

46:13be a use guide to help communities

46:17actually know how to work through each

46:19the section each section and identify

46:21where their existing UDO language kind

46:23of intersects where our draft language

46:26is and how they can use it to be useful

46:29to their specific community. And then we

46:32will also share the draft wars and key

46:35findings with the state in hopes to just

46:37help broader inform conversations around

46:40data centers and the best practices that

46:42we've seen through our regional

46:44convenings that we've been doing over

46:46this past year. Obviously, we're going

46:48to continue to moderate what's going on

46:51at the state and federal level because

46:54we want to make sure that the ordinance

46:55is constantly and always aligned with

46:58those changing requirements or it's

46:59pretty much null. And then what's really

47:02important is to have ongoing and

47:05consistent conversations with our

47:07providers. So utilities, water

47:09providers, and other technical providers

47:11so that they can actually tell us what

47:13we need to prepare for and what to look

47:15look for. And then as we move forward,

47:18we will continue our regional convenings

47:20and technical assistance to our

47:22communities that are navigating interest

47:24in data centers or they're getting

47:26sightings or they're just feeling the

47:27rumblings of a potential data center.

47:29We're here to help you guys out and kind

47:31of parse out the path forward. We're not

47:34complete experts, but we have a lot of

47:36people that can help us and planners

47:38that are able to figure out for each of

47:40our specific communities how to navigate

47:42this

47:45>> question. Um,

47:47who is the target audience here? The

47:50reason I asked that is

47:52Vick is almost getting built out. you

47:54know to do those hypers scales is pretty

47:57hard but

48:00are you guys person I think personally

48:03you guys should be targeting the small

48:05towns who have no knowledge and people

48:08go and get the UI changes uh and second

48:12you know by right they have it um I know

48:16or something has the Google or Amazon I

48:20don't know hypers scale and

48:23is getting restricted on the DEQ side

48:26because that is the only way to stall

48:28for the water and other than that like

48:32you know many of the small towns have no

48:34clue what it is and many people think oh

48:38it's a tax dollars and and it very

48:41little quickly depreciates

48:43um so are you guys going beyond

48:47I know Triangle J I was there for

48:49several years but you know more of the

48:51small towns where like they have

48:53large pieces of land. I think those are

48:56the targets that all these companies are

48:59looking for.

49:01>> Yeah, we're trying to reach as many

49:03communities as at least in our

49:04footprint. We are directly trying to

49:06reach across all seven counties. Um as

49:09our region grows, there are fewer and

49:11fewer small rural communities in our

49:13region. But um we still do have a good

49:15number in Johnston and Chadam and um Lee

49:18and Moore to some extent which are part

49:20of our region. Um I think there's also a

49:24I will say um our working group includes

49:27some larger communities and no one is

49:30doing something I think everyone is

49:32benefiting from the conversation

49:34especially on the zoning side. Um mostly

49:37because there is a lot of pressure to

49:39get it right on zoning because of the

49:42downzoning issue that there is at the

49:44state level. Um, and so there's a lot of

49:47everyone wants to just make sure what

49:48they put in place will last for a long

49:50time and there's a lot of unknowns about

49:53things like technology and all that as I

49:54said. So, um, there's definitely less

49:58pressure and there's a lot less places

50:00for it to happen in Wake County, but I

50:01think everyone is happy to have a

50:04working space to be talking about this

50:06topic because there's just a lot of

50:09public pressure on it. So um yeah, but

50:13we are definitely trying to reach our

50:14smaller communities. We we have some

50:16staff um who actually are planning staff

50:19for the small communities which helps

50:21because we can

50:22>> we can help get ahead of some of that um

50:25because some of them see as a great

50:26source of revenue and it can be it can

50:28be a great source of revenue

50:29>> and and for Mars school particularly we

50:34don't have we don't control water we

50:37take care so and electricity obviously

50:42we are so far behind to do anything

50:45here.

50:52>> I know this probably isn't within your

50:54purview, but I did want to say that I

50:56hope that at the state level or even

50:58that at the federal level that someone

51:01is going to be looking out for majority

51:04minority communities, which is where

51:06this type of thing does tend to get

51:08placed. You know, first it was hog

51:10farms, now it's going to be data

51:11centers. and you park this in the

51:15backyard of people that don't have the

51:18money or the resources to fight you and

51:22it just increases generational

51:25inequities. So, I don't know if you've

51:27heard anything along that line. I know

51:29that this probably isn't a great time

51:30politically to have that conversation,

51:34but I just wondered if you had heard

51:36anything.

51:37I think mostly we've just heard the it

51:40more from a rural perspective. Our

51:42communities that are um that are rural

51:46and are in need of money are are looking

51:49at it as an opportunity and it can it

51:52can provide money. So that is not not to

51:54diminish that that's a possibility, but

51:56there's also a lot of other impacts that

51:57come with that. Um so we haven't had

52:01that piece of the conversation to to

52:04this point.

52:06So, is there anything you need from us

52:08or are we just sort of having a little

52:09discussion in reaction to what you

52:11>> Yeah, I we I mean, we would love to hear

52:13if there's resources that you think

52:15would be helpful, if there's speakers

52:16you think would be helpful. Um the your

52:19staff will be receiving and I'm sure you

52:21all are welcome to look when we have the

52:23template ordinance, but this is just

52:25meant to beformational. So,

52:26>> so I had a couple of thoughts. Um I'll

52:28start with the and council member

52:31Garamela brought up the fact uh very

52:33interesting like where can it be done by

52:35right right now and have you guys tried

52:39to create some kind of sample language

52:41or best practice to get ahead of that

52:45for all 50

52:47look at each one and say okay you have

52:50risk right here and if you want to not

52:53have it happen by right before you know

52:55it these would be your steps Is that

52:58part of your effort?

53:00>> It hasn't been to directly assess each

53:04community's um zoning, but we certainly

53:07could do that. I think most of our

53:09communities did not have it as language

53:12at all as a definition in their

53:15documents already. So, most of them are

53:17adding it in as a definition. I think

53:20Chhatten County may be one that had it

53:22in there and has had some changes, but

53:24that's a great idea. So that might be a

53:26value ad

53:27>> coming off the buy rate because that's

53:30once it's happened, it's too late.

53:32>> Um, another thought, what is the risk of

53:35the federal government saying that

53:38municipalities cannot say no like they

53:40did many years ago with cell powers?

53:43Are you assessing that risk and trying

53:44to figure out what we can do to advocate

53:46against that type of blanket statement?

53:49Yeah, there's been general statements

53:53pushing, you know, development of it. We

53:56haven't seen anything legislatively come

53:58out that would be indicating that that's

54:00going to happen anytime soon. Um, it

54:02would obviously be a concern and we

54:04haven't seen anything at the state

54:05level, which is also um

54:08useful, but that's another great space

54:11for us to look into.

54:12>> Okay. Um, as you get to the defining

54:16data centers and how to use it, will you

54:18be able to also provide like some AI

54:20prompts to people to say, "Okay, put

54:24your geo here, put this here,

54:27>> help have AI integrate it like to save

54:31them time.

54:33>> That might be a good thing to come at it

54:35with an AI expert about which prompts

54:37would help them to do that."

54:38>> Yeah, that's a great idea. I think um

54:41>> yeah there is um for sure um there's one

54:46water when you talk about one million

54:48gallons a day

54:49>> and the one water concept is that all

54:51water is good ground water used water

54:53should be reused so I need a little

54:57education about this water that goes

54:59through a data center doing the cooling

55:00and it comes out the other side is it

55:02useful for anything else

55:05>> so yeah I'll try and please correct me

55:07if I miss anything do you want to

55:09Okay.

55:11[laughter]

55:12>> So, um, so I'm an HBAC design engineer.

55:16So, um, uh, this is used for cooling.

55:19So, you have an openloop system and a

55:21closed loop system. The openloop system

55:23is basically you have um

55:26cooling tower that feeds a chiller,

55:30let's say, and that's what keeps all the

55:32data, all the racks cool. um in an

55:34openloop system the uh it's evaporative

55:38cooling. So the water is put into um

55:42these cooling towers and then it just

55:44evaporates away. So that's how the

55:47that's you know it's taken in a million

55:50million gallons of water. That water is

55:52then getting evaporated

55:54becomes clouds and comes back into the

55:57environment

55:59>> potentially. But it also um

56:03you know it's taken water away from the

56:05community.

56:06>> Yeah. I know there's been from some of

56:08the utilities they've indicated that the

56:10general concern around water is just how

56:13much even if it's a closed loose closed

56:15loop system is a preferred from my from

56:18our research but it still uses a lot of

56:21water. And so for utilities obviously

56:24considering how much water is being

56:25taken from other uses that's something

56:27to keep in mind. The other piece that's

56:30water but it's waste water. So DEQ was

56:33really stressing the wastewater impacts

56:37that will come out. So when it whatever

56:40comes out of the facility um is often

56:42very hot and there's some sort of either

56:46from the equipment or the treatment it

56:49it completely renders it

56:52useless as a water source.

56:58Yeah. So figuring out where that goes is

57:01a large concern and which bodies of

57:03water. Um so that's something that DEQ

57:05when we had them come speak to one of

57:07our groups said there's been a lot of

57:09conversation about water, but we'd

57:11actually encourage there to be equal

57:12conversation about wastewater because of

57:15the impacts that there could be from the

57:16wastewater.

57:17>> Because back in like the 2010s when

57:19Vicki and I first got on the council,

57:21there was talk about Jordan Lake having

57:23enough water for like 50 years. I'm not

57:25sure what that number is now, but it

57:26would be good for you all to sort of dig

57:28into that and sort of give us what the

57:30expectations are and if data centers do

57:34come up a lot more, what will that

57:35change? How will that look differently

57:38into the future? Um, getting really

57:40granular in municipalities

57:43since the noise is an issue. Would the

57:45notifications about zonings and resoning

57:47requests be larger

57:50than the 500 ft that we have now, for

57:52example? That might be something to look

57:54at to make sure that you're protecting

57:56the municipality a little bit more and

57:58giving them a little bit more.

57:59>> Yeah, I think one of the standards the

58:03the distance is much more than 500 ft if

58:05I'm not mistaken.

58:06>> Yeah, we've in our ordinance we have

58:08kind of adopted that kind of perspective

58:10of taking if there is a like max buffer

58:14that we've seen in best practice that's

58:16what we've listed and then giving

58:18context. But we will definitely make

58:19sure that we're looking into that and

58:21addressing that. is higher than 500.

58:24Yeah. For hypers scale.

58:26>> Okay.

58:26>> Yeah.

58:27>> And I guess um if you could add to your

58:29presentation what hypers scale looks

58:30like compared to what we're used to. Is

58:33it an Amazon warehouse? Is it two of

58:35them? You might know better than most of

58:37us. What is hypers scale? I have no

58:40idea. Is it like Lenovo center? What is

58:42>> No, like hypers.

58:45>> It's like 100 megawatt. It's on a 100

58:48acre. There's a design for it already.

58:51like you know you can put get 100

58:53megawatts um hypers scale on 100 acres.

58:57>> So that homage would be helpful for

58:59people like this is the Lenovo center

59:01this is a hypers scale.

59:02>> I think we've actually seen it one of

59:04our planners

59:05>> did take that really quickly and just

59:07sent it over just randomly. That's crazy

59:09that he had that same exact example side

59:11by side. But that's a great idea to add

59:14in there.

59:15>> And we're talking about energy um and

59:18how it takes so much. Is it possible to

59:21in new ordinances essentially require

59:23for a solar offset require them to have

59:27solar or something? Probably not, but I

59:29mean I think there

59:31>> I think there's a lot of difficulty with

59:33acquiring

59:35>> anything.

59:36>> Yeah. I mean not anything but a lot of

59:39things and especially related to energy.

59:42So just thought planting the seeds about

59:44doing that and saying your communities

59:46might be more accepting

59:48>> if you say 50% of our energy is coming

59:50from this solar source anyway

59:52>> so we're less impactful to for the

59:54community. Um

59:59those were my thoughts that came out of

1:00:01your presentation and the prompting from

1:00:03the rest of the council.

1:00:05Looks like representative body and then

1:00:08council member Aramela.

1:00:11>> So the example of the cell phone of the

1:00:14cell towers is a really interesting one

1:00:16because we really find ourselves in the

1:00:18same situation. Nobody wants a cell to a

1:00:21cell phone tower in their in their area.

1:00:25Nobody wants a data center in their

1:00:26area. But at the same time, nobody is

1:00:29going to stop using AI to do everything

1:00:32from write their grocery list to design

1:00:34their house. So,

1:00:38so the data centers aren't going to go

1:00:40away. Like they're I mean they're going

1:00:42to get built somewhere, but so is this

1:00:45just about

1:00:47keeping it out of our backyard? Is that

1:00:50what like is that what we're doing here?

1:00:52You know, like put those things in the

1:00:53desert and just let them go. So at least

1:00:57for the work that we've done, we are not

1:00:59taking a approach of no data centers or

1:01:02data centers because we have communities

1:01:03that want them in their communities. And

1:01:06so our approach has been what are the

1:01:09potential negative impacts that can come

1:01:11from it and how can we help communities

1:01:13that may not even be aware of of that

1:01:16from research plan for that. So, the way

1:01:19that they're using water, the way that

1:01:21they're using energy, how close they are

1:01:22to residential neighborhoods. Um,

1:01:25there's some things that communities are

1:01:26not regulatory involved in. And so we're

1:01:29trying to not put that into this and

1:01:33recommend that you take a role that you

1:01:35don't have, but trying to get ahead of

1:01:37of that so that if you do want a data

1:01:39center because there are communities

1:01:40that do, here are best practices um to

1:01:44make it as as least impactful as it can

1:01:46be because they are going somewhere.

