2026-10-12 - City Council

>> Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the October 12th meeting of the governing body. I would ask our clerk if she would take the roll, please. >> Mr. Layborn? >> Here. >> Mr. Moody?

>> Here. >> Dr. Rennie? >> Mr. Seagrave? >> Present. >> Mr. White? >> Present. >> Mr. Wolf? >> Here. >> Dr. Aldrich? >> Present. >> Mayor Collins? >> Here. >> Dr. Emmons? >> Present. >> Mr. Escobel?

All members are present. We do have a quorum. >> Well, if I could ask Troop 116 to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance, please. If you guys would do that for me, I'd appreciate it. >> I understand

what nation forgot, indivisible, liberty and justice for all. >> Troop 116, thanks for joining us for your -- was it a civics merit badge? Citizens in the community. Thank you very much for being here

this evening. Madam Clerk, first item. Actually, before we do that, I want to let everybody know tonight we're going to have some maintenance on our Internet system, and we may lose our Internet here,

so I'm going to ask if we can try to be succinct in our comments tonight, both from the City Council and from the audience, because I'm afraid that there may be a point when our Internet goes down and

the folks who are watching at home won't be able to participate. So I'm going to hope to move this meeting along this evening. Thank you very much. Madam Clerk? >> Number four, consent agenda. All

agenda items listed with a designation of CA are considered to be routine items by the governing body and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a

member of the governing body so requests and support by two other members is received. Any item removed from the consent agenda will be considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. >> Dr. Aldrich?

>> Yes. >> Do you have any item you want to list? Remove from the consent agenda. >> Yes, sir. The first one is item number 22. >> That one's removed. Next item. >> Item number 24. >> Okay, 24. >>

Item number 33A. >> 33A. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> And number 23. >> Okay. Item 22, 23, 24, and 33A. Are there any others? Mr. Layborn? >> Item 26, industrial siting council for the prairie generation. >>

Incur. >> Okay. Item 26. Anybody else? All right. Hearing none, I'd entertain a motion. What's left? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Moved by Mr. Seagrave, second by Dr. Aldrich. All those in favor of the

consent agenda with items 22, 23, 24, 33, and 26 removed, please signify by saying aye. >> Aye. >> Opposed? The consent agenda is approved with those items removed. Number 6A, public hearing to

determine whether compliance of annexation conditions required by Wyoming statute 15-1-402 exists for about 8.18 acres of land and right-of-way located south of U.S. 30 and north of Commerce Circle.

>> All right. We'll open a public hearing, but before we get started, we'll have Mr. White give us a quick staff report. >> Mayor, members of City Council, Connor White Planning and Development

Department, this annexation is for roughly 8.18 acres of land and right-of-way generally located south of U.S. 30 and north of Commerce Circle. City received a petition to annex this land and right-

of-way from the owners, which was filed with the city clerk on July 29, 2026, petition was certified by the city clerk containing the necessary signatures according to state statute on July 30, 2026.

Should note the city is actually the applicant on this one and is the owner. This public hearing is being held in accordance with Wyoming state statute 15-1-402A pursuant to filling the requirements

and state statute staff asks the governing body to consider the following. The land proposed to be annexed is contiguous to current city limits, specifically parcel A, which is north of, which is

Christensen Road north of the bridge over the railroad is 20% contiguous, parcel B, which is the smaller triangle parcel that's south of the bridge is 57% contiguous. Utilities are adjacent to this

portion of the right-of-way and could be extended in the future. The city already maintains Christensen Road, making it a natural geographical, economical and social part of the city. And annexation

would also clear up maintenance obligations and provide a clear boundary for both police and fire protection. This area to be annexed is within the urban service boundary. Certified mailing was sent

to all landowners and utilities within the annexed area, not less than 20 business days prior to the public hearing, according to the city's calendar, 20 business days was September 14th. Certified

mailing was sent on September 10th, earliest confirmed receipt was September 14th, and all property owners within 300 feet of this area were also mailed in that same time period. This annexation is

item 13. On tonight's agenda, it's accompanied by an assigned zoning ordinance, which is item 14. It should note that the assigned zoning ordinance is only for parcel B. We don't actually zone right-

of-way. So parcel B is actually a parcel currently. So that is what the assigned zoning is for. Another note I'd like to make is once this is all annexed, there is an administrative plat that will

basically turn everything into right-of-way. So even parcel B will become right-of-way in the end. So ultimately, the assigned zoning is just until we get it turned into right-of-way. With that, I am

available for any questions. Anybody in the governing body, questions for our staff? Dr. Aldridge. Mayor Collins, through you, I'm wondering how this impacts the residential property that we own that

I believe is very close to that intersection. Mr. White. Mr. Mayor, through you, the residential property, are we talking about the detention pond or I guess Mr. Cobb? Sorry. It's the north. I'm going

to point to it. Sorry. So the house that we currently have ownership of the city and out there would not be impacted by this at all. Thank you. Mr. Seagriff. Mr. Mayor, through you, I don't think it

matters in this circumstance, but I thought city-owned property did not have to be contiguous. Mr. White. So while that is correct, it doesn't need to be contiguous. In this case, we're basically

doing this for the right-of-way portion. Because we own the triangle and then you've got the right-of-way that is included in the annexation, we chose to just do owner petition and go that direction

with this one. It is contiguous, so it doesn't matter ultimately, but that is the reason that we decide to go with the owner petition on this one. Mr. Labor. Anybody else for staff? Mr. White, thank

you. Anybody in the audience want to speak to this 8.18-acre annexation the city is proposing? All right. Hearing none, the purpose of the public hearing has been met. We'll move on to the next item,

please. Mr. Mayor, I believe we need a motion to suspend the rules. Go ahead, Dr. Mr. Mayor, I move to suspend the rules to hear the following agenda items related to the Hitching Post District in the

following order. Item number 7, followed by number 8, 22, 9, 33A, and 24. This will allow for the appropriate and recommended approval process. Second. My doctor, Aldridge, seconded by Mr. Seagrave to

amend the order of the day or the agenda. Comments from members of the governing body? Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? All right. We'll go in that order.

Madam Clerk, starting with number 7. Number 7, ordinance, third reading, annexing to the city of Cheyenne, Wyoming, land located south of Interstate 80, southeast of Otto Road, and west of Interstate

25. All right. Number 652.67 acre annexation of what we call the Hitching Post District, which will become the future home for the PRCA and their headquarters, museum, and Hall of Fame. And then the

rest of the property would be for businesses that would be complementary to that destination tourism, I guess, the properties that will be going there. And we'll take it out to the audience to see if

anybody wants to speak to this ordinance on third and final reading. Anybody in the audience? How about online? How about in the audience? All right. Hearing none, Dr. Aldrich, will you have a motion?

Mr. Mayor, the recommendation of the Public Services Committee is to approve on third and final reading, and I so move. Second. It's been seconded by Mr. White. Comments from members of the governing

body on this annexation. Madam Clerk, would you take the vote? Mr. Escobel? Aye. Mr. Layborn? Mr. Moody? Dr. Rennie? Yes. Mr. Seagrave? Yes. Mr. White? Yes. Mr. Wolf? Aye. Dr. Aldrich? Yes. Second.

And final reading. Next item is number eight on page two, ordinance third reading amending the official zoning map of the City of Cheyenne, establishing the zoning classification of AG Agricultural

and LI Light Industrial for land annex to the City of Cheyenne, located south of Interstate 80, southeast of Otto Road, and west of Interstate 25. All right. When we annex land, we have to give it a

city zone, and we try to give it the closest zone to the current zoning that it has in the county, which in this case is agricultural and light industrial. We've got to the audience. Anybody online?

Okay. How about in the room? Anybody? All right. Hearing none. Dr. Aldrich? Mr. Mayor, the recommendation of the Public Services Committee is to approve on third and final reading, and I so move.

Second. Seconded by Mr. Seagrave. Comments from members of the governing body in establishing the zone districts. Madam Clerk, would you take the vote? Dr. Emmons? Yes. Mr. Escobel? Aye. Mr. Layborn?

Mr. Moody? Dr. Rennie? Mr. Seagrave? Yes. Mr. White? Yes. The established zone districts is approved on third and final reading. Next item is number 22 on page four, resolution amending the future

land use map of Plan Cheyenne by changing the land use designation from agricultural, rural, open space and parks and mixed use employment, community business and removing the natural and cultural

resources area designate designation for property generally located south of interstate 25 southeast of auto road and west of interstate 25. All right, we're going to go out to the audience first in

the online. Does anybody want to speak to this amendment of our future land use map? Hearing none. How about in the room? Anybody? It's a quiet group tonight. Dr. Aldrich? Mr. Mayor, the

recommendation of the public services committee is to adopt. Second. Seconded by Mr. White. Comments from the governing body on the amendment to the future land use plan. Hearing none. All those in

favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Those opposed? This resolution is adopted. Next item is number nine on page two, ordinance third reading amending the official zoning map of the city of

Cheyenne, changing the zoning classification for land located south of interstate 80 southeast of auto road and west of interstate 25 from AG agricultural and LI light industrial to BP business park.

All right. This is an owner requested zone change to business park to accommodate the PRCA and the complimentary businesses we hope will go there. Being the audience like to speak to that ordinance on

third and final reading. All right. Hearing none. Dr. Aldrich? Mr. Mayor, the recommendation of the public services committee is to approve on third and final reading and I so move. Second. Seconded

by Mr. Seagrave. Comments from members of the governing body on the zone district. Yes, sir. Mr. Moody. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Through you. So a point information for the public. No day center here.

This is where the PRC rodeo and also business there. So and I'd also say let's keep it there and not lose it because Colorado Springs didn't care about it and they lost it to us. So just want to put

that out there. Agreed. Anybody else? All right. Hearing none. Madam clerk, would you take the vote, please? Mayor Collins? Yes. Dr. Emmons? Yes. Mr. Escabel? Aye. Mr. Laborn? Mr. Moody? Dr. Rennie?

Mr. Seagrave? Yes. Mr. White? Yes. Mr. Wolf? Dr. Aldrich? Madam is number 33A on page six preliminary plat for Hitching Post District City of Cheyenne, Laramie County, Wyoming located south of

Interstate 80, southeast of Auto Road and west of Interstate 25. All right. Is there anybody online or in the audience who'd like to speak to the preliminary plat? Hearing none. Dr. Aldrich? Mr.

Mayor, the recommendation of the Public Services Committee is to acknowledge receipt of the preliminary plat. Seconded by Dr. Emmons. Comments from members of the governing body on the preliminary

plat? Hearing none. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed? The preliminary plat is acknowledged. Next item is number 24 on page four resolution authorizing the mayor and

the city clerk to sign a final plat for Hitching Post District City of Cheyenne, Laramie County, Wyoming located south of Interstate 80, southeast of Auto Road and west of Interstate 25. All right. Is

there anybody online or in the audience who'd like to speak to the final plat for the Hitching Post District? All right. Dr. Aldrich? Mr. Mayor, the recommendation of the Public Services Committee is

to adopt. Seconded. Seconded by Mr. White. Anybody in the governing body that would like to speak to the final plat? Hearing none. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed?

The final plat is adopted. Mr. Mayor, we need the second motion to suspend the rules at this time. Okay. I have it. I'm ready, Dr. Aldrich. Mr. Mayor, I move to suspend the rules to hear the following

agenda items related to Orchard Hills in the following order. Item number 10, followed by number 11, number 23, and number 12. This will allow for the appropriate and recommended approval process.

Second. Moved by Dr. Aldrich and seconded by Mr. Seagrave to suspend the rules and change the order. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed? All right. We'll start off

with number 10. Thank you. Number 10 on page two, ordinance, third reading, annexing to the city of Cheyenne, Wyoming, west of South Greeley Highway, south of West College Drive, and southwest of and

adjacent to section of Apple Street and York Avenue. All right. Before us now, we have 162.42 acre annexation for, that will be the Orchard Valley or Orchard Hills division that will be the home of a

Denny Center if it is approved. And so we'll go out to the audience, Dr., or, yes, Jennifer. Shea Pfeiffer, you can go ahead. Yeah, she's not there. Who's next? Okay. How about in the audience? Good

evening. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and members of the council. My name is Jeff Nakashima with Trammel Crow Company, and it's great to be with all of you again this evening. We wanted to start just by

saying thank you. Thank you to this governing body, to city staff, and most importantly to the residents of Orchard Valley, who we've gotten to know over the last several months, and just for the time

and the effort on this project. We have learned an incredible amount through the hours of meetings, the dozens and dozens of conversations we've had in person, plus phone calls, emails, texts, and

ultimately feel that this project has dramatically improved by taking the feedback that we've heard from the neighbors and us taking action. And that's something we're really, really proud of. We

ultimately hope that this project will raise the bar for all data centers in Cheyenne, and it is a step in the right direction for better community, city, and industry partnerships. We know we have a

lot more work to do, and we are excited to meaningfully continue to engage and meet with residents and stakeholders in Orchard Valley and South Cheyenne to ensure that this project is a win for

everybody, and that they see their feedback continue to become action. We've also received a couple questions on backup power, and I wanted to address those tonight. Question one, how are you

approaching the technology and cost issues related to backup power? What alternatives have you evaluated? Can you use batteries or gas turbines? The answer to that from TCC is that we are constantly

evaluating technological advances and changes in backup power and how our sites can be better. One that we are specifically looking at is the technology like batteries on site instead of backup diesel

generation, but we haven't made a decision yet on this project as it is usually client driven, but just want to clarify, we do not use gas turbines at all. If you decide to use generators, how are

they operated for testing and what's the maximum duration they can operate? So each diesel engine or the collective group is allowed to operate for a maximum of 35 hours per year. That's about five

minutes per day, but gens are not tested daily, and that we would make the effort to coincide that testing with other emergency services like amber, tornadoes, things like that, storm warnings, to try

to limit that impact. Maximum duration, again, it would depend on the situation. So if it's an actual utility outage, obviously there's fuel and how long the outage would last. As I previously

mentioned, 35 hours, will TCC use, Tremel Crow use tier four generators. That's an emission kind of cap that reduces emissions of each generator by 90%, and the answer to that is that is our standard.

