2026-11-09 - City Council

03:01recording in progress. Uh good evening ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the November 9th meeting of the governing body. I would ask the uh clerk if she would take the role please.

04:23>> Dr. Renie >> present. >> Mr. Crave >> present. >> Mr. White >> present. >> Mr. Wolf >> here. >> Dr. Aldrich >> present. Mayor Collins >> here. >> Dr. Emmens >> present. >> Mr. Escoel

04:34>> here. >> Mr. Mr. Leborn >> here. >> Mr. Moody >> here. >> All members are present. We do have a quorum. >> Would you please join me in the pledge of allegiance

04:47to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

05:10Number four, consent agenda. All agenda items listed with the designation of CA are considered to be routine items by the governing body and will be enacted

05:18by 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

05:27consent agenda will be considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. >> All right. Hey, is there any item on the consent agenda a member of the governing body would like to remove?

05:37>> I hear none. May I have a motion, please? >> Second. >> Moved by Mr. C. Graves, seconded by Mr. White. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I.

05:45>> Those opposed. The consent agenda is adopted. >> Number 6A, public hearing to determine whether compliance of annexation conditions required by Wyoming statute 15-1-42

05:57exist for about 5.06 06 acres of land located south of East Fox Farm Road, north of East Allison Road and east of and adjacent to South College Drive.

06:08>> All right, we'll have a public hearing on this, but before we do, we'll ask our staff for a quick report. >> Mayor, members of council, Counterway Planning and Development Department, the

06:18sanctation is for roughly 5.06 06 acres of land generally located south of East Fox Farm Road, north of East Allison and east of adjacent to Southwest Drive.

06:32City received petition to annex this land from the owners which was filed with the city clerk on August 13th, 2026. The petition was certified by the city clerk as containing all necessary

06:42signatures on August 20th, 2026. This public hearing is being held in accordance with Wyoming State Statute 151402A. Person of filling the requirements in

06:56state statute. Staff asks the governing body to consider the following. The land proposed to be annexed is contiguous to city limits. Specifically, the property is 65.43% contiguous.

07:11I should note this is part of a county pocket as well. Um that is also on tonight's agenda. All city services and utilities currently available to properties within

07:21the city will be provided to the land of the annex land. Extending water and sewer will increase the health and safety of individuals living or working in this area of the community.

07:32The area to be annexed is inside the urban service boundary and designated with mixed use employment by the future land use map. This type of development

07:39is best supported by being within city limits and by connecting to city services. Certified mailing was sent to all land owners and utilities within the annex

07:50land not less than 20 business days uh prior to the public hearing. According to the city's calendar 20 business days prior to today's hearing was October

07:5812th. Uh certified mailing was sent out on September 30th and earliest confirmed receipt was October 2nd and then all property owners within 300 ft of the property were also uh mailed notice

08:09within the same time period. This annexation is accompanied by an assigned zoning ordinance and an owner requested zone change. All items on uh relate to this annexation are all on third

08:21reading. Um I know there have been questions about why are we doing uh public hearing on third reading. There's nowhere in state statute that does mention when the public hearing has to

08:32happen. It just has to happen during the process prior to uh council's final consideration. and then the effective date of the ordinance would be 20 business days after the approval of an

08:43annexation or after the public hearing. So, um that's why within the ordinance specific to this property, um should that one be approved, it would be December 7th is when it would become

08:55effective. There have been no comments from any surrounding property owners. Um with this, we haven't had any additional public comment uh for this annexation.

09:05With that, I am available for any questions. >> Thank you, Connor. Anybody on the governing body have questions for staff? All right, we'll open it up to the

09:14public. Does anybody in the public want to speak to this uh owner initiated annexation of 5.06 acres? Jennifer, do you have somebody? >> No, I don't. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. Uh the

09:32purpose of the public hearing did you want to speak, Miss Smith? Tommy Nicely 200 Waltershy. >> Tommy, can I get you to bring that microphone up so you're talking right

09:44into it so people in the back can hear you now? >> Oh, that's so much better. Thank you. >> Tommy Nicely 200 Walter Shide. Um, I would also a victim of annexation. Can we can I just

09:58ask you for one small kindness? Instead of stating that this is owner requested, we all know why they want to annex. Now, when you're force annexing, you don't say this is forced annexation.

10:13You just call it annexation. But when the owner finally succumbs, can we just be kind? Can we just please just refer to it as annexation? Just a a small kindness please.

10:33>> Anybody else in the audience? >> If you can push that button, sir, so you can turn that light. There you go. Thank you. >> Tony Perry. I live in uh Pine Bluffs,

10:50Wyoming. I'm not here tonight to try to convince you to change your minds. Everyone in this room knows you're already committed to an agenda. Instead, I'm here to hold a mirror up to what

11:01this community has been forced to witness. Public office is a public trust, not a private lever for big business. Yet today, it feels as though we the people means little more than a

11:12rug to be walked on by elected officials who have forgotten whom they serve. What we have watched over the last several months is not governing governing. It is

11:20steamrolling. I have always believed in the principles of servant leadership. However, looking at the forced annexation of a hardworking family in our community, I do not see leadership.

11:31I see a usurping of authority and a blatant form of bureaucratic bullying. Worse still, we have still we have witnessed a startling lack of compassion and almost antagonistic comments from

11:42some on this day. That is not the Wyoming way. It is a sad day when the bullying we see in our own town comes from our own local government. John Adams once wrote, "The

11:53public business must be done by someone, and that if wise and honest men neglect it, it will be left to those who lack both." Thomas Jefferson also reminded us

12:03that the care of human life and happiness is the first and only legitimate object of good government. True authority is not measured by how much power you can wield against your

12:12own neighbors. It is a me it is measured by the restraint and care you show to the people you were sworn to protect. What we have seen here is not public

12:19service. It is political entanglement and cold bureaucracy. I want everyone remember member of this council to look in the mirror this evening and ask yourself this. Is business as usual

12:29worth the immense drain and frustration you have placed on a hardworking family simply trying to live the American dream? Or do you see this as another notch in your professional political

12:39portfolio? Mercy could have been shown in this tough situation. Instead, you chose polit politics as usual. I quote and then I'm done. If the citizens neglect their duty and place

12:50unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted. Laws will be made not for the public good so much as for the selfish or local purposes. Corrupt or incompetent men

13:01will be appointed to execute the laws. The public revenues will be squandered on unworthy men and the rights of the citizens will be violated or disregarded

13:09by no Webster. To my fellow citizens watching tonight, be encouraged. Do not give up. refuse to quit and refuse to take a silent seat. We the people are still vital and our voices remain

13:21crucial for tomorrow's hopes and future. Thank you. >> Anybody else want to speak on this public hearing for this 5 acre annexation? >> No. >> Hello, I'm Patricia. Oh, I'm sorry.

13:39>> Patricia, did you want to speak about the Wresh Farm or you want to talk about this annexation? the wirefresh farm. >> Okay, that that item's not before us

13:46yet. It might be better to hold off and and you can you can talk to us about it when we get to that point. >> Thank you. >> Okay. I just hadn't seen you here

13:53before, so I didn't know if you knew our what we were doing. Thank you. Anybody else? >> Okay. Anybody on the governing body? >> All right. The purpose of the public

14:05hearing has been met and we'll move to the next item, please. Number 6A, public hearing for a bar and grill liquor license application filed with the city

14:12clerk's office for Bal's Wyoming LLC doing business as Bal Cheyenne, 1734 Medalan Drive, Cheyenne, Wyoming. >> All right, we have before us an application for a bar and grill license

14:24and I didn't know if maybe the folks from Bal might want to do a presentation before we start so everybody can hear it or it's up to you guys. Hi, I'm Carrie Smith representing BS.

14:38>> Welcome, sir. >> Thank you. Uh, you guys have a copy of the presentation we put together. Just had some pictures on the outside of the building and what the bar area is going

14:48to look like inside. It's going to be a a kind of a high-end sports bar feel on the inside of the facility. We will be serving food and beverage in there. Um

15:00hopefully um don't want to use up too much of your time. You if you guys have any questions for me? Anybody in the governing body have a any questions for the applicant?

15:17We appreciate you guys being here this evening. How about from the audience? Does anybody want to speak to this request for a bar and grill license uh from valleys?

15:29Okay. Anybody on the governing body? All right. The purpose of the public hearing has been met and we'll assign this item to the finance committee. Number 6 C. Public hearing for a

15:43restaurant liquor license application filed with the city clerk's office for Shack and Co. LLC doing business as Wingshack 5719 Yellowstone Road, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

15:52>> All right, we have a business that's moving within our community and please sir, welcome. >> Thank you very much. Good evening. My name is Steve Mlowski. I'm the vice

15:58president of president of operations for Centennial Hospitality Group, Shack and Co. LLC uh representing our interests in uh transitioning our existing business from uh Stillwater over up on

16:08Yellowstone uh as we acquired that building that was old grandfather's Pizza. Um, very much looking forward to continuing our existing 10 years uh, here in Cheyenne and um, look forward to

16:19answering any questions you may have. Uh, should there be any, but can't wait to expand our footprint and become a a little bit even more of a neighborhood

16:28feel. Um, serving great wings, beers, cocktails, and good times. >> Can you give us an idea when you're going to open? >> I wish I could. So, only as of late uh,

16:38did we clear some of the final permitting constrictions that we've been working through. So, uh, we are now with all of our contractors, subcontractors

16:45running at full steam. Um, so hopefully in very, very short order is my goal. >> Sounds good. Thank you. Anybody on the governing body have a question for the applicant? Dr. Aldridge.

16:54>> Mayor Collins for you. Um, I'm sure that you're aware that Godfathers used to be quite a draw for the students at Central High School. Um, yeah. And some of the

17:04adults in the area as well, I should hope. Um, and so I'm just wondering, will you be um looking to attract some of that um school business um of the teenagers during the lunch hour um to

17:18your restaurant? >> Very much so. Yeah, we offer uh a series of value forward options that we target specifically towards uh students and the like and also any individual diners that

17:29like to save a little bit of money. So, um, but yeah, we we focused on that throughout many of our locations to make sure that we have a a prompt and quick

17:35service with a good value oriented meal. >> Great. Thank you. >> Anyone else in the governing body? >> All right, let's go out to the audience. We have a request for a and good luck,

17:44sir. Thank you so much. >> Hey, thank you very much. I appreciate it. >> We have a request for a restaurant liquor license. Does anybody here want to speak to that under this public hearing?

17:54>> Nobody. Nobody on the governing body. All right. Again, this uh purpose of the public hearing has been met and we'll assign this item to the finance committee. >> Thank you all.

18:04>> Good luck, sir. >> Number seven, ordinance third reading, annexing to the city of Cheyenne, Wyoming, various tracks of land completely surrounded by current city

18:12limits, situate in western and southern Cheyenne, generally located east of I25, south of the intersection of Westland Road and Missile Drive, north of West

18:21and East Allison Road, and east of and adjacent to North College Drive. >> All right, ma'am. I think this is your time um if you wanted to come up and speak to us. This is uh uh the

18:31annexation on third reading of the county pockets surrounded by 100% of the city. And u if you do Yes, ma'am. I think this would be a perfect time for you to come talk to us. Hello,

18:50my name is Patricia Meyers and I live at 5402 Ryan Avenue here in town and I wanted to speak in support of the Wyoming Fresh Store. Um, in my adult life, I've lived in six states coast to

19:05coast and a few cities in some of those states. At the same time, my husband and I have always sought sources of really good, nutritious food that's affordable.