1:01:49>> Yeah. Okay.

1:01:53>> I got a lot of questions here. So

1:01:58when you're saying data center, what are

1:02:00you going behind? You're going behind

1:02:03more electricity and water. Is that the

1:02:06two? And noise. Those are the three

1:02:08things you're going behind.

1:02:10>> Our definition of hypers scale.

1:02:13>> I think it's by me megawatt. And there

1:02:16was some conversation about it. It

1:02:18involves size. Yeah.

1:02:21>> Um the reason I asked that is because

1:02:26what is next? You have we have forge

1:02:29nano. It takes equal amount of water

1:02:33actually more than or sometimes you know

1:02:36to a data center because chip

1:02:38manufacturing all those things are comes

1:02:40very high. for also comes not high but

1:02:44when you have like 10 15 pharmas in the

1:02:47same area is almost equivalent to a

1:02:48hyperscale right so how are you

1:02:53by definition you know

1:02:57coming you know like you can have 10

1:03:00farmers

1:03:01in Mars world and it's almost consuming

1:03:04water and electricity equal to hypers so

1:03:10is that that's the reason I'm asking who

1:03:12who is the target you know is it the

1:03:14data center because next I can see uh it

1:03:17will be pharma or you know it could be

1:03:21chip manufacturing and and for sure um I

1:03:25think

1:03:27Arian Baldwin when she was the mayor I

1:03:30asked her specifically because Micron

1:03:32Technologies was supposed to come and

1:03:35fast you know like a billion dollars and

1:03:38the reason they stepped up stepped back

1:03:41is because the Harris nuclear plant did

1:03:44not even allow a gallon of water to be

1:03:47used to any of the other purposes. So

1:03:50they were protective of their water

1:03:52because the nuclear plant needs you know

1:03:54all those things and that's the reason

1:03:55they went to Austin

1:03:57and that's my thing is what is the

1:04:00future look like and that is because at

1:04:03Morrisville we take a lot of pride in

1:04:06pharma and other stuff.

1:04:10Any other questions?

1:04:15>> Oh, I forgot who the question was.

1:04:18>> Yes.

1:04:20Um,

1:04:24actually, yes. Do we know what this

1:04:28companies uh the criteria companies use

1:04:31to select a site for the data centers?

1:04:35>> So, we have some sense. We would love

1:04:37we'd love to if they would share exactly

1:04:39what they're looking for. We um we know

1:04:42based so the town of Apex was one of the

1:04:44first pieces that sort of triggered us

1:04:46to be involved in this topic because

1:04:48they had a proposed development. Um and

1:04:51so we've had some conversations with

1:04:52them to understand what this developer

1:04:54found to be attractive about the site.

1:04:55The Harris nuclear plant was one of the

1:04:57things that they found to be really

1:04:59attractive as they were really close to

1:05:01a large energy source. Um, so they are

1:05:04looking for easy access to energy.

1:05:07They're often looking for a lot of land

1:05:09um and access to water

1:05:12are the the large ones. There's others,

1:05:14but um that was one of the main reasons

1:05:16they chose the location. It was directly

1:05:19either behind or really close to the

1:05:21Harris plant and they wanted that source

1:05:24of energy.

1:05:31Does anyone else have any questions or

1:05:32thoughts to share? Council member

1:05:34Johnson.

1:05:35>> So, I don't really have any questions,

1:05:37but I appreciate um the conversation and

1:05:40the update on the work that you all are

1:05:42doing for um for all of us in in the

1:05:46Central Pines region. Um I think what's

1:05:49more important is what we already are

1:05:52doing and um how we're protected and if

1:05:57we are um confident in our UDO that it

1:06:01is um

1:06:03it is protecting us the way we want. And

1:06:07of course, now we're talking special use

1:06:09permit, which is um really um I I hate

1:06:13and love special use permits, but um you

1:06:16know, we if I'm not mistaken, Jazelle,

1:06:18that you we need to have a or uh anyone

1:06:21that would come in here for a data

1:06:23center has to has to request through a

1:06:26special use permit. So, it's not even a

1:06:28reasoning, but a special use permit

1:06:30process.

1:06:33>> I'm going to look up Michelle to make

1:06:35sure she corrects me if I'm wrong. That

1:06:36is correct. But it's only allowed in the

1:06:39gold district

1:06:42>> BAC, sorry, a business activity center

1:06:45zoning.

1:06:46>> Okay.

1:06:46>> So only within that zoning and requires

1:06:49>> and industrial

1:06:50>> and industrial and it requires a special

1:06:52use permit if it was to be allowed.

1:06:54>> Okay. Okay. So you know, so we've

1:06:57already addressed it. Now are we

1:07:00comfortable with that is a different

1:07:01question, but we've already addressed it

1:07:03in our UDO.

1:07:04And then I'm going to go back to um

1:07:08Council Member Garamela's comments about

1:07:10there are other uses that are just as

1:07:14heavily a heavy user of electricity and

1:07:18water and all these other things that we

1:07:20have embraced in this town. So this for

1:07:24me this is and I know for other

1:07:27communities it's different. for other

1:07:29communities they wanted to put a

1:07:30moratorum because they they haven't

1:07:32thought uh or they don't have I don't

1:07:35want to say they haven't thought but

1:07:36they don't have the UDO as updated as

1:07:38they want and um

1:07:41but I um I'm not sure we're in that same

1:07:45boat I guess that's my comment

1:07:49>> council member Kesler

1:07:52>> so I also had the question about our

1:07:55ordinance um specifically you know will

1:07:57Morris build ordinance be misaligned

1:07:59with the model ordinance once the model

1:08:02ordinance comes out. Um simply because

1:08:06it really was adopted before a lot of

1:08:08the conversations have been happening

1:08:10throughout the throughout the country

1:08:12really um throughout the state. So

1:08:14that's a question there. Um I don't

1:08:18know.

1:08:20So, so with the open loop systems, one

1:08:23of the things um this is uh

1:08:27kind of pertinent in in hospitals and

1:08:29some other places, but Legionnaire's

1:08:30disease um that is something that you

1:08:33can uh Legionella can grow in a in a

1:08:37cooling tower and um so if you do have

1:08:40those open loop systems and you place

1:08:42them next to some residential

1:08:43communities, um I don't know what the um

1:08:46carryover on that is uh but

1:08:51Yeah, it could be a possibility there

1:08:53and probably hospitals would be the the

1:08:55place to look look to for um how they

1:08:58address that. Um I also wanted to um

1:09:05give a plug for an organization run on

1:09:07climate. They have a lot of um data on

1:09:11or not data but uh examples and toolkits

1:09:15and whatnot. Uh some of it looks like

1:09:18it's um maybe overlapping with what

1:09:21y'all have um but just a lot of

1:09:23resources there treasure trove basically

1:09:27you could say and then um I'm also

1:09:30involved with Ashray the American

1:09:32Society of Heating Refrigerating and Air

1:09:33Conditioning Engineers and we have

1:09:35subject matter experts um that you can

1:09:37reach out to the um to that staff and

1:09:40they might get to get you connected with

1:09:42someone that's a inside the building

1:09:44sort of thing. So, especially if you're

1:09:45talking about um state building codes,

1:09:48um that would be a good resource to uh

1:09:52um you know, pick their brain on

1:09:55some of those regulations and let them

1:09:56know.

1:09:59>> Um the resources sound great, so we'd

1:10:02love to see them. Just on the the dis

1:10:04the the ordinance, I don't imagine being

1:10:07adopted the same by each community. We

1:10:09already know um some that are in the

1:10:12working group are going to take a much

1:10:13more stringent approach on how far away

1:10:17things need to be or some of the

1:10:19standards um because each committee

1:10:22already has some standards in place. So

1:10:25that's just a comment that it won't be

1:10:27just everyone adopting the exact same

1:10:28thing and you're not adopting it. Um but

1:10:33>> and when you have resources to sort of

1:10:35look into the legislature and see what

1:10:37the communities are authorized to. You

1:10:40can't go unlimited, right? So, there's

1:10:42probably some limits on how stringent

1:10:44they can be and they might not have the

1:10:47capability to do that in house.

1:10:49>> Does that make sense?

1:10:50>> Could Yeah. Could you repeat that? I'm

1:10:51sorry.

1:10:52>> Um, so like the notification buffers and

1:10:55things like that, there's probably some

1:10:56maximum set by the legislature if you

1:10:58include that so they know not to exceed.

1:11:00Um, Council Member Scar Johnson, please.

1:11:05Very

1:11:09good.

1:11:10>> Well, good evening. Thank you for coming

1:11:12out tonight and sharing with us some of

1:11:14your research and um next steps. So,

1:11:18that's very helpful. Um Morrisville

1:11:22is an unusual situation in that we don't

1:11:24have a water utility. um we rely on

1:11:29Carrie providing us with an allocation

1:11:32for our um entire town. So with that, if

1:11:39a hyper data center is needing an

1:11:43excessive amount or an excessive

1:11:45percentage of our allocation, that is

1:11:48going to be harmful to our community. So

1:11:51looking at our UDO and understanding the

1:11:56parameters of our allocation is

1:11:58important to this town.

1:12:01Um

1:12:03the

1:12:05electric supply issue has been a

1:12:09challenge in the sense that we have

1:12:13introduced a business sector with

1:12:15biioarma which is a high consumer of

1:12:19electricity for their light industrial

1:12:22manufacturing and their activities. So

1:12:25we already are at deficit in our town

1:12:27for electric needs and future planning

1:12:31without any data centers coming into the

1:12:33horizon. So

1:12:36um

1:12:38that that I struggle with is like how

1:12:41can we provide what we don't have when

1:12:44we came and we strive to provide what we

1:12:47need in order to um

1:12:50serve the business and residential

1:12:52community that we have today.

1:12:54And then finally, the noise

1:12:58ordinance is tricky. We just have a

1:13:00simple noise ordinance about so many

1:13:03decibb, you know, no parties after 11,

1:13:06that kind of thing. Um that is an

1:13:10opportunity

1:13:11to look at a noise ordinance that might

1:13:14have a little more

1:13:18flavor of you know ongoing continuous

1:13:23uh intense sounds of certain decibb and

1:13:27looking at those parameters. I think

1:13:28that is an opportunity for our town to

1:13:30revisit the noise ordinance. It's not

1:13:32just

1:13:34the social noises, if you will, or the

1:13:37construction noises. We typically no

1:13:40construction before 7 a.m., that kind of

1:13:42thing. So,

1:13:45definitely identified a blind spot for

1:13:47me as to what noise really is and where

1:13:52we might have to think about um further

1:13:56definitions of noise for the town. So,

1:13:59thank you.

1:14:04And I had one further thought for your

1:14:05working group and perhaps you might be

1:14:06able to add value to municipalities that

1:14:08are kind of seeking maybe data centers

1:14:11as an opportunity like what type of

1:14:13redevelopment could they fit in like

1:14:16could they fit in an office that's

1:14:18underused or flex space or something

1:14:21like that and how much would they need?

1:14:23So that might be another thing that you

1:14:25can add to your list of things to do.

1:14:28>> Yeah. No, that's a great idea. No, and I

1:14:30one thing that we didn't touch too much

1:14:31on, we don't have a ton on there really

1:14:34are not a lot of resources on this is

1:14:36the conversation of decommissioning of

1:14:38data centers is also something that has

1:14:40come up. Um, partly because we assume

1:14:43the technology will change and so they

1:14:45may not need the facilities the way they

1:14:46are right now. And what will that mean

1:14:49for any community that has one, but for

1:14:51if it's a community that really wanted

1:14:52one um and then has a a nonoperational

1:14:57data, no longer need a data center. Um

1:15:00and so in conversations with DEQ, who's

1:15:03been our best resource on that, there's

1:15:05really no templates on decommissioning

1:15:07for data centers that we've found yet, I

1:15:08don't think. um they have some samples

1:15:11present solar panel decommissioning as

1:15:14their best answer, but that's just been

1:15:16an interesting

1:15:18um it's not exactly what you were

1:15:20saying, but maybe think of it is the

1:15:22decommissioning conversation being a

1:15:24concern.

1:15:27>> To pass it back to our deputy town

1:15:29manager to let us know um how our staff

1:15:33has been interacting with this group and

1:15:35what next steps are and how you're using

1:15:37them as a resource or what you need from

1:15:39us in order to do that more.

1:15:42>> Thank you and thank you to Grace and

1:15:45Elena for the information they have

1:15:47provided to us tonight. So the intent of

1:15:50bringing this to you all is definitely

1:15:52provided as anformational session just

1:15:54the work that is occurring here in the

1:15:56region and just making sure that we're

1:15:58plugged in with what's happening. Um

1:16:00they currently have what's here is the

1:16:01the website where they are putting a lot

1:16:03of information a lot of the research

1:16:05that they are doing is available on this

1:16:06website. They also have um provided

1:16:10access to staff to some of the

1:16:12information. They also have on their

1:16:13share uh point site and um we continues

1:16:17to stay uh connected to the work that

1:16:20they are doing. They continue to do

1:16:22webinars and different sessions that we

1:16:24can come together and continue to be

1:16:26informed. Um my question to council is

1:16:31now that you have received

1:16:32thisformational session uh what else

1:16:35would you like to hear about? Is this a

1:16:37topic you want to continue to hear

1:16:39about? Uh do is there anything

1:16:41particular that you are interested in

1:16:44for staff to research any further and

1:16:46bring back to you?