We don't use any other type of generators other than that if we use them. And then lastly, all of our generators, if they're installed, would be on the south side to away from the residences. We just

wanted to thank you again for the opportunity to work on this project. We're incredibly excited about the opportunity to grow in Cheyenne, to be a great partner and sincerely hope that we get the

chance to do so. Our team is available for any questions throughout the conversation this evening. Thank you all very much. Thank you very much for being here again this evening. Anybody else in the

audience? I'm going to come up and speak. Please, ma'am, if you want to come up to one of the podiums, please, ma'am. Welcome. Push that button, turn it green. There you go. Gotcha. Point it right at

you. Good job. Gotcha. Welcome. Hi. My name is Susan Cottlewis. I live in Ward 1. My name is Pete, and Mr. Wolf never met Mr. White, but I am in your ward. I am speaking today. After having ridden

around a little bit this weekend, I had the opportunity to come up wasting gas. So I went to a craft show down at the Alpha Buck and went to the end of Wallach Road and noticed that things are pretty

flat there and looks like construction is ready to go because it's so flat. And then I went on College Drive and went to York Avenue and got to the end of the road there where there's a gate, and the

gate was open. And there was a sign that said that they were looking to annex that land. And because the gate was open, I drove through, and it was pretty washboardy in some places and pretty dippy in

other places and very, very hilly. And it impressed me how hilly it was. And I know that you guys have talked before about light industrial when you've talked about improving land for data centers.

And I guess they need to be on flat pieces of land. So my thinking is if it has to be on flat pieces of land, there's going to have to be heavy, massively heavy construction equipment that's going to

have to be on that piece of property to be able to move the dirt from all them hills to flatten it out. Massive amounts of dirt are going to be moved. As you know, that piece of land with all those

hills is west of Orchard Valley where I don't live, but I know people who live there. And I know that people that live there as well as a little bit to the north of there have already told me that

they've gotten incredible amounts of dirt inside their house because of the wind blowing all the dirt around from when they have already flattened land. And with the amount of hills that are on that

property, there's going to be mountains of dirt inside all those homes in Orchard Valley. And my friends' homes, they live there. I saw horses when I went down York Avenue and I know that there's not

just a problem with audible noise, which I've heard it goes click, click, click. I'm aware that in other places in the country, because I've done some reading, that there have been animals that have

been killed because of the tonal noise that you feel. It comes up through the ground and you feel it. And it kills turkeys and other animals because it's that kind of noise. I've also heard about

light pollution. You guys really need to reconsider what's going on with this piece of property and where it is in proximity to homes where people live and try to enjoy their lives and their

livelihood. Thank you, ma'am. Please, over here, please come forward. Introduce yourself. Push that button, turn the green light to turn screen. Now grab that microphone, pull it right in front of

you. There you go. Perfect. Thank you so much. Diana McNamara, and I have been a resident of Orchard Valley for 49 years. And when we first moved out there, it was the rural atmosphere, the village

community that we had. And so with these proposals coming out now, I was wondering when the Planning and Zoning Commission was first contacted about the Orchard Hills project. That's one question. And

my second question is, when were the people in the neighborhood, Orchard Valley? And there's another one further west of us. When were they first notified of this proposed project? And then my third

question is, how long does it usually take to get a project of this magnitude approved? And so have we gotten all the information we need to change the entire neighborhoods due to both data centers

being on the south side, along with five or six or however many other ones are all going to be on the south side of Cheyenne? Thank you, ma'am. Welcome. So I don't like-- You like to introduce

yourself for us, please? Tamara Watts? Welcome, Madam. And thank you for being here. I live just a little bit west of Orchard Valley. It's another suburb, whatever. I live on Lampman. And we're just

maybe half a mile from where you guys want to put this data center. And I want to ask you guys, why did you move to the neighborhood that you are at right now? Why? Because it was someplace that you

guys enjoyed and you guys liked it just the way it was when you moved in, right? You guys all enjoy your neighborhood, right? You guys are asking us, people that went out and we wanted to live in the

rural area. We have no say so. It doesn't matter how many meetings we have. It's already been done because I live in Orchard Valley. I was never told about this. The first time I heard about this was

two weeks ago. That's it. I live on Lampman Court. I should be involved in this. This is all just, you guys are just trying to just think of how we are. We used to have antelope out where we were. We

used to have foxes with babies that I saw every spring. I've lived there since 1998. And what you guys have done in the last few years out there, I cannot understand why you guys want to do that to

people that you guys are supposed to be helping. You're supposed to be working for us. It's like the rest of the world here, the United States. We don't have any say so anymore. It's the big people.

Let's talk. We have no say so. And I am tired of having all this shit done, excuse my language, because you guys probably live close together. You guys will never have to worry about data centers,

will you? Anybody going to be lived by a data center? At one time, we could go outside with our boys, with our telescopes, and look up at the moon and all the stars. We can't do that anymore. We used

to go out in the middle of November and watch asteroids go by, showers. And now we can't even do that because there's too much light where we live. You guys are not thinking, why do we even have the

meetings? It doesn't matter. I've been down here twice. And no matter what we say, we have come down here and we have filled this place and nothing matters. Nothing. All the stupid data centers you

have south of us, it's ugly. Thank you, ma'am. Welcome. Donna O'Donnell. I live in Orchard Valley. I've lived in Orchard Valley for 45 years. I'm totally against the data center, and I know the future

use originally was for residential. What is bothering me is the data center is going to be too close to where I live. And I don't understand. People will say, we have one data center meta down there.

What's it going to hurt to have another one? I don't want to be part of this, to have a data center in a residential area. And I think the lady that just spoke, I mean, I don't know how far you guys

live from a data center, but Orchard Valley is going to be pretty close depending on where you are. I've told Ward 1, I said that I went through, I photocopied the bus flyer that Trommo Crow gave.

Many of the people didn't even know anything about these data centers, didn't know what's going on. They're just on their flyers, they never give a link, they never give any further information where

this is going to be. So people in the last two weeks or so, a lot of people have learned about this. I'm not a fan of this data center. If you want to put it on the north side, that'd be great. But I

would like everybody to think, where you live? And everybody comes to a home at night. Where do you live? How far? And I don't know. I haven't looked it up. I think it's going to be 0.2 or 0.5. I

don't know how close you guys are to a data center. Maybe you can address that at some time. Or if you're looking forward to a data center being by your house, I don't know. But that's all. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Sir. Hi. Hi. Ross Gensil. I live right on the border of this area. Welcome, sir. One of, I think there's five or six of us that own, and quite a ways from Orchard Valley, which is a

titty corner of the whole project. Just to address some of the other people, I see lots of animals right there. And every night, hear the coyotes howling, sea foxes, antelope. It's constant down

there. And I'm for the data center, because you won't see any of that with housing. Not a bit. But this data center plan for Dramel Crow, they've got a nice 560-foot berm. It's going to have trees.

It's going to protect us from sound, from light. And I am an amateur astronomer. I have a 10-inch Dobsonian telescope, and I watch lots of stuff. Even with the metal lights shining my direction, I can

still see a lot of stuff. Lots of planets, Saturn lately, Jupiter, Mars. Haven't quite seen Neptune lately and Uranus. But we enjoy the country atmosphere, and what Dramel Crow is proposing will keep

that atmosphere to us. It'll also keep us from having heavy, heavy traffic that would go to a housing area. Now I live in reality, and reality says this annexation is going to happen sooner or later.

So we have a choice between lots and lots of houses and lots of lots of traffic, or what Dramel Crow is proposing, which would limit traffic to almost not existent change and would still give us a

nice 560-foot berm with trees. We get to continue to see the antelope in our yards and have protection for our children as well as without that traffic from a housing area. The amount of crime,

residential crime, and hopefully not any children being abducted or hurt because of that heavy traffic. So I'm all for reality. The annexation needs to happen, and Dramel Crow's plan is very good for

our neighborhood. And that's all I have. Thank you. Thank you for being here. Yes, ma'am. Yes, sir. Ma'am, you've already spoken once. You don't get to speak twice. You don't get to speak twice,

ma'am. You've already spoken once. Thank you very much. Sir, good evening. Can you bring that microphone up? You're a little taller. There you go. Thank you so much. My name's Andy O'Donnell. I do

live in Orchard Valley, and I've lived there for 45 years. And the reason I moved there was because it was quiet, had a big yard, was a nice village-type atmosphere, quiet at night, could do

stargazing easily. But the people most impacted by the adjacent land being rezoned and annexed by a city of Cheyenne were not informed of this possibility when this first started. They wanted to

change the prairie into an industrial site. It's completely opposite of what people bought that property for. They didn't buy down there, put up with that. And I don't understand what kind of mindset

you guys on the council have that you think our investment and our homes and our property should be completely disregarded by you. We've worked at buying our homes, maintaining them, improving them,

paid our taxes, and then all of a sudden the city wants to be our neighbor with an industrial site. That's not what we had in Monning. That's not what we invested for. And I think you're ignoring,

well, you've already ignored your advisory people on that. We've heard you, the mayor, talk about housing shortages and build more houses in the area. And now you're housing a data center in a

neighborhood that's already established. And it doesn't make any sense to me. So I think you're disregarding the people who live there, who've lived there for a long time. And like Domen said, it's

not what you're concerned about. You've got your own agenda and too bad about us, I guess. And I don't think you're cooperating with people. I don't think you want to understand what the heck people

want to move there for. We deliberately moved out of the city to be there. I wish you'd understand that and appreciate it and respect it. Apparently you don't. Thank you, sir. Yes, ma'am. Welcome.

Welcome, City Council, to you, sir. I am Susan Gensil. I live right up against the property of Orchard Hills. And I've had that property since 2000. And I love the landscape and I love being out in

the country. But I also realize that reality of it is, is that property is going to be annexed sooner or later. Right now I have a choice. Do I want a bunch of housing butted up right against my fence

lines with heavy traffic in front of my house and a block away? Or do I want the data center who promises to give us a 560 foot berm with natural habitat growth and mature trees to block most of the

sight sound of what will be going on? And I am all for that. I believe that is our best choice for us. I have talked to all the residences that have border up against it. And they agree that they

don't want that high density housing there, that it would be nicer to be able to look to the south of our properties and see some natural landscaping. And that's almost two football fields. That's a

tremendous amount. They have told us that it would only take two to three years for construction. They would not use any of our roads. They would extend Wallach and they would extend partially south

and go those routes. They would not be bringing heavy construction vehicles our way. And I'm sure that they're going to put up the plastic fence lines to protect from most of the dirt that might blow

around, unlike what Black Hills did to us when they put in a sub power station. So I agree that we need the data center and not the high density housing because it will still give us that country

feel. And they're not going to be anything like meta. It has been an issue, but this company has worked with all of us in that neighborhood and we're really not considered Orchard Valley. We're all

different subdivisions east of or west of York. So we're the ones that have the biggest impact. Thank you. I have a question. Mr. Mayor. Thanks for being here. Sorry. I got a question. Go ahead and

ask your question. Thanks. How many houses did they say potentially could go there? What's the estimate if it was to be a residential area? Mr. Edwards. You want to answer that question? Got to push

that button, Mr. Edwards, and turn on that microphone. There you go. Thank you. Forget that. Mr. Mayor, through you. I'm Bill Edwards, Edwards Development 506 Shoshone Street, Cheyenne. Also one of

the property owners of Orchard Hills. To answer through you, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Moody's Councilman Moody's question, with the mixed use residential, it could be easily up to 800 units. Our plat that we

started about four years ago is 600 units. So it comfortably will fit 600 housing units. Follow Mr. Mayor. Follow Mr. Moody. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, sir. And then can you say a traffic study

had said it would increase drastically? Traffic. I'm sorry. He's asking you to have a traffic study or a traffic analysis and talk about the amount of cars. I do have a, could you share that with us?

You bet. Thank you. Excuse me. Go ahead, Mr. Edwards. Let me take the top one. Excuse me. Why don't you give us a second, let us all get one, and then you can walk us through it. Okay. Thank you.

They're the same. Sorry. Those are the same. Mr. Escobello, you can pass that down if you'd like. Go ahead, Mr. Edwards. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Newman, Moody, you've asked for the chart that we

developed about two months ago and then perfected it to be sure that our references, our sources of information were correct. So the two buildings that would be built by Trammel Crow, developed by

Trammel Crow versus the 600 rooftops, pretty much everything is there. You'd ask about the traffic, which is really a glaring focus, number three. For two buildings, they'll be developing, and this is

including an estimate for deliveries. This is once it's constructed, 368 trips per day, as 600 residential units, it would be 5,400 trips a day. And that was calculated by Sean Keller, a currently

practicing professional traffic engineer who has done two or three different projects for us. Mr. Moody, thank you. Okay, I'll wait my turn. Okay, we'll let go over here and we'll come back to you.

How's that? Thank you. Ma'am, would you like to speak? Welcome. Thank you for being here. My name is Susan McNamara, and I've lived in Orchard Valley for about 30 years. And I guess I'd like to start

with this information that came from Trammel Crow, because I would like to know what they're basing some of these improvements that they say are going to happen. It says on here that our homeowners,

home values have increased 21%. Well, first, the growth has increased from 64% to 95% where there's data centers. It says home values have increased from 174,000 average home price, and now they're

saying in the areas where there are data centers, the home values are 431,750, whatever. I'd like to know how they think that a data center is going to improve the value of my home. I'd like to know

where they're getting that information. What statistics they base that on, because I don't see how putting a data center south of my home on Park Avenue is going to increase the value of my home. As a

matter of fact, I know in the last couple of years, everything is for sale. The homes for sale have increased, and the value of my home on my taxes has gone down now. I question their information and

their research on how they think that this is going to improve our neighborhood. If it says real other perceptions of residential impact, real other perceptions, the impact on nearby home values are

mixed, but everything they say is increasing and improving. I guess that's my main question is how I'd like to see some kind of information that shows me how it's going to improve. I don't see

building that data center. They're not building restaurants. They're not building a park. The berm, we have a picture of the berm. I find it very unattractive myself. I don't see that it looks like

some hills with pine trees stuck on it. I don't see that that's a great improvement. I don't see where businesses, restaurants, shopping, anything like that, parks, I don't see any of that being built

down there now. I'd like Trammell Crowe to tell me, and I did ask for some information, which I didn't get. I got an offer to come to my home and discuss with me, but I'd like to see more concrete

evidence of where they're getting their information or how they're generating their information. Since somebody else wasn't allowed to ask their other question, I will ask for them. How will

annexation affect the business owners? For example, the people, the small businesses that pick up our trash, there's an impact right there. There's small businesses that. You're not being annexed, so

it won't affect it at all. If we're. You're not being annexed. The homes in Orchard Valley are not being annexed, it will not affect it at all. Okay. So there again, then does the city have funds to

provide police protection, garbage services, fire protection to areas proposed for annexation? Yes. Okay, so you have that that fund, all of that. Yes, ma'am. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and

members of excuse me. No, ma'am. He came up to answer a question that was asked over here. He came up and answered that question. So ma'am. He was not here to speak. He was in here to answer a

question that was directly answered. So this is his time to end. I'll do his testimony. Yes, ma'am. I understand. Go ahead, Mr. Thank you. Bill Edwards, Edwards Development, Edwards Construction, 506

Shoshone Street, Cheyenne. I am one of the owners of this property and my business partner is in the audience. He and I have owned this property for 27 years. We're celebrating our 50th anniversary as

general contractors in Cheyenne this year. We know a lot of folks in this town. We've developed a lot of neighborhoods. We are very cognizant and thoughtful about our citizens and our neighbors in

Cheyenne. This property has gone through a lot of changes, mostly in recent years. We now have two new substations, electrical substations that are large. We now have a large overhead power line along

the west side of the property serving meta. We have a high pressure gas line, 16 inch, that is an immense gas line. We now have large water and sewer that crosses the property. That's really changed

its character more towards industrial. In this case, we're not asking for industrial, we're asking for light industrial. All this many years, we thought this would be residential. We were approached

by Trammell Crow two years ago to discuss a different approach to a data processing center. We didn't just jump off the cliff into this thing. We listened to them. They came to Cheyenne numerous

times, visited with us. Part of our requirements were you need to be transparent, you need to protect that neighborhood. I want to respond to that specifically. They are creating a zone of protection

on the south border of what is called Orchard Hills. There's actually many subdivisions that make up what we know as Orchard Valley. They're creating a zone through there that protects that from

traffic going through there and so forth. This berm that they're doing is phenomenal. It's what's required in places like South Carolina and so on and so forth. As my friend Mark Isley said on the

Skybox thing, the rancher out there, he said, "I've been in business long enough around Cheyenne, I know how to recognize a carpet bagger, and so do we." This company is not that. This company has

really been very professional. With the residents, that was important to us. We've had four community meetings, three that were really well attended, in fact, attended by most of you gentlemen and

women. I'm sorry, but your time's about up. Excuse me. I'm sorry, but your time's about up. Can you? Oh, yes, it is. I'm sorry. That's all I'll say. Okay, thank you. We're proud of them, proud to work

with them. Thank you. I'll start with, I don't appreciate being told to stop it when I'm calling out fairness when you're not, and that's your job, Dr. Emmons. Yes, Madrid, you can answer your things

to me, or we'll call you out of order, okay? Heather Madrid, Ward 1. I said I was going to come to this meeting, I said I was actually done speaking at these meetings because of this exact dynamic. It

runs in such a way that it's confrontational and oppositional, and the council always gets the last word, which is often used as the gotcha moment. But I can't let go of this property rights argument.