19:17And um I find that Wyoming Fresh is unique. They truly are a wonderful resource for this city. And they truly do feature local foods, you know, the meats, the dairy, the produce, and some

19:32of this is from their own farm. I um discovered them when I lived in South Gley, but um we've moved since and I'm still going back. So, it's a great store. Just wanted to and farm. Just

19:45wanted to point that out. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Nicely. Do you want to maybe give us an update on on what your request is because a post that was I guess

19:54attributed to you said that you would uh um would be asking for annexation tonight because you have changed your plans and I just didn't want to anybody to put words in your mouth if that's

20:04something you wanted. I thought maybe it'd be good for you to share that with the governing body. Please turn your microphone on. >> David Nicely 200 Walters. Well, as uh

20:14Tommy said, um you know, it's ironic that you're calling the Hobvels annexation a voluntary annexation when it's in fact an involuntary annexation. Um I think it's ironic that the

20:26effective date of that involuntary voluntary annexation would be Pearl Harbor Day. um because um I'm sure they feel as blitzed as I do and I'm sure that um [snorts]

20:41at least some of the folks who survived Pearl Harbor Day might have felt better than I do at this point. Um we're mad. Um we're unhappy with the city of Cheyenne. Um, I'm mad at

21:03your administration. I'm angry that you all pretended like you wanted to work things out with us and then immediately turned us in to the Department of Agriculture for alleged

21:17violations that weren't violations. I'm angry that your chief of staff, Mr. Collins, refused to allow your administration to meet with us this summer. So, my intention tonight is that

21:28people give you hell for the way you treated us. And then I'm expecting that you will free us from the burdens of living in this city knowing because city officials have told us,

21:43county officials have told us, and state officials have told us that you will hound us and hound us and hound us out of existence anyway. Um, so please vote to annex us and then please

22:02listen to the people and understand that they're not going to take it much longer. You all are a threat to liberty. Not all of you, but some of you are, and it needs to stop. Your

22:18administration is corrupt. Um, it seeks to take advantage of people that you put in under duress. That's been happening. And if it doesn't stop, if the people do

22:35not put a stop to it, it will continue to happen. So, if your goal is to get me to say, "Yeah, we want to be annexed." And then have people stop. No. No. What you've

22:47done is a shame. You should stop. And the best thing you can do tonight is show some mercy on us. Annex us and then we'll sell and we'll go. Um Jesus told us to shake the dust off

23:06of our feet and I'm doing it. Flee Sodom and Gomorrah. That's where I am. That's my heart. Um, I still think you should resign. Um, your administration is corrupt. If the

23:23city council can't reign you in, Mr. Wolf, you said that it's not the way city council works. Well, you're the governing body. Reign in this corrupt administration.

23:34Dr. Ammons, pull the dogs off. You closed down Laramie County over CO. You could have stood for righteousness and justice and allowed people to live. and >> Mr. >> make their living.

23:48>> Thank you, sir. >> Go ahead. Mrs. Nicely Tommy Nicely. Whoa, that was loud. You want me to be that loud? >> You. >> Okay. Um 200 Wide. The damage has been done.

24:11There's no recovering what we've lost this year through this forced annexation process. You may have allowed me to continue to farm, but you stripped me of any legal

24:24protections to farm. You are all culpable. I really just please stop blameshifting by saying if I was just friendlier or if I was more articulate that maybe things

24:42would have worked out for us. I want to encourage you to be a leader. I want to encourage you to lead with kindness, fairness, and respect. We had to fight so hard

24:58for you to even listen to our concerns. Instead of being helpful to find out which statutes may conflict with common a practices, we had to go through all of them. My

25:13friends had to go through all of them ourselves. You could have required the department heads to do so, but you put that responsibility on us. You know, we've requested the same

25:25lawful protection to common ad practices. We asked for it in February. We continued to ask for it through an attorney, through coming to multiple meetings, through social media posts.

25:43In fact, we even had to clumsily write the amendments ourselves. again. Why did you push that responsibility on us? Why not just help to make a way forward?

25:58You guys are forcing the city on me. Why not just do it with some kindness and some respect? When we came to you saying we're having trouble dealing with the city,

26:14you chose to publicly belittle me and justify their bad behavior. Why didn't you investigate our complaints? You say you listen, and maybe you do. Maybe the problem isn't about listening.

26:32Maybe the problem is about caring. What you've created is a situation where technically I can continue to farm, but I'm completely vulnerable to anyone who wishes to complain about a rooster

26:50crowing, manure that may stink, or a tractor that is noisy. So, yes, technically I can continue to farm, but in reality, I cannot farm. If farming is punishable with vines and gel,

27:14the damage has been done. We will move. We will move because we want to continue to farm. I now ask that you will be just kind to my family as we retreat.

27:29that you guys can listen to the people of Cheyenne and even Larmy County and treat them with kindness and respect to offer help. Not everybody knows how to move through the civic procedures.

27:48Why don't you want to help the people? You guys hold a vast amount of power of everybody in Cheyenne. Please. Mr. Wolf had told us that maybe the reason why we're having

28:10problems with the city is because we're the problem. And he encouraged us to selfreflect. And although I truly believe it was premature for him to say that before he

28:27collected all the facts, I do agree with him that we are constantly supposed to self-reflect. Aristotle said that a life without questioning is not a life worth living.

28:40And I truly hope that you guys will take some time to reflect on how you can do a better job, how you can be a better human. Please, you guys have a lot of power.

28:57Do better for the people. I love the people of Cheyenne. I hope you can learn from them and learn to love them more than I do. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Ma'am,

29:19>> my name is Vera Booth. I want to thank the council people who responded to my questions. I enjoyed I appreciated hearing from them and where they were coming from.

29:36The city council rolls out the welcome mat for liquor and gambling establishments, but it spends an inordable inord inordinate amount of time and effort to close a small family business that

29:52supplies wholesome food to our community. The Nicely have continually fought for the freedom, for the right to do what they've always done in their own land,

30:03and they've done it very successfully. Your 100% goal was more important and negatively impacted the quality of life in Cheyenne. How is Cheyenne going to be adversely

30:20affected if you don't rebuild the pump house roof? And yet, how many vendors and customers in Cheyenne do you already affect by trying to forcibly annex the nicely property? People matter.

30:39Property rights matter. And it's scary to think that that might not be the case anymore. Welcome. >> Um, Peggy Gates, Ward Three. Many times this summer and fall, we heard a lot

30:54about the rights of land owners to be annexed and to sell. At what point should a land owner have the right to refuse that? I under I realize and understand this is a forest annexation

31:06and city law allows that to be done to county pockets inside city limits. But just because it could be done doesn't mean it should have been done. I can't

31:16fathom a city official official knocking on my door and saying the city wants my land and my home. I want to thank the nicely for the special place they opened

31:26to Cheyenne. I always looked forward to going to that warm, friendly little store that provided so much. Many times it turned into a gathering place of customers, vendors,

31:39neighbors who um share just a a a like-mindedness about health, about nutrition, about food and farming. They have a strong faith and I will will go on to do wonderful things

31:55wherever they land. They treat everyone who walks through their door like a new friend. Um, but Cheyenne though, Cheyenne loses tonight. Thank you, >> sir. Welcome.

32:10>> Good evening. I'm Bob Abasi and um I'm fairly new to this city. Um, but I've heard a lot about this case. Um, the nicely family farm produces high quality, domestically produced products

32:25that everyone here seems to love. and uh it really isn't their fault that the city has expanded and now their farm falls within the city limits. It's encircled by them. So I would say no to

32:41this annexation and leave the nicely family farm alone so people can continue to enjoy the products that they always have enjoyed. Thank you. >> Good evening.

32:54>> Jimmy Churro one word [clears throat] one. um been coming for almost almost two years now and I remember when the mayor said that you would go and work

33:02with the nicely one of the topics that I had brought up is about even though that they're in the city limits that if they had a coyote or something they couldn't

33:11discharge a firearm to ch you know to kill the coyote of that. So it made it difficult for them to continue under those constraints to still do the farm. Uh I've recently read I'm very

33:22disappointed in you Miss Emmens. I had a lot of respect for you until I saw that you guys were going after them. >> Mr. Chair, talk to talk to the chair.

33:30Don't talk to Well, through you, your mayor. You know, it's it just disgusts me. I've been coming for almost two years. And thank God I did not win for W one [clears throat]

33:39because those of you that would uh vote for these annexations, I'd hold you very much so accountable. I would have been an inside mole to see what the corruption is going on with this

33:50governing body. And and and I hate to say it as a Christian, but you know, karma will come back to you. Each and every one of you that keeps going and voting for these annexations,

34:01blindly rubber stamping these data centers and that and I I just pray that it's it's not a miserable, painful death for you. And that's all I have to say. >> Mr. White,

34:15>> Thomas White, I got do you know what's going on here kind of bother me? have been thinking for a long time like that farm on Will Shire. You know you I listen to you guys said

34:26when they analize that land for data center you says the people that own the land has a right to sell that land do what it was different you still in her land she

34:38lived out in the county before the city was in around like sure it goes around the area I heard people around the area trying to help them out so basically what I look at you guys are the

34:49government you know you know I'm native and you know my culture and my people and My other brothers, government came and took all the land we had. Now you

34:58guys are the government. I wish you guys would listen. But you don't listen. You know, you're taking land from them that what they owned before you ever was

35:08around. They owned it. It was county. They do their things. They want to be free and want to do what they want to do. not be controlled from a government

35:18telling them what to do, how to do it, what inspection you got to do and so forth. You know, we raise my sons and I he raised cattle and everything. I understand that. We understand the

35:28agriculture. A lot of time agriculture people take care of the land more better than the city folks. We understand the land. We know what we need what we need

35:39to do to take care of it. We don't dis uh destroy it or whatever. This been bothering me especially at that when I heard that was going on at that whilshshire on that farm. You guys are

35:51practically just stealing their land. They think about it. You are stealing their land. They live out in the county. They was in the city. You're you Mr. uh

36:03I forgot your name, but you I heard that you're trying to ansize every I'm sorry. inside every land around Cheyenne. But you don't consider some of the people

36:12that live there. They live there because they want to be free. So they don't have to be told how to do what to do and so forth. Yes, there's money involved and

36:21there's, you know, they get connection with water and all that. That's the thing that's connected there. Well, you we'll get you this and that. And I've

36:29read stories about where you was going to help them with certain things. You guys backstabbed them. That's what I see. You you guys got to sit on my side

36:38and see what's going on. Like I'm going to throw this in your face real quick. The data center where I live outside of town, they build a big dirt pile. I

36:47can't see the prairie. You know, it's easy for you to say what you're going to say because you don't live there. You if these people that live near it will

36:56understand. That's all I have to say. That's why I came here to don'tize their land. You're stealing their land. That's what I look as a native. stealing their

37:06land where they lived. You guys ain't going to listen to me in the matter because I watch your meetings all the time. Oh, you guys going to ask it? I I I nay. It's always that there's no

37:16consideration at especially with this part. That's all I'm saying. That's what I feel and I've been thinking about this for a long time. Thank you for allowing me to speak. Thank you.

37:28>> Yes, ma'am. >> Hello. Hello. Thank you. I'm Ann Do and I just want to remind everyone what all of us spoke at the beginning of this meeting. One nation under God,

37:41indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. And there has I f I've been here from the beginning and there has been a division and it's gotten bigger and bigger and bigger and

38:00I don't understand why I have my suspicions um based upon things I'm aware of. It does seem to be financially motivated in a lot of respects. Um annexing all of

38:14these pockets. I know you said that was your mission when you first got on board, but then what do you do to maintain what is already part of Cheyenne?

38:25It's almost like it's deliberately kept run down and limited, choices limited, so the people are left wanting and needing and desiring. They're more controllable that way.

38:42I came here because I understood why I am to Wyoming to be free and people to be independent and sovereign and very in very strong and they are. They really are and they're amazing.

39:00I've heard people say, you've said also and some people on this council have said, "We want to support the Wyoming way of life." What does that mean? Are

39:10there two meanings? One for civilians, one for governing bodies? Because that's what it seems like. There's there's definitely a disconnect. And unfortunately in this whole process,

39:23there is no methodology to have true communication where you can sit down and actually talk through issues. It's I'm on this side. I bat it over to you. You bat it

39:37back to me. There's no coming together. There will always be a disconnect if you continue operating that way. Thank you. >> Closer. >> Don Odum. Ward three. I'd like to echo what David said

39:57earlier. Uh with the exception of Dr. Aldrich and Mr. Moody. I believe your whole bunch are enemies of liberty. And Mr. Mayor, you're going to get what you want out of this. We know that. I

40:12think it's sad that this family has reached the point of just feeling like they might as well surrender because of the way they've been treated and will continue to be treated.