1:16:51>> Council member Kesler

1:16:54question that I was asking earlier about

1:16:56Morrisville's um ordinance and how that

1:17:00aligns with the um model ordinance.

1:17:07Okay,

1:17:09>> that was gonna be my question. Um, as

1:17:11soon as you publish your best practices,

1:17:14I'd like I'd be interested in knowing

1:17:16what staff will do with that.

1:17:18>> Council member Scott Johnson.

1:17:21So um to council member Garamela's

1:17:24point, I think we need to define data

1:17:27centers in our UNO much more clearly and

1:17:30in fact add a definition because I don't

1:17:33like data center generally being in BAC

1:17:36and industrial. I think the hyper data

1:17:38center would only belong in an

1:17:40industrial environment in our town and

1:17:42not in a BAC just due to some of the

1:17:45safety and health concerns that you were

1:17:47described tonight. Um but data center

1:17:51for the purpose of a small data center

1:17:53that a company needs in order to do

1:17:55their operations. I don't see that to be

1:17:57a problem. And so I I want that

1:17:59flexibility to allow our business

1:18:01community to thrive, but not the the you

1:18:04know superersized uh data centers to

1:18:08begin the um wrong place to impact the

1:18:12quality of life. Thank you.

1:18:15>> We have space in Morrisville. Could we

1:18:17fit a hyperscaler? No. Right. Okay. I

1:18:21All right.

1:18:24>> Saying that we don't need it. I'm just

1:18:25saying I'm I was just asking because I'm

1:18:28I mean if you need 100 acres for we

1:18:30don't we don't have that anywhere.

1:18:32>> Okay. I don't think we're going to be

1:18:33the most attractive community for this

1:18:35anyway. But I do agree that we should

1:18:37have some level of protection for

1:18:40ourselves in our UDO

1:18:43>> and most expensive. Well, and well,

1:18:46yeah, fair point. But also, I mean, if

1:18:50you know, if quantum computing just

1:18:52shrinks the footprint of the data

1:18:54center, it's still not going to shrink

1:18:56probably the resource allocations. So,

1:18:59you know, we want to have we want to

1:19:02have clear definitions of what we do and

1:19:04don't want and the resources that we're

1:19:06willing to expend.

1:19:12to Mayor Protim's um Robat's comment. Uh

1:19:18we definitely can put can get more

1:19:20information more definition to make sure

1:19:22that we are protected. Yes, we don't

1:19:24have a site that will fit a hypers scale

1:19:27data center. Um, I do have to I I do

1:19:31want to let you know there is actually

1:19:32as we were doing a little bit of

1:19:34research, we did find that there is a

1:19:36data center in Morrisville that's been

1:19:38here since the 2000. Um, is a much

1:19:41smaller care scale of a data center is

1:19:44not really a high use of utilities. Uh,

1:19:47but it has been operating for 26 years.

1:19:50Um, and that's probably what we may see

1:19:52more of. Um we do um know that there is

1:19:56some interest for some potential outfits

1:19:59to expand uh the use of data centers but

1:20:02again those are in the smaller scale uh

1:20:05type of data centers.

1:20:12I think

1:20:15those are completely fine because that

1:20:17is the need for operations of the a

1:20:20particular company and

1:20:24or we can have the ordinance in such a

1:20:27way that if this if they are making

1:20:31money

1:20:34off that data center like say Azure you

1:20:37know Microsoft

1:20:38or Google it's basically they're making

1:20:40money by giving the services but most of

1:20:44them that you're talking about are only

1:20:46for their internal purposes I think by

1:20:48definition if you can tweak it like you

1:20:51know then pretty much many of the things

1:20:53can be cleared out because that will

1:20:58automatically stop hypers scale and many

1:21:01other big ones

1:21:05>> so um you're you're absolutely Right. We

1:21:08have a small, very small scale data

1:21:10center already here. Um, and I'm not

1:21:13sure we want to discourage any of that,

1:21:15especially in areas where there's

1:21:19redevelopment opportunities. Not that I

1:21:21want to see a lot of them either, but um

1:21:23one thing that I'm interested in um when

1:21:26it comes to the special use permit for a

1:21:28data center,

1:21:30we I know we ask about um impacts like

1:21:35health impacts on the community. I

1:21:36forget the exact wording we use. It's

1:21:38like health and self health and safety

1:21:40of the community. But I would are we

1:21:44specifically

1:21:46asking or targeting this concept of

1:21:49noise. The the noise honestly the noise

1:21:52concerns me more than all the others.

1:21:54The others are concerning as well. Um

1:21:57but I'm not sure we I don't recall us

1:21:59ever really focusing on noise as a um an

1:22:05issue. So I I and there's no no need to

1:22:08answer. You don't have to answer it

1:22:10tonight, but because we're going to come

1:22:11back. The noise is going to be a um

1:22:15something I want to focus in on. You

1:22:17know, we understand all the energy

1:22:19consumption, the water consumption, but

1:22:21um the noise is what's going to impact

1:22:24the surrounding area more than anything.

1:22:27Of course, I'm not diminishing, you

1:22:29know, water and and energy impacts the

1:22:33community also, but it's the noise that

1:22:35concerns me. And then I also am um I I

1:22:40want to make sure we revisit the BAC

1:22:43too. And you know, industrial management

1:22:45is one thing in the IM district, but in

1:22:47BAC,

1:22:49um

1:22:50that might be something to make sure

1:22:52we're all okay with. Again,

1:22:56>> I also would like to know if there is

1:22:58are sites adjacent to Morrisville, like

1:23:01in RTP or in Durham, if there's some

1:23:05place out there that we should be

1:23:07concerned about.

1:23:11>> Yeah. Um,

1:23:15so I've heard it expressed here that we

1:23:17have some of these life science formula

1:23:20that might be more resource intensive

1:23:23than a data center. I don't know. I'm

1:23:26sure not as resource intensive as the

1:23:28hypers scale. Um, but certainly it's up

1:23:31there on the same level. Um

1:23:34so I think the concerns around data

1:23:38centers with the resources that are

1:23:40being consumed I think it would be worth

1:23:42knowing uh kind of an equivalent

1:23:46um

1:23:48equivalent information you could say uh

1:23:51for the things that we do have here and

1:23:53the things that we are trying to attract

1:23:55um to understand the impact of those

1:24:01>> kind of

1:24:04I guess a gayla apple to a pink lady.

1:24:13>> So,

1:24:14>> anything else? Any other questions?

1:24:16>> Just a big thank you for all the hard

1:24:18work you've already done and all the

1:24:20help that you're going to be providing

1:24:21to all 50

1:24:22>> as we go forward. Really appreciate your

1:24:24time.

1:24:25>> Thank you. It sounds

1:24:26>> economic developments.

1:24:28It sounds like from the questions that I

1:24:30just uh jotted down that you have an

1:24:32interest in. It seems like you will be

1:24:34appropriate to come back with an update

1:24:35on the topic and perhaps if central

1:24:38clients has any additional updates on

1:24:39the time we can share those with the

1:24:41council and then dive a little bit more

1:24:42into Morrisville itself. But thank you

1:24:45for uh for your time tonight.

1:24:53>> Yeah. Want to take a five minute break?

1:24:54Come back at uh 7:20. Sound good?

1:24:58And then we'll be talking about the key

1:25:00to the town policy.

1:34:30So, we're coming back into session right

1:34:32now with the second of three topics. I'd

1:34:34like to recognize Brandon Zudo, our town

1:34:36manager, to go over the key to the town

1:34:38policy.

1:34:40>> Thank you, mayor. Good evening, mayor

1:34:41and council. Um, as you'll recall, uh,

1:34:44last meeting or a meeting recently, uh,

1:34:46on August 11th, I should say, we had a

1:34:48discussion about a key to the town

1:34:50policy. Again, shared that with you

1:34:53because we have issued a key on five

1:34:55different occasions, and we've never had

1:34:56a policy for it. So, thought it was a

1:34:58good time. There is no no pending

1:35:01application, no pending person I'm aware

1:35:03of, which probably makes it even a

1:35:04better time to do it rather than having

1:35:06someone in mind. Uh, so we talked

1:35:09through that and you gave me some

1:35:10feedback and asked for some addition

1:35:12additional information and

1:35:13clarification. So I think the easiest

1:35:16way to do that is walk through the red

1:35:18line uh version of what was in the

1:35:21policy when I showed it to you the first

1:35:22time and what I've changed and then can

1:35:24certainly try to answer questions, take

1:35:26comments. My goal um if we can would be

1:35:29to get any final discussion tonight so

1:35:32that it can be final edited and brought

1:35:34to you on September 8th on consent.

1:35:38So, um, key to the town in the scope, it

1:35:42said the key to the town is a

1:35:43prestigious honor that recognizes

1:35:44individuals who have significantly

1:35:46impacted the town of Morrisville. And

1:35:48I've clarified through their actions or

1:35:50through their visiting the town. Uh,

1:35:52that speaks to the dignitaries that was

1:35:54brought up definitions. I've added a

1:35:57couple of definitions. One for heroic

1:35:59life-saving act when an individual or

1:36:02group of individuals take action or

1:36:04actions to save the life of another

1:36:06person. Honored presence when a

1:36:08dignitary or other individual of great

1:36:10importance visits the town of

1:36:11Morrisville and their presence is an

1:36:13honor to the town. So then I've taken

1:36:16this first section that was the criteria

1:36:18for awarding a key to the town and

1:36:21changed it to just speak to those

1:36:23exemplary contributions. That was really

1:36:25the focus of the first policy. Then down

1:36:28the line we'll get to it. I've added a

1:36:30second criteria section more for the

1:36:32dignitaries and the heroics. So two

1:36:35different sort of ways to get the key to

1:36:37the town. So in this section um length

1:36:40of service again I there wasn't

1:36:42consensus among you. Um I had included a

1:36:45minimum of 10 years and I've indicated

1:36:47it's at the discretion of council to

1:36:48reduce this requirement in unique

1:36:51circumstances.

1:36:53That gives you that flexibility if you

1:36:55want it.

1:36:59It is at the direct discretion. I'll

1:37:01correct that.

1:37:05All right. And then the nomination and

1:37:06selection process for those uh added a

1:37:09reference to timing. Council member

1:37:11Garame Miller recognized the award takes

1:37:13time to purchase and prepare following

1:37:14approval. Council should work with staff

1:37:16to understand production and scheduling

1:37:18timelines. You know, I think our intent

1:37:21would be regardless is to have this be a

1:37:23personalized key to the town. We've also

1:37:25talked briefly that there could be that

1:37:27surprise visit and we can always keep

1:37:29one on hand that just doesn't have a

1:37:31name on it and we could still do that

1:37:33and then we could always add a a more

1:37:35personalized one later or something like

1:37:37that. But for now that just reminds

1:37:39everybody that you know don't don't tell

1:37:41us today if you'd like it tomorrow.

1:37:45Uh Council Member Scrogggins Johnson I

1:37:48think your suggestion around who could

1:37:50be eligible or who could be on this uh

1:37:52committee. So I've indicated the mayor

1:37:54or the mayor prom. So that's one or the

1:37:56other of the two. Uh and then two

1:37:59members of town council which can

1:38:00include the mayor prom if not serving

1:38:02and live with the mayor. And then again

1:38:04there's a town manager or I can

1:38:06designate someone from senior leadership

1:38:08and a department head selected by me.

1:38:11>> Really good.

1:38:12>> Thank you.

1:38:14So here's that new criteria for awarding

1:38:17a key to the town for a one-time

1:38:18occurrence. two primary occurrences

1:38:21which would result in the awarding of a

1:38:22key to the town for a one-time

1:38:24occurrence. Uh, an honored presence in

1:38:26Morrisville by a dignitary or another

1:38:28individual deemed by council to be of

1:38:30great importance in the context of

1:38:32visiting the town. Heroic life-saving

1:38:35incident occurring in the Morrisville

1:38:36community in which one or more persons

1:38:38are responsible for saving the life of

1:38:40one or more persons outside of their

1:38:42normal career responsibilities. So we

1:38:44have a way to recognize police officers

1:38:46and firefighters that might do this in

1:38:49the it's not the norm of every day but

1:38:52it's a job expectation.

1:38:54>> So this might be you know if two

1:38:56inspectors are heading to lunch and they

1:38:58see a crash and they save two people or

1:39:00two residents or two passers by um this

1:39:03would be them.

1:39:05So a nomination for this award must come

1:39:07from a member of council. Uh the

1:39:09nominating council member can seek staff

1:39:11assistance in advance of the meeting

1:39:12during which they make their nomination.

1:39:14Council may elect to vote on a

1:39:16nomination the same night it is

1:39:18presented, particularly if the time is

1:39:19of the essence in having the award ready

1:39:21to present. So again, we don't normally

1:39:23ask you to contemplate and vote the same

1:39:26night. But again, if there's a short

1:39:27notice that there's an ambassador coming

1:39:29that you all want to recognize, that

1:39:31just might be required to do it all in

1:39:33one evening.

1:39:35Uh again, is that council's discretion

1:39:37to award a key to the town for either of

1:39:39these one-time occurrences based on a

1:39:41majority vote? There will not be a

1:39:43selection committee given the nature of

1:39:44these awards and really the timeliness

1:39:47that we expect a little more with them.

1:39:50The anticipated timing for the award of

1:39:52a key to the town for behind you

1:39:55um for a one time occurrence is

1:39:57anticipate be two weeks from the time

1:39:59council approves such an award. Council

1:40:01may request a staff attempt to expedite

1:40:03this process in unique circumstances.