I would like to start by giving credit where it's due. The benefit agreement for this project is a step in the right direction, although as it's currently written, it will not stand beyond Trammell

Crowe's involvement. This agreement was shaped with resident input and tangible benefits, and I hope it becomes the baseline standard for this council's expectations from now on. A good benefit

agreement is not the same as addressing every concern or question. Some impacts cannot be mitigated. When heavy industrial, there is nothing light industrial about Dallas centers today. There just is

not. When heavy industrial developments are right next to people's home, there is no amount of noise mitigation buffers. By the way, 500 feet is less than a tenth of a mile, or lighting that can

eliminate the effects of pollution. That is not about good faith, that is about science, and the science says that the most effective mitigation is distance and location, which are two things that

cannot be addressed at this location, and those questions have not been answered. It's been said that decisions like these boil down to property rights. Property rights do matter, but they are not

absolute. If they were, we would not be here discussing this tonight. We would not have zoning. We would not have a land use map. We would not have an annexation process. Those exist because what one

owner does with their property affects everybody around them. The residents near this site are property owners too. Our right to safe, uncontaminated water, which I don't know if you guys are aware,

but there's a concern around the water again. Our health and the quiet enjoyment of our homes at the value that we've invested are also property rights. The question here is not whether property

rights matter, it's whose rights get weighed and how much and how heavily. There is one adjacent property owner who has been to every meeting and has spoken on behalf of three other adjacent property

owners who have not been here. According to him, they prefer data centers over houses, and that's been offered as a reason to approve this project. That argument undercuts itself. The property rights

position says neighbors shouldn't get a say in what happens on someone else's land, but the moment a neighbor agrees with the land owner, their opinion becomes a reason to approve while dozens of

people who disagree come to meetings and speak on behalf of hundreds of property owners who do not come to meetings. We are told that we are interfering with the property rights. We saw the same thing

at the Cox Ranch. Mr. Isley's support was treated as meaningful while plenty of other adjacent property owners who were against it were set aside. If neighbors opinions matter, they all matter. Only

listening to the ones who agree isn't a principle about property rights. It's a principle about whose opinion you prefer. Annexation and rezoning are not entitlements. No one who buys land is

guaranteed approval for its most profitable use. That risk belongs to the property owner and should not be passed off to the surrounding community. And that is why we are here. You're being asked to

consider whether this proposal and this location serves the people you represent. Please give the health and property of the people already living here the same way as the rights of the seller. Mr.

Lyle, please. Bring that up. Richard, just bring it up just a little bit, would you? There you go. Thank you. Hi. I'm Richard Lyle. I live in the Western Hills. I want to have a couple of comments.

Artificial intelligence is a technology that is changing society in many ways and will continue to make changes. And I'm concerned, you know, like any new technology, it's good, but it can also be

abused. You know, things you can do now, you go down, put chat GPT on your phone, scan the cereal box before you buy it and learn more about chemicals that you can't pronounce. And you can imagine

Google uses a lot of data, but, you know, they are very altruistic. They don't charge a penny to use their search engine, but they make approximately a gazillion dollars every year from the processing

and the sale of data. Where do they get the data? Well, you know where they get it. I am concerned that, you know, artificial intelligence involves the collection of huge amounts of data, processing

that data and storing that data. You can put a moratorium on the storing of data, which is data centers, and the corporations are going to take that data overseas to process it. And that's where the

technology is going to be. And that's, I think, where the abuses could come from. So I would like to see responsible data centers where the humans who have the technology and technical skills can help

us protect ourselves from those abuses. So we need to have data centers here because technology would be here rather than in Wuhan or Shanghai. So thank you. Good evening, ma'am. Welcome back. Thank

you. I've been on vacation. I'm Jane Lessinger, O'Leary County resident, which I think is the very important part here besides being part of Ward 1. There was a time when, or you've hired people to do

a plan. This is something that we've talked about before, to have a whole plan for not just the city, but now we're affecting the county. So I think that plan is needed for the whole county. Mayor,

you went to, or have had plans to go to a learning center about data centers, and I don't know how much you've learned about that and about how the effects it has on property, community, and the whole

other issues we've talked about before. I believe I read something that there's some ordinances being put together or rules that data centers will need to follow. And I'm just wondering whether those

are going to be retro to the data center already existing or whether they'll be grandfathered in and won't need to follow any of the. I recently went to Michigan. Michigan is having the same issues we

are. They don't want the data centers and yet Michigan used to be underwater. Michigan has a lot more water than we do. There's a data center in New Mexico that their water allocation has been abused

even though there are rules to go over it and then how are you going to handle those kind of issues when people's wells go dry. The gentleman mentioned China and actually the United States is planning

on or has or will have more data centers than China has and then the other issue is by the time some of this all gets done some of these data centers because actually it's the money that they have now

that they need to spend to build facilities won't even be fully filled and what happens when they vacate them and we have huge warehouse buildings where what are we going to do put people in them as

the people will be gone. Thank you. All right anybody else in the audience want to speak to us on this annexation. All right I don't hear anymore so I'm going to go to Dr. Aldrich for a motion please.

Mr. Mayor the recommendation of the Public Services Committee is to approve on third and final reading and I so move. Second. Seconded by Mr. Seagriff. Comments from members of the governing body on

annexation. Mr. Seagriff. Mr. Mayor the issue we're discussing now is annexation it's not zoning and I just want to reiterate the state statute and the requirements that it sets forth for annexation.

The state statute indicates that the council needs to find that this is for health safety and welfare and this needs to be a natural geographic and economic and social part of the municipality. It

needs to be a logical and feasible addition. Services must be provided within reason. We must have a contiguity. It must be adjacent and there must be electrical franchise readiness where applicable

and there must be notice and hearing compliance. Those are the issues we're being asked to decide for annexation and in my opinion this property meets those requirements so I'm going to vote for

annexation. It does not include zoning at this point just annexation. Thank you. Mr. Moody. Thank you Mr. Mayor through you. I have a motion to postpone until January January January 25th 2027. It's

been a motion to postpone till January 25th 2027. Is there a second? Second. Thank you. All right. We have a motion to postpone seconded by Mr. Wolf. All right our rule said we go back out to the

audience. Does anybody in the audience want to speak to a guess that would be almost a three month postponement? Jennifer. Mr. Flores you can go ahead. Good evening. Can you hear me? I can. All right.

Orlando Flores my property is 2404 Draper Road. I am right north of where this is going to happen. So like everybody's saying Orchard Valley Orchard Valley but we are there's four houses here that are

directly affecting and it's our house Ross and Sue's house and two other homes and if anybody moves here they would say oh it's such a nice peaceful countryside. Okay yeah let's keep it that way but

life has to change so now they're annexing to do you guys want to annex and do it the data center way which is what we're all in for because what's better than waking up and seeing the landscape

they're gonna do instead of seeing 650 rooftops over right on the south side of my house that is just not not not the reason why about this house stuff has to change. Yeah we all know that but let's

change it for the best of us because we we live here we're property owners and we want to continue living here and safety wise it's not going to be the same once they put rooftops here so let's keep

it as simple as possible if and yes do the data center and as long as travel crew continues working with us I do not see a problem with it at all. Thank you. Thank you sir. All right guys maybe I

didn't make it very clear but we're on we're on the postponement now so the discussion with the governing body needs to be whether we should postpone this for almost three months. Ms. Madrid. Heather

and Madrid ward one I guess Cheyenne is is done having new humans move in just data centers now. I support this postponement because as the developer from Trammell Crow said that this agreement isn't

really completed yet they still have work to do and so this will give them time to do that before we lose all of our leverage. Thank you. Yes ma'am we're speaking on the postponement right. Donna

O'Donnell and I am for the postponement there's many people I feel that haven't learned enough about this and I from the conversations I've had I think this would be very good. Thank you. Thank you.

Mr. Mayor point of order. Yes the council only postpones for two weeks at a time so should the motion be to can't remember how our attorney is phrase that we're actually going to sign it to the public

service committee on January 25th 2027 is the way I get the motion but in the past we've essentially recommitted back to the public service committee to a certain date rather than postponing so I

think our attorney would prefer different language if that's the intent I took it as that was the language Mr. Dr. Raney but the motion was to postpone not to recommit that's true we can have it

worded again how would you word it Mr. Brody if he wants to send this back to the public service committee until January 25th of 2027 Mr. Mayor as councilman Raney indicated I think a motion to

recommit is a more accurate way to do it under the rules motion to commit to a date certain whether that's a if you want to recommit it to the service would you make it make the motion that way please

Mr. Mayor I motion to do it to a day certain on January 25th 2027 and Mr. Wolf are you okay with that okay all right yes ma'am we're still talking about postponement we're still talking about a

postponement yes ma'am okay well that's what I wanted to speak about I'm in favor of postponement just simply because I don't think that the city council has looked at a community benefits agreement

that might be possible and how much money might be left laying on the table that you guys have not taken advantage of if be the right phrasing for that in other places they've gotten commitments from

developers for low noise commitments they've gotten monies like ten million dollars for community funds and two of those packages they've done classrooms and child care and recreation centers and caps

on water usage and we know water is going to be a big deal again flattening those hills and mitigation of that dust in the air and cooling 35 diesel diesel generators and the heat from all the servers

the 35 generators that I heard mentioned for extra power that we're only going to run five minutes a day that's what I heard okay the data centers that current cooling is an underperformance agreement

for those coolers for the data centers the more the more water you the less water you use to cool the servers the more power you need and therefore the more electricity you need and the more power you

need and it's just this loop of an increasing amount of power so then we have additional generators that are now putting pollution into the air along with all that dirt that we did with the heavy

industrial so what counts as success for Cheyenne with the number of data centers and if we put it off at least until January maybe some of the questions and some of the ideas that I just mentioned

have already been thought of can be looked at and maybe generate more discussion about how to mitigate some of the dangers of just even thinking about having another one that's that close to

residential and we talked about 600 housing units I have a funny feeling that traffic isn't just going to run on Walnut Road or York there isn't a road that I saw between York going west to the

interstate on that side of the highway so there's lots of room for lots of roads to be coming out on to college it doesn't have to run through somebody's neighborhood and just west of South High

School and they're putting in houses so why are why is it wrong in houses on the south side of college thank you ma'am sir on the postponement right bring that microphone up I'm Richard Lyle the idea

of a postponement actually comes from the Democratic Socialists of America Bernie Sanders introduced Senate bill 44 214 which is called the artificial intelligence and data center moratorium act and

he flew agree with Bernie Sanders for pushing the moratorium thank you ma'am I am Susan Gensil again and I am not for delaying this because it's not going to change anything houses there are going to

increase traffic increase water increase heating for everything the data center is self-contained they are not going to use wells they are not going to use any of our stuff it shouldn't affect them so

I think we should go ahead with this it's going to be a lot safer than putting a bunch of houses there thank you sir welcome again hi Ross Gensil I live on the border of the property in question I'm

against postponement I think we've been here a lot and talked a lot about this I think Trammell Crow has done a wonderful job explaining what they would do for our neighborhood and I think it's a

waste of time to postpone it we need to get going thank you thank you go ahead Mr. Mayor members of the council Jeff Nakashima Trammell Crow we are not in support of a postponement of this we believe

that with this project that we have followed the process that many other project data center projects had to do in Cheyenne and I would say above and beyond that I would say that our project has been

one of if not the most transparent with both elected officials but also with most most importantly Orchard Valley and again that's something we're very proud of and addressing the community benefits

agreement that is ready to execute it's been stamped by the city attorney reviewed by Trammell Crow legal and and we are ready to move forward on that I would say we know that there's and I alluded

this to us earlier there's a lot more work to do with working with Orchard Valley making sure that the contributions we make to so not only the neighborhood but also you know the surrounding area make

the most sense that takes time and I think ultimately we need to know if we have a project and for a site then typically the the next step the community benefits agreement or development agreement

excuse me would be completed before the site plan is approved so another look for this governing body for city staff to approve it I just in closing I would just say we're ready to start our

partnership with the city of Cheyenne and with Orchard Valley and we're ready to do that hopefully after this evening thank you yes ma'am Jane Lessinger Ward one I would be in favor of the

postponement I've heard several people tonight say they've only known about this for two weeks they brought up several questions that they don't have answers to I don't know if it needs to be

postponed that long but I think Tramico needs to get with the people and get some of their answers to their questions made as well as some of the questions that were made tonight on top of all of that