40:22And we know you aren't running for mayor again, but if you run for anything else, the people are going to remember this. And anyone up here, we're are going to remember this.

40:35You need to remember that you're public servants. This crap with NDAs and catering to corporations and not even attempting to negotiate to get anything

40:46back for our area when you do that like cities in other states do. I can't say any more other than we'll be watching. Thank you. >> Good evening, sir. >> I'm Al Gates in Ward three.

41:02>> Can you bring that microphone up? You're pretty tall there. It'll help the people in the back hear you better. >> It's fine. Is that better? >> It is. Thank you.

41:07>> Okay. I'm Al Gates in Ward 3. Uh public speaking is not my thing, but I do have a a [clears throat] brief comment. Um there's been a lot of studies describing the value of [clears throat]

41:19local and holistic grown food and its benefits to everyone's health and welfare. I have personally experienced uh these benefits. Uh, I feel the city has missed an

41:31opportunity to put a 100% of its support into this treasure of a business that provided this kind of a marketplace for local food to Cheyenne residents that's

41:43available right here in Cheyenne. It's a real loss to the city. Thank you, >> Representative. Welcome. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh, Steve Johnson, uh, soon to be former legislator. Um,

41:57when I got a legislature, I thought the intent of the law is what we should understand. No law is written perfectly. I I think that the intent of this law was to allow for the benefit of the

42:10people of Cheyenne. And this annexation, I can see no benefit to the people of Cheyenne. The criminal part of this is that your intent was to actually take away their

42:24livelihood and take away their way of living and production of money and providing for a wholesome food in the city of Cheyenne. So, I would hope that you would vote um against this. I know

42:40that's not what you want, but I don't see the intent. The intent that the legislators had put in this law was not to allow you to be a bully and tell these poor people what they have to do

42:51um and take away their livelihood. It I think that's criminal. So thank you for your time. >> Good evening. >> Good evening. Uh I'm Brian Pixley uh at 1912 Turway Trail uh in the county and

43:08uh I'd like to say uh you know I told you I know I told you all you know about about my history about the data centers and all that you guys are catering to

43:18all the the data centers but you but you like the you know annex these all these other places you're listening to all these plan commissioners and plan this

43:27and plan that you know you guys need to stop you know How much more land do you need? You know, how do you guys how do you guys wake up at night knowing that, oh my

43:37gosh, I'm gonna be Microsoft or Meta or what else? You know, so I I just can't believe all the way you guys just stand there and I I would you know what I wouldn't be able to sleep at night

43:51knowing that I annex annex the county or annex these poor people. You know, they know I'm going to have to live two miles away from my data center. another one.

44:02Then I have the crypto miner over by the Walmart dis business center that's always constantly going around all the time. You're you're putting more strain

44:10on me and everything. So yeah, you're just listening to all these plan commissioners instead of the people. We the people, you know. So that's say I'm with these people. I support them

44:22through and through. and God bless them and hope they you guys can listen to them instead of the plant commissioners and all the all the rest of these people. Thank you. >> Welcome back.

44:37>> Hi. It's been a while since I've been here. Um if you guys remember, I was pretty heavily involved in the first whole group of this um just for the record.

44:46>> Oh, Chelsea McCord one. Thank you. Um it's been a while. uh been dealing with a lot of personal things but I needed to come today because I feel like I need to

44:56send say my piece in resolving this whole thing. Um so as I mentioned I've been helping them um the very beginning and it was months of research of discussions of meetings of sleepless

45:09nights including an entire week where I got home after midnight every single day and I was looking forward to what I expected to be a great chance to rest

45:19with my family to catch up on some sleep and spend time with my kids. And when we got home after the meeting of March 9th, I had faith in the government and I had

45:27faith that you guys had done something correct. That you had proposed that we work with the city to come up with an amendment to come up with changes to the

45:37ordinances so that WFresh could continue to function. But that dream was very short-lived because within weeks the plans fell apart. Within weeks there

45:47were people calling issues in to WFresh. Within weeks, we were getting emails from the city saying that they would no longer meet with us, which was a problem

45:56because emails had been sent back and forth for months, even longer than that, and nothing had happened. The only time progress was ever made was when there

46:05were meetings face tof face, and all of a sudden, we were no longer allowed to do that. So, I would like to add one quick note that there were some changes that I believe

46:17have come out of this positive changes that will affect some small businesses from the code amendments that have been proposed. And I am grateful for the people that have worked hard to make

46:25those amendments. That being said, it was not enough, not nearly enough. And so, I come back today feeling the complete opposite, feeling devastated and angry and frustrated. And if anyone

46:39knows me, that is not a feeling I ever experience. [snorts] So let this bee a lesson to you guys. When the next family farm faces annexation, when the next group of

46:55people object vehematly to what is happening to them, to listen to them, to not say work together, and then turn their backs a couple weeks later. The people don't want this.

47:10Not only is Cheyenne losing a business that is important to the community, a business that I care about, but because of this, I'm losing one of my best

47:20friends who will be moving away with her family who has dealt with undue stress and frustration dealing with this whole thing for over a year. So, please think next time.

47:34Please listen next time. That's what you're here to do. Thank you. >> Good evening, sir. >> Micah Sutton, Ward One. Um, going to be shooting from the hip a lot here. Can you hear me? Okay.

47:51>> Yeah. >> Okay. I've uh experienced a loss in my life just from the lack of products that they've been able to offer in the last eight months. I have found other ways of

48:06finding said products. Not quite as good as WFresh. When I first found out about the existence of Wish, I was thrilled. A very convenient place right here in the

48:18m south of town that I can go to and quite easily access compared to maybe some other places that are quite further away. There has been a lot of listening, but listening without action

48:36does nobody any good. Give people the consideration they deserve and honestly look at yourselves, reflect. If this is truly what you want, you will get what you want. And

48:59I don't think I need to go any deeper than that other than to say this is a family that has fought and struggled and given their effort to each and every one of their customers that has come

49:17through their door. Thank you, >> Jennifer. Mr. Love, you can go ahead. >> Hello, Mr. Love. >> Mr. Mayor. >> Yes, sir. >> Mr. Mayor, members of the city council,

49:37my name is Steven Love. I live in [clears throat] Ward One. I think that despite the council mercilessly destroying a local business, stripping a family of their livelihood,

49:48and ruining the only f place for my family to shop locally grown produce within miles of our home. There's been some positives to come out of this. Things like protections for small

49:58gardens at our homes and other modifications to the UDC that will better fit everyone in the city. I think in that light, we could continue to make the best out of this situation and have

50:06the city offer to buy the land that will have been annexed tonight. The southside is lacking in parks and green spaces in the area and the land is right by the

50:15greenway. We can burn up $1.3 million to waste on a pump house roof that not 10 people care about. We can come up with threequarters of a million dollars to

50:25buy this land. Let these pe poor people have some peace and make this whole situation into something on the cusp of being a positive. Thank you, >> Jennifer. Jennifer,

50:40>> Mr. Miller, you can go ahead. >> Can you hear me? >> We can. Charles Miller. >> Um, [clears throat] excuse me. >> Uh, Mayor Collins, members of the governing body, Charles Miller, on item

50:55seven, county pocket 10, third and final reading. I expressly object to adoption on the grounds I am stating tonight. I request that these objections be

51:03preserved in the minutes, recording, and official record for potential judicial review. This is your final reading. Resolve the statutory questions before you vote, not after the owners must

51:14challenge not after the owners must challenge your decision. First, [clears throat] the hearing chronology. Wyoming statute 15-1-405 requires a hearing to determine

51:26statutory compliance and specifies a 30 to 180day interval after certification of a complete petition. The city initiated annexation statute directs you

51:36to follow that hearing procedure. Your ordinance dates resolution 6511 to uh January 26, 2026 and the hearing to February 9th, 14 days. I object to the

51:50finding of procedural compliance unless you identify the legal authority permitting that interval here. Reconcile the introductory memo's conflicting year. Identify the adopted resolution

51:59and actual hearing record. A finding of compliance needs a legal and factual foundation. Second, protection of existing lawful uses. Wyoming statute 15-1-410

52:10says municipal regulations shall not restrict qualifying continuous uses of property annex through this process. That protection extends to current and subsequent owners. Yet your packet

52:20describes farming as permitted by right while also describing existing uses including livestock as non-conforming. I object to adoption without resolving that distinction. Identify every

52:31existing activity you consider non-conforming. explain what restrictions follow and how they comply with state law. The statute contains a one-year discontinuence provision, but

52:40that does not answer whether a temporary interruption in poultry production or keeping one species ends the protected use of an operating farm. Do not leave the owners to discover your

52:50interpretation through enforcement. Third, costs and services. Wyoming statute 15-1-42 requires an annexation report addressing infrastructure costs, including

53:00improvements required of land owners and services with their timetable. I object to the sufficiency of those findings unless you identify the supporting report, the owner funded obligations,

53:08their triggers, and the minimum and the service commitments. Minimal improvements is a conclusion, not a cost disclosure. Finally, your companion zoning report says agricultural zoning

53:17allows continuation, but also easier reasonzoning in the future. This is not permanent agricultural protection. Explain what enforceable provisions protect this operation today rather than

53:26relying on assurances about what officials intend tomorrow. I request an express response to each objection before final action. Retain the documents supporting your findings and

53:34rec record the roll call vote. Vote no on item seven. Alternatively, postpone adoption or approve a legally supported exclusion of parcel floor four. You have been placed on notice of these

53:45objections if you proceed. >> Jennifer, who do you have? >> I believe she put her hand down. >> Okay. Anybody else in the audience want to speak to us before we move to the city council?

54:02Jennifer, >> Miss Sigleiano, you can go ahead. >> Kathy, welcome. >> Hi, I'm joining a little late, so I'm just curious if you're still on the annexation of Wrush. >> We are.

54:18>> Okay, great. Um, Kathy Sigliano, Ward 3. I just want to express my deep sympathy and appreciation for the Nicely and how they have handled the situation. I

54:32obviously oppose the annexation. Um, I think that the way this has been handled has been extremely egregious and I am sorry that they have been treated the way that they have throughout this

54:46process. The fact that the city council has acted the way that they have and has treated the way that they have the nicely has been deeply disturbing I think to a lot of community members. I

55:01do appreciate the council members that have continuously voted against this and have spoken up against this annexation. I just want the community to know and to

55:14understand exactly what is happening tonight and why it's happening tonight. If you have spent any time at WFresh or spoken to the Nicely, you know that this

55:24is not something that they have wanted. And I think that everyone in this community should remember exactly how this has transpired and what has happened. And please during the next

55:39election cycle, vote wisely. None of them deserve your votes. Thank you. >> Jennifer, do you have anybody else online? How about in the audience? >> Did you want to speak, ma'am?