1:40:06[clears throat] Um, yeah, that's it.

1:40:10And then there's there's the the uh the

1:40:12application. Happy to take questions.

1:40:16Yes, sir. Um,

1:40:19I like these ones, but what if

1:40:24like going in the for B, right? Right.

1:40:28It's only talking about a heroic or

1:40:30life-saving incident.

1:40:32What if a kid uh from Marsville goes

1:40:37into Olympics or basically does you know

1:40:40something that no one else has done? How

1:40:43do you recognize that in this this

1:40:46structure? You cannot

1:40:50question.

1:40:52So, um

1:40:53>> I know I'm just thinking

1:40:55>> um so again right now that technically

1:40:58would probably not fall under this

1:41:02>> couldn't proclamation or

1:41:04>> you could do a proclamation a letter

1:41:06recognition. If if you want that to be

1:41:09something that would be a key to the

1:41:11town, we would have to add another

1:41:13category.

1:41:17I'm just think

1:41:19>> I mean I think that's

1:41:21>> I think if you want to think about you

1:41:23know one-time performances by a resident

1:41:26um it it needs to be a separate section

1:41:29and and I'm not saying we can't

1:41:32respectfully I'm a little concerned

1:41:33about what's the fourth one and the

1:41:35fifth one and the sixth one and then

1:41:36we're giving this thing away like it's

1:41:37candy.

1:41:39So, couldn't that fit under a

1:41:43couldn't that fit under

1:41:47um you a is for somebody that is

1:41:50visiting

1:41:51>> is visiting and two is pretty specific

1:41:54for life saving

1:41:56>> or you can add a line into that like you

1:41:59know heroic life saving instant or

1:42:02something like

1:42:04>> put it under the first category the the

1:42:09just it's

1:42:10>> performing an amazing Yeah. a long time

1:42:14service and we could just wave the years

1:42:17>> if we really want. I mean it says right

1:42:19there we can wait the years.

1:42:20>> Yeah. [clears throat]

1:42:22>> If we really wanted to I personally

1:42:24don't but if we did want to do that we

1:42:25could do it that way.

1:42:29>> Other thoughts on that?

1:42:32Yeah, I think I think if you um I don't

1:42:35I don't that's a good example, but

1:42:37there's probably 5,000 more examples.

1:42:40So, I think we got to have to lock in on

1:42:42something,

1:42:44see how it goes. And what with

1:42:47everything we do, we can tweak it as

1:42:49time goes on. But I think I think we

1:42:52could also include that example and many

1:42:54others quite frankly in the first

1:42:57category. Just reduce the length of

1:42:59service if we want to.

1:43:04And there's a catch based on any

1:43:05violation we have. It's a discretion of

1:43:07the council

1:43:08>> in the end.

1:43:09>> It's policy. It's your policy. This is

1:43:12really to give you guidelines.

1:43:14>> And anybody who's going to the Olympics

1:43:15has put in way I'm sorry and anybody

1:43:18who's going to the Olympics has put in

1:43:20way more than 10 years of preparation.

1:43:22I'm just saying, you know, that I feel

1:43:24like it fits there. We don't need

1:43:26another category.

1:43:31What's up? Any other questions,

1:43:33comments?

1:43:36>> Looks like we're good to bring it back

1:43:38on the consent.

1:43:39>> Yeah, that's the plan. I'll make that

1:43:40one edit and we'll bring it back.

1:43:43>> Cool. Thanks.

1:43:44>> Thank you very much. That's maybe a

1:43:46record 7:31.

1:43:49Uh, at this time we'll move on to item 2

1:43:52C, town council roundt. We'll welcome

1:43:55back deputy town manure Rodriguez. Bless

1:43:58you for sure.

1:44:04>> Good evening again. Um so this is the

1:44:06time for round table. We have four new

1:44:09roundts uh to be discussed today. There

1:44:12is also has been provided the tracking

1:44:15spreadsheet that has all of the previous

1:44:17uh roundts that have been provided

1:44:19including the one that were submitted

1:44:20the last time with an update for those

1:44:23items. uh given the the amount of

1:44:26information to be shared in the update

1:44:28on two of them. We added them as

1:44:30memorandums that provide a detailed uh

1:44:33response to two of those and those are

1:44:36attachment three and four and that's for

1:44:38the little libraries and

1:44:41let's see

1:44:43and the foodways uh program. So if if we

1:44:47will go over the new ones first and if

1:44:49there's any questions on the other ones

1:44:51then we will visit that uh after we

1:44:53discuss the new ones. So the first one

1:44:55we have is Mayor Pat Robati if you would

1:44:58like to introduce your item.

1:45:03>> Thank you. [clears throat]

1:45:05Um

1:45:07I think that my item is pretty

1:45:09self-explanatory. Safe Child Raleigh is

1:45:13an organization that offers services for

1:45:15free to

1:45:18children where there's an a suspicion

1:45:22that they've been sexually assaulted,

1:45:24abused, or neglected.

1:45:27So, the investigations into this type of

1:45:30situation can retraumatize a child in

1:45:34addition to what's already happened to

1:45:35them. safe child has a facility where

1:45:40the basically

1:45:42the child stays. They have an advocate

1:45:45and then if they need to see doctors,

1:45:48the doctors are brought in. If they need

1:45:49to see psychologists, the psychologists

1:45:51are brought in. So they have a home base

1:45:54of safety and security during the time

1:45:57of the investigation.

1:45:59So, up until now, they've been providing

1:46:02this service for free. Uh, I believe all

1:46:05through Wake County. I'm not entirely

1:46:08sure of that, but I believe that's the

1:46:09case. And Carissa Johnson brought this

1:46:12item to me because the safe child people

1:46:15had reached out to her and asked if

1:46:18Carrie could start covering their costs

1:46:21because they need they need a revenue

1:46:24stream in order to continue to provide

1:46:26these services. So, the Carrie

1:46:29contribution was going to be about

1:46:31$100,000.

1:46:33I don't know what the Morrisville

1:46:35contribution would end up being. I God,

1:46:37I hope it would be zero. But

1:46:41I think that this is very important work

1:46:44and I don't think that they should do it

1:46:46for free if they're expressing that they

1:46:48may not be able to continue to do it at

1:46:50the level that they want to do it. So, I

1:46:52would like us to consider

1:46:55at least asking staff to find out what

1:46:58our contribution would be and whether

1:47:01that's something that they recommend we

1:47:03undertake.

1:47:08>> Any questions, comments? Council.

1:47:12>> So, yes, the safe child is an excellent

1:47:16organization. and I went for the gala

1:47:18and in fact Frank's colleague Carmichael

1:47:22she's the president of that association

1:47:26and we had it and they have a good

1:47:29amount of money they make um especially

1:47:31in auctioning and all those things you

1:47:33know that that night they made almost

1:47:35like $250,000 or something but

1:47:38nevertheless I think I like the concept

1:47:40what they do but for us we don't have a

1:47:44policy to to anything to a nonprofit

1:47:49and that is it it's comes back to that

1:47:52principle you know and till we have that

1:47:57policy

1:47:58this is one of the many of the where we

1:48:05failed to do it because this is they

1:48:09showed I went to the facility too and

1:48:11it's I think one in Vendale and one in

1:48:13rally or something they have Um but uh

1:48:18if we don't have a policy then we don't

1:48:20know how to go about and Kerry does have

1:48:23policies because they give money to

1:48:26Hamsub and all those things and like

1:48:28they have the funds to distribute you

1:48:31know PW.

1:48:36>> Any other questions or comments?

1:48:41>> Council member Johnson. So I um I would

1:48:44kind of echo what um Sati says but I

1:48:47think more than that I also

1:48:50say I know I I given to Safe Child.

1:48:53attended their fundraisers in the past.

1:48:56Not the Gallow because the Galla was too

1:48:58expensive for me, but um and they did

1:49:00raise a lot of money, but um they're a

1:49:02fabulous organization doing incredible

1:49:04work, but I don't know to what extent

1:49:08they do work with our police

1:49:10departments. So, that would be important

1:49:12to kind of understand. And they are not

1:49:15the only nonprofit that works with our

1:49:17police department. So now um I think

1:49:21there's a lot of precedent setting to to

1:49:24think about here and then um fairness

1:49:27too as to who who is working with our

1:49:31police department and

1:49:34working more than another group. I I

1:49:36mean we have Kieran that does domestic

1:49:38violence and and then we're getting into

1:49:41a point now I know you said to reimburse

1:49:44them. So that sounds like we're entering

1:49:46in some kind of contract. So that's a

1:49:48whole different ball game for me. So it

1:49:50seems to me that this is

1:49:53and I don't I don't even mean you know

1:49:55it was supposed to be easy quick but

1:49:58there's a lot I think that goes into um

1:50:02just making a decision to reimburse

1:50:04somebody and and I don't even know how

1:50:08um clearly they they if they if they

1:50:11approach the town of Kerry

1:50:14they must work in the town of Kerry a

1:50:15lot I would assume. I I they've never to

1:50:19my knowledge approached us. So I don't

1:50:21know what that means. Well, Cararissa

1:50:23had told I'm sorry. Cararissa had told

1:50:25them that she would speak to neighboring

1:50:27municipalities. I think was the

1:50:29situation. I like I said I would put it

1:50:32on a round table.

1:50:33>> You know, if we can't do it, then we

1:50:34can't. I get it. the profit

1:50:37[clears throat]

1:50:38>> mayor colleague.

1:50:39>> So sounds sounds like there's

1:50:41recognition of this nonprofit and others

1:50:43doing good work in Morrisville, but we

1:50:46cannot do it because we don't have a

1:50:47nonprofit policy and we've already done

1:50:50a little work towards it, but this

1:50:52council past councils have not supported

1:50:55just even having a policy in place so

1:50:58that we could consider these things or

1:51:00consider a way to have staff choose

1:51:02these so it's not political. So I guess

1:51:05a sub ask would be or we can wait till

1:51:08the end because it's one of them that we

1:51:10could go over and revisit in order to be

1:51:13able to address these in a timely manner

1:51:15when they do come up um to direct staff

1:51:18to revisit that other round table item

1:51:20and say please create a policy so that

1:51:23we'll have the option so we don't say

1:51:25well this is really great but we can't

1:51:27because we don't have a policy.

1:51:32So if we think it's a good thing to do,

1:51:33having a policy doesn't commit us to

1:51:35doing anything. It just commits us to

1:51:37having the ability to serve our

1:51:38community in a way that's legal because

1:51:41there's some things that we cannot

1:51:42expend taxpayer dollars with, but we can

1:51:45work with Doris for example or something

1:51:47like that. So if anyone wants to react

1:51:51to that now, otherwise I'll bring it

1:51:52back towards the end of this round table

1:51:54session.

1:51:57>> Council member Johnson. So I got to look

1:51:59at this a little differently. If staff

1:52:02thinks we need to enter into contracts

1:52:06with folks to supply

1:52:09with groups to supply support to the

1:52:12work that they're doing. I'm I I would

1:52:15like you to bring that forward.

1:52:18So that and that sounds like something

1:52:21totally different. So um

1:52:25if I may, mayor, so I think yes and no

1:52:29to some extent. So I think we we do need

1:52:32a policy that speaks to I think

1:52:35generally giving any money to any

1:52:38nonprofit. And then I think within that

1:52:40you could certainly have a discussion

1:52:42about a contract for reimbursement as

1:52:45being one option. You know another

1:52:47option is you're going to give $5,000 to

1:52:50organization Y and trust them to use it

1:52:54for Morrisville residents. So, I think

1:52:56to me anyway, and I don't want to speak

1:52:58for any of you, but I think those are

1:53:00both within the the confines of a

1:53:03nonprofit policy where you would be

1:53:05agreeing to take taxpayer dollars and be

1:53:08willing to give them to a nonprofit and

1:53:11we would talk about the criteria under

1:53:12which that could occur. One of those

1:53:14could be a reimbursement contract. One

1:53:16of those could be a donation for

1:53:18services to Morrisville residents. And

1:53:20there's probably others. We we still

1:53:22have some research to do. Look at what

1:53:24Carrie's doing. Look at what others are

1:53:25doing. We're not reinventing the wheel.

1:53:29>> Yes. To to expand on onto that related

1:53:32to to an alternate,

1:53:35if it was specifically a contract, it

1:53:38will be if we were seeking the services

1:53:41of the company and the company is

1:53:42working directly for the town, which we

1:53:45have other contracts that we do. uh but

1:53:48for that there's a solicitation that

1:53:50occurs and then we will select the most

1:53:52qualified consultant and then utilize

1:53:55that consultant for that particular

1:53:56service and then we enter into a

1:53:58contract in which we pay for their

1:54:00services. It sounds like on this case

1:54:02they are particularly working for the

1:54:04victims instead of working directly for

1:54:07the town as the service seeker.

1:54:16Okay. So, uh, Council Member Kesley,

1:54:20>> you'll be bringing up the nonprofit item

1:54:23later.

1:54:24>> Uh, yeah, it doesn't sound like people

1:54:26are wanting to talk about it as part of

1:54:27this, although it's essential in order

1:54:30to make this go forward.

1:54:31>> Um, I guess my comment is um for this uh

1:54:35proposal. I would like to know how that

1:54:38would fit in our quote unquote

1:54:40established nonprofit policy. However,

1:54:43it seems that we do not have a nonprofit

1:54:45policy. So I would like that to be

1:54:48investigated with the you know the

1:54:51eventuality of okay proposal like this

1:54:54how would that fit within our policy

1:54:56once we get it established or as we're

1:54:59establishing it.