I would say you guys just need to postpone or pause this whole data center thing until Laramie County has a plan until you guys have learned what the impacts are totally being until you've seen other

states and gone to other states and seen what they have gone through and what they're dealing with now you need to pause everything the question is there is moody yeah there's murder thank you ma'am

you said you were in Michigan right yes um Mike Rogers is running for Senate is he support a moratorium I don't know what Mike Rogers supports or doesn't support but I can find out from my brother

tonight he does thank you yes ma'am I see you I'll get you in support this Tamar Watts I live in Orchard Valley um I'm in support of the postponement for a while um because I think everybody the

people of where I live I don't think anybody up there nobody up there knew what was going on until I said something to a neighbor and that neighbor told so nobody up where I live I live up on Lamont

very last house up on Lamont all those people up there don't know anything about what's going on and um high traffic stuff the gates that they have open people my neighbors to two boys that grew up

with our boys work down there um and the road that goes from York all the way down in there they use that to come home so there's a bunch of cars that are going through there right now so you know

there's a bunch of people using that access right now so we have a lot more traffic on York than what we usually do so I'm I'm for postponing it you know maybe not till January but more people around

Orchard Valley need you know just because it's not we're not Orchard Valley doesn't mean it's not gonna not gonna affect us you know get everybody send out another letter explaining more maybe put a

decent map in there and show them what what you guys are doing because nobody really knows what you guys are doing thank you ma'am and no I'm not done you still have time okay and I know this has

nothing to do with this but how long does it take for those trees to get big sir on the postponement what I wanted to do once ago was postponement take a postponement take a breath step back and look

at all this stuff people we've been asking questions and been asking questions got more questions than answers and I think it won't hurt to get more answers than questions thank you sir Mayor Brad

Emmons ABI agent helping with the Orchard Hills and the Trammel Crow project moving to not postpone this will postpone and that will not change whether the criteria for annexation they're going to

change and the longer the takes for these things to move forward the longer it takes for the mutual benefit agreement and all of those things take place so be against the postponement is I don't think

it changes whether this is going to be meet the criteria or not thank you did you want to speak Matthew hurt Matthew heard three sorry correct me if I'm wrong but is this after the swearing of the new

City Council okay so I don't support this because you're going to be swearing in at least two new City Council individuals and I don't think that's economically responsible for you guys to do I don't

know if they're going to have the information enough to be able to make a realistic answer and quite honestly I think a delay meant is more because you can't win you can't win so let's delay instead

let's just suck it up and realize that hey this is going to be annexed whether it's now we're in January and let's move on and stop holding up that's all thank you Jennifer she's fine can you hear me

we can okay I am in support of the postponement because we actually don't have enough information and we shouldn't just roll over and accept it because that's the way it's going to be because we have

a few things here like shame on anybody for thinking that putting residential neighborhood in there is worse than putting a data center like why is all of a sudden the residential neighborhood can

have abducted children number two I think a few of you should actually recuse your votes for conflict of interest and number three we would like to know what the mitigation risk is for the current

Legionella bacteria outbreak in the South Australian water system do you have you know are you going to supply everyone with bottled water to shower brush their teeth with and cook are you going to

give single mothers water to mix their formula with are these isolated incidents or is this a systemic problem you know people are getting very sick from this and so this is a very serious problem

that we do need a postponement for because you have many things happening consequences and unintended consequences that you aren't dealing with because you like to lie and hold things in the dark and

quite honestly I can't seem to wrap my head around the fact that a lot of you aren't in jail so we want a moratorium we would like a pause because we are not for sale we are not your sacrificial lambs

so please please postpone because you have a mess on your hands right now your blood on your hands right now Jennifer Martin Smith you can go ahead and hear me we can hear you um and actually this is

Charles Miller excuse me on the postponement Council Charles Miller for the permanent administrative record I'm speaking in support of the maximum procedural postponement permitted under this body's

rules this Council's established practice governed by past city attorney opinions mandates that this body can only postpone an item to the next regular meeting and chaining two week postponements

together as necessary if this body attempts to use that two week ceiling as an excuse to prematurely force a final vote tonight you are committing a fatal administrative defect let the verbatim record

document why the maximum possible postponement is legally mandatory before this body takes final legislative action first the administrative record is incomplete as a matter of law the city's own

planning staff and legal counsel have confirmed that the annexation and development agreement remains unexecuted unrecorded and incomplete pushing this item forward without an executed agreement

severs the annexation from its mandatory infrastructure terms violating basic due process under Wyoming statue section 16 3 1 1 4 second uncured plan Cheyenne criteria deficits the planning commission

entered a formal recommendation of denial planning staff confirmed that the proposed designated designation conflicts with the comprehensive plan explicitly failing review criteria 1 2 5 and 8 passing

this ordinance without the time required to cure those criteria creates an arbitrary and capricious legislative record on the we're on the we're on postponement and you're talking about other fatal

flaws this is why the maximum possible postponement is legally mandatory before this body takes final legislative action and so third the surrender of municipal authority you cannot legally defer

traffic mitigations buffering utility capacity commitments and taxpayer protections to administrative site plans after jurisdictional boundaries are expanded once you annex without a recorded

developer agreement statutory statutory rights vest and the municipality loses its leverage to compel offsite capital improvements if a two week postponement is the maximum single delay councils

procedural rules allow then council has a mandatory fiduciary duty to vote yes tonight and commit to oh so you guys aren't going to be daisy chaining the postponement you guys are going to go till to

January on this one is that correct yes okay so I guess any vote to reject postponement tonight is an intentional record certified circumvention of your own planning commission and staff review

criteria vote yes on postponement thanks Jennifer Stephen Love you can go ahead Mr. Mayor members of the council my name is Stephen Love I live in word one I do not support the delay Wyoming is an

exporter of youth today not in three months from now please support the fortification of our city's industry and jobs thank you Jennifer and brennan swain you can go ahead good evening folks can you

hear me we can't hear you brennan okay great I'm on my ipad this is the first time I've used it not directly related Mr. Miller you're all hat no cattle my friend second of all I'm not in support of

the amendment it's arbitrary whether folks like it or not the developer has followed the rules and I'm always of the mindset we have a responsibility to pay attention to the agenda there's been at

least three public hearings regarding this item I have no skin in the game I'm not affected with it whether it passes or it doesn't it just pains me to see someone follow the process and then just to

have a delay be added and respectfully when I've seen the governing body approve postponements in the past mostly I'm referring to this urban farm deal it doesn't seem to work out it seems to be on

the private side and then the folks who are against the goalposts continue to move so I'm not alleging anyone in the audience of that I'm just saying in my experience with what I've observed that's my

perception so as the gentleman said a couple testimonies ago let's just get it over with all the band-aid off it's on third reading there's been plenty of notice and it's been out there thank you you

have any more anybody else in the audience want to speak all right hearing that how about on the governing body mr. Moody you made the motion do you want to speak yes thank you mr. mirror through you

the reason why is because through your planning Commission we are looking to implement more guardrails on the data centers it did get delayed until next meeting by the feelings gonna get delayed again

because there's a lot we got to go through that's why I'm proposing that so that way this property has to follow the rules because otherwise they'll be grandfathered in and not have to follow the

rules by the planning Commission that's why and it takes three reasons to get new warrants is there and as you see we're doing it for the urban farm it's gonna take probably a couple weeks in December

to get done that's why I proposed till January so it's set and it's the law that's why so that way they're not grandfathered and they have to follow the rules during the planning Commission and there

been suggestions for setbacks because I would did testify that meeting via zoom and so it'll live other people thank you Dr. Aldridge Mayor Collins through you I am not going to be in favor of a

postponement tonight I believe in and having attended the informational meetings having read the information having done research this company has gone above and beyond to meet those regulatory

guidelines that we follow for annexation when we talk about setbacks I don't believe my colleague is probably informed enough to know that they're proposing ten more than ten times the setback that's

required under our current requirements I just think that this is a shameful tactic to delay this until a new council until new council members are here who will not be able to be as informed and as

go through the process and then there will be another reason to delay and another reason because if you can't win the vote you delay the vote for that reason I will be a no on postponement tonight.

Dr. Emmons. Thank you Mr. Mayor so I have a question if the the additions that Councilman Moody is speaking about are passed by the planning council and by this body which are in reference to noise

lights space things like berms water several other infrastructure requirements if those were passed after the this vote but prior to the actual building of the facility would they not be held to those

standards Mr. Brody if we if before they pull their building permit Mr. Mayor John Brody city attorney it's kind of difficult to work in hypotheticals I would say generally before a right vests then

the city can can change the rules there's also other legal principles at play like amortization periods where you can change the rules even even after perhaps a right has vested and that would allow

you know a particular land user to recoup some of their costs before the regulatory environment changes so um that's the best probably answer I can give right right off the cuff. Dr. Emmons. So Mr.

Mayor through you so would we not be able to put something into their permits though that caveat to rules that we pass prior to building that would hold them to those standards Mr. Brody again the

details matter but generally yes um so Mr. uh Mr. Mayor through you um I agree with the wise Mr. Herd that um unfortunately we are um asked to make a difficult decision half the people if we say yes

are going to be mad at us half the people if we say no we're going to be mad at us which nobody likes regardless of how people feel no none of us up here are trying to upset people so um I'm very much

against this amendment because I do think that we are just trying to dodge a difficult decision which unfortunately is our job um so I am very much opposed to putting this off as um councilwoman

Aldrich said we've already created one bad situation I definitely don't think we need to create another one so I would speak against this amendment Mr. Seabroof. Mr. Mayor once again we're being asked

to consider annexation there's basically five items health safety natural geographic economic social part of the municipality is it logical and feasible can services be provided is it contiguous

that's not going to change between now and January so I will be a no vote thank you Mr. Wolf uh Mr. Mayor thank you through you there is nothing shameful about what councilman Moody did he had a

perfectly reasonable motion to make and to justify and his reasoning has merit now what might be shameful is trying to figure out which of us is the democratic socialist uh but um I have a strong

personal reason to want to postpone this I won't be here in January um but actually I'm against the post moment um I think we're ready to make this decision of the um the agreement while not perfect

is um a step in the right direction and we have Mr. Nakashima's uh promise to us that they will continue to work with the community and with the council um to on on all of the critical issues um so um

we should we should move ahead and and get this decided tonight thank you Mr. Mayor anyone else in the governing body on the postponement all right all those in favor postponing or sending this back

to the planning commission or the public services commission till January 25th 2027 please signify by saying aye those opposed no Mr. Moody is a yes the motion fails next item or uh back to the

governing body on the annexation comments Dr. Renee Mr. Mayor I have two two things I want to address first of all um I'm sure that the conflict of interest statement by one of the people that spoke

was addressed at me I want to point out that um I do want to acknowledge that I my son is a partner in AVI however I have run this situation like this past every city attorney I think going back to

the case and administration um the contract between AVI and Trammell Crow was probably instituted close to a year ago way before this vote and that contract will stay in place regardless of how I vote

so it has been determined by like I said every city attorney in the last two and a half to three administrations that I legally do not have a conflict of interest in this case so I do intend to vote

and I think I can be objective in in my thoughts on it um the other part that I guess I want to point out to people is that that if you look you know and going back I know Mr. White who's who's spoken

to us a few times from the audience brought this up two years two weeks ago and said why are you always why are you picking on South Cheyenne and I want if you look at a map of the city the county has

allowed ranchettes to be built to the north and to the east of us the bases to the west of us we are constricted in growth in those areas south is the only direction we have to grow at this point and

so the city will continue to grow south whether you like it or not that's the only direction we have and I am not going to um and again you know I realize most of us look at what's best for the entire

city but but in the end I do I mean most of the people I have talked to that I that voted for me want to see continued economic development and diversification and so um obviously as those of you have

been watching I have supported this will continue to support it but I want people to understand um city's going to continue to grow south because that's all we've got left so um and that's just the

reality of the situation so thank you Mr. Mayor last call comments Madam Clerk Dr. Aldrich yes Mayor Collins yes Dr. Emmons yes Mr. Escabel hi Mr. Layborn Mr. Moody Dr. Rennie yes Mr. Seagrave yes Mr.

White yes Mr. Wolf this annexation is approved on third and final reading with Mr. Moody and Wolf voting no next item is number 11 ordinance third reading amending the official zoning map of the city

of Cheyenne establishing the zoning classification of ag agricultural for land annex to the city of Cheyenne located west of South Greeley Highway south of West College Drive and southwest of and

adjacent to the intersection of Apple Street and York Avenue all right again we have uh recently annexed land it needs a city zone and we're assigning it the closest zone to the current county zone

district which in this case is agricultural and we'll go out to the audience to talk about the establishment of this own district Dr. Aldrich Mr. Mayor the recommendation of the public services

committee is to approve on third and final reading and I so move seconded by Mr. White comments from members of the governing body on the establishment of the zone district Dr. Rennie did you um

hearing none um Madam Clerk would you take the role Mr. Wolf Dr. Aldrich yes Mayor Collins yes Dr. Emmons yes Mr. Escobell aye Mr. Laborn Mr. Moody Dr. Rennie Mr. Seagrave yes Mr. White yes the

established zone district is approved on third and final reading with Mr. Moody voting no next item is number 23 on page four resolution amending the future land use map of Plan Cheyenne changing the

land use designation for mixed use residential to mixed use employment for property generally located west of South Greeley Highway south of West College Drive and southwest of and adjacent to the

intersection of Apple Street and York Avenue is there anybody the audience want to speak to the changing of the future land use map I'm sorry no that'll that will come after this I believe anybody Dr.