56:06Welcome back, >> Marin Stall. >> Pull that down and push it right at you. >> Marin [clears throat] Stal, I don't know where what I'm W three. Um, I've come here a couple times to watch this

56:22particular and first of all, I have a question. Why do you want to do this? Number two, you want to annex that part. My late husband, we were married less than a year and we

56:40bought a house on the corner of Jefferson and Dur. Across the street from us was the AA Club 300 Club. That was Alcoholics Anonymous. Across the street the other way was this

56:58brick house. And I'm pretty sure you guys know that house. Then there was just nothing. Just it was a pasture kind of because they had horses. The worst

57:11thing that happened with that area, that land, was that we had a couple snakes come up into the yard because the the horses didn't like them in the pasture. Um

57:26the 300 Club, they put a street light out for us because on that street on Jefferson, if you keep going in the middle of the night and they didn't have

57:38a light, we had one guy almost drive off into the pasture. Um I was told that uh it was not needed, that it was out of the city limits. In so many words, it was, "Nice little

57:57girl, go. You just play with your babies and leave us alone because we're more important than you." This kind of sounds like this general uh group. I have a brother-in-law that lives

58:14right off Waldershide. his house. That area is not um whatever you're gonna do to these guys. It's they don't have sidewalks. They do have some um streets that are

58:36paved, but there's flooding due to where um the street or the houses are just by uh the grade school there. Um he's lived there on that for about uh 40 years and it's not annexed. why

59:02it would bring tax money into Cheyenne. And partly that's what you're after. This five acres, put a park in there. There's no park. It doesn't make any difference. If you

59:19annex it and put a park in there, you're doing the same thing. You're taking food. You're taking livelihood from people. And I we lived in that house for two years until he decided we should

59:33move to Wheatland. But that area needs that farm. There's a mini mart that's closed down for probably 55 years. Do something about that. Don't do the farm. Leave the farm there.

59:55Let them have their livelihood that God gave America for. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for your your time. >> Appreciate you. >> One more time, >> Tommy. Nicely. Thank you for giving me

1:00:17another opportunity to speak. 200 Waltershide, not in anybody's word yet. Um, it must be really hard for you all to sit up here and have people and their diet tribes directed at you.

1:00:37It is it is a mess of your own making, but it still must be difficult. and I apologize, but I want you to embrace that difficulty and embrace that pain because

1:00:52pain usually brings about great personal growth. And I would really like you guys to think about how if you continue to do these forced annexations or any other

1:01:07leading of the city, you can do this with kindness and respect. If you just think about how you could have done something differently because this did

1:01:17not have to play out this way. It should never have played out this way. And now you're in a conundrum. If you vote to annex us, it could be considered

1:01:27uncaring. If you vote to pull us out, it can be considered uncaring because it's a mess. I want to be very clear though. I know being clear and communicating is kind.

1:01:47I do want to be annexed now because the actions of this city has convinced me I do not want to be part of it. It is not what I stand for. >> Okay. No sir, we only do once, but Mrs. Nice,

1:02:12I deserved a second opportunity. Thank you. All right. Anybody else want to speak for the first time? >> All right. Hearing none. Dr. Aldrich, will we have a motion on the ordinance, please?

1:02:23>> Mr. Mayor, the recommendation of the public services committee is to approve on third and final reading, and I so move. >> Second. >> Then seconded by Mr. Crave. Comments

1:02:32from members of the governing body. Dr. Aldridge. >> Mayor Collins for you. Um, I was fully prepared tonight to present a substitute um that had been uh drawn up and had

1:02:45been prepared to withdraw this property from this annexation. Um however um in light of uh the social media post today and in light of the Nicely's request um because they really

1:02:58are feeling the need to um be able to put this behind them and to move on. Um I will not be bringing that substitution forward. Um I will support this

1:03:08annexation at their request. I know that many of you um have asked for us to vote no on this. Um, but I think that um, historically, as I've served on council

1:03:20over the last six years, I um have never voted for an annexation when there was a a landowner opposed to it. However, I've never failed to vote for one where the

1:03:30land owner was asking for it. And so, in uh, this instance, I will be supporting this annexation tonight. Um, and I'm just I I agree we can do better. Um and

1:03:42uh we I think it's been a learning experience all around. I think uh we have had a lot of uh staff hours put into this. Our staff has worked hard on it. Um there's been some definite

1:03:54barriers uh where there were a lot of questions uh on the 147 or plus questions that uh still remain unanswered. I think there's still some uh challenges with the urban farming um

1:04:09code that we're going to uh hopefully um make happen and real put into place as a result of this. Um but I think that there's still work to be done. Um and I think that as we move forward um

1:04:26hopefully this will be that that Ebenezer and that u monument to a learning opportunity. So for that reason, I'll be a vote yes vote tonight. >> Mr. Escoel.

1:04:38>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Through you for staff, I had a question exactly about how many staff hours went into this one annexation, particularly with urban farm.

1:04:52>> Mr. White, do you have any sense on that? >> Uh, Mayor Thu, Conor Way, Planning and Development. Uh that's going to be a hard number to come up with from just

1:05:03this technically any county pocket annexation prior to even coming before council starts about two to three months ahead of time. um preparing whether it be the contract for getting the maps

1:05:16done um to basically having a meeting with land owners prior to it even going to planning commission or being having mailed notice. Um and then with the text

1:05:30amendments that was that's also been a lot of staff time. I don't know if I have a very good number. Um I can definitely say it's been a lot of staff hours. If you want a rough estimate,

1:05:45>> it's not necessary, Mr. White. >> Mr. Mayor, >> yeah, it'd be difficult to come up with a number. >> Then, have you ever spent this much time on any other annexation?

1:05:54>> Um, mayor, through you. No. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, was it back in June, Mr. Mayor? Is that when we postpone to now? >> March. >> March. >> March 9th, if I remember correctly.

1:06:08>> I remember. Yeah. >> Uh and I know what I said to the nicely back then was that um I would vote for the annexation when you were comfortable with the annexation and I think I was one of

1:06:23three nos maybe on that. Um but that was hasn't been the way I've been treated the past few months. But uh you don't seem like you're comfortable with the annexation. So, I'm going to

1:06:36stick to what I said back in March and uh continue to vote no. >> Yep. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It's uh always interesting how people can look at an issue differently. Um I look at this as

1:07:01well, let me start over. February, I believe it was February 12th, the mayor received an email from the Nicely asking him to communicate only through email.

1:07:12Okay. Um, the Nicely then hired an attorney. When someone hires an attorney, you work through that attorney. You don't step in between the attorney and their client.

1:07:29So, it's not just the city that has created some barriers as far as communication. I believe the city has gone beyond anything I've ever seen before. We postponed this in March. We've worked

1:07:46tirelessly to update and create new unified development codes to accommodate this farm. Um, we changed the UDC's earlier to eliminate the requirement to hook up to

1:08:02water and sewer and sidewalks and all of those types of things. So, the city through its staff has worked diligently. On the other hand, I've seen some of the

1:08:18social media posts from some some probably some of you, but definitely people in our community and it's very disturbing. The threats today there was a threat. Let's put them

1:08:30in the crosshairs. You know what? That's beyond the pale. That's that's pretty disgusting. Um, even tonight, oh, we're going to we're going to vote you out. You know, it

1:08:49I just uh it's just been an interesting process and I' I've just seen it from a different view. I feel like we've gone above and beyond to try to make this work.

1:09:01Um, we have assured as much as we can that by zoning at agriculture, you're still going to be able to to do your farm business. Out of the other other areas that we've

1:09:17annexed, I'm not aware of any business that has been u adversely affected. So, um, I feel really bad for some of our staff. They have been just um I don't know. I don't I don't I I don't

1:09:38really know the right word for it, but uh slandered possibly. Yeah, I think I think that's probably true. So, you know, if the Nicely really want us to annex it,

1:09:54um I think we I think we should. They've made a decision. uh they've made it very clear tonight. So I will be supporting this action tonight. Thank you, >> Dr. Emmens.

1:10:05>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. [clears throat] So, I would like to address a couple of the comments that were made tonight that were directed specifically at me. First of all,

1:10:16I didn't shut down any businesses during COVID. The governor via the president had quarantine mandates that came down that it was my job in my professional capacity to

1:10:33enforce. I had no choice. I don't get to defy the president regardless of which one's in power. That was the governor like say the president to the governor to the county health officer

1:10:49to the community. I shut down no go no businesses. Second of all, no one in this county, no business is being targeted by any kind of health officials. When a

1:11:06complaint comes in, complaints have to be investigated. There are laws that we have to follow for the health and safety of the public. When a complaint comes in, it's

1:11:20investigated. It often has to be sent to the Department of Agriculture for interpretation. That's what's happened in this situation. You you can shake your head.

1:11:32No, but but we've got the we've met with you and you know that this was not the first time. So you need we I just need to be very clear about that. No one is

1:11:45being targeted now or in the future. So I want to be very clear about that. And um I think that was all I wanted to say. >> Mr. Wolf. >> Uh thank you Mr. Mayor through you. Uh

1:12:04thank you all for coming. Thank you all for your multiple emails we've gotten over the last uh week or so. Um thank you for all who've uh taken the time and for your comments. Um

1:12:20this has been a struggle and I would remind the nicely and remind the audience that in March I voted against the annexation after hearing from I think we heard from 50 witnesses at that

1:12:33time. Um that was eight months ago. I think I was hopeful that with the uh additional time that the city and um the nicely and all of the people who supported you could come to a um a

1:12:54resolution uh amongst themselves. I do agree with uh President Cgrave that our staff has put in an awful lot of time and energy and I compliment them for that on these ordinances that we are

1:13:10going to consider here very shortly. Um and I um I think they have resulted in updating uh our ordinances um and bringing them into modern um uh times. Um, I'm sorry this hasn't worked. Um,

1:13:30as with everything I've seen on this council and learned, um, every every issue, every important issue has multiple sides to it and this one is no exception.

1:13:46there is uh there are a lot of just human beings involved and human beings when they get involved it's complicated um and that I would actually ask you to

1:14:01you described a conversation I had with you Mrs. nicely that that occurred probably in my first month on the council and I don't think anybody should be held to anything they said on their

1:14:13first month on the council. So [laughter] because um we just had so much to learn and I've learned a lot. Um but um I it sounds like we should proceed with the

1:14:28annexation. So, uh, I will, um, uh, be voting for it. Thank you, >> Mr. Moody. [clears throat] >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First, I want to thank everyone who came out tonight,

1:14:43especially those who stood up for WildFresh Agriculture in our community. This council has failed WildFresh, a local agricultural business. And most importantly, we failed to

1:14:58listen to the people who elected us to represent him. This never needed to happen. All of us could have done more, including myself. We constantly hear that Cheyenne is open

1:15:12for business, supports small business, and wants fewer regulations. What good are those promises when our actions tell a completely different story? Some claim this annexation was necessary.

1:15:28I disagree. Was not necessary. This council is effectively driving out a successful agricultural business out of our community. I asked the same question as others have

1:15:43asked. What is the motivation behind this relentless push for annexation? Despite overwhelmingly public opposition and support for WildFresh, we need to remember agriculture is a big

1:15:57part of Cheyenne Larmy County's economy, our heritage, and our identity. I'll take a different route. What message does this send to Cheyen Frontier Days, to the Pro Rodeo Hall of

1:16:12Fame relocating here, to the proposed fertilizer plant that I do support coming here because I think it'd be great for Wyoming in the Mountain West. Yet, we're driving an agriculture

1:16:24business away. When we hear about data centers, major developers coming for the city, we hear about growth being businessfriendly. We seem to try to cater them as much as we can.

1:16:39But when a local agriculture business needs help, suddenly this flexibility disappears. This is not economic development. This is hypocrisy. Where is that same commitment to this business

1:16:54changes are being made, the UDC code. I do thank staff. I do thank my colleagues for supporting it to allow for more agricultural businesses. I'm sponsoring

1:17:03two ordinances to enshrine the Wyoming Right to Farm Act to protect future uh urban agriculture that will be heard next Monday. But it cannot erase what happened here tonight.

1:17:15Cannot erase it. I want my colleagues to understand something. All of us, we will be remembered as the council that drove Wild Fresh out of Cheyenne. That stigma will be with us for the rest

1:17:31of our lives. We cannot complain support agriculture while making it harder for these business to survive. This council cannot claim to represent the people while ignoring this massive

1:17:46opposition. Mr. Mayor, I'll close with this. Everybody, including especially our farmers and ranchers, deserve better. Our small businesses deserve better. Wild Fresh deserve better.