1:55:07>> Thank you. Our current unofficial policy

1:55:10is not to have a policy and therefore

1:55:12not donate to any specific nonprofit

1:55:17because of there's so many good

1:55:19organizations.

1:55:21It becomes difficult related to safe

1:55:24child and other um health and human

1:55:27service um

1:55:30um organizations.

1:55:34Wake County

1:55:36has a function with health and human

1:55:38services and I know they are woefully

1:55:40underfunded like all the health and

1:55:43human services across North Carolina and

1:55:46we need organizations like these

1:55:48nonprofits to help um expand those

1:55:51services

1:55:53but it is a challenge for a municipality

1:55:55without that health and human human

1:55:58services function. So, I'm not

1:56:01necessarily in support of establishing a

1:56:03nonprofit, but I'm just kind of

1:56:06expressing frustration with the fact the

1:56:08town doesn't really have

1:56:11health and human services within its

1:56:13freement and when we have good examples

1:56:16like this of true need, how do we even

1:56:19approach that, you know, fairly? So,

1:56:22>> thank you.

1:56:23>> Thank you,

1:56:26>> manager.

1:56:28So I think maybe council member Johnson

1:56:30to your point you know we actually do

1:56:33have one pro nonprofit that we have a

1:56:35contractual agreement with and that's

1:56:37the farmers market and so that is uh you

1:56:40know we agree to give them in some cases

1:56:44dollars and in some cases staff time and

1:56:46in some cases we reimburse supplies and

1:56:49materials up to a level. It's very

1:56:51defined in the agreement, but that's an

1:56:53example of where we do that in return

1:56:56for a service provided to the community.

1:56:58So, I think, you know, you have that

1:57:00oneoff example. Um, that but again, it

1:57:03could still fall under a nonprofit

1:57:05policy that whatever that was would be

1:57:07guided by this this policy over and

1:57:09above it. Um, because I think that's

1:57:11getting something in return. And that

1:57:13probably leans a little bit towards what

1:57:16Mayor Pam is referring to depending how

1:57:18you work that out because I don't know.

1:57:19It sounds like they're working. They're

1:57:21looking for, you know, if we treat this

1:57:23many or support. I apologize. I I don't

1:57:25know the exact word to use, but if we

1:57:27support x number of people, you will pay

1:57:29us $10 times x. It's not that, but you

1:57:32know, that sort of thing. So, I think

1:57:34there's that which is a little different

1:57:35from we want to give additional money to

1:57:37a nonprofit and say use this at your

1:57:40will.

1:57:42>> Council member Garo. So Brandon uh do we

1:57:46have a contract with neighbor because uh

1:57:49for affordable housing and then if they

1:57:52are

1:57:53>> yes that's another example

1:57:55>> okay that's what I thought okay

1:57:59and and by definition that is neighbor

1:58:04directly working with a town and giving

1:58:07services

1:58:10>> right

1:58:12any other questions or comments on this

1:58:14round table item.

1:58:22>> Say that again. Mayor apologize.

1:58:25>> Sorry.

1:58:26>> Can you repeat?

1:58:28>> I would just say I would support it now

1:58:30and in the future supporting this

1:58:32nonprofit and others once we have

1:58:34policy.

1:58:35>> Support the nonprofit, not necessarily

1:58:37the roundt item moving forward.

1:58:40>> I'd support this round table item. Good.

1:58:43Is there okay to be clear the ask is to

1:58:47have staff find out how much a morsel

1:58:50contribution would be. That's it. A lot

1:58:53of these related very important ideas

1:58:56are coming out but I think very

1:58:58specifically we need to answer mayor

1:59:01prom's question.

1:59:04So to ask that question, can I get

1:59:06thumbs up? Support, not support.

1:59:09>> Is it?

1:59:10>> I would ask. Yes.

1:59:13>> And then do what with it? We don't have

1:59:14a nonprofit policy. I think I think

1:59:17we're in a circle here.

1:59:18>> It gives us a measure

1:59:22that as we look at, you know, is there

1:59:30>> it gives us a measure

1:59:34of that service so that we understand um

1:59:38and right now we have no basis for

1:59:42the health and human services sector at

1:59:45all. I mean maybe it's a broader

1:59:47question of what other contributions are

1:59:49there allocations you can't get a

1:59:52specific number necessarily but

1:59:56quantifying I I think is helpful

1:59:58information we might say we still can't

2:00:02because we don't have a policy but I

2:00:04would like to know

2:00:06basically how much

2:00:09more spill with our dense population you

2:00:12know are are those resources really

2:00:14being

2:00:15carries a very large community.

2:00:17Morrisville is not, but we might be

2:00:20surprised how much Morrisville is in

2:00:22need of those services.

2:00:29>> Any other comments?

2:00:30>> I just had one additional comment um

2:00:33response to Council Member Scroggen

2:00:36Johnson. Um

2:00:38there's Health and Human Services at the

2:00:40county level. Um, but then how are those

2:00:44services getting squeezed by the

2:00:47situation that the county's in where

2:00:50maybe that maybe municipalities could

2:00:53chip in a little bit more to support

2:00:55that support those efforts um until the

2:00:57state decides to fund them.

2:01:01>> Thank you.

2:01:03Thank you. We'll move on to the next

2:01:05one. Um, Council Member Kling has two

2:01:08items.

2:01:10Uh the first item will be voluntary

2:01:12pre-application developer review policy.

2:01:15>> Yes. So I'd like to direct staff to look

2:01:18into a voluntary public pre-application

2:01:21preview process for legislative

2:01:23resonings. So before a developer spends

2:01:25significant time and money preparing a

2:01:27formal resoning before staff spends

2:01:29their limited capacity on their

2:01:31application, uh the developer could

2:01:33bring an early conceptual proposal to a

2:01:35public council work session for

2:01:36feedback. This would give the public

2:01:38earlier visibility, give council an

2:01:41opportunity to identify major policy

2:01:42questions sooner, and provide a

2:01:44transparent alternative to developers

2:01:46seeking individual meetings with council

2:01:48members. It would be completely

2:01:50voluntary and non-binding, and I'm sure

2:01:52staff would recommend safeguards to

2:01:54protect the integrity of the formal

2:01:55review process.

2:02:00>> Questions,

2:02:02comments? Council member SC,

2:02:06>> I had the honor of discussing this with

2:02:07Harrison prior to this meeting and um I

2:02:11just want to clarify it really truly is

2:02:13an optional opportunity proposed for a

2:02:17developer or a large project even even a

2:02:20small project that might have some

2:02:22unique characteristics.

2:02:24But for years, we had always thought for

2:02:27some of the more complex projects, it

2:02:30might have been easier to first go to

2:02:32council and get a a read, then send it

2:02:35to planning and zoning board to get a

2:02:38little more fine-tuning and then have it

2:02:40bring bring it back up. Versus today,

2:02:44the first time we really can react to

2:02:46something is after PNZ has had a chance

2:02:48to look at it. And sometimes that is

2:02:52with a lot of work, time and effort that

2:02:56has been expended on the project. And

2:02:58when council has a reaction that causes

2:03:00rework, it's more expensive and and it

2:03:03really elongates the process. So this is

2:03:05an um even though it adds a step in

2:03:08possibly initial time, it's an

2:03:10investment and cost savings for the town

2:03:14as well as the applicant optionally. So,

2:03:18it's not every single one to put a huge

2:03:20burden on, but it does like some of the

2:03:23reasonings I I can

2:03:26at least five different examples where

2:03:28this might have been a a really helpful

2:03:30tool for everybody. Thank you,

2:03:34>> Council Member Gar.

2:03:37>> I think Kerry does something like that.

2:03:39To my knowledge, they have the initial,

2:03:41you know, yes, no kind of a thing and

2:03:43goes back. But again, for

2:03:47the way we conduct our meetings like

2:03:50already five hours, six hours and when

2:03:52we bring these kind of things you know

2:03:54with no staff inping and just hearing

2:03:57from a developer

2:03:59we are getting into operations I feel

2:04:01and where we may like it but

2:04:05understanding there are like a lot of

2:04:07caveats and lot of rules and regulations

2:04:11um that have to be streamlined

2:04:15um by the staff before it comes to us

2:04:18you know because sitting on the dasis

2:04:20wow that's a great idea you know so what

2:04:24you know then what because it has to go

2:04:27back to them and say are they getting

2:04:30the yield of how many apartments they're

2:04:32doing are they getting the square

2:04:33footage how many they're doing so we are

2:04:35not in the space at all

2:04:41>> but I'm just saying it it just adds up

2:04:44it just adds up our time here uh and it

2:04:48never reduces because we talk for every

2:04:52small thing.

2:04:54Mayor Britain Robot.

2:04:58>> So, I'm not necessarily opposed to the

2:05:00idea, but I I think that this shouldn't

2:05:04this be happening at the staff level

2:05:06when a developer brings a project to

2:05:09this like most of the staff has known us

2:05:12some of you guys for 28 years. You know,

2:05:14it seems to me that the staff should be

2:05:17fully able to guide a developer and say,

2:05:21"Council member Castle is going to ask

2:05:23you about sustainability. Just put it in

2:05:25there." You know, I'm going to ask

2:05:27about, I don't know, plans. You know,

2:05:30other people are going to ask about I

2:05:32mean, they brought hundreds of proposals

2:05:35to us. So, I guess my question is what's

2:05:39the difference between if there's a

2:05:42value ad in a developer hearing from

2:05:45council? I'm not opposed to it, but I'm

2:05:48not exactly clear on

2:05:52where the delta is between what they

2:05:55would hear from staff and what they

2:05:56would hear from us in that situation. If

2:05:59I may, let me try to answer that

2:06:01question before I move to council

2:06:03members Johnson. So the way the process

2:06:05works now and and with council member

2:06:08Johnson being in council a little longer

2:06:10and also council member Scrabbins

2:06:12Johnson, there have been multiple things

2:06:13that over time has been delegated to

2:06:16staff to handle that as a as a more of

2:06:19an administrative item for reszonings. U

2:06:23applicants are required to have a

2:06:25pre-application with staff and they can

2:06:27have as many pre-applications as they

2:06:29want to. Like they can have a

2:06:30pre-application

2:06:32before the official one. they can come

2:06:34back for a second reapplication. And in

2:06:37a lot of cases, you may have received

2:06:39some phone calls from some of uh

2:06:41developers that may be interested on

2:06:43hearing from your opinion individually

2:06:45before they make an official submission.

2:06:48Um

2:06:49very much like the way you described it

2:06:51that staff will specifically tell them

2:06:54this is what our council will be looking

2:06:56for. That's exactly how the meetings go.

2:06:59The meetings are very detailed as to

2:07:01what the interest of council is and what

2:07:04staff does through those meetings is

2:07:06they enter into a negotiation process

2:07:08for conditions. All conditions have to

2:07:10be offered voluntarily. So what they do

2:07:14is understanding what council's typical

2:07:16feedback is and some of the concerns and

2:07:19requests from council they incorporate

2:07:21that into recommended uh conditions so

2:07:25that their the developer can elect to

2:07:28offer those in exchange for whatever

2:07:30concession they are requesting. Uh but

2:07:32that's essentially the way it goes is

2:07:34staff will always lead those

2:07:37conversations with the developers

2:07:40um with council's direction with the

2:07:44priorities that they have heard from

2:07:46council and making sure that those are

2:07:47incorporated so that they are bringing

2:07:50forward a recommendation that staff

2:07:52believes align with a project that

2:07:55council would support and that's what

2:07:57the process is now.

2:08:01So, can I I'm sorry. Did

2:08:04>> So, thank you for that because um I

2:08:07think and I don't want to speak for

2:08:09Council Member Kesling, but I think what

2:08:11what he's trying to get at is he wants

2:08:14to make that part that is happening more

2:08:18transparent to the public. And so, how

2:08:21do we make that happen? And maybe it's

2:08:24not

2:08:24>> and maybe it's not worded as a

2:08:26pre-application pre maybe this is worded

2:08:30something very differently but I think I

2:08:33think that's the gist of it. Um I agree

2:08:36100% with you. There are there are

2:08:39projects over the years that were so

2:08:42ridiculous and so horrendous that they

2:08:44never made it to the public because

2:08:47council members put a stop to it or

2:08:50staff put a stop to it. But that was all

2:08:53happening kind of behind the scenes and

2:08:54it's really hard to articulate that

2:08:57publicly and I have tried to do that

2:09:00>> many many many years trying to explain

2:09:03to people that this it's the best stuff

2:09:05or or the stuff that we have no

2:09:08sometimes we have no ability to change

2:09:11it too. there's there's often zoning

2:09:14that's already in play that um we don't

2:09:17have the ability to um to to change. But

2:09:21but anyhow, but I think that's the gist

2:09:24of it. How to how to make all of that

2:09:26much more public transport.

2:09:30>> That makes a lot of sense.

2:09:31>> Go ahead. Council member Screenings

2:09:33Johnson.

2:09:34>> That's really funny. Council member

2:09:36Johnson, I was that was my point. Um,

2:09:39sorry.