Aldrich Mr. Mayor the recommendation of the public services committee is to approve on second reading and I so move it's been seconded by Dr. Emmons comments from members of the governing body on the

amending of the future land use map hearing none all those in favor please signify by saying aye aye those opposed Mr. Moody is a no the resolution is adopted next item is number 12 on page two

ordinance third reading amending the official zoning map of the city of Cheyenne changing the zoning classification for land located west of South Greeley Highway south of West College Drive and

southwest of and adjacent to the intersection of Apple Street and York Avenue from AG agricultural to LI light industrial all right this is a zoner initiated a zone change to light industrial for the

Orchard Hills data center development in order to be able to have a data center it has to be zoned that way and that's what we're doing now Jennifer Mr. Love you can go ahead Mr. Baer through you to

members of the city council my name is Steven Love I live in ward one less than two miles from this project I support this and every other data center in Cheyenne we need jobs in Cheyenne a former

city council shut down the meat packing plant that would have provided hundreds of jobs I would encourage everyone to look at the abject poverty in West Virginia coal is dying oil will go away one day

whether we want it to or not regulations squeeze the industry more and more every every year with those industries the railroad will go to if we don't diversify our state will experience the same

shortfalls West Virginia did when it failed to diversify away from coal and manufacturing if we don't diversify the only jobs in Cheyenne that will be left will be gas station attendants along our

interstates dealers at our casinos please support this and other data center development in the future they will provide good high paying jobs if members of the public are worried about light or noise

lobby for more stringent decibel limits and light hours don't lobby against the future jobs of your children and me and my children also please let people do what they want with their property that is

the Wyoming way I think that everyone who spoke in opposition tonight would say they support their rights to their private property again if someone else else's use of land affects you lobby for

ordinance to protect your use rather than against the industry that secures the future of our children if you're worried about water use I encourage you to extreme examine the extreme quantities of

water that golf courses use compared to that or something thank you ma'am did you want to speak to this welcome back can you bring that Donna back it may help save people in the back here you thank

you so much Donna O'Donnell or true valley um this whole light industrial and I just heard what he said I'm living closer to the data center than this individual that was just talking the thing is

what I don't understand and I'm worried about the domino effect you know this is going to be light industrial what will be the next data center that will be coming I don't know I did see on the

application that the Sarah family Joe Sarah signed and he was all for light industrial but I know if his land goes to light industrial that's a whole another another this isn't on this application I'm

worried about this that this is going to be a domino effect by zoning it like this I I'm not for it I I don't think any of you can promise me that correct that there wouldn't be any other data centers

there can you promise or just because one's there there'll be another one I don't know where this is going but I'm against thank you thank you sir sounded like a broken record but uh I'm Ross

Gansville um right there in the board of the property um I would like the light industrial uh definitely due to the fact that the the uh it would allow the data center to build which would allow a

nice berm that would protect us from the other option which be houses so many house rooftops so much traffic which and I'm I'm a former police officer with the federal government so I know what

housing areas what kind of crime residential crime involved maybe I have a a little more informed view than some of the people that spoke about crime because I've seen it so I'm for the light

industrial I'm for the data center they have been great as far as their proposal of what they're going to provide for us and being right on the border as I said the berm with the trees that's 560 foot

deep would be so much better than houses butted right up to my property and also the amount of traffic or less traffic would be so much better than I I believe the number was in the five thousand per

day trips which is extremely dangerous for any children uh we don't have uh that issue right now and I'd like to keep it that way also we're a rural area uh people have horses we have livestock and

more and more traffic is detrimental to raising livestock if you've ever done that so um like I said I'm all for the light industrial I think it's the best way to go to preserve what we have uh as a

neighborhood today as one neighbor my neighbor had talked earlier uh Orlando Flores talked about changes imminent but we would like to keep it as close to what we have now as possible and preserve

that piece that we have now thank you miss Madrid um Heather Madrid ward one just to quickly address someone's concern about more data centers um there is another data center knocking on doors down

there compass data center so expect expect it to be nothing but data centers in that field um so over the summer and this has to do with my concern about it being li in a business park area and

controlled by leads leads um I requested emails with Cheyenne leads and the data center companies the city released 961 emails that show a pattern on issue after issue the mayor turns to leads for

what the city thinks should think say and do when the governor issued his data center order in June the lead CEO wrote the city should respond the mayor replied how should we respond when the mayor

drafted his testimony to the legislator and legislature in February he sent it to the lead ceo first thoughts anything you want to add when leads proposed a council resolution supporting the data

center sales tax exemption the mayor answered I think that would be powerful and suggested a letter signed by council member when Black Hills Energy gave the mayor tax figures he forwarded them to

leads with the words hope it helps our cause when a reporter asked about an unnamed data center the mayor asked leads who it was after the Cox Ranch annexation hearing lead staff wrote rewrote the

city's own statutory findings the staff email says says leads quote prepared a response to each of the six provisions in order to substantiate the annexation end quote it went to the planning director

and the mayor and the response was thank you on the days of the data center hearing the moratorium vote and the highlands hearing leads emailed the mayor and the council directly lobbying them leads

is a private non-profit organization it sells land to data center companies and um according to the ceo of leads microsoft quote saved our bacon end quote it lobbies this council the mayor sits on its

board and signed its confidentiality pledge the city pays leads a hundred thousand dollars a year has passed at about 3.5 million in sales taxes and recently committed another one million leads is

entitled to its opinions but the residents elected a mayor not leads when the city's positions testimony and legal findings are drafted or shaped by an organization with a financial stake in the

outcome residents lose so i am asking please that the mayor is not on the board while the city funds in contracts with leads um adopt a policy that statutory findings and staff reports are written by

city staff alone and that outside input is disclosed in the public record and that the city disclose all communications with leads on matters pending before this council at the time they happened

thank you yeah thank you mayor council to the mayor i'm sissen gensil again um i am for light industrial because putting housing there means they're going to take draper and run it straight out to

college drive that means anybody in their path is going to get affected and york will too so i would rather have a data center who is going to work with us give us some natural habitat some mature

trees and they're also if you looked at any of their plans they're having trees along the east and west side as well as a big berm on the south side so i am for the light industrial i think it is our

best choice for the people directly involved in that area thank you i'm um can you push the button to turn it on please and talk right into the microphone goodie i'm trish turner i live at the very

end of park avenue in orchard valley and i received a letter about the data center i am for the data center i am against more residential in our neighborhood we cannot handle the infrastructure from

the residential so i am for the data center thank you it's been a long time since i saw you guys um susan cottawoods word one i um i don't do this very often i'm going to say these words because they

come straight out of the bible and i don't quote the bible very often it's not that i don't believe in in god but i just don't quote the bible very often make the rough way smooth in order to do that

it's going to have to be called heavy industrial before it gets to be light industrial if you guys are going to be honest about this process you need to do it in the right order it can't be light

industrial with those hills if you have to flatten that land out in order to put buildings on it i'm sorry it just you can't put a building on a flat surface if the surface is like this and there's

massive amounts of dirt that need to be moved you just it's impossible so it needs to be zoned heavy industrial before you can zone it as light industrial sir mr. mayor members of the council um jeff

nakashima the trammel crow company and we just wanted to highlight um just a few things of why we're in support of the light industrial zoning um we believe that this is the highest and best use of

the property with the before mentioned utilities that are existing on the site another thing that we've heard through kind of consistently through all of our neighborhood meetings that we've had um is

roadway issues meaning traffic um and the abi our engineer has estimated that the construction of wallack and parsley road is approximately 15 million dollars um and that would be a project cost for

trammel crow as well as an obligation for us to deliver those um another thing that we've heard very consistently is pedestrian safety um and we want to help be a part of that solution so with new

roadways new crosswalk street lights um making roads safer particularly for the the elementary schools um the five six schools while it's being built to the east of us um i think another thing that

we're really excited about is the greenway and being able to have provide another amenity for pedestrian access both for orchard valley and and south cheyenne and those are just a few reasons but

thank you again for the time jennifer did you have one mr williams you can go ahead can you hear me we can um through you mary um we you know guys how many data centers is enough i mean you know you

guys are going to be known as the council that ruins cheyenne you are you i hope that you guys like like that like that because that's what's going to end up happening you guys i just think you're

lucky stars that the people in the county are not voting for the city because none of you would be there goodbye ma'am yeah i live in sports valley and i'm just gonna say this and then i'm going to

leave because coming down here i knew it would be a waste of time because everybody's made up their mind so i just want to know why you guys have these meetings if everything's already done why and

another question is uh i know you guys are all you know just want to go home and you know do whatever and this is probably going one through one air out the other but uh these burns and these trees

and stuff how long is it going to take for those trees and prep to grow jennifer mr flores you can go ahead orlanda flores again i'm just all for the light industrial you know i am like sue and ross

recently spoke about it we are the ones directly north of it we are the ones that are directly going to be seeing everything and what's better to see than the berm yeah they're talking about the trees

they've already talked about they're going to put in mature trees so we're not going to have to wait forever for them to grow so we'll see that change right away so that's something we got to consider

that tremor crow is promising and i'm pretty sure talking to everybody all the community meetings they are going to go forward with their promise so i'm all for light industrial thank you sir yeah

richard lyle again one okay an issue that hasn't come up is what the city is going to do with the extra tax revenue that comes in from a data center is the city does the city have plans for some

wonderful projects or is the city going to be able to use that money to reduce the taxes on this uh residents thank you jennifer randy t you can go ahead uh hi i'm randy true i live at the corner of

plum and draper i've lived there for 33 years now and i'm in favor of this uh zoning change um i'm about 200 yards north of where the berm would be constructed and if nothing else i see that berm as a

buffer between us and the already existing metadata center you know i hear people speaking against data centers an area well we already have one and you know these two data centers and that berm would

be a buffer between us and and meta and probably do nothing but improve the situation for those of us closest to it um i hear a lot of people talk about orchard valley orchard valley orchard valley

for years i've heard well if you're west of york you're not orchard valley and kind of a snobbish tone well i'd like to turn that around and say if you're east of york you're not in orchard hills um

those who are most affected are those of us along plum street and to the south of there and west of york almost everybody i've talked to in this neighborhood is in favor of this and i'd like to throw

my voice behind that too that's all i have jennifer who do you have mr miller you can go ahead thank you who's next all right hearing none we'll go to dr alrich for a motion mr mayor the

recommendation of the public services committee is to approve on third and final reading and i so move second by dr emmons comments from members of the governing body on the uh the zone change before

us mr white thank you mr mayor through you um one of the things um even that i found during the course of this process is that even though um i've had many conversations with some folks who disagree

with me on this they've been very positive conversations and i'm very sorry miss o' donnell and miss madrid left because uh they're really kind of the two primary ones that i've engaged with on this

who oppose this um in my opinion trammell crow has has set the bar for uh future any type of future project they have held four public meetings i was i attended three of those um two of those three it

was the rossman jim rossman school gymnasium was full um the most recent one was at l triple c again that was full and while uh in the last council meeting i said that the residents that that i had

engaged with and spoke with were overwhelmingly in support of it uh obviously that wasn't the case at the last public meeting it was uh more more folks who were opposed to it uh participated in that

but i think we can all agree that of all the projects that we've listened to over the last six to seven months there's been more people speak in favor of this one than perhaps the others and trammell

crow has been far more uh engaging with the public and came to the table with a very solid credible uh community benefit agreement that i think is is really well done i don't uh they have indicated

that uh that's not finished that they're still willing to uh have engagement with the public in the area residents that they're still willing to incorporate suggestions and recommendations i think

that's good and you know they've they've really convinced me going forward that if any company doesn't come to the table with any type of proposed community benefit agreement or willingness to uh

engage with the public like they have i'm probably not going to support them um because i think that they've shown how the process should be done how a developer uh should participate in these

discussions and um that's one of the reasons why i'll be supporting this zone change tonight dr raney mr mayor members of council i i guess i want to kind of maybe going back echoing what mr gensil

said earlier that you know and what i said that south side is going to develop it's going to be annexed and it's and it's just a matter of how it develops This property, I know the people around there

don't want to see it developed all, but it will be developed. It's owned by it, as Mr. Edwards pointed out. They have a 50-year history of doing developments, and they've just finished the Saddle

Ridge development, and we're ready to move on to the next one, which, if this doesn't become a data center, will become Orchard Hills Housing. So it's going to develop regardless of what people want,

and the question is how it's going to develop. Obviously, with Trammell Crowe, we have a company that is willing, I mean, this is a type of corporate citizen we've been looking for, I think, as a

council member over the years. They've just said we're willing to invest 10 to 15 million dollars in the roads that are going to be required to be improved in that area. Nobody's offered that before

in the past. Again, they're bringing jobs, and going back to Mr. Love's comments about its economic diversification and its jobs for our children and grandchildren. Well, as I said, and again, as my

colleague from Ward 1 has said, they're bringing more to the table than any company has done yet to date, and I do think they've set the bar. And I do want to tell people, I mean, this is a new

process for most of us up here, and we're learning as we go along too, and I think we're starting, we are asking more from large companies, data center companies like this. So all I can tell you is

that, you know, yes, I think it will be less impactful on the area than a housing development. And with the infrastructure improvements, I mean, I'm sure if a housing development was going to go

there, we wouldn't see 10 to 15 million dollars invested into Wallach and Parsley. So, they're bringing things to the table that developers and businesses have not done in the past. And I, as I said

to me, these, they seem to be the type of corporate citizen we've been looking for over the years and I think we ought to give them a chance to prove that. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, through

you. My printer wouldn't print so I've been looking at my phone in case you thought I was watching the football game or something. I apologize what the score was but I guess you were right thing. I

could make one up, Mr. Mayor. I wrote this out in order to have a short lecture, and not the one I gave two weeks ago. And, you know, we on the council, all of you are inundated with information about

data centers, and we've all had to try and synthesize that for ourselves and evaluate both the sort of macro issues and then what this is which is, I mean it's a real, in some sense a micro issue

directed to this part of Cheyenne. And so I'm hoping this is actually the last vote I have to cast on a particular data center. Because we've been at this for six months or more at this point. And

we've gone through a lot of hearings and concerns so let me, let me just say a couple of things. I struggle with this vote. On the one hand I want to encourage companies to follow the lead of trammel

crow and enter into comprehensive community agreements with the city. I want to thank Mr. Nakashima and his team, and Mr. Lansing, you've approached this incredibly thoughtful, constructive,

professional way. And it's really a model for anybody who comes next to emulate. On the other hand, there's, there are really only two defining issues that the statute itself, basically, is not very

meaningful. Any kind of clever lawyer could write an opinion neither for annexation or against annexation. Meaningful or two things. Number one, are we properly citing these data centers. And what I

think that really should take into account is what impacts are the data centers that are being proposed, and that will be coming, going to have on established residential neighborhoods, because if you

build a data center like vantage and in Google and tallgrass are doing. Now, they got a little residential subdivision right next to them. And they're going to be infected, but it's not of the size

and longevity of Orchard Valley Apple Valley the Shirley edition, all of the other names I've heard. So, that's the sort of first question is this the right location. Secondly, if we pass that

threshold, or even considering that threshold are these this agreement that we're getting with the data center developers, is it enough, is it enough to address in part, probably not fully the

concerns of the citizens. And in this case, there's an awful lot of benefit, I think, to the community there, the investment in just the direct community there and investment in the roads is

substantial, but I think we also know this data centers are never going to be good neighbors, as hard as they might try data centers are a source of noise light constant construction dust emissions.

It's really hard to be a good neighbor to a residential area for such a big substantial multi billion dollar facility. So, you have to weigh that you have to weigh and say okay have we, have we gotten

enough do we think to mitigate our concerns about what the data centers going to do. And I've been asking this question over and over again what do you, what are the residents think well, as we've

seen the residents are just like people all over the country are divided. Some like it. Some don't some have more direct impacts than others. Some don't like data centers at all. And so, we have to

weigh all those considerations. I will make one observation, actually two. These developers and this includes Microsoft and includes the Cox Ranch and includes trammel crow have been incredibly lucky.