1:18:04This council failed that responsibility. I will honor Niser's request for annexation. But no, I will continue to pray for you every day and I encourage all the

1:18:17public, please continue to pray for them every day. We're god-fearing people here and I know I will live up to that. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Mr. White. >> Mr. Mayor, um I'll keep my remarks

1:18:30short. U Miss Gates, um your comments hit my uh philosophy on this situation exactly. I have supported uh every single annexation that's come before us um because we've been able to mitigate

1:18:51all the concerns that have uh come up. And I do believe that an owner of a piece of property should be able to if they want to annex that property, they should be able to. Um, and

1:19:08if an owner of a piece of property does not want to be annexed, then they should have a say in that situation. And I've been consistent about that uh from the

1:19:20time I've arrived on council 10 years ago. Um, so, um, I had come tonight prepared to vote no, but I will honor the nicely's request and I will, um, support the annexation tonight.

1:19:38>> Anybody else in the governing body? Madam clerk, would you take the vote, please? >> Mr. Moody, >> I. >> Dr. Renie, >> no. >> Mr. Crave, >> yes. >> Mr. White. >> Yes. >> Mr. Wolf, >> yes.

1:19:56>> Dr. Aldrich, >> yes. >> Mayor Collins, >> yes. >> Dr. Emmens, >> yes. >> Mr. Escoel, >> no. >> Mr. Leborn, >> yes. >> This ordinance is approved on third and final reading.

1:20:08Number A, ordinance, third reading, amending the official zoning map of the city of Cheyenne, establishing the zoning classifications of AG Agricultural, MR medium density

1:20:17residential, CB community business, and LI light industrial for land annex to the city of Cheyenne. Generally located east of I25, south of the intersection

1:20:27of Westland Road and Missile Drive, north of West and East Allison Road, and east of and adjacent to North College Drive. >> All right. annex property needs a city

1:20:36zone and in this process of establishing that we try to uh zone the property the closest it is in the county and um so we'll go out to the audience and see if anybody has any comments on the

1:20:49establishment of these zone districts >> Jennifer Mr. Mr. Miller, you can go ahead. >> Can you hear me? >> Yes, we can. >> Um, Charles, uh, mayor, members of the

1:21:12council, Charles Miller, uh, for the record, um, I did want to try to prepare, uh, something a little bit, uh, better, uh, for this particular one. Um, but [clears throat]

1:21:27you guys kind of caught me off guard there. Excuse me. Uh, the the Nisley's are clearly I just want to say for the record here, the Nisley's are are clearly under duress.

1:21:41Um, and so maybe you could look into the legalities there, but they're clearly under duress. Um you your uh your February 9th memo uh classifies the farm's use as limited agricultural

1:22:02um let me see here uh and agricultural product sales. It says AG allows agricultural uses through different approval paths. Um, I also uh Okay, here we go. I I I also

1:22:22object to the apparent unequal treatment during the annexation discussion uh when uh Mr. Collins allowed Mrs. Nicely to speak for a second time. >> Point of order. We're on zoning, Mr.

1:22:36Mayor. >> Second. No, this definitely in regards to the proceedings here because you cannot uh vote to you cannot pass a uh reszoning on a property that has been uh not

1:22:52properly annexed. Uh and that's what my point is here is that uh allowing somebody to speak more than once and then disallowing another to speak. >> You know, Mr. Miller, I think giving the

1:23:09owner of the property a chance to have a second say is probably humane thing to do. And um and I think as a chairman I get the right to uh or have the responsibility to make those

1:23:18determinations. And I made it and u we don't need to talk about it anymore. Mrs. nicely deserve to be able to talk a second time and I gave her that right.

1:23:27>> Sir, in Mesa vers white, the 10th circuit found that procedural pretext and different treatment could support a view claim. >> Mr. Miller, you've been found out.

1:23:37You're not following the talking about my first amendment objection and request review of any public meetings act violation. The full record establishes

1:23:46section 16443 provides nully for action taken at a meeting not in conformity with that act. Thank you, Mr. Miller. >> Anybody else want to speak on the zoning?

1:24:02>> Anybody on the establishment of the zone districts? All right, hearing none. Dr. Aldrich. >> Mr. Mayor, the recommendation of the public services committee is to approve

1:24:10on third and final reading and I so move. >> Second. It's >> been seconded by Mr. Crave. Comments on the established zones uh from the governing body. All right. Hearing none. Madam clerk,

1:24:21would you take the vote, please? >> Mr. Lebornne, >> hi. >> Mr. Moody, >> I. >> Dr. Renie, >> yes. >> Mr. Crave, >> yes. >> Mr. White, >> yes. >> Mr. Wolf, >> hi. >> Dr. Aldrich, >> yes.

1:24:33>> Mayor Collins, >> yes. >> Dr. Emmens, >> yes. >> Mr. Escoel, >> I. >> The zone the established zone districts are approved on third and final reading.

1:24:42>> Number nine, ordinance, third reading, annexing to the city of Cheyenne, Wyoming, land south of US30 and north of Commerce Circle. >> All right. Before us we have a uh owner

1:24:51initiated annexation of Rightway and a small triangle that will become a future part of Rideaway and we'll go out to the audience to see if anybody wants to speak to this annexation.

1:25:00Anybody? All right. Hearing none. Dr. Aldridge. >> Mr. Mayor, the recommendation of the public services committee is to approve on third and final reading and I so move. >> Second.

1:25:12>> Seconded by Dr. Emmens. Comments from members of the governing body on the annexation. >> All right. Hearing none. Madam clerk, would you take the vote? >> Mr. Esel, >> I. >> Mr. Leborn,

1:25:24>> hi. >> Mr. Moody, >> hi. >> Dr. Reneie, >> yes. >> Mr. Crave, >> yes. >> Mr. White, >> yes. >> Mr. Wolf, >> hi. >> Dr. Aldrich, >> yes. >> Mayor Collins, >> yes. >> Dr. Emmens, >> yes.

1:25:36>> Uh, the annexation is approved on third and final reading. Number 10, ordinance, third reading, amending the official zoning map of the city of Cheyenne,

1:25:43establishing the zoning classification of BP Business Park for land annexed to the city of Cheyenne, located south of Tate Road, north of Commerce Circle and

1:25:51west of and adjacent to Christensen Road. >> All right, we just annexed a piece of property. We need to give it a a city zone and the closest zone to the area in

1:25:59the county is Business Park. And so we'll go out to the audience and see if anybody wants to speak to the establishment of the business park zone district. Anyone? All right. Dr. Aldridge.

1:26:13>> Mr. Mayor, the recommendation of the public services committee is to approve on third and final reading. >> Second. >> Seconded by Dr. Emmens. Comments from

1:26:21members of the governing body on the establishment of the zone district. Hearing none. Madam clerk, would you take the vote? >> Dr. Emmens. >> Yes. >> Mr. Esabel. >> I. >> Mr. Leborn. >> Hi.

1:26:32>> Mr. Moody. >> Hi. >> Dr. Renie. >> Yes. >> Mr. Crave. >> Yes. Mr. White, >> yes. >> Mr. Wolf, >> I. >> Dr. Aldrich, >> I. >> Mayor Collins, >> yes. >> The established zone districts are

1:26:46approved on third and final reading. >> Uh, next item is number 11. Ordinance, third reading, annexing to the city of Cheyenne, Wyoming, land south of East Fox Farm Road, north of

1:26:59East Allison Road, and east of and adjacent to South College Drive. >> All right, folks. I believe this is a part of the county pockets that we just recently annexed and according to our

1:27:10city attorney, we can't really do it twice. Is that right, Mr. Brody? So, we need to uh we need to vote this one down and the accompanying uh zone district

1:27:18and zone changes because they've already been accomplished or do we still need to do the zone change from agricultural to business park? I guess 13 will still

1:27:25have to do, but the other two would be uh >> uh Mr. Chairman, John Brody, city attorney. Uh it would be my recommendation that you vote down the annexation for the pocket or the parcel

1:27:36that was already included in county pocket 10. >> Okay. And then uh we vote down the establishment of the zone district which would be number 12 which is to do it

1:27:46agricultural. It's already been done but in 13 the the change of zone would still need to go forward. >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you very much. All right.

1:27:54So, we have a uh an annexation before us that I guess is moot because it's already been annexed, but we'll go out to the audience if anybody has any questions in that process. Jennifer,

1:28:07>> Mr. Miller, you can go ahead. >> Can you hear me? >> Can you hear me? >> We can. >> U Mr. [clears throat] Mayor, members of the council, Charles Miller for the

1:28:26permanent administrative record. [clears throat] Excuse me. I'm formally placing an on the record objection to the entirety of this proceeding because the mayor and this council have just

1:28:38committed an unconstitutional act of viewpoint discrimination directly violating the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and the statutory mandates of the Wyoming Open

1:28:46Meetings Act. >> Mr. Miller, we're on number 11, which is an annexation. Do you have any comments on the annexation, sir? >> I do. uh as captured live on and

1:28:55corroborated by the official transcripts of tonight's proceedings, >> the mayor explicitly permitted selective preferred individuals to see. >> Do you have any comments on the

1:29:03annexation? I'm going to hold you out of uh order and I'm going to move on to the next person >> even once under United States Supreme Court president in Reed verse town of Gilbert 57.

1:29:15>> Anybody else want to speak on the annexation? Okay, Dr. Aldridge. >> Mr. Mayor, the recommendation of the public services committee is to approve on third and final reading. And I so

1:29:28>> seconded by Mr. Wolf, comments from members of the governing body on the annexation. And again, we've already annexed this property, so our our goal

1:29:36would probably be to vote this down, but anybody have a comment? All right, hearing none. Madame clerk, would you take the vote, which I hope will be no. >> Mayor Collins, >> no.

1:29:45>> Dr. Emmens, >> no. >> Mr. Esel, >> no. >> Mr. Leburn, >> no. >> Mr. Moody, >> no. >> Dr. Renie, >> no. >> Mr. Crave, >> no. >> Mr. White, >> no. >> Mr. Wolf, >> no. >> Dr. Aldrich, >> no.

1:30:00>> This annexation fails on third and final reading. Next item is number 12 on page three, ordinance third reading, amending the official zoning map of the city of

1:30:08Cheyenne, 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

1:30:18and adjacent to South College Drive. >> All right, same situation. Uh we just voted down the annexation, so we need to vote down the uh establishment of the

1:30:26zone district because we already did that. But we'll go out to the audience and see if anybody wants to speak to that motion before us. Dr. Aldrich, will we have a motion, please?

1:30:36>> 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. Crave. All

1:30:45right. Before us is a uh an establishment of a zone, which we did a couple motions ago. So, the hope would be that we would vote this down because we can't have two um competing uh zone

1:30:58or ordinances. That's hard for me to say. And uh, Madame Clerk, would you take the vote? >> Dr. Aldrich, >> no. >> Mayor Collins, >> no. >> Dr. Emmens, >> no. >> Mr. Escoel, >> no.

1:31:08>> Mr. Leborn, >> no. >> Mr. Moody, >> Dr. Renie, >> no. >> Mr. Crave, >> no. >> Mr. White, >> no. >> Mr. Wolf, >> no. >> The established zone district fails

1:31:19unanimously on third and final reading. Number 13, Ordinance, third reading, amending the official zoning map of the city of Cheyenne, changing the zoning

1:31:26classification for land located south of East Fox Farm Road, north of East Allison Road, and east of and adjacent to South College Drive from AG Agricultural to BP Business Park.

1:31:36>> All right, before us, we have an owner requested zone change to allow the 5.06 acres to uh be combined with the property that they already own for a

1:31:45data center campus. And we'll go out to the audience for the zone change if anybody wants to speak to it. All right. Hearing none. Dr. Aldrich, may we have a motion, please?