2:09:41>> It's like an early warning system,

2:09:43right? I mean, we've had several

2:09:45reasonzonings and some projects where

2:09:48the public finds out on a Thursday and

2:09:51we talk about it at the town council

2:09:53level on a Tuesday and they're major

2:09:56projects, major resonings, 20 different

2:10:00conditions. It's not

2:10:03fair to the public when they may or may

2:10:06not miss a meeting. And it just I I

2:10:10remember years ago we had brief twice

2:10:14vote once where that cadence allowed for

2:10:18the public to first be aware of

2:10:20something. This was a town council

2:10:22business meeting. So we we had different

2:10:24kind of meeting formats but we would

2:10:27introduce the item, give some initial

2:10:29feedback, bring it back, have a robust

2:10:32discussion, then the third meeting we

2:10:34would vote and that gave the public

2:10:37time to be alerted, give some feedback

2:10:43initially, show up to the discussion

2:10:46meeting to help us kind of vet out some

2:10:49um items and then the final vote It was

2:10:53after that so that we came upon a better

2:10:58solution without having uh continuous

2:11:02rework and then there were some projects

2:11:04because um there was so much complexity

2:11:08it would was delayed 18 months you know

2:11:12so the you know brief twice vote once

2:11:16was something that I think is similar

2:11:18but it's just a different sequence to

2:11:20what you're proposing.

2:11:23Mayor Collie.

2:11:26>> So, I appreciate um everyone's input

2:11:28into this and for you bringing this

2:11:30forward in the first place. So, I like

2:11:32the transparency idea. I'm a little

2:11:34afraid and concerned about getting in

2:11:36ahead of staff before staff has those

2:11:38discussions and shares with them what

2:11:40they think that the council would accept

2:11:44because if they bring something early to

2:11:46us and we say, "Oh, yeah, that sounds

2:11:48great." then staff is not in a

2:11:50negotiating position anymore.

2:11:52>> Maybe it's something staff could

2:11:54suggest.

2:11:56>> So I So I'm trying to find the way um to

2:11:59do it. So it's after those discussions

2:12:02but before the planning and zoning

2:12:04meeting. So that would be a way to and

2:12:07we'll recognize him in a second. Thank

2:12:08you for letting me know. Um so that

2:12:10would be my thought about the timing.

2:12:13Give staff their chance to negotiate.

2:12:16Um and if it looks like it's a n third

2:12:18anyway, they're going to go away like

2:12:20the um 55 plus units. It would have been

2:12:25nice if we saw that before the planning

2:12:27and zoning meeting so they knew they

2:12:28needed to do a neighborhood meeting

2:12:30because that one where people felt like

2:12:32they were it was too late for them. This

2:12:35would take that make it easier and staff

2:12:38now knows you should probably do a

2:12:40neighborhood meeting for certain things

2:12:43so they can encourage that going

2:12:44forward. So, that would be my I would

2:12:47support this if we did it that way and

2:12:49didn't put staff in an awkward position,

2:12:51but getting in front of planning and

2:12:53zoning so that people could speak at

2:12:54planning and zoning if they want and

2:12:56then they have time to speak to us. Um,

2:12:59I'd like to recognize the town manager.

2:13:02>> So, mayor, I do think the timing is

2:13:04critical if if you wish to pursue this.

2:13:07Um, you know, this has to come after at

2:13:09least the first staff conversation that

2:13:12typically occurs in a presubmitt. Um,

2:13:14but what you don't want is a project

2:13:16coming to you that staff has and I think

2:13:18I'm repeating you so but and not you but

2:13:21council. um because staff has to

2:13:23evaluate that because what you don't

2:13:24want is a I think a developer innocently

2:13:27or otherwise coming before you and

2:13:29suggesting they're going to do X Y and Z

2:13:31and we don't know if they're allowed by

2:13:33the UDO to and and staff can answer some

2:13:35of those questions in the in the moment

2:13:38of a meeting but some of that requires

2:13:40research and some of that has questions

2:13:42to it and there's a lot of work to be

2:13:43done. Um, so I think that that would be

2:13:46my first point was that it would have to

2:13:47come after an opportunity for staff to

2:13:50review it. And then I would also

2:13:52recommend that if we're going to allow

2:13:53for this, that is a developerdriven

2:13:56presentation. There should not be an

2:13:58expectation for staff work to accompany

2:14:01that because I think we're just creating

2:14:03redundant workload at that point. Um, so

2:14:06I would also suggest that that would be

2:14:08an important part of it. And I think uh

2:14:10council member Kessing, if I may, you

2:14:12know, this this came I think from a a

2:14:14Garner project or a Garner approach to

2:14:17doing this work. And so that's what I

2:14:19talked to, you know, their assistant

2:14:20town manager. They do they do it after a

2:14:22staff review and then they have a chance

2:14:24to do this in a meeting. Um, and again,

2:14:27I realize it doesn't address this the

2:14:29transparency component, but there's

2:14:31always still um developers that are

2:14:33going to try to reach out to you

2:14:35individually and small group because

2:14:37they may want to talk to you and when

2:14:38they're not in front of a a room of

2:14:40people um depending on the nature of

2:14:42their project or if they're trying to

2:14:44hold anything back from public

2:14:46consumption for any variety of perfectly

2:14:48good reasons.

2:14:51>> Council member Canel. Oh, sorry.

2:14:54So I would be first of all thank you for

2:14:57bringing this as a round table item and

2:14:59I think you and I have discussed this

2:15:01topic and you have addressed a couple of

2:15:04concerns that I had and yes I agree with

2:15:08mayor and town manager that

2:15:11as long as it comes after that first

2:15:13step of

2:15:15have staff discussion then I support it.

2:15:21Council member King I from my

2:15:23perspective just a point of

2:15:25clarification I wanted to reach with you

2:15:27because you are the sponsor of the item

2:15:29just making sure that it's going in the

2:15:31direction that um you intended it. Um

2:15:35you included transparency and also uh

2:15:39council input. If I understood from

2:15:42council member Johnson she supported the

2:15:44transparent adding some level of

2:15:46transparency component. Um, and I my

2:15:50question to you as a sponsor is the

2:15:52interest and end goal to increase

2:15:54transparency to the community or to

2:15:58include earlier input from council

2:16:01because that's two different things.

2:16:03>> Do you think that what the mayor

2:16:04proposed does both?

2:16:08>> So, I'll uh I guess address some of the

2:16:11things that I heard and then also um

2:16:15kind of get my my thoughts on it. um

2:16:19complex projects are increasing. Um

2:16:21that's one thing. Um and we certainly

2:16:23have limited land. Um so the is the

2:16:26juice worth the squeeze kind of

2:16:27component on this and you don't want to

2:16:28be in a position where you're having to

2:16:30decide whether to squeeze the juice and

2:16:31the community's watching to squeeze the

2:16:33juice and it's it causing friction

2:16:35within the community. That's certainly

2:16:36something. um

2:16:39even if staff has those meetings and

2:16:43gives those recommendation that doesn't

2:16:44seem to stop developers from reaching

2:16:46out. So it seems

2:16:49um for the interest of transparency um

2:16:53and for the you know in the public

2:16:54interest that as individual counselors

2:16:58um

2:17:00nothing would preclude a council member

2:17:02from having an individual meeting for

2:17:04the developer. But I think having uh

2:17:06normalizing a process well well we have

2:17:08this um you know voluntary uh developer

2:17:11preview and if you are you know if

2:17:14you're serious about this project we uh

2:17:16we we will direct you to that if you'd

2:17:18like to do that. Um and we and you could

2:17:20end it there with you know we're uh

2:17:22don't want to have that kind of

2:17:24conversation um you know with you in

2:17:26private. We'd rather have that in um in

2:17:28in in public setting. Um so that's

2:17:30another thing. And then it does seem a

2:17:33little bit strange that staff speaks for

2:17:37us on policy. These are legislative

2:17:40resonings that we decide and they are

2:17:44essentially a policy question of you

2:17:47know what are we um you know what are we

2:17:49approving here. So that's that's kind of

2:17:52another component to it as well. I think

2:17:54still having the meeting is important.

2:17:56Um but certainly making the um

2:18:02and it's it's ultimately or not

2:18:04ultimately but a lot of it is for the

2:18:06public, right? We're here to serve the

2:18:07public. The public this is one of the

2:18:09the things that the public is very

2:18:12sensitive about, right? So just trying

2:18:14to make bring one bring them into the

2:18:18conversation a little bit earlier. Not

2:18:19that it would be a public hearing at

2:18:20that time, but you know, maybe we do

2:18:24have this meeting and we do give our

2:18:25thoughts and we do give our concerns.

2:18:27Um, and that would that would show the

2:18:29community that we are looking out for

2:18:30them instead of just having to decide on

2:18:33something. Um,

2:18:36you know, with with them not thinking

2:18:38that we're listening to them, that's a a

2:18:41lot of words to say. Um, yes, the

2:18:44transparency. Um certainly getting

2:18:46council's uh letting the public see how

2:18:49council is um approaching these

2:18:51projects.

2:18:56>> Council member Garamela,

2:18:59>> I I agree what you're saying. Um

2:19:03the timing is everything. I'll give you

2:19:06an example. A presubmitt happens and

2:19:09then they'll come and do voluntary

2:19:12breathing. The time from when they do

2:19:16the pre-submittal to the final submittal

2:19:20is almost like what six, seven, eight

2:19:22months. Uh and so we are creating a

2:19:28perception that not even knowing we will

2:19:31vote for it or not vote for it but

2:19:33you're creating that store without even

2:19:37knowing what your end product you're

2:19:39getting out of it.

2:19:41So, so that unnecessary creates in a

2:19:45transparency is great but it's also

2:19:47creating a lot of rumbling and anxiety

2:19:51not knowing how we are as a council is

2:19:54going and how the staff is going to do

2:19:57it because they all the technicalities

2:19:59they sort it out and then it comes to us

2:20:02so it's almost like seven eight months

2:20:03so I don't know if like people have that

2:20:06much

2:20:08memory that

2:20:11u unless it's a it's a bigger uh issues

2:20:14you know they'll forget about it so and

2:20:18the anxiety still remains

2:20:20that's I'm just thinking because and you

2:20:23guys have to tell me how much time does

2:20:25it take not not every presubmitter

2:20:27actually becomes a submitter too

2:20:31>> as I would say like one

2:20:33>> so so the anxiety is already created but

2:20:36they never submitted

2:20:37>> so then what happens

2:20:42I would ask the you know staff to

2:20:44provide some direction on that but I

2:20:45think that you know all the points still

2:20:47stand that this is a an opportunity to

2:20:50allow um you know I know that it's a

2:20:54year from when the you know it actually

2:20:56gets decided you can have those comm

2:20:58those conversations with your community

2:21:00and certainly um you know okay well what

2:21:03what

2:21:04maybe maybe I didn't address the things

2:21:06that my community uh cared about in that

2:21:10developer preview, but now I'm having

2:21:11those conversations with my community on

2:21:13this instead of it being that kind of

2:21:15tense moment whenever we're actually

2:21:17having to decide and we're actually

2:21:18having to, you know, balance all of

2:21:20those things. I think it would also, you

2:21:22know, this is another thing that kind

2:21:23of, you know, ease our um, you know,

2:21:25burden a little bit because we can work

2:21:27with our community and we can work with

2:21:28the developers to make sure that what

2:21:30they are what they are um,

2:21:34uh,

2:21:35selling to us essentially is something

2:21:37that the community actually wants. Um,

2:21:40and if they know about that before they

2:21:41spend the time and the energy and

2:21:43staff's time and energy to um, you know,

2:21:46do all this, then I would assume that

2:21:50that would be resources saved.

2:21:53>> And your interest is for that to be a

2:21:57council conversation.

2:21:59>> Ideally, yes.

2:22:11So staff will direct staff to

2:22:13investigate and bring back.

2:22:16>> Thank you. And you can proceed with your

2:22:18next item,

2:22:20which is

2:22:21>> so folks are interested. I did print

2:22:23this out. Um only got five though, but

2:22:27um this is the Strong Towns Financial

2:22:29Decoder. I was mentioning it um at the

2:22:31retreat. Uh

2:22:36so I'll just give a brief explanation of

2:22:39strong towns. Um it's a framework and

2:22:44there's three components that come to my

2:22:45mind which is street safety, housing

2:22:47affordability and municipal finance all

2:22:49with an underlying community engagement

2:22:51component and different communities

2:22:53engage in different ways. Um so just

2:22:55kind of setting that as the as the um as

2:22:58the scene. So the most pressing need and

2:23:01opportunity is the municipal finance

2:23:03component which is where this finance

2:23:05decoder comes in. Um and I had reached

2:23:07out to several municipalities and the

2:23:09core question you know just trying to

2:23:11have conversations about how are they

2:23:12using these frameworks um and how are

2:23:14they thinking about some of these things

2:23:16and the core question is is our growth

2:23:18and development creating enough value to

2:23:20support the infrastructure and services

2:23:21we are committing to maintain. So what I

2:23:24understand about this finance decoder is

2:23:26that it extracts already existing data

2:23:28from our annual comprehensive financial

2:23:29reports to evaluate sustainability,

2:23:31flexibility and vulnerability metrics

2:23:33over a multi-year timeline to help

2:23:35answer that very question. Um and I can

2:23:39give an example uh from the

2:23:43uh so the financial assets total

2:23:45liabilities chart can show a rising

2:23:47trend meaning the city is improving its

2:23:49financial buffer or a falling trend

2:23:51meaning the city is becoming less able

2:23:52to handle its obligations without

2:23:54borrowing or cutting services and the

2:23:58data that I've gathered on Morrisville

2:24:00shows you know a slightly downward trend

2:24:05so um

2:24:08which may be indicative of the

2:24:09conversations we've been having as of

2:24:11late. Um would it not be beneficial to

2:24:14use this free Excelbased tool that

2:24:16requires no license to investigate our

2:24:18financial position and take a higher

2:24:19level view of where we as a community

2:24:21are to help us determine how to achieve

2:24:23our fiscal resiliency?