They've been lucky in first respect which is, they have not run into opposition by deep pocketed opponents in many communities around this country, where there are debates over data center

developments, you have people who have substantial resources and are willing to put them into the fight and fight fiercely. That has not happened in Cheyenne, and they have been they the data centers

have been big beneficiaries of that. And second of all, they have the data centers have had the benefit of a basically compliant government city and county both. The city has long taken a position of

being open for business. And we have, therefore, data center developers come here because of that. And that has benefits for the city obviously benefits for employment. But it also means we're going

to get data centers and we may get a lot more of them. So, I think what we need to do is that Cheyenne wasn't built in a week wasn't built in six months. It's taken a long time I've been here 52

years, and it's still growing, we're all learning as Dr. Rennie has said, a couple times and we've come a long ways the question is, where do we go from here. I think over the next couple weeks want

to propose some thoughts about really what could be a full life cycle cradle grave regulation of data centers, because while we're addressing some of the issues, they're, they're, they're any number

of them were not addressing we aren't talking about what happens when they actually aren't going to use the data centers anymore and there's a whole bunch of literature and research on how you in fact

ought to be thinking about decommissioning data centers. And there is a lot more that can be done on the operational issues and on the issues and I really appreciate Mr. Nakashima you answering my

questions about the backup generators. Actually, if we have to have them, everything that you said is actually reassuring and I really appreciate you doing that particularly since I only sent that to

you on Friday. But thank you all thank you all for coming thank you for all these hearings, I really appreciate it. Thank you to the members of the council for all of this discussion. Thank you Mr

Mayor. Couple of thoughts that I have on this is as City Council people, we have a responsibility to the residents of this city. And when I look at yearly property taxes of 41 million for this

potential data center and property taxes from 2000 to 2040 of $461 million. And I think about the things that we could do for the people in this city that we've been, I've been here 40 years, and I've

heard the same things I mean how many times have we heard, we need a rec center, and we need to figure out how to get it past to get it built. There are so many things that we could be providing to

the residents, not to us, nobody on the City Council benefits financially at all from any of this. There's nothing that we get from this. But if we can turn around and bring in revenue that impacts

our residents, while mitigating as much harm as possible, which I think is what we're doing with the with trammel crow, as well as with the requirements that we are working on to put in place. And I

know I keep saying we can walk and chew gum. This is that if we can bring in those kind of resources for the city. Are we not, is that not part of our job. And to me that that's one of the reasons we

got elected is to make good decisions that impact the residents of the city. Is it going to make everybody happy. No, is this the first time I've had people not happy with me. I was involved with

COVID. I didn't cause it. I didn't do it. But, I mean, there are people that are going to be mad at us for a very long time, call us names, do all the things that okay, but we have a responsibility to

make good decisions for the residents of this city. And I think going forward with this line industrial helps to do that. And I really, I mean this, this document. I wish every council member would

have gone to those meetings to hear the public and hear the one lady that was sitting back by where Councilwoman, Aldrich and I were sitting, who said, I came in here and didn't support this. Right

now I support this. And that was after listening to the presentation, getting the questions answered getting facts. She said, Okay, I get it. I understand this. So, sorry that's a long rambling, but

that's why I would be in support of this. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, through you. The one thing that I've heard in every election, going back to my legislative years is we keep exporting our most valuable

resource, our children, you know, in this election, I'm not heard that I've met a lot of people who have jobs at Microsoft and some of these other places, NCAR for example, related digital have told

me these are the best jobs they ever had and if they didn't have that job, they would have left the state. So, as elected officials we have to be visionaries, and this council will go down as probably

the one that did change Cheyenne, put us on the map that has Forbes talking about us as fortune 500 talking about us, and maybe we'll be the envy of the rest of the states cities that said no, it's a

lot easier to say no, we are not elected to just make the easy votes. We'll see what the future holds, Dr. Aldrich. Mr. Mayor Collins through you. Well, I have to echo my colleague from Ward three

Councilman Escabel I spend my days, every day, working on workforce development for the state of Wyoming and ways to keep our youth here and ways to provide the training, and I have to say that data

centers have really responded to that, and I've attended several of the job fairs and a lot of the things that they're doing in order to train employees here in our community working with our local

community college, working with our local high schools investing in scholarship programs, and in our youth, and I do want to say that travel crow. I've been really impressed, because they did come

forward with a community benefit agreement. And it's a little, I feel much better about that because they've built that with the community, that there is going to be impacted by this decision. Are

there things that we could improve or add to that, like maybe, I think, what I heard loud and clear tonight was about the dust and the dirt that's, you know, a problem when construction is being done.

I definitely think there are some things we can add to that. I believe that our job as council people is statutorily to basically take care of things like public safety, law enforcement, water,

sanitation, all of that infrastructure, roadways. We can build a road that we probably quite honestly could not afford to build at $15 million for the number of people that it would impact or benefit.

And so, knowing that we are going to be making a decision that will generate revenue for our community, which will allow us to take care of the statutory requirements that we're required to do, are

really where I think my decision always lands. The annexation piece that we just did, I think is important. I want to make sure that these things are done in the city not in the county. I want to make

sure that there's no company is dipping into our aquifers. I want to make sure that we're able to meter and monitor the water that's taken and used by companies. I want to make sure that a lot of the

issues that we're talking about in the UDC and the zoning requirements for data centers is addressed, and not only for this company who will be bringing their plat to us, but also for future

companies, as they're wanting to do business in our community. I think the word is out that if you want to be a do business in our community you need to be a good corporate partner, and you need to be

a good community member and that's our expectation. I think we've raised the bar with trammel crow and that I think we're going to see a significant impact in our community, but our job as counsel

people is to maximize revenue, while making sure we hold companies accountable. So that we protect our natural resources and provide the infrastructure and the public safety that's required

statutorily for that reason I'll be a yes vote tonight. Mr. Mayor, I'll be brief. I just want to say how eloquent I believe my colleagues are tonight. Everyone has really thought through this process

we've been, we've been on a six or eight month journey here. Councilman wolf got me thinking back to the maybe one of the first data centers we considered. I was remembering testimony from our labor

union rep who talked about having 200 journeyman electricians the most they've ever had in their history. That's a big impact on a community like ours. I remember testimony from Black Hills energy on

the process it takes for these entities to acquire the power and the, and the federal laws the state laws that are in place to protect you and I. I remember Black Hills telling us that there's not

been a residential rate increase, I believe it was 2014, because the data centers have upgraded all of the substations and the, and the overhead lines to get the power here for us. That's a hidden

benefit that rarely gets talked about so over this journey, I think we've all learned so many things. We've, we've morphed into where we are today with a, an agreement that I think is very very good.

And I think we'll continue to do that. Should this, should this happen again, but I also agree with Councilman wolf that it'd be nice to have a break for a while. And as far as I know there's, there's

none on the horizon so I'm ready for that. Is this agreement perfect. Nothing's perfect, but I think it's for the benefit of our community. The question was asked what, what will we gain from it. I'm

not sure we know. I don't know what the tax revenues are going to be, I would hope, as a group, that we do the best we can to improve our community for the benefit of all of us, whether that's

improved roads whether that's a rec center I believe was mentioned, should we benefit and financially in a way that we can do those things I would like for us to do that. I think we need that here.

So, thank you all very much I appreciate your support. And I appreciate everybody sharing your thoughts. Thank you. Mr. White. There's no further comments. We'll go to our clerk for a vote. Mr. White.

Yes, Mr. Wolf, Dr. Aldrich. Yes, Mayor Collins. Yes, Dr. Emmons. Yes, Mr. Escobel. Aye. Mr. Layborn. Aye. Mr. Moody. Dr. Rennie. Mr. Seagrave. Yes, his own changes approved on third and final reading

with Mr. Moody voting no number 13 ordinance first reading annexing to the city of Cheyenne Wyoming land south of us 30 and north of commerce circle. Sign this item to the public services committee.

Number 14 ordinance first reading amending the official zoning map of the city of Cheyenne establishing the zoning classification of VP business park for land annex to the city of Cheyenne located

south of Tate road north of commerce circle and west of and adjacent to christianson road will send this item to the public services committee number 15 ordinance first reading annexing to the city of

Cheyenne Wyoming land south of east fox farm road north of east allison road and east of an adjacent to south college drive will sign this item also to the public services committee number 16

ordinance first reading amending the official zoning map of the city of Cheyenne establishing the zoning classification of AG agricultural for land annex to the city of Cheyenne located south of east

fox farm road north of east allison road and east of and adjacent to south college drive will sign this item to the public services committee number 17 ordinance first reading amending the official

zoning map of the city of Cheyenne changing the zoning classification for land located south of east fox farm road north of east allison road and east of an adjacent to south college drive from AG

agricultural to VP business park. This will also go to public services committee. Number 18 first reading amending sections 1.4.3 1.4.4 2.2.3 5.1.4 and 5.7.2 of the Cheyenne unified development code

to add and clarify specified use allowances, clarify processes for agricultural uses and providing definitions. This will also go to the public services committee. Number 19 ordinance first reading

amending section 6.2.8 of the Cheyenne unified development code to allow for unpaid parking in certain sites specific, specific situations. One more for public service. Number 20 ordinance first

reading amending section 6.08.020 of the municipal code of the city of Cheyenne Wyoming to revise exceptions to restrictions on keeping livestock within the city. This will also go to public services.

Number 21 ordinance first reading amending section 9.12.080 of the municipal code of the city of Cheyenne Wyoming to allow electric fencing for certain agricultural and livestock uses. Dr. Aldridge

one more for public service you will have a long and start meeting sorry about that. Next item is number 25 we take a five minute break. Just, I think, people are. So we'll come back is 823 we'll come

back in 10 minutes at 833. Thank you. Number 25 resolution re appropriating $250,000 from general fund reserves for repair and replacement of cart paths at the airport golf course. All right, is there

anybody in the audience wants to talk about the city council's desire to take some reserve money and make some improvements on the golf course. Yes, Jennifer, Mr. Love you can go ahead. My name is

Stephen. I live in the world one. I think this is a frivolous amount of money and, quite frankly, we've talked about benefiting the whole city, a lot tonight and I don't think it rises to that

definition so for those reasons I don't support this. Thank you. Mr. Miller you can go ahead. Hello, can you, we can. Oh, all right, Mayor Collins members of the council Charles Miller for the

administrative record, the sheer fiscal contradict contradiction of this docket is astounding. 30 minutes ago sponsors of this resolution told South Cheyenne residents that our city is so broke. We

have no choice but to surrender our neighborhoods to industrial data centers to pay for basic services. Dr. Emmons lamented that the city can never figure out how to fund a recreation center well Dr.

Aldridge argued that Cheyenne could never afford a $15 million road without developer charity. Excuse me, the very first standalone resolution before you tonight raids a quarter of a million dollars

from emergency general fund reserves for repay of golf cart paths at the airport golf course, let the fiscal record document the reality. To protect municipal credit ratings backstop emergency

response and fund essential public works depleting liquid cash reserves for discretionary recreational amenities while telling taxpayers we cannot afford residential road paving or neighborhood

traffic calming is an indefensible prior prioritization of municipal assets failure of enterprise self sufficiency the airport golf course operates on user fees and concessions discretionary capital

maintenance should be funded through the golf enterprise fund capital depreciation reserves or adjusted greens fees, not subsidized out of general municipal tax reserves viewpoint and procedural

disparity working class neighborhoods and Ward one we're just told they must absorb heavy industrial truck traffic and noise because the city lacks infrastructure funding while the council

simultaneously finds $250,000 in taxpayer cash for country club cart paths Councilman Moody was correct to vote against this measure and finance committee, if the council cannot find funding for

neighborhood safety. You have no business rating emergency reserves for golf court golf carts vote no on item 25. Thank you. Anybody else in the audience want to speak to these proposal to make some

repairs on the golf course. Welcome sir. This first time for me I'm buff. Could I get you to bring that microphone glue closer to your mouth. Yeah, thank you. You can thank YouTube for this as seems

to want me to watch every city council meeting and finance. And I just was watching the finance committee and this popped up, and it's basically the city rec department was just asking $250,000 for

cart paths, and I am a golfer and not a lot. Quite frankly, we, the golf courses are getting filled up completely I think the figures with 75,000 75,000, whatever I walk, but, and I also go to pray

view and they've done improvements out of purview. But if any rep department or anything, and I'm not asking for higher fees or anything but if any city departments should be pulling a profit or plus

profit. It should be the golf course. So as anybody looked at the books, and, you know, and that's about all I have to say, I, I've been quite upset about the rec department in the past few years on

and your decisions for the past few years with the rec department. Just different decisions they've made. That's about it. Thank you. Anybody else. All right, hearing none. We'll go to Mr. Escabel for

emotion. Mr Mayor the recommendation of the finance committee is to adopt and I saw move second by Mr wolf comments from members of the governing body on the resolution Mr Mayor, Mr seagrave. I'll

take credit for sponsoring this. So you can throw the darts at me. We have a multi multi multi million dollar investment in the airport golf course golf courses today can easily run a million dollars

a whole. This is a effort to update. update part of the golf course that is badly broken over the last two years, we've used some council contingency funds to put band aids on it, but honestly, the

condition of the cart paths at this time are dangerous. I mean we have tree roots growing up. We have trip hazards we have undulations big enough to depending on the speed of a cart to cause damage to

the cart and or the people riding in it. So we have looked at patching. We have looked at, can we continue to patch, or is it better to do it all at once and try to save some money. And I, I guess we

could add 10 bucks to every round and gouge people and maybe that would cut down on the number of rounds. But is that what we really want to do. We invest in all of our properties we put new roofs on

our properties recently. As a result part of that was as a result of hail and we had some help with that. But our goal is to provide recreation parks, swimming pools, the public just approved a new

swimming pool should we not spend that $12 million. That's, that's the quality of life that's what we've been talking about these are the things that keep our people here, and to let a current asset

appreciate and potentially cause harm. I think is negligent, and I don't want to do that. So, I brought this in front of the governing body. I invited folks out for a tour we got in some carts and

took a nice ride and and saw the condition. It's not something that just dropped out of the sky today. It's, it's a necessary repair and improvement to a city asset, in my opinion. Thank you.