1:31:58>> Mr. Mayor, the recommendation of the public services committee is to approve on third and final reading and I so move. >> Second. >> Seconded by Dr. Emmens. Comments from

1:32:07members of the governing body on the zone change. >> Hearing none. Madam clerk, would you take the vote? >> Mr. Wolf, >> I. >> Dr. Aldrich, >> yes. Mayor Collins, >> yes. >> Dr. Emmens,

1:32:20>> yes. Mr. Escoel, >> I >> Mr. Leborn, >> hi. >> Mr. Moody, >> no. >> Dr. Renie, >> yes. >> Mr. Crave, >> yes. >> Mr. White, >> yes. >> Uh, the zone changes approved on third

1:32:33and final reading with Mr. Moody voting no. >> Number 14, ordinance, third reading, amending sections 1.4.3, 1.4.4, 2.2.3, 5.1.4, and 5.7.2 two of the Cheyenne

1:32:46Unified Development Code to add and clarify specified use allowances, clarify processes for agricultural uses, and providing definitions. All right, this is a a UDC amendment

1:32:57that kind of helps identify some of our agricultural uses. Um, we'll go out to the audience to see if anybody wants to speak to these uh UDC amendments.

1:33:09>> All right, hearing none. Dr. Aldridge. >> Mr. Mr. Mayor, the recommendation of the public services committee is to approve on third and final reading and I so move. >> Second.

1:33:16>> Seconded by Mr. White. >> Mr. Mayor. >> Yes, sir. >> Um I would like I hope everybody has a copy of this. I would like to make an um amendment by amend by substitute.

1:33:29Um there were some recommendations that came out of the planning commission that had to do with grandfathering um uses, especially egg uses that were already in existence. And apparently we

1:33:41really didn't have anything definitive in our um in the UDC or in our ordinances. So um the staff has prepared this ordinance which reflects um the grandfather

1:33:56conditions for nonconformance that the planning commission would like to see. So um and if that's not clear enough to my colleagues, Mr. Lloyd can can probably illumine.

1:34:08>> Is there a second? Pardon me. >> I need a second. >> Yes, you do. >> Second, >> Mr. Moody. >> All right. So, as I understand it, this substitute data 10:30 basically just

1:34:20moves the grandfathering clause that the planning commission uh recommended to the most appropriate part of the UDC. Is that correct, Mr. Le? >> Mr. Mayor, members of the city council,

1:34:29my name is Seth Lloyd. I'm with the planning and development department. That is correct. So the planning commission wanted to make sure that grandfathering clauses applied to

1:34:36annexations which staff has always treated them as applying to annexations but there is actually nothing in the UDC clearly applying that. And so this moves

1:34:44uh adds a section um sorry adds language to the non-conformances section clearly stating that upon annexation legal uses can continue in the city. >> And Mr. Lloyd that's for uh annexations

1:34:55initiated by the city not voluntary annexations. Right. It >> it applies to both voluntary and annexations initiated by the city. Um, so if it's legal in the county, when the

1:35:04owner requests annexation, they continue the use. That's how we've treated annexed properties previously. Um, then that's how the language is written in the amendment as presented.

1:35:16>> All right, we'll go out to the audience and see if anybody has any comments. >> Jennifer, >> Mr. Miller, you can go ahead. >> Mr. Miller, we're on an amendment. Are

1:35:29you on the amendment? page. >> Can you hear me? >> We can. Mr. Miller, we're on the amendment. Are you on the amendment? >> Mr. Mayor, members of the council,

1:35:37Charles Miller. Uh, for item 14's agricultural grandfathering amendment. >> Uh, um, I support meaningful protection for existing lawful agricultural operations,

1:35:50but the protection must be in the operative language, not merely in tonight's uh, explanation. Um, can you can you guys define exactly uh what what's being amended here? Like

1:36:06what what's the exact words that are going in there? >> No, it's >> Mr. Lloyd. >> Mr. Mayor, this is Seth with the Planning and Development Department. Um,

1:36:19the language applies to non-conforming uses, non-conforming structures, non-conforming site conditions. Um, all of these are currently allowed um as non-conformances for properties that

1:36:31were legally within the city and uh built under a different code and then have just continued forward in time to this time. Um, this amendment would apply that to upon annexation as well.

1:36:42So, if a building was legal in the county but doesn't meet the setbacks of the new zone district in the city, it can continue. If a landscaping was met requirements that the county had prior

1:36:54to annexation um and that's annexed to the city, that landscaping can continue. Um for the section, >> can you hear me? >> Uh >> did you hear explanation? >> I just wanted to mention that uh

1:37:09tonight's agenda um notices amendments strictly to section 143, 144, 223, 514, and 572. Section 1311 non-conformance was never noticed in the September se 6 legal

1:37:23advertisement or the ordinance title. It was never opened for public hearing before the planning commission amending an unnoticed UDC section by floor substitute on third reading violates

1:37:32statutory zoning notice requirements and WS5115. Um second the 12month forfeite kill switch violation of 151410 moving annexed farms into section 1311. subjects them to the city's 12-month

1:37:50non-conforming use abandonment clock and strict expansion bans. Under Wyoming statute 151410, no law, ordinance, rule, or regulation of a municipality annexing

1:38:00property under 151404 shall restrict the continuous use of the property. In agriculture, pausing livestock or crop rotation for 12 months due to aven flu,

1:38:09drought, or the city's own Waltershide Boulevard storm water flooding is routine. Yet section 1311 permanently extinguishes their agricultural rights after 12 months and blocks biological

1:38:21herd growth. Third, the bait and switch admission by uh shoving NX farms into section 1311 non-conformances while familiar. Three minutes are up. >> Anybody else in the audience want to

1:38:36speak to this uh amendment to our uniform de unified development code? All right. Um, anybody else on the on the substitute before us? Dr. Rainey. >> Mr. Mayor, I just wanted to explain

1:38:51again that these were recommendations that came out of um the planning commission as as our staff has already stated. They essentially codify what we're what our

1:39:03current practice is. And I do want to apologize to my colleagues. Um, I guess it's not my fault, but it was the intent was that some one of us on public

1:39:14service committee would have made this amendment last Monday, so we would have had it in advance. Um, so and apparent none of the three of us, the word chair in the committee thought to

1:39:27do that, so it got skipped. But, um, like I said, I think we should approve it. And I do want to add that, um, if Mr. Mr. Miller had been down here, I would have been happy to give him my

1:39:36copy so he could have looked at it quickly. >> Mr. Secret, >> Mr. Mayor, I'm going to vote against this. Not not that I'm opposed to it or on third and final reading.

1:39:49I had no idea this was even on my D on the DIS tonight. Hadn't heard a word about it in the last week. Um, I'm really tired of this. I'm really really

1:40:01tired of getting lastm minute amendments uh on a variety of topics. So I think the only way to stop that is to start voting no. So that's what I'm going to do tonight. Thank you.

1:40:13>> Anybody else in the governing body? >> Mr. Labour. >> Mr. [clears throat] Mayor, I have to uh totally agree with that previous comment. This is no way to make law.

1:40:26It immediately occurs to me the vast well it's maybe not vast but numerous issues that will come out of this [clears throat] um when we and certainly I I think we've

1:40:43had examples of that in South Cheyenne tonight uh you really don't want to be binding uh by law the next council. Uh this is so broad and so last minute

1:41:06that I uh certainly oppose it as well. Thank you. >> Anybody else from the governing body on the amendment? >> I have a question. >> Dr. Aldridge. >> Uh Mayor Collins for you. I have a

1:41:16question. I have a document here that we were given on Monday at public services commission dated 11226 that sites in 2.2.3 under site plans section F um

1:41:32talks about upon involuntary annexation is the proposed substitution or amendment does that change that wording and it updates that >> Mr. Lloyd >> Mr. Mayor um to Dr. Aldrich Seth with

1:41:48the planning and development department. Um so the that language was added by the planning commission. It basically only exempts an existing use from a site plan

1:41:56process. It doesn't exempt it or continue. It's not non-conformances. So that language has been discontinued. Um normally an existing use doesn't even require a site plan anyway. Um so it it

1:42:07really doesn't serve a purpose in that section and the amendment removes that language from the site plan and takes the intent of that amendment and puts it in 1.311. >> Thank you.

1:42:17Dr. Evans. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I have a a question. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Um, >> if we and I'm still trying to learn all these processes. If we don't do this

1:42:29now, is it something we can bring later? >> Well, we we could we could write another ordinance to add it. We could postpone this and and have it go back through the

1:42:42council process or we could just not do anything with it >> or we could approve it tonight. >> Thank you, >> Dr. Renie. >> Mr. Mayor, I don't disagree with my

1:42:56colleagues in that it it's kind of seems at the last minute. The amendment was given to all of us on planning at the public service committee on Monday or a

1:43:06week ago. Um, and I guess the assumption was that one of us would see that it needed amended and and it would uh and proceed and then it wouldn't have been at the last moment. So, I

1:43:20understand where my colleagues are coming from and I think they have a point. Um, may I suggest, Mr. Mayor, that perhaps we adopt the amendment and then postpone for two weeks so that

1:43:30everybody can look at it and see it? >> Yes. >> Any other comments? Miss White, >> I'm comfortable with that compromise. I agree with my colleagues from W two and

1:43:43W one. Um, all this just seems really rushed. Um, I know the amount of work that staff has done on this. I know that these codes very much need updating. Haven't been updated in over 20 25

1:44:00years. Um, so I just hate for it to die. Uh, so I'll support the amendment and then I will support a motion to postpone. >> Anyone else in the governing body? >> Mr. Mayor, >> Mr. CR,

1:44:13>> why would we approve it, make it part of the ordinance, and then postpone for two weeks? Once it's part of the ordinance, it's done. So I I don't I don't understand the the procedure.

1:44:32>> Mr. Mr. Gab, is it your idea then that we'd reject the substitute, postpone the ordinance, and then have the committee go back and work it? >> And that's one option. But if we approve

1:44:42this as as was just discussed, it's done. There's no reason to postpone. >> Well, Mr. Mayor, >> Dr. >> I guess I disagree. I mean, my thought was first it's it's amend by substitute.

1:44:58So then we have the substitute in front of us. And I guess my it's just an attempt to let everybody have two weeks to look at it, make sure they're okay with it. Um if we voted if if they're

1:45:11not okay with it, it's going to die tonight or it's going to die in two weeks. But at least everybody has two weeks to look at it, think about it, make sure they're okay with it, ask

1:45:19staff questions. So I think um as I said, it it's just a compromise. it fell through the cracks of public service committee on a week ago. Um I do think it is important that we at least

1:45:34consider it and I understand the objections to it being at the last minute. So that's that's my rationale for saying let's get it on the agenda, send it back to committee so they can

1:45:45look at it, everybody could at it, ask questions and then in two weeks if you don't like it we'll kill it. >> Mr. Secret, >> again, Mr. Mayor, I'm I'm not following

1:45:56this. If we go ahead and approve it tonight, it is part of So, in two weeks, if we don't like it, we're going to have to do a motion to withdraw it from the main ordinance. >> Mr. Mayor,

1:46:12>> am I missing something here? >> Dr. Aldridge. >> Mr. Mayor, I would like to move to postpone uh this amendment um for two weeks. Well, I'm not sure how you can postpone

1:46:26an amendment. You can postpone the main motion, but I'm not sure how you postpone an amendment, >> Mr. Mayor. >> Sir, >> I agree. The issue with that is it's an

1:46:36amendment. It's a it's to amend by substitute. So, um if we postpone the amendment by substitute, then we still have the original that we have to act on, which

1:46:47we either have to postpone or we kill. And if we kill or we approve it and if we approve it then the amendment by substitute becomes irrelevant. So um so I

1:47:04you know we can we can vote down the amendment postpone the main motion and bring the amendment up again at the next public service committee if we'd rather do it that way. >> Yes sir.

1:47:19That's >> I think that's >> okay. We have amendment before us by substitute dated 10:30 that moves the grandfather provision to the most appropriate part of the UDC. All those

1:47:30in favor of the substitute, please signify by saying I. >> Those opposed? >> No. >> No. >> Okay. That substitute fails. >> And madame clerk, there was not a yes vote.

1:47:41>> Now we're back on the main motion. M >> Mr. Mayor, I would move to uh postpone for two weeks. >> Second. Okay. So, Dr. Aldridge and Mr. Caggrave made Dr. Aldidge made the motion. Mr.