2:24:28That's your question.

2:24:32>> Mayor, mayor body.

2:24:35>> Um, I would support having the IT team

2:24:41evaluate the tool and if the if the tool

2:24:45is safe to put our information into and

2:24:50the underlying formulas are what's being

2:24:54proposed here, I think it's a great

2:24:55idea.

2:24:56So just you're aware our data is in

2:24:59strong towns. It's been entered into

2:25:00strong towns already. Okay. Not by us.

2:25:03>> Yes. I'll

2:25:05>> I'll share that there's 140 communities

2:25:07with this data using the finance code

2:25:10are already out there. That's not

2:25:11necessarily municipalities. That could

2:25:13also be community um groups that are

2:25:15doing this. It's a very community um

2:25:18aligned

2:25:20framework essentially. Um,

2:25:24but it is it is something I did also

2:25:25want to mention as well. The

2:25:27governmental accounting standards board

2:25:28is already looking at changing the

2:25:30reporting standards of infrastructure

2:25:32assets by 2028. So, this may also offer

2:25:35a way to help us prepare for that new

2:25:36requirement as well.

2:25:44>> I'm not sure which one went up first.

2:25:46Council member Patel.

2:25:49>> I'll be sure. Thank you for doing all

2:25:51the research and bring this round table.

2:25:59>> Sorry, I was just thanking council

2:26:01castling for doing his research and

2:26:03bringing this to usable item and I would

2:26:06support it.

2:26:11>> Okay. So um I think this is a rather

2:26:17innovative way at kind of looking at uh

2:26:20the fact that we are nearing buildout

2:26:22and we have to understand

2:26:25um our what I call like a reserve study

2:26:29or how much of um where where is our

2:26:33value going how much will we have to do

2:26:38refurbishment or replacement over time

2:26:41as well. So it's not just are we getting

2:26:44our ROI, but for me it's like when are

2:26:46we going to have some major replacements

2:26:49of our infrastructure that ultimately

2:26:52ties into this financials

2:26:54as well. So that might be an advanced

2:26:57question, but I think of infrastructure

2:27:00as not just a constant, it's also

2:27:02something that needs care and feeding.

2:27:05And I support this. Thank you,

2:27:09>> Mayor. I support it. I think it'd be a

2:27:12good additional data point for decision

2:27:14making.

2:27:20>> Is this our information? I'm sorry.

2:27:22Maybe. Okay. Sorry.

2:27:24>> Okay.

2:27:25>> I um I inputed I uploaded it actually um

2:27:28about a year and a half ago. I think

2:27:31>> um involved in the Strong Tones group. I

2:27:33was not involved in the in the

2:27:34invitation um Saturday. Um but I was

2:27:37involved with the group uh for a little

2:27:39while. Um and this was something that

2:27:41you know was discussed and and talked

2:27:43about but yes it is more data.

2:27:45>> One of the points that I would ask is

2:27:48certainly to validate that data. Yes.

2:27:50>> Because right maybe I put a zero in

2:27:52wrong or something. You know I'm sitting

2:27:54here is like oh what's this?

2:27:57>> Okay.

2:28:01>> Okay. Any other questions? No. Okay.

2:28:05Thank you. I did want to add um

2:28:09just for the record from our

2:28:10organizational resiliency document um so

2:28:14where the town has been investing

2:28:15approximately 1 million to 1.2 2 million

2:28:17annually that may need to increase in

2:28:19the coming years to maintain a PCI score

2:28:21of 80 or higher. Right? So that you know

2:28:24directly feeds into this. Um

2:28:27I appreciate everybody's support.

2:28:30>> Yes. Payment commission index.

2:28:34>> Thank you. So our last new round table

2:28:38item is from council member Johnson.

2:28:42>> Do we want to formally vote on that?

2:28:44Like thumbs up or something? I think we

2:28:46all

2:28:48>> we were shaking hands. I everybody

2:28:51everybody said supported individually.

2:28:53So I was counting and we had enough

2:28:55support.

2:28:57>> Um okay so this one is uh really quick

2:29:00and short. It it has to do with our

2:29:03advisory committee application

2:29:06and uh what I put in here is twofold. Um

2:29:10one is are we asking the right

2:29:12questions? Do we want a review of that?

2:29:15That's

2:29:16kind of the lesser of the two asks and

2:29:18then the most important ask for me. Um

2:29:21there's a question on there where we

2:29:23actually ask the applicant what their

2:29:25party affiliation is and for the life of

2:29:28me I don't know why we put that on

2:29:30there. Um in the recent couple of months

2:29:34I've heard from multiple people and I'm

2:29:36talking people that don't know each

2:29:38other, people from different parts of

2:29:40this community who have expressed a

2:29:42concern about that question. And um when

2:29:45I hear that from multiple people and

2:29:48again from multiple people that don't

2:29:50know of each other from all different

2:29:52worlds uh here in this town um it it

2:29:55rises to a point where I think um we

2:29:58need to have a discussion about it.

2:30:00Again don't know why we put it in there.

2:30:02I'm assuming there's a big assumption

2:30:04because I really don't remember the

2:30:06conversation. I'm assuming we were

2:30:08asking to make sure we had a diverse

2:30:10group of people on our committees of

2:30:13different backgrounds and thought

2:30:15processes, but um it's not coming across

2:30:18that way.

2:30:18>> It wasn't a loaded question back then.

2:30:20>> No, it was not a loaded question. You

2:30:22are correct. You are correct. It is not

2:30:24coming across that way now. It's being

2:30:26perceived as a litmus test and that is

2:30:29far from what I want for sure and I'm

2:30:31I'm sure all of you. So, I'd like that

2:30:33question removed ASAP. But um I'd also

2:30:36like us to make sure that the

2:30:38application is the way we like it. And

2:30:41just to also to be transparent that

2:30:43question about your party affiliation,

2:30:45it is not a required field. So you don't

2:30:48have to answer it. Um because I went out

2:30:51there to I know. So I don't just get rid

2:30:53of it.

2:30:54>> Yeah,

2:30:54>> that would be my ask.

2:30:55>> Yeah, that's a I don't

2:30:58>> So I echo I I say remove that

2:31:02immediately. Um optional or not because

2:31:06we are asking for residents of

2:31:08Morrisville to apply to our advisory

2:31:10committees and not everybody has the

2:31:12ability to vote in our town

2:31:14>> and so we have to be very you know

2:31:16respectful of that. We want to encourage

2:31:18a diverse group of people. We're

2:31:21immediately isolating a part of the

2:31:24population. So I I really think that we

2:31:26need to remove that. But I would like to

2:31:29ask if we could look at that um

2:31:32application form as a group maybe and

2:31:34just kind of all not tonight but um look

2:31:38at that and say is this are these asking

2:31:41the right questions that we need in

2:31:44order to appoint the right people for

2:31:47our committee.

2:31:48>> Thank you.

2:31:51Mayor Patraati,

2:31:53>> I would actually like to with council

2:31:55member Johnson's permission expand this

2:31:57item to look at the application process

2:32:00because I spoke to someone this morning

2:32:02that wants to be on one of our

2:32:05committees. And what she said to me was,

2:32:08you fill out the application and it goes

2:32:10into a black hole. And I don't know if

2:32:13I'm on the ballot this time. I don't

2:32:15know if I was on the ballot last time.

2:32:17And I I think that there's always room

2:32:21to improve the process. And with Kayla

2:32:26here and Kimberly, I think that it's

2:32:29time to take a look at that process and

2:32:32see if we're doing everything we can to

2:32:34make it a positive user experience in

2:32:36addition to the form.

2:32:38>> Totally agree.

2:32:41>> Council member Kesley, I apologize. I

2:32:43think I had my tail first. Apologies.

2:32:47Sorry.

2:32:47>> Oh yeah. So

2:32:50thank you for bringing this up uh

2:32:54council Johnson because I myself was

2:32:57wondering first time I looked at this

2:32:58question I thought what you just

2:33:01explained that maybe it was for

2:33:03diversity but

2:33:06it in

2:33:08today's

2:33:10political climate I think it may give an

2:33:11impression that

2:33:13>> we're making making our decisions based

2:33:15on the information they provide on that

2:33:18question. So yes, 100% take it out and

2:33:22also agree with Mayor Proam. We should

2:33:26read visit the entire process and review

2:33:28other questions as well.

2:33:29>> I agree.

2:33:34>> Thank you, Council Member Cassie.

2:33:36>> Yes, I agree with removing it. Um

2:33:40something that I was actually thinking

2:33:41about uh

2:33:44it I'm sure that not everybody knows

2:33:48every single applicant that applies. Um,

2:33:50and I know that some of the more

2:33:52successful applicants um, do either know

2:33:55some people or they come and give a

2:33:57public comment or they give an email.

2:33:59Um, so I think figuring out how to

2:34:01encourage folks who do apply to um, you

2:34:06know, if they're not already shown up to

2:34:08that um, committee meeting, uh,

2:34:11definitely encourage them to show up to

2:34:13the committee meeting, but then also

2:34:14come and you know, give a public

2:34:15comment. I think we're always wanting to

2:34:17get more people um you know to our

2:34:19meetings and communicating with us and

2:34:22whatnot. So I think not necessarily

2:34:25requiring that you got to give a public

2:34:26comment at town council meeting but um

2:34:30perhaps that is a you know

2:34:33to to um to bolster your application

2:34:36let's say um you know it is recommended

2:34:38that you attend town council meeting

2:34:40attend the committee advisory meeting

2:34:42things like that to provide some more

2:34:43direction like you said on so that it's

2:34:46not just a black hole.

2:34:52Yeah, we do ask the question, have you

2:34:54attended any of the committee meetings

2:34:55or anything? But they're applying so

2:34:58it's too late to encourage them to do

2:34:59that. So we they just keep encouraging

2:35:02them to be part of the meetings even

2:35:03before they're members. But I support

2:35:05the round table item. So thanks for

2:35:06bringing it forward.

2:35:16>> I believe by her support.

2:35:19Okay. So that concludes all the new

2:35:21items. Um we have provided the

2:35:25spreadsheet with the tracking of the old

2:35:27items. Are there any questions? Any of

2:35:31them that would like to be discussed. I

2:35:33know Mayor Collie had mentioned the one

2:35:35about nonprofit. Mayor Collie.

2:35:37>> Yeah, we can just bring it up. Um it's

2:35:40way at the very end. Essentially, we

2:35:42brought it up in 21 and then again in 24

2:35:45and there wasn't really support. Now

2:35:47we're in a different environment and I

2:35:48think it's to have the opportunity to

2:35:52um give staff the opportunity to provide

2:35:54grants or something to nonprofits to

2:35:56give a little bit more wraparound. I

2:35:59think it would be really helpful. We

2:36:00still have safe child today which would

2:36:02be really good. Um I know that neighbor

2:36:05provides funds to Morrisville residents

2:36:08in a way that in order to keep on doing

2:36:10that they could probably use a little

2:36:12bit additional support. So, um, if we do

2:36:15care about making sure no one is left

2:36:17behind, I think just having a nonprofit

2:36:19policy in place gives us the opportunity

2:36:21to be reactive,

2:36:23um, and not just see this again in two

2:36:26years and say, "Well, we couldn't do it

2:36:27because we didn't have a nonprofit

2:36:29policy."

2:36:30So, I hope that you'll just support

2:36:32having staff just like our town managers

2:36:35created a policy about the the key

2:36:38pretty quickly. This is a little more

2:36:40complicated because there's other towns

2:36:41doing it already, but I think he could

2:36:43put together a framework for our

2:36:45examination as a briefing item.

2:36:50>> So I have I am showing above on the

2:36:53screen. This is the last update that

2:36:55staff provided based on the research. Uh

2:36:58there have been multiple updates

2:37:00provided and this is the latest one. Um

2:37:05there's background here about different

2:37:07research that staff conducted looking

2:37:09into other municipalities

2:37:12and what our others doing and what staff

2:37:15is recommending on our case. Um,

2:37:20as you can see in the last sentence,

2:37:21staff does not recommend pursuing

2:37:23development of a nonprofit funding

2:37:25policy at this time, but if there's a

2:37:27specific need or policy objective uh to

2:37:30be identified in the in the future, it

2:37:33can be revisited. Um,

2:37:35>> what is the date of that update?

2:37:38>> This is the last update. So, it would

2:37:40have been

2:37:44the August update.

2:37:49Okay.

2:37:58And why would staff not recommend

2:38:00because we've talked during budgets and

2:38:03everything like that that there's we

2:38:05don't want people being left behind.

2:38:08>> Understand. Um my my recollection

2:38:11speaking with uh Tiffany

2:38:14because she also had our minister

2:38:16program in the past. Um

2:38:19managing the compliance component of the

2:38:22nonprofit becomes a heavy uh

2:38:26administrative uh duty and oftent times

2:38:29it becomes very hard to manage the

2:38:32program. Um and based on what the

2:38:34research that staff had completed on

2:38:36other municipalities that had been doing

2:38:38the program seemed like there were some

2:38:41different pro different ways of doing

2:38:43the program in which there was some

2:38:46inconsistencies on the way that it was

2:38:48being administered and in a lot of cases

2:38:51it felt like it would definitely be an

2:38:53additional load that it's not something

2:38:56that we are currently like on this case

2:38:58if it was to be economic development

2:39:00definitely there's no capacity there for

2:39:02the additional overload that will be

2:39:04required um on this. I think there is

2:39:08one particular case where they looked

2:39:10that uh the applications were actually

2:39:12being reviewed by council. So some of

2:39:15that will come directly for the council

2:39:17uh that will need to be reviewed and

2:39:19it's something for to be considered as

2:39:21well. Um and there are different levels

2:39:24out there. There are municipalities that

2:39:25are allocating 100,000, others that are

2:39:28allocating 25,000 and just making awards

2:39:31depending on on what the specific policy

2:39:34might be.