Comments. Yes, sir. Dr. Aldrich. First and foremost, I wanted to say thank you to Jason and his team that took us on an early morning tour on the golf course. And in, I wanted to also note that in

Ward three we have done some concrete path repair also at Prairie View out of our word contingency funds and I think this morning on the radio is mentioned that word to has done that but we also have

done that in Ward three, not to the extent that word to has done, because there is a need for the concrete cart paths, and especially when there are some low areas where they get really muddy and it

becomes a mess for people that are trying to golf. We do have, I was almost an excessive use of our golf courses, and they're probably getting very close to capacity if not already there. And I know

my council fellow councilman from Ward three would love to have another golf, or at least another golf course for people who are going to need to have a golf course or a golf course for people who are

going to need to have a golf course for people who are going to need to have a golf course for people who are going to need to have a golf course for people who are going to need to have a golf course

for people who are going to need to have a golf course for people who are going to need to have a golf course for people who are going to need to have a golf course for people who are going to need to

have a golf course. I just, I, in good conscience, cannot look at using $250,000 from our general reserve for repair and replacement of cart paths at the airport golf course, understanding that it is

one of our larger investments. And understanding that there is definitely some need for some upkeep, but I tonight, while I understand the need and appreciate what we have there. I just don't know

that taking it from general fund reserves is the right answer. So for that reason, I'll be a no tonight. Mr. White, Mr. Mayor through you. I'm going to be supporting this and I just wanted to correct

a comment that I made in committee. I think I'm the one that that said 75,000 rounds and Jason got back with us after that meeting. The airport course has over 40,000 rounds on that particular course,

and then I think Prairie View had 30 so total with both courses is 70,000. But at any rate, the airport is, as my colleague from Ward 3 said, is almost a capacity and I think that we really need to

recognize how utilized by the community. It really is, particularly since the United States Air Force just decided to close their course on the base. After that happened, just the use of the airport

course has just grown exponentially, far more than it was before, and it is the only for a city of 65,000 people to have only one 18 hole golf course is highly unusual. When you go across the border,

Wyoming border by Torrington, you have small communities in Nebraska, moral Mitchell. There's actually quite a quite a well used golf course by folks here because they can't get onto the airport

course that's in Kimball Nebraska. And yet we have just the one municipal course. So, I have been on those paths, they are treacherous in some places. And I think this investment is is well needed.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm also going to support this for a couple of reasons. One is having been on the tour that we went on and thank you, Jason for doing that because I had never been. On on all 18

holes of that golf course or any golf course, for that matter. That's a lot of holes miniature golf course yes. But my biggest concern is based on the condition of those paths. If something were to

happen, and a cart tips over, and somebody gets hurt. The liability is going to easily exceed 200 could easily exceed $250,000. So, and especially the fact that we're talking about it puts it out into

the world that we know we've now identified that we have an issue, and to not take care of it I think puts us in a precarious position. So, that's one thing that the liability and the potential

litigation and the second is, as I think Dr Aldrich pointed out, we have a responsibility to maintain our resources that nobody else is going to take care of that but us, and it's our asset, the

bigger we wait, the more it's going to cost, and the higher the price the higher, you know, the resource or the, the cost is involved. So between those two issues I think we really need to consider

approving this. Mr Escobel. Thank you, Mr Mayor through you, as was mentioned we use Council contingency funds for both golf courses, and all we're really doing was piecemealing this course to a

little bit here a little bit there and it's just better to do it all at once and get it done with word three also put in money for the fence and the driving range pads that you have now at very few.

We're seeing more people going there for to get their practice in a preview. During frontier days there was a big downpour and that waitresses were running around with buckets, because the roof was

leaking. So, there's something else that's going to be coming our way on the horizon that we need to take care of out there. Thank you. Anybody else have a question. I have some information.

American's, I am just wondering, I had a friend who was injured while playing a round of golf, and that injury, which required a surgical procedure later. I was informed that when you are playing golf

on any of the city courses it basically there is a liability waiver if you will, that the city is not responsible for people that are injured on that course. Is that not accurate. This road, we have

governmental immunity for those kinds of issues or true john brody city attorney, a true attorney answer I would say is it depends. We've been played it under the waiver of governmental immunity under

the government governmental claims act. So there is potential liability, Wyoming also has the, I believe it's called the recreational safety act, where if you're injured while engaged in a

recreational activity then you've assumed the risk of injury that comes from that activity. So there's a number of factors at play that can come into an injury when it comes to a sport like golf or,

you know, cross country scheme. So, I can follow up with additional information but that'd be the kind of general overview. No I just if anybody's thinking that that might be a fundraiser, I consult

your local attorney first evidently. All right, we have a motion before us re appropriate $250,000 for a replacement of guard card paths at the airport golf course all those in favor. Please signify

by saying aye, and those opposed. No, Mr. Moody, Dr. Aldridge and Dr. Renee are knows the re appropriation is adopted next items number resolution authorizing the mayor to execute a memorandum of

understanding with participating county cities and towns regarding the allocation of impact assistance funds associated with the Cheyenne Prairie generating station expansion project application

before the industrial siting Council. All right, does anybody in the audience want to speak to our participation in the industrial siting Council process. Hearing none, Mr. Escobel, Mr. Mayor the

recommendation the Finance Committee is to adopt and I so move second that Mr. Moody. Comments for the governing body. Mr. labor. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. There's a reason that I wanted to all this off

the consent agenda is to point out the anomaly that exists here, where this generating station and its expansion is going to be considered of that impact assistance, and rightly so. In other cases, we

have a major generating station that is not going to do that because it's in declared to be in a business park, and I know that we can't really change that tonight or in the near future that's a

matter of state law, but it really is a big difference between what one entity might have to pay for that impact and what another might. And so, I speak in favor of this authorization, but I caution

that we've got big issues here with a lot of different projects that do are having impacts, and they really should be looked at the same, not not that differently so thank you. Any other comments.

Hearing none, all those in favor of the resolution to enter into an mo you on the industrial siting Council process, by saying I, I was opposed. This resolution is adopted. Next items number 34 be on

page six professional services agreement between the city of Cheyenne and Martin Martin Wyoming Inc for the redesign of the municipal building parking lot. All right, we'll go out to the audience to

see if anybody has any comments on this professional services agreement, Jennifer, Mr. Miller, you can go ahead. I guess he's not there. Thank you, Jennifer. Anybody else. All right. We'll go to Mr.

Escobel for emotion. Mr. Mayor the recommendation of the Finance Committee is to approve an amount not to exceed $132,000 and I so move, second, seconded by Mr. Wolf comments from members of the

governing body. Mr. Mayor, yes, Dr. Raney on can someone explain page for the contract paragraph five discusses parking canopies around the perimeter of the parking lot so I see Mr. Lavoise getting up

and Mr. Lavoise thanks for being here tonight. Did you care to the question. I did pick avoid public works. The idea behind the canopy was a lot to do with the recent hail storms that we've had. We've

had quite a few thought would be to see how much of a cost to put in some cannabis we can park underneath it. That's the one idea the second idea is if we're going to do that. If it could support, we

would design it to support solar if there was a need for future to help ease the electrical requirements for this building. So, Dr. Raney. Yeah, Mr. Mayor, I guess, I don't know how mean recently we

voted down in order to change that would allow people to have essentially metal canopies in their driveway. So, how is this differ from what we just what we voted against a few months ago. And I guess

that's my one question. And then, and then perhaps Mr. Lavoise can go through the timeline I presume that this will dovetail with the plans that I mean obviously if with plan ones plans for the city

building that the entrance will be moved to the north side. So I'm assuming that these plans will will coordinate with with what the future orientation of the building will look like is that accurate.

This little boy. Yeah, through you, Mayor. Yes, it would exactly do that part of the improvements to the building requires us to bring the parking and the area up to. Sorry, bring the area up to the

current standards that are required to build in the city and the parking the structure would be required. Well, I guess I go back to my original question then Mr. Mayor maybe that's to the rest of us.

I mean we voted down essentially parking canopies for the public so I was going to look when we say it's okay for us understood. Anybody else Dr. Aldridge or Collins for you. I also had the same

question, knowing that we had have been working with a company to do plans for the city hall renovation, and for the, for lack of better term senior building across the parking lot. Would any of that,

if in fact in the future we can go forward with those projects, would this be disrupted or have to be worn out or redone to accommodate that. Mr. Lebois, through you, Mayor. This is the design that

will go along with the construction of the building. So it is not the actual construction, it's just the design and the work so it can be included in the design package to do it all once. If, if we

choose to move forward with the renovations, like, Mayor Collins, just to follow up. If anyone's curious about the solar panel type of awnings, the VA hospital uses these pretty extensively. There's

always parks under them. When there's a hailstorm predicted, and they tend to serve a pretty important part. I'm not really sure how much energy they generate for the VA hospital but it is something

that's pretty commonly used in commercial settings. All right, we have a motion for professional services agreement all those in favor, please signify by saying aye those opposed. No, Mr. Moody and

Dr. Aldridge are no's the resolution for the professional services agreement is approved. Next item is number 36a. Is there anybody in the governing body or online or that wants to speak to the

vouchers. Jennifer, Mr. Miller. Can you hear me. I can hear you. Well, this is Charles Miller for the record I I'm not, I'm not sure what's exactly going on here but I've had my hand raised for pretty

much every and or select me. Wait two seconds, or you don't even know what Mr. Mr. Miller you're breaking up. Mr. Miller. Yeah, can you hear me. We can. Okay, can you hear me a little bit better now.

It's better. Yes, sir. All right. You have a comment. Yeah, I do and I also have, I want to just, I want to just let you guys know that I do intend on speaking on other business. Oh please do not just

wait two seconds, obviously connection is a little bit poor right now and so it may take me more than the two seconds that you gave me before to initiate the Mr. Miller Do you have a comment on the

vouchers. Yes, yes I do. In terms of the vouchers. Let's be here. I've got that right here. Ms. Miller, if you're not prepared, I'm going to move on. and block rubber stamping without forensic

scrutiny. The city's voucher register bundles hundreds of thousands of dollars in outside legal counsel, administrative consulting and discretionary vendor payouts into an unbedded bulk vote. Council

members do not pull question or audit individual warrant line items on the public record, treating taxpayer funds as an administrative rubber stamp. Outside legal and consulting costs versus in-house

capacity while counsel and staff repeatedly plead poverty and lack of legal bandwidth, confessing on the record that staff lacks the expertise to audit industrial impacts or negotiate executed

developer agreements. Taxpayers are funding continuous, unexpected voucher payouts to external consultants and specialty counsels paper over administrative deficiencies. Statutory duty under

WS-15-1113. - Thank you, Mr. Miller, your time's expired. Anybody else? Some write-ups on the vouchers. Don't talk to get to the microphone and introduce yourself so we can put it on the record, okay?

- Well, my question is-- - Introduce yourself, please. - I'm Buff Cook Ward-Worn. - Thank you. - I'm not sure where we are on the agenda, but we were talking-- - 36A. - 20, what? - 36A. - Yeah, well,

what happened to 34D? - 34D was passed on the consent agenda at the beginning of our meeting. - I see the CA, okay. That's what I-- - Just so you know, sir, if you have an item like that that you'd

like to talk about, you can ask any of the council members who would be happy to remove it from the consent agenda. They just pass unanimously through council. We expect they'll pass unanimously here.

- Yeah, thank you, bye. But, sir, honestly, if there's something you wanna talk about, bring it up. - I would like to talk about it. - Let any one of us know, and we would have pulled it from the

consent agenda, and we've done that. And I know you're not sure of our process. - No, I'm learning, but-- - But our next items are the business, and you could come up and talk about your thoughts

during that time. - I will do that. - Okay, thank you. Anybody else on the governing body or on vouchers? All right, next item, please. - Number 37, other business. - Come back up, sir. (laughing)

We'll find a way to get this in for you, one way or the other. Yep, introduce yourself, and you have the floor. - Okay. - Introduce yourself, and you have the floor. - I'm Buff Cook, Ward One. - Thank

you. - I'm just, like I said earlier today, first of all, yes, we are at total capacity with golf courses, and it's getting worse every day, every year. But what I really came here for, and I

understand what the C8s, there I see it now, is talk to the councilman either. But I did see the finance committee, and I kind of even lost it. I watched it on YouTube the other day. And I have a

problem with the, not really Jason, but just the city and the rec department. They've built buildings and stuff, four million dollar buildings on the north side, or it's called the beast. And I really

got upset about a year and a half ago, you know, a year and a half ago, two years ago, in the Y and Johnson pool was closed down about the same week. And I was told that the YMCA is a piece of junk,

but I don't think the city's ever supported it. At a Ward One meeting, or coffee, where several members were there, they kind of heard me go off on that. But then the data centers hit. And quite

frankly, Mr. Mayor, I talked to you about the Johnson pool, and this was before the vote and stuff. And I was talking about where it would be cheaper to repair Johnson pool than, 'cause it's a great

asset to the neighborhood. And I was told there was numbers, and this was not our conversation. It would be better to duplicate it all around the city, but at a cheaper price and just repair it. But

there was never, you know, I was told that I would get repair costs. The city's looked at it, the rec department's looked at it. You know, what's cost to repair it instead of replace it. Anyways, it

did go on and it was passed for $10 million. And then also, and this is my biggest thing is, and this is what the finance committee that I saw last week or three days ago or whatever is on this

professional service city thing. You know, in '24, you passed the design, or, you know, you paid this TSI or whichever. $240,000 for a design. I haven't seen a design. Nobody asked for a design. -

Sir, we had a bunch of public meetings and we actually have a beautiful design. They both did a- - Where is it? - I think it actually might be a picture of it in the law. - Yeah, there's a picture.

That's all I've seen. - Yeah, we have a design to a certain point. - Yeah, 65%. - Right, we wanted to wait until after- - But where is the 65%? Have you seen it? - Yeah, we have. - I haven't seen it.

- Well, we had a number of public meetings. If you want to go to see the recreation department, I'm sure they can show you what we have so far. We didn't want to design it all the way to 100% because

we didn't know if the voters would approve it. But we asked in 2021 for the money to do a design for the pool, to do public meetings to see what the neighborhood and what the community wanted. And

then we brought that forward in the last six penny election. So we did exactly what we asked them to do. And that is to give us a design, do the public meetings, find out what people wanted. And we

put that onto the next ballot and we did that. - I'll say so impact on neighborhood, which I've lived in that neighborhood. You're going to put $10 million worth of infrastructure and does a pool cost

$10 million? - You know, not maybe just a hole in the ground in a liner, but with the changing rooms and the bathrooms and concession stands and the slides and the lazy river and the complete package

that the community asked for, yes, sir, it costs $10 million. - I haven't seen, have you all seen the figure? Have you seen the design, the 65% design? And I'm just, you know, and then they're asking

for another 600,000. You know, it's not a lot of money. - Yes, sir, it is. - You know, and we should look into this stuff and there's just no record. And it's, I brought up the golf course thing just

because it's just, oh, well, we need this. We need more golf courses, but I just wish you'd look at the numbers a little bit, the design a little bit. It's been passed by the, you know, the students.