1:47:54Cagrave um seconded to postpone for two weeks. Anybody in the audience want to speak to the postponement? How about from the governing body? >> All those in favor, please signify by

1:48:05saying I. >> I. >> Those opposed. >> All right. This ordinance is approve is uh not approved, postponed is the way you say that for two weeks. Number 15, ordinance, third reading,

1:48:16amending section 6.2.8 of the UN at the Cheyenne Unified Development Code to allow for unpaved parking in certain sight specific situations. >> All right. This is a amendment to the

1:48:28UDC that kind of came from it kind of came from the farm uh discussion to allow gravel parking in some situations. Anybody in the audience want to speak to that ordinance?

1:48:42Did you have one? Okay, Dr. Dr. Aldrich. >> Mr. Mayor, the recommendation of the public services committee is to approve on third and final reading and I so move. >> Second.

1:48:51>> Seconded by Mr. White. Comments from members of the governing body on the gravel parking lot ordinance. >> Yes, sir. >> Dr. Aldrich. >> Uh, Mayor Collins through you. I am

1:49:02going to be a no vote on this this evening. Um, I really am I have several concerns. One is that we work really hard and have worked and invested a lot of money around um

1:49:17trying to keep um dirt and silt um out of our drainage system and out of Crow Creek. We also have um a lot of individuals who um have accessibility issues. I think that um while this has

1:49:35good intentions, there would still be the requirement for um accessible parking to be uh paved and for there to be a clear route to an entrance. Um I think it's misleading in that respect um

1:49:50for individuals who are trying to uh not have to pave a parking lot to think that they're completely off the hook. And I um also think that in our weather system

1:50:03with well traditionally with uh rain and snow and hopefully lots of it this year that uh unpaid parking areas uh just contribute to a lot of mud and runoff

1:50:15and slime. And so for that reason I'm going to be a no vote on this um particular ordinance tonight. >> Mr. Secret, >> Mr. Mayor, I I agree with uh my colleague from W three. Thank you.

1:50:30>> Anyone else? >> All right, Madame Clerk, would you take the vote, please? >> Mr. White, >> yes. >> Mr. Wolf, >> hi. >> Dr. Aldrich, >> no. >> Mayor Collins, >> yes. >> Dr. Emmens, >> no.

1:50:47>> Mr. Escoel, >> no. >> Mr. Leborn, >> no. >> Mr. Moody, >> hi. >> Dr. Renie, no. >> Mr. Crave, no. All right. This ordinance fails on third and final reading with Mr. with Dr.

1:51:03Aldridge, Mr. Crave, Dr. Emmens, Mr. Escoel, Mr. Leborn, and Dr. Renie voting no. Number 16, ordinance, third reading, amending section 6.08.020 of the municipal code of the city of

1:51:18Cheyenne, Wyoming to revise exceptions to restrictions on keeping livestock within the city. >> All right. another UDC amendment uh to revise our rules for keeping livestock

1:51:30for like urban farms and we'll go out to the audience and see if anybody wants to speak to that. >> All right, hearing none. Dr. Aldridge. >> Mr. Mayor, the recommendation of the

1:51:42public services committee is to approve on third and final reading and I so move. >> Second. [snorts] >> Thank you, Mr. Wolf. Comments from members of the governing body on the ordinance.

1:51:54Dr. Um, >> thank you, Mr. Mayor. I have a question. Yes, ma'am. >> Um, so does >> the having the liv having livestock in town, is that just within the parameters of the urban farm zone,

1:52:09>> Mr. Lloyd, >> Mr. Mayor, members of the city council, Seth Lloyd's planning development department. So, this ordinance proposes making livestock in allowed use wherever

1:52:24they have a site plan to approve livestock use or if the property is zoned agriculture. Um, we have various properties within the city limits that are zoned agriculture upon annexation

1:52:33and they can still graze animals there. Um, we also could have largescale properties that are now being turned into say BP zoning for example that are probably still grazing livestock um on

1:52:44those properties. So, as a continuation of use or as a new use um with approval, um this would allow the that livestock. Uh I don't it's not for one property if that's was your question.

1:52:57>> Mr. Mayor, follow up. So, I just want to avoid any unintended consequences. If I have a large yard, I can't have a cow and I live in the middle of town.

1:53:09>> Mr. Mayor, this is Seth with Planning Development Department. That is correct. you're most likely not zoned agriculture. Um, so general agriculture use would not be appropriate on that

1:53:18property. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Mayor. >> Is it your emotional >> ju just checking out? [laughter] >> Oh my gosh. All right. Any other comments from members of the governing body?

1:53:34>> Yes, sir. Mr. Moody. >> Uh, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Three. Just a real quick comment. Um, our neighbor in Well County, Gley and Evans, they're technically two different cities, is

1:53:44very similar to this actually. If you go to the far end of Evans, there's literally cattle right there and then neighborhood right across from it. So, and there's

1:53:54been no issues because I've asked people I live there. Thank you. >> All right. Hearing nothing else. Madame Clerk, would you take the vote? >> Mr. Crave, >> yes. >> Mr. White. >> Yes.

1:54:08>> Mr. Wolf. >> Hi. >> Dr. Aldrich. >> Yes. >> Mayor Collins. >> Yes. >> Dr. Emmens. >> Yes. >> Mr. Esabel. >> Hi. >> Mr. Labour. >> Hi. >> Mr. Moody. >> Dr. Renie. >> Yes.

1:54:20>> The ordinance is approved on third and final reading. >> Number 17. Ordinance third reading amending section 9.12.080 of the municipal code of the city of

1:54:30Cheyenne, Wyoming to allow electric fencing for certain agricultural and livestock uses. >> All right. Again, we have another UDC amendment to allow for electric fencing

1:54:39for egg operations to keep critters environments from getting after their livestock and keep them inside the fence lines as I understand it. And we'll ask

1:54:46the audience if they have any comments. >> Okay. Hearing none. Dr. Aldridge. >> Mr. Mayor, the recommendation of the public services committee is to approve

1:54:56on third and final reading. And I so move >> second. >> Seconded by Mr. Wolf. Comments from members of the governing body on the fence ordinance. All right. Hearing none. Madam clerk,

1:55:06would you take the vote, please? >> Dr. Renie, >> yes. >> Mr. Crave, >> yes. >> Mr. White, >> yes. >> Mr. Wolf, >> hi. >> Dr. Aldrich, >> yes. >> Mayor Collins, >> yes. >> Dr. Emmens, >> no.

1:55:18>> Mr. Esabel, >> hi. >> Mr. Leborn, >> hi. >> Mr. Moody. >> Hi. >> All right. This ordinance is approved on third and final reading with Dr. Emmens voting no.

1:55:30>> Number 18, ordinance, second reading, creating sections 1.1.8, 8, 1.1.9, and 5.8.9 and amending sections 1.4.3, 4.5.3, and 4.5.4 of the Unified Development Code to clarify requirements

1:55:46around establishing uses including expectations for all construction sites. >> All right, here we go. Another uh ordinance on second reading this time to

1:55:56our UDC to talk about uh expectations on construction sites. Does anybody in the audience want to speak to that? >> Please come forward. Welcome, sir. Thanks for sitting through

1:56:10the meeting this long. Bring that microphone right up so you can talk right into it. >> Uh, Mr. Mayor, city council members, Paul Steed. I work for mechanical systems.

1:56:22I strongly oppose this proposition, this amendment for the reason I understand that data centers are a hot topic at the moment. There's there's been a lot of negativity from

1:56:42businesses, [snorts] homeowners, residents, etc. But to to limit noise to to change the noise ordinance to limit the the noise that is the unified business development code

1:57:05is not directed toward the data centers. It's directed toward everyone in Cheyenne. businesses, especially construction. So, [clears throat] the the reading, as I understand it,

1:57:22limits the noise in non-residential areas to 65 dB. That's basically the conversation we're having right now, that noise level. Then, residential areas to a 45 decel.

1:57:41That's the refrigerator humming in your home. So, it would greatly limit my livelihood. There would be have to measures be taken that would be very expensive to to develop

1:58:00Cheyenne, particularly residential, a subdivision right next to residential to have to put up sound walls or whatever else you'd have to do to to limit that noise that reaches the local

1:58:17residents. So, I I strongly recommend and hope that the city council would direct the intents and purposes to not disrupt local businesses. Thank you,

1:58:40>> sir. Could you share with us what your recommended recommendations would be then as far as um noise or the other items that are reflected here with I

1:58:50guess it's lights and uh all the other areas that this ordinance covers. >> So I understand the the concerns about light pollution other things. The the motion that I'm

1:59:04against would be the noise >> and I'm asking sir what would you recommend or just have no have no noise ordinance? >> Certainly not. I mean >> we have a we have a noise ordinance already.

1:59:19But but to to bring that down to to a lower degree of level is I mean excuse the term but it's ludicrous. >> So sir are you comfortable with the current noise levels? >> Yes.

1:59:36>> Okay. That's what I was trying to get to. >> All right. >> Thank you so much. Appreciate you being here. >> Folks in the back want to speak please. >> Welcome.

1:59:48>> Yeah. Good evening. Uh my name is Chris Tetlo. I'm the metro director for Microsoft here in Cheyenne. Uh I'm here this evening to provide input on the

1:59:56proposed amendment. Microsoft supports reasonable noise protections. We recognize and support the city's responsibility to protect residents from excessive noise. Our concern is ensuring

2:00:08the proposed standards are technically sound, avoid unintended consequences, are practical for the city to implement, and are consistently enforcable. Clarity

2:00:17in the standards protects everyone. We support retaining the codified limits of 60dba daytime, 55 dBA nighttime. These noise levels are consistent with a threshold set by Fairfax County, a

2:00:30jurisdiction who exhaustively studied data center specific noise impacts over a 16-month period and concluded these same standards are appropriate levels to

2:00:39protect residents when paired with strong enforcement requirements for modeling and sampling. Uh in contrast, we caution that the contemplated 40 to 45 dBA levels that were informed by the

2:00:51World Health Organization recommendations are not appropriate as they are proposed to be applied. The World Health Organization standard applies at the sensitive receptor, not

2:01:01the property line, which is a key distinction. A property line stand a property line standard line necessarily needs to be higher for excuse [clears throat] me needs to be higher to

2:01:12account for sound dissipation over distance. This is why the slightly higher current standard should be continued. Uh likewise the world health organization standard is an annual

2:01:22exposure standard for transportation sound and entirely different application and it cannot be reasonably translated to the fiveminute measurement interval proposed.

2:01:31We're also concerned the lower standard has not been studied to understand whether it's lower than existing ambient levels, which if true would present significant enforcement challenges for

2:01:40the city and have severe unintended consequences. Uh lastly, we support adopting requirements for pre-approval noise modeling and a post construction compliance report to ensure data center

2:01:51facilities are designed, cited, and operated to the high standards expected by the community. Thank you for your careful consideration of these standards

2:01:59and for your strong leadership on behalf of the city of Cheyenne. >> Thank you. >> Welcome Dante. >> Good morning or good afternoon Mayor Collins and good afternoon members of

2:02:13the council. My name is Dante Rush member of Cheyenne Leads. Uh so Cheyenne Leadeds we work with members of the data center community here and then construction operators. We do have a

2:02:23list of recommendations. I believe we sent you in an email. Uh I just wanted to note not notate those tonight on the recommendations. Um as mentioned by MSI

2:02:31and Microsoft there's some concerns with items such as decibel levels. So just to list some though some of those items from the letter. One is to retain the

2:02:40existing 60 decel levels at daytime 55 at nighttime standards for high frequency noise as suggested by city staff. Evaluate interim low frequency noise protections with any DBC

2:02:53thresholds and associated measurement pro procedures established through appropriate technical review. Increase the duration sampling period from 5 minutes to one hour to better account

2:03:04for steady in uh steady rate operations. Define how compliance will be measured including measurement locations, averaging periods and treatment of existing ambient sound. Expressly

2:03:18address shortterm or short duration events, emergencies, testing, maintenance, and other non-rine operating conditions. Consider predictive acoustic studies and post

2:03:30construction verification as a sight specific means of demonstrating compliance. So those are just some of those recommended. So we look forward the opportunity to converse with you in

2:03:41the future on these. I'll stand for any questions. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Pick one. Wendy, you come. >> Hello. >> Good evening. Good evening, mayor and

2:03:59members of the council. My name is Wendy Vulk. I'm a fourth generation Wyoming real estate professional with more than 30 years of experience in residential,

2:04:06commercial, and land development in Cheyenne. I've spoken before with the planning commission regarding the industrial noise regulations. I appreciate the city's efforts to

2:04:15establish stronger development standards addressing noise, lighting, water use, and power generation. These are important steps toward protecting our community. However, based on my

2:04:25professional experience, I believe additional protections deserve consideration. I'm currently involved in a real estate matter in Camptol in the city limits near the intersection of I80

2:04:36and Caml Road near the Lowe's distribution center. The issue involves a Bitcoin mining data center operator. Industrial noise from its cooling equipment has generated significant

2:04:48concerns. The installation of large sound mitigation walls has subsequently created additional concerns about appearance, architectural standards, and impacts on neighboring commercial

2:04:59properties. A solution to industrial noise should not create another problem for neighboring property owners. This experience demonstrates why noise impacts and mitigation measures need to

2:05:11be addressed before construction begins. I respectfully ask the council to consider three additional protections. First, require baseline noise measurements before construction.