2:39:36>> Yeah. And as we've noted, there's so

2:39:38many good valid organizations that

2:39:41there's more reason to actually create a

2:39:43policy and to make it work for our town

2:39:46than the other way around.

2:39:53And it will be up to it is entirely up

2:39:55to council. Um, Mayor Patraati,

2:40:01[clears throat]

2:40:02>> I actually kind of like the idea of the

2:40:05council making the decision. But so I

2:40:13I don't necessarily think there's any

2:40:15overhead until such a policy is funded

2:40:20in which case then there would be

2:40:23overhead

2:40:25and I think that it's not a bad idea to

2:40:29have the policy and then when we're

2:40:33ready to make some type of you know when

2:40:36we're ready to dip our toes in that

2:40:38water, then we have the policy. Because

2:40:40what I don't want to do is to have a

2:40:43year when we suddenly find ourselves

2:40:44with $100,000 that could do a lot of

2:40:47good in the community and then have to

2:40:50wait a year while we develop a policy.

2:40:52So, I would be in favor of having a

2:40:55policy,

2:41:08>> Council Member Casting.

2:41:10So, I

2:41:13I don't think that I'm going so far as

2:41:18staff pursue development of a nonprofit

2:41:20policy at this time, but I do think it

2:41:23would be worth since, you know, we we we

2:41:26have this conversation

2:41:28um not say frequently, but you know,

2:41:30we're it's it's an active conversation

2:41:33that we are having. Um, I think it would

2:41:35be good to have, you know, the

2:41:37information and the research that staff

2:41:38has done so far, um, in something like a

2:41:41white paper that, um, you know, is

2:41:44available to us so that, you know, when

2:41:46we're having this conversation again, we

2:41:48can review it. And I would hope that

2:41:51provide you know if we if we did have a

2:41:53policy this is what would kind of this

2:41:56would this is what all would be included

2:41:59in that policy or will be encompassing

2:42:00of that policy um or considerations of

2:42:03that policy and then it's something as

2:42:06easy as you know once the um you know

2:42:10once conditions change it might be easy

2:42:12to uh ramp up that policy. It sounds

2:42:15like it's going to be more trouble to

2:42:17produce that white paper than it would.

2:42:19No, I mean, I'm not trying to be funny.

2:42:20I I think what you're talking about is

2:42:22is a lot of work to come up with what

2:42:25the policy would be if we were to

2:42:27implement it and like a lot of

2:42:29background research, but really I think

2:42:31that staff has already done the research

2:42:33and could develop the policy more easily

2:42:36than they could develop a white paper on

2:42:38the subject.

2:42:41>> Council Johnson.

2:42:44So I don't support developing a policy

2:42:49draft at this time. One of my concerns

2:42:52is that we are collecting

2:42:55tax dollars and and uh funding from

2:42:59multiple revenue sources and for us to

2:43:04reallocate to only a few nonprofits is

2:43:07is is

2:43:09really

2:43:11I think premature at this time. I I'm

2:43:14not feeling very comfortable

2:43:17reallocating tax dollars for nonprofits,

2:43:20even though they're all worthy. I'm just

2:43:22not ready for the policy at this time.

2:43:24So, I would like to see what research

2:43:26has been done, but I I think we're still

2:43:29too early.

2:43:32>> Council member Gabella,

2:43:34>> I I agree. Uh for me, I know we don't

2:43:38have a policy. I get it. But that is for

2:43:41a reason.

2:43:43We went through the budget every 200,000

2:43:46only every 250 we are trying to scramble

2:43:49from here and there and uh we are not

2:43:53carry they have a $800 million budget

2:43:56you know for us every $50,000 is

2:44:00accounted for and when even if you have

2:44:04a policy and say we have

2:44:0750,000 or 100,000 allocated to it it

2:44:10will become so politically charged that

2:44:14we gave it to them, we did not give it

2:44:15to this one and you know that temple got

2:44:18it, this temple did not get it, that

2:44:20church record it, this did not get it.

2:44:22We are setting up ourself for a big um

2:44:26you know face off with the community is

2:44:28is what I feel and and because

2:44:33I would if if if a policy was there I

2:44:35would help the seniors who are not able

2:44:38to pay taxes. we don't have that policy,

2:44:40you know, like so there's so many things

2:44:42that you can do, but we don't have those

2:44:45dollars to we're very very thin

2:44:47stretched. So that's what I would say.

2:44:53>> Any other comments or questions? Council

2:44:55member Johnson.

2:44:57>> So this is coming from somebody who

2:44:59works with several nonprofits. I am

2:45:01constantly trying to raise money for

2:45:03nonprofits. Um, I'm not in favor of u

2:45:07nonprofit policy at this time um for a

2:45:11lot of the reasons um that were just

2:45:13discussed and and honestly so the re and

2:45:17I've said this before when we've had

2:45:18these conversations. This is just not

2:45:22something I'm hearing the community

2:45:24wants us to invest in. I am not hearing

2:45:27that. I am not I am hearing all kinds of

2:45:30other things about how we spend our

2:45:32money and what we should spend it on.

2:45:35This one never I I just I do not hear a

2:45:39a clamoring from the community that they

2:45:41want us to spend their taxpayers money

2:45:44um on nonprofits that we choose. I'm not

2:45:48hearing that. And and I'm hearing that

2:45:49from a community that I think is very

2:45:52generous. I think we have a community

2:45:55that does support a ton of nonprofits um

2:45:59you know associated with the temples um

2:46:01nonprofits that serve our community. I'm

2:46:04I'm hearing from a very generous

2:46:07community but they they're taking care

2:46:09of that on their own and I think they

2:46:12can continue to do that in a thoughtful

2:46:14way on their own without us getting in

2:46:17the mix.

2:46:20Mayor Collie

2:46:21>> and I would just respond that safe child

2:46:23neighbor up the seniors

2:46:26they

2:46:28are saying otherwise that the community

2:46:30has needs and the people who are

2:46:33benefiting they're not the people who

2:46:35are time to talk to us about how they

2:46:37would like to see there some support

2:46:39there so that their families could

2:46:41thrive more. So, um, I'm going to keep

2:46:44on trying to bring this up because I

2:46:46think having a policy gives us the

2:46:48opportunity for when one of us says

2:46:50something like, "Yeah, Safe Child's

2:46:51doing great work, but we don't have a

2:46:53nonprofit policy." That we won't hear

2:46:55that anymore. We'll hear Safe Child's

2:46:57doing good work. Let's have staff set up

2:46:59a grant program. So, these different

2:47:02organizations can come in, ask for small

2:47:04grants, large grants, whatever is

2:47:07appropriate, and I believe that the

2:47:09community would support it. Um, so I'm

2:47:13sorry that this one once again is not

2:47:16moving forward to just have a simple

2:47:18policy enacted uh by this council.

2:47:25So I just want to say that yes I agree

2:47:29that if we create a policy

2:47:32uh then it'll be question of who do we

2:47:37provide funds to and who we don't but

2:47:41perhaps we can help this uh nonprofits

2:47:44in different way uh raising awareness

2:47:47about the work they do right I did not

2:47:50know about this this nonprofit did

2:47:53today, right? So perhaps we can town can

2:47:56help them raise funds other way instead

2:47:59of us funding them directly.

2:48:02>> So that is something to think about.

2:48:03>> I love that idea.

2:48:06>> Can I add to that?

2:48:08>> I love that. Can can um at our events we

2:48:13are really good about inviting our um

2:48:17our uh different advisory committees to

2:48:20have tents and establish a presence and

2:48:23we have done it for some nonprofits. Can

2:48:25we make that maybe a priority to invite

2:48:29some of these nonprofits and I think we

2:48:31do to some extent

2:48:34>> Kieran yes Kieran is at Dwali but I I

2:48:38like all our events um

2:48:40>> that's a great idea

2:48:41>> and that's another way to help um

2:48:44>> the veterans

2:48:50>> so we did at one time on our website we

2:48:53had a list of nonprofits we had a list

2:48:56or am I making that up? I may be going

2:48:58way back. We used to um we used to share

2:49:01all kinds of information and um so that

2:49:04might be yeah I love

2:49:05>> yeah I'm talking about more than just

2:49:07sharing the list like perhaps uh

2:49:10something along the lines of at every

2:49:12town event uh we have one or two uh

2:49:16nonprofits

2:49:17>> we highlight

2:49:18>> you know we have a booth for them or

2:49:20whatever and that would actually raise

2:49:23awareness the people would know about

2:49:24them and maybe that would be very

2:49:26helpful for them. I love that. And add

2:49:28on the fact that these are nonprofits

2:49:30that are doing work here and more so

2:49:33>> and our comm's team can highlight every

2:49:35month one. Yes. So that way

2:49:38>> social media and we can all help them

2:49:40promote them our social media. Yeah,

2:49:43>> that's a great idea. I think we should

2:49:44put together a policy to create that

2:49:46opportunity.

2:49:48>> Um

2:49:50guidance.

2:49:51>> I wanted to add it. Well, I just wanted

2:49:53to add that um we have the small

2:49:54business listings directory, so having a

2:49:58nonprofit directory um would be good as

2:50:00well.

2:50:08>> Any other questions?

2:50:10>> Any other questions or comments?

2:50:14>> Well, this concludes round table. Thank

2:50:16you.

2:50:18I would like to recognize the town

2:50:20manager.

2:50:21Like to recognize the town manager

2:50:23>> super quick just we have made some

2:50:25adjustments. Sorry that's super loud. Um

2:50:27to the rolling calendar and I just want

2:50:29to make sure so your time with David

2:50:32Hacker related to my evaluation is now

2:50:34scheduled for September 22nd and October

2:50:3813th. And obviously I think it's

2:50:40critical that all seven of you just

2:50:42wanted to touch base and make sure

2:50:44nobody has any conflicts with September

2:50:4622nd or October 3rd. They're both

2:50:48regularly scheduled Tuesday meetings.

2:50:51>> Wait, what?

2:50:53>> September 22nd and October 13th.

2:50:56>> Oh, 13th. I'm sorry. I thought I heard a

2:50:58different number. Okay. A different

2:51:00date. Sorry.

2:51:03>> I thought he said third.

2:51:06Just want to make sure we're

2:51:07>> these are both regular council meetings

2:51:09that you'll have a closed session during

2:51:11those two council meetings. Just

2:51:13occasionally folks have conflicts. Just

2:51:15want to make sure we have everybody

2:51:16anticipating being there.

2:51:17>> Brandon, remind me why we are having our

2:51:20work session the first Saturday, first

2:51:22Thursday of this month.

2:51:24>> Sorry. Why are we having

2:51:26>> Why are we having our work session on

2:51:30September

2:51:32>> 10th instead of the last week?

2:51:35>> Typically they're later in the month.

2:51:37That's

2:51:37>> we do. And I think there was a conflict

2:51:39when we developed the calendar that

2:51:42there was something. Let me look. Let me

2:51:43get my stuff open.

2:51:48>> Yeah. Because that has out that I will

2:51:51be out of town because I was always

2:51:53planning for

2:51:58No, it's next month.

2:52:00>> September 10th.

2:52:07>> I can look back. I apolog I don't recall

2:52:09tonight the specific.

2:52:10>> Yeah, I get it. I just saw it because

2:52:13the idea was always the

2:52:14>> Yeah.

2:52:14>> You know, second

2:52:16>> and again, we're um so Kayla is already

2:52:18working on the calendar for next year.

2:52:20Um, again, you should have information

2:52:22from her about January and early

2:52:24February, particularly about retreat

2:52:26because we'd like to get that settled as

2:52:28soon as practical because again, getting

2:52:30a lot of us together is not the easiest

2:52:32path to take. Um, so the sooner you can

2:52:34respond on that, the sooner we get you a

2:52:36draft calendar and we can get something

2:52:38adopted for calendar year 2027. But

2:52:42again, as long as everybody can be here

2:52:43September 22nd and October 13th, that

2:52:46will be incredibly helpful.

2:52:47>> I don't have my phone. Would you mind

2:52:49texting out those dates so I can check

2:52:51my calendar?

2:52:52>> Sure.

2:52:53>> Thank you.

2:52:57>> Anything else from council?

2:52:59>> I

2:53:02one thing on the food waste pilot um

2:53:03appreciate everybody's support to

2:53:05investigate that and uh like that we got

2:53:08the the pilot in um you know for our

2:53:11food waste out there and I just want to

2:53:13say appreciate uh that support and also

2:53:15appreciate the the quick turnaround on

2:53:17that.

2:53:19Wonderful. Staff's doing a great job.

2:53:21Anything else for the good of the order,

2:53:22sir?

2:53:23>> Nope.

2:53:24>> I'd entertain a motion to adjurnn.

2:53:26>> I move that.

2:53:27>> So, Mayor Patm has the motion to

2:53:29adjurnn. Council member Patel second.

2:53:31All those in favor of adjourning, please

2:53:33say I.

2:53:33>> I. Any opposed? And not that carries

2:53:36unanimously. 70. It is 8:40 p.m. Thank

2:53:38you.