Quite frankly, I think $10 million just gonna destroy the neighborhood and the park. And I'd like to see it go to Romero as much as I hate losing the pool that I really was for. You know, just passing

these things, $600,000. That's a lot of money. - Mr. Cook, I think we're a little late under the litigation of this, right? As far as arguing about it, you know, the plan was made. It was put before

the voters. The voters approved it, and so I feel like we don't have a choice now, but to do exactly what we told the voters who we're gonna ask for. - I do, but last week the finance committee and

you did it by official consent, decided another $300,000 on something they haven't even looked what they got for the 240. - Well, sir, what that does is it takes it to 100% design and it gives us

construction management so they can be there to make sure the pool was built the way the design was done. - The people on the council would at least look at what they already have and what they've

got. - Sir, I tell you, we have done that. We have done that. We've looked at the design. We have looked at, we've gone to those public meetings. We have done that. - Well, if I as a taxpayer would,

for $10 million, I'd like to see the design. - So all you gotta do is ask. It's a public document. - I did, I asked Jason. - We'd be happy to show you. - A month ago. - And by the way, sir, the beast,

we didn't build the beast. The beast was built by a private organization and we, they were going to close it and we didn't have the gyms in the city, so we decided rather than lose the capacity, we

bought it, but we didn't build it. It was-- - Okay, this, I just-- - Yeah, I understand. - Been upset with many of the decisions been made in the past with the rec department and the money wise and--

- I love that you're watching our meetings on-- - It's just pinpoint. - I love that you're watching our-- - People have looked at how much money's being spent and I realize you got a $10 million

pocket, but it is gonna, I hate to see it leave the neighborhood. - The 65%, I have not seen the design. I've seen a picture, that's it, thank you. - Jason, you wanna-- - Mr. Mayor, Jason Sanchez,

Community Rec and Events. So our 65% is online. I think what the gentleman is wanting though is to actually see the construction documents that we're in the process of acquiring. So the renderings

that we have, the public meetings that we have, the charrettes that we provided for the community, the things that they said that they wanted included in the design are where we're at with the 65%. To

get to the full construction documents of where we're gonna place it in the park, what type of towel dispenser we'll have, how everything is going to sit, that's the next move. You are correct, in the

previous six panel, the taxpayer supported us to do a design for Johnson pool. We got it to 65%, we did not go to 100 because we didn't know if it would pass. And so to try to utilize those funds on

something that may or may not pass, we didn't feel was a prudent move, so we held tight. Once it passed, then we went forward to get to the 100% design. The contract, yes, we did pay the 240, now

we're into the 350, you are correct. That includes construction administration that goes beyond just doing the design. They're gonna help make sure that the pool is built for the design, and then it

keeps them on contract for two years until our warranty period expires. So that's where we are in the process. I think it's going to be an asset to the area. And like you said too, the community

supported this project. So 65%, they are online. I think that what the gentleman is asking for is the 100%, we're not there yet. Thank you. - Jennifer. - Mr. Love, you can go ahead. - Mr. Mayor,

members of the council, my name is Steven Love, Ward 1. I hope that my name coming up doesn't cause you any kind of disdain amongst the members of the council. I really do care about our community,

and I am invested in our community as I am a homeowner, but that said, I was hoping you might be able to address something another member of the public said during comment on another item that was

deeply concerning to me. And frankly, knowing what the chlorine content of our water tends to be a little more personally than some others may, having formerly worked on our water lines myself, I find

it unlikely. But do you know, or can you ask someone if there's actually a Listeria outbreak in the Southside Water District? And if so, is there any threat to Boku customers? - Sir, I have not heard

of it, but that doesn't mean it's not true. And I don't see anybody from the Board of Public Utilities here to answer that. But Mr. Love, I will ask that. Jennifer, do you have somebody? - I do have a

couple people on, but they haven't raised their hands, so I don't know. I just wanted to give them a minute to see if somebody wants. - Who's on from the board? - So, Mr. Strong, you can go ahead. -

Thank you, Mr. Strong. - Mayor, can you hear me okay? - We can, sir. - I am currently not aware of any outbreaks in the Southside Water Sewer District. Additionally, we do have check valves at all of

our connections to South Cheyenne to provide protection between the two systems. - Thank you, sir. Mr. Love, I hope that answered your question. - Yes, sir, Mr. Mayor, I didn't think there probably

was, but I'm just making sure. - Well, I appreciate that, thank you. Jennifer, who else do you have? - Mr. Williams, you can go ahead. Mr. Williams, you can go ahead. - All right, I'm here. My concern

about all this is I went down to where all this is going on, where the data centers are, and where everything is going on. The construction trucks that I'm seeing are all from Colorado. Are we here to

give Colorado jobs, or are we here to give Wyomingites jobs? Because, you know, the golf course, we should make sure that the Wyomingites are getting those jobs, not Colorado people. It just seems

like we give all of our jobs to the Colorado people, instead of taking care of the people that are here. Also, there is a sidewalk that is on Central that has been sitting, I've been here since 2017,

and this sidewalk is actually coming out of the ground. If you guys, I don't know if you guys have seen it, but it's definitely a hazard. I think somebody should get over there and fix that. - We're

on Central Avenue, is it? - It's right before, it's right before the light, the light on Yellowstone in that area. So I think that somebody ought to get over there and at least look at it, or at

least, Mr. Mayor, if you could let them know. - I know exactly what you're talking about. It's along the fence of the airport. - Yeah. - Yeah, I know what you're talking about. - Yeah, it's pretty

bad. It does it, but I think that we ought to give these contracts to Wyoming companies instead of the Colorado companies. We have enough of Colorado here. - Mr. Williams, that sidewalk is Y.

property, so we'll send a note to them to let them know that that's a problem and that's their jurisdiction. And we love your comment on Wyoming people getting jobs in Wyoming, we love that, thank

you. - You're welcome. - Jennifer. - Mr. Miller, you can go ahead. - Can you hear me? - We can. - Mayor Collins, members of the council, Charles Miller for the administrative record. Tonight, this

governing body trapped itself in a permanent loop of contradictions. Every defense you offered on this bias was immediately dismantled by your own subsequent actions and your own transcribed words.

Let the administrative journal lock in the four irreconcilable paradoxes you established tonight. The procedural paradox at 1955-27 on item 12, the clerk called my name in less than two seconds. The

chair gaveled the floor shut with hearing none to rush emotion. My hand remained verified and raised continuously across the next five agenda items. This body extends unlimited patience and technical

pauses to corporate developers, yet manufactures artificial silence to shut out a registered public auditor. You cannot claim to operate a lawful public forum under WS-16-403 while actively

engineering viewpoint discrimination on the visual floor. Number two, the competence paradox. Tonight, you overruled your own planning commission and planning staff to approve 162 acres of industrial

zoning, yet your own leadership confesses technical blindness on the public record. Mayor Collins admitted on June 22 that staff lacks the expertise and is not qualified. Councilman Layborn conceded

staff is not remotely capable of assessing these catastrophic impacts. Planning director Bloom testified his department is underwater and lacks the bandwidth to track cumulative utility strain. You

cannot legally execute quasi-judicial land use approvals under Wilson Advisory Committee when you have openly confessed you lack the empirical capacity to understand what you are approving. Number

three, the fiscal paradox on item 12, council justified industrial rezoning by lecturing the public that Cheyenne is too financially crippled to build a $15 million roadway. Yet minutes later on item

25, you rated a quarter of a million dollars from emergency cash reserves because golf carts are hitting undulations on the fairway. You have panicked, you panic that golfers might have to drive to

Campbell, Nebraska and warned of a $250,000 tort liability if a cart tips over. Meanwhile, older neighborhoods face a 100 year sewer collapse and an $80 million lead pipe crisis which the Board of

Public Utilities addresses by handing families a plastic filter pitcher. You claim poverty for public health and declare emergencies for county club asphalt. You claim to act as an independent

regulatory body yet councilman Wolf confessed on item 12 that data centers enjoy the benefit of a basically compliant government. That compliance is fully documented in the 961 emails entered into

tonight's transcript exposing the mayor forwarding generation tax numbers to private lobbyists that Cheyenne leads with the note, I hope it helps our cause. You do under private real estate

transactions through municipal ordinances while bypassing industrial lighting council regulations to shield developers from impact fees. Your administrations are indexed, your contradictions are

locked. - Mr. Miller, your time's up. Are you gonna make that phone call you promised me two weeks ago? I guess not. - Anybody else in the audience? Okay, how about from the governing body? - Sir. -

Dr. Aldridge. - Mayor Collins, just a reminder that in Ward 3 we will be holding council and coffee this Saturday morning on October 17th from 9 to 11 at the Dasbaug on the east side of town located

at College and Pershing. So we would invite anybody to come out and join us for our no host council and coffee. - Anybody else? Dr. Rennie. - Mr. Miller, could Mr. Miller send me an email explaining

is there such thing as a registered public auditor and how does one register to become one? Thank you. - Anybody else? - Mr. Mayor. - Yes, sir. - Mr. Mayor, through you just wanted to make a comment

that there was, I guess there was a rumor going around that there would be no trick or treating downtown this year, which I don't know how that got out, but it is false. There will be trick or

treating downtown on October 24th, downtown first is kind of coordinating with that. I think folks start at the depot and get like a golden ticket and then there's areas of trick or treating all

around the downtown area. So I just wanted to make note of that. - Wonderful. Mr. Laborn. - Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to share with the council some concerns that really came to a head at a meeting

that was held in this room with the Planning Commission last week. So a week ago, the Planning Commission received and we certainly did as well, the proposed changes that would put the data center

regulation in the unified development code. Where these regulations came from, who worked on them, what they are is a matter of great concern to me and a concern to the members of the Planning

Commission as well. They postponed that matter until there'll be another meeting a week from tonight. And that is something that has a lot of very technical specificity. And it is not something that

very many of us have a lot of experience with. Same thing with the Planning Commission. It's really something that is a great concern as we saw tonight and we've seen over the weeks, how we regulate

and deal with the specifics of data center development is something that very important, very complex. And I would also like to point out that this is something that we could have been working on as

time went along. And now we're looking at these ordinance changes coming at us probably leading right up to the holiday season and the fact that some members will no longer be with us. So one of the

key elements here is fuel center power. That is something that is evolving technology. It's one that I really wanna call your attention to the fact that the DEQ no longer regulates carbon dioxide from

a plant like that. This is really something that I'd sure like some answers as to who in the planning office or their consultants is coming up with these answers to the questions that were raised in

the Planning Commission meeting. Who helped draw these up, Mr. Mayor? Is that a question I can ask tonight? - Mr. Bloom, Charles, did you hear the question? - Yes, Mayor, I did. - Thank you. - Mayor,

members of council, the current text amendments that we have right now, we have three of them that went to the Planning Commission last week. Unfortunately, all aligned on the same date, they weren't

supposed to. One was the urban agriculture, which is moving forward. It was introduced today. One was the power generation amendments. And that was following the unified development code process

regarding unclassified and unlisted land uses that we are required to move that forward as a text amendment. Those items, the power generation, that was derived by staff, most of myself and Seth

Lloyd, was a little bit more leaning on Seth with that. We did have low to sustainability of engineering review some of the items there for any big ticket items, but our primary goal with that

amendment is to be able to find a path forward for power generation facilities in some manner because there are active requests for power generation and we need to provide that clarity to the

developers. So that is how that goes through. With the data center and development language, same thing, that's been worked on collectively by staff. That was initiated by the request of council

member, Rini, who wanted us to look at, I'll admit it was very limited what Dr. Rini had mentioned, which was the prohibition of evaporative cooling. And we expanded a little bit slightly and that

opened up a rabbit hole which led to other elements like temporary construction uses. How do we address those? How do we address the lighting? And we decided let's go ahead and codify our noise

regulations, which right now are essentially an informational interpretation that we have based on what we perceive as discernible. So we have put all those together. We believe we've had a workable

package. We've been working with our city engineering staff to make sure we can address some of their concerns. We've been working with Fire as well, Board of Public Utilities. And although there are

very likely some additional changes that we'll have to go through, we are moving forward with those regulations. Our next planning commission agenda was just published this evening and it's available

on the planning commission website. And you can read those text amendments in the planning commission format for what will be presented as the sole topic at next Monday's planning commission meeting.

- Mr. Mayor, well, that's certainly somewhat enlightening. I would ask if there's anyone from the Board of Public Utilities that might be listening in and have a comment as those comments were made at

the commission meeting. Jennifer, do you have anyone that wants to comment? - You ask those questions through me, sir. We'll ask those questions through the chair. We'll try to get an answer for you,

please. Who do you have, Jennifer? - Bryce Dore, you can go ahead. - Mr. Mayor, council members, this is Bryce Dore, representing the Board of Public Utilities. So I guess just to follow up a little

bit on Councilman Layborn's comments. I did make a comment at the planning commission meeting regarding the codification of limiting cooling systems to closed loop type cooling. We have learned a lot

over the last three, four months around the water energy nexus and emerging technologies around cooling. And just don't really see that as potentially the most prudent approach. It may paint us into a

corner that we might not wanna live in. So we have worked as Director Bloom had mentioned with the planning department around coming up with a little different language in there to give us a little

more flexibility to evaluate projects as they come and be able to continue being the responsible stewards of Cheyenne's water supply that we have done for many, many years. So I think there's gonna be

a lot more to come on this topic. If there's any other specific questions that you had in mind, happy to answer. - Mr. Layborn, follow-ups. - Yes, well, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, this is obviously a

topic that we'll be dealing with, that the planning commission will be dealing with. In my testimony at that meeting, the most important point that was pointed out was the comments from industry. This

isn't a matter of putting a notice in the paper, a legal notice in the paper, and then believing that's adequate for communication with a multi-billion dollar industry that is currently developing in

the city and really is something that really needs that comment. I also would like to point out that some of us on the council have been expressing concerns for some time on how we do regulate and

certainly the UDC, there's a place there for it, how good it is, I don't know. But I'm very curious how our concerns were evidently met with silence and Dr. Rennie's concerns led to these ordinances.

This is a matter of the utmost importance. This is the biggest change certainly in Cheyenne that I'm aware of probably possibly ever and it is highly technical, it is evolving, and the use of this

particular consultant, I'd like to know more about that. So Mr. Mayor, I appreciate the time here. I would tell the members of the council, we're gonna be getting into this. And when we do, maybe some

of you are more scientifically and technically oriented than I am, but read through that. Read through it and see what we're really putting into law, what we're putting into that matter. And I wanna

also point out that I have a lot of respect for the individuals who work in the planning department and I believe are excellent employees. Whether they have the background and expertise to do this is

a question we need to ask. So I appreciate everyone's time. You're gonna be hearing more about this and it really is a matter of something that you wanna do one time and you wanna do it right. And

part of that is that certainly as I've been involved and followed the UDC for years, the key question is that annual review. Here this really major change is coming out of the blue, evidently to help

us make these decisions coming right up to the holiday season. And I think that that's, I've seen that before, Mr. Mayor and members of the council. That's not a good way to make lesser decisions, but

it certainly is not a good way to make this kind of law because we will be having to really take a look at this. I think that we need to certainly involve third party people who have much more

experience. They're out there, they're available. This isn't a homemade deal. Thank you. - Thank you. I wanna concur with my colleague from Ward 1. Mr. Mayor, if it can be posted on social media, this

meeting, Planning Commission for next week so we can get members of the public to make comments more 'cause more on what's better, if that can be done. - Anybody else? All right, hearing none, we are

adjourned. What's that?