2:05:23Developers should document existing daytime, nighttime, and low frequency noise conditions at potentially affected properties. Without these measurements,

2:05:32how can we accurately determine how much a new facility changes the surrounding environment? I also encourage consideration of acoustical expert Robert Ran's recommendations for a 40

2:05:42decel nighttime residential limit protecting existing homes regardless of zoning. Second, require cumulative noise analysis and consider neighboring property impacts.

2:05:55Data centers and associated power generation facilities should be evaluated together when determining combined noise, vibration, and appropriate setbacks. The city should

2:06:05also consider how proposed mitigation structures may affect neighboring residential and commercial property values, marketability, and future development potential. Third, establish

2:06:16independent compliance, verification, and accountability. Once facilities become operational, developers should fund independent noise testing to verify

2:06:25compliance with established standards. The city should have clear monitoring, complaint response, and corrective action procedures, including review of

2:06:34substantial equipment modifications and sound mitigation structures. My experience at Camptol reinforces one important point. It is far better to prevent these conflicts during planning

2:06:44than to resolve them after millions of dollars have been invested in construction. I support responsible economic development and I appreciate the city's work on these proposed

2:06:53regulations. I respectfully ask these additional protection protections be considered before final approval of items 19 and 20. Thank you for consideration. >> Welcome back

2:07:08>> Mayor and Council Lori Chestnut. I'm a resident of W 2 and I'm speaking today as an individual and as a public health professional. I would like to support

2:07:17the discussion presented by Wendy Vulk and Heather Madrid previously on the subject of noise. I am in support of the nighttime limit of 40 dB uh awaited

2:07:29decibb. Now I live on the east side of town and I'm used to hearing motorcycles, airplanes, and general traffic noises. In fact, we are on the approach for the the airport, but these

2:07:40noises come and go and they're not constant and they're not generally at night very much. We certainly don't have airplanes coming in at night. Um, it all stops around 10:00.

2:07:51Saddle Ridge is only about 2 miles from the construction end of the Venture Drive and Cherry Hill subdivision is practically on their back doorstep. I feel very sorry for the residents of

2:08:01Cherry Hill once these businesses go up and go are up and going on Cam Stol. The data centers have every intention I know of being very good neighbors, but the

2:08:11nature of their business makes it very difficult. The 45dba nighttime limit may be the industry standard, but the rules are made to be broken. The great minds

2:08:21that run these data centers should be able to find a way to lessen their impact on our community. They successfully did this with water consumption using closed loop systems

2:08:31for cooling. They can do the same with the noise that they create produce. Our health should be important to you. My concern lies in the cumitive effect of so many data centers around our

2:08:43community and the noise that they will force us to live with for the foreseeable future. Of course, I'm also concerned with air quality, including CO2 emissions and energy and water

2:08:53quality. I agree with Wendy Vulk that we need independent evaluators to help our community monitor these environmental impacts. Data centers should contribute

2:09:03to a fund to help our community hire experts for this purpose. We can help you find these experts, but we need to have independent people that are helping to monitor these. Thank you.

2:09:25>> Welcome. >> Thanks, >> Mayor Collins. Council members, my name is Anne Brand and I am here before you tonight as a fourth generation Wyoming business owner and operator of Wyoming's

2:09:41oldest downtown business, Lewig Photography, which was located at 1705 Logan Avenue here in Cheyenne, for over five decades. My husband and I also own and operate Handle Information

2:09:53Technologies, which has utilized a Cheyenne data center now for over 20 years to manage all of its clients based solutions for state and tribal government. I am also the founder and

2:10:05executive director of the Albany County Conservancy, ACC. Our 501c3 Wyoming nonprofit organization has members throughout southeastern Wyoming with the heaviest concentration residing in

2:10:17Albany, Laramie, and Plaque counties. I'm reaching out to you because many of our professional members who have credentials have taken a deep dive into the cumulative contiguous impacts of

2:10:31industrial noise because industrial development once approved attracts more industrial development or backfill. And as identified decades ago by the World Health Organization, WHO,

2:10:44nighttime noise exposure repeatedly over the 40 dBA causes severe health complications and has been identified to even cause human death. On October 27th, the Cheyenne City

2:10:59Planning Commission adopted base level generic up-to-date minimum night sound levels that provide a defensible backs stop for public health. The reason they

2:11:10did so is the members of the Albany County Conservancy decided to fundra to yet again hire the expertise of raw Brand. We originally hired Raw Brand in 2021 regarding a energy generating

2:11:28facility that exceeded noise regulation. And so that's why we reached out to him again. ACC members realized the importance of quality city of Cheyenne sound metrics

2:11:42when they reviewed an article in the local paper and they had a link that provided them to city documents talking about the noise amendments. They saw that there were deficiencies

2:11:54specifically regarding tonal measurements and so they wanted Rand to continue the positive direction that the city planning staff was going. So October 27th there was discussion and the

2:12:11planning commission voted to accept Ran's chart. If you have any questions regarding Rob Bran's succinct and explanatory noise management for public health and

2:12:23wildlife standards letter that he emailed you this morning. Please do not hesitate to reach out to him directly. We ask you, our city council, to approve

2:12:34the incorporated Cheyenne planning sound amendments presented to you. Quality night sound levels are an amenity worth guarding. Focusing on safe levels proven

2:12:44by measurable scientific metrics will not only be best health practices for Cheyenne and that community, but also help mitigate or prevent the possibility of future lawsuit.

2:12:56>> Thank you, ma'am. >> Thank you very much for your time, >> Mr. Mayor. >> Yes, >> I just wanted to share that I sent Dr. Ran's uh report and letter to you all a

2:13:09couple weeks ago. So you ha you should have that. >> Thank you. Thank you ma'am. >> In addition to the comments that he submitted to you all today. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.

2:13:20>> Anybody else in the audience want to speak >> comments to find DBA. >> Thank you ma'am. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anybody else? >> Jennifer, did you have somebody?

2:13:32>> Mr. Simick, you should be able to unmute yourself. >> Yeah. Hi. Can you guys hear me? We can hear you balance. >> Great. Mayor Collins and members of the

2:13:42city council. Good evening. My name is Balon Simick. I'm a senior vice president of development with Related Digital. As many of you know, we are developing a data center on the east

2:13:51side of town just north of I80 with plans for further expansion on the site. First and foremost, I want to say that we are committed to being good neighbors

2:13:59and citizens in the city of Cheyenne. We certainly understand the importance of transparency and I think folks will agree that we have been open and transparent since we began construction

2:14:08about a year ago. We understand that the health, welfare, and safety of the community is paramount in developing responsibly, something that related is committed to doing. Noise levels and

2:14:18their impact on the local community are an important topic and we're glad it's being discussed. Our site specifically sits between the Union Pacific Railroad

2:14:26and I80. We went through a thorough design process with the city in 2025 before we broke ground that included submitting modeling to planning staff to show how we meet code, including for

2:14:37noise. The city reviewed and approved our project on that basis. A couple things I would mention quickly. First, the ambient noise on our site prior to any development was between 60

2:14:49to 70 dBA. This was determined by deploying acoustical equipment on site for multiple days. Second, our site was designed, modeled, and approved by the city to meet 70 dba

2:15:01daytime and 65dba nighttime overall noise limits. We will meet and comply with those limitations once operational. I would also highlight that these limitations are equivalent to the

2:15:13ambient noise on the site without a data center. Lastly, the low frequency DBC measurements are not part of the current code. So, we did not measure a model

2:15:23debt during our analysis or permitting. We intend to expand our site and we ask that we be able to do so under the same standards as our original entitlement.

2:15:32Thank you for your time and effort on this important topic and I'm available to answer any questions you may have. >> Thank you, sir. Jennifer >> Heather, you can go ahead.

2:15:46>> Hello, Heather Madrid. I live in Ward One. Um, I don't I just personally don't think that this is ready yet. I think there's a happy medium and I can't remember the name of the

2:16:00gentleman who just spoke on behalf of related digital, but I do think he has a point if they're sandwiched between I80 and the railroad. And as long as their

2:16:11noise isn't affecting nearby neighbors, I just think zones matter and proximity to residential areas matter. And I don't think data centers should be all

2:16:21regulated in the same way. I also don't think that solving this problem by regulating every machine shop or warehouse in Cheyenne so tightly that they can't even operate

2:16:36inside city limits is appropriate either. I think that data centers need to have their own regulations and right now they're regulated far too loosely to

2:16:45keep the community safe from noise and on other things. Um, so I just think that this noise ordinance piece needs some work. That's all. Thank you, >> Jennifer.

2:17:05>> Mrs. Stevens, you can go ahead. Thank you. Can you all hear me? >> Yes, ma'am. We can. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the council. Um, my name is Katherine

2:17:17Stevens. I'm a homeschool mom and um, I live in the Chugwater area, but many of the industrial projects in and around Cheyenne do have an impact on my family

2:17:27uh, due to the far-reaching effects of low frequency noise over long distances through rural areas. So, I've done a lot of research um over the past 18 months

2:17:38in the field of industrial noise, sound propagation, measurement, and the physiological impact of sound waves on the human body. I've testified at the

2:17:48county and state level on this topic for over a year, and I've had interaction also with um Robert Rand uh who you got a letter from, and I urge you to uh to

2:17:59take that seriously. So, I submitted public comment to the Cheyenne Planning Commission a few weeks ago and then also this weekend to you all. Um, I am in

2:18:07support of the nighttime 40dba noise limit uh when it's adjacent to residential areas because my primary concern is about sleep and especially for children. So, I just wanted to kind

2:18:23of bring it home a little bit. So the current DBA limit of 55 dB at night is not safe. Um children are more affected due to their developing brains when they're sleeping. If there are noises

2:18:38that are coming in while they're, you know, into their ears, their brain basically processes that as a potential threat. So it wakes them up even imperceptibly. imperceptibly. I mean um

2:18:50it can increase stress hormones, their heart rate, their blood pressure, other kind of cardiovascular risk factors. It interferes with their focus during the

2:18:59day. Uh lowers their school performance and all of this is very well documented. So it's not fringe science. Uh it's a real thing and it's it's not good for

2:19:07adults either, but I have four children so I'm primarily concerned with what it does to children. developers can implement better sound dampening technology and I understand that that

2:19:16costs money. It's not that I'm insensitive to that, but there is no wealth without health [clears throat] and we have to protect people. Um, that's what zoning regulations are for.

2:19:30So, um, yeah, like I said, I would urge you to to actually support that 40 dBA noise limit at night. And if you want to specify, you know, when the data center

2:19:41is near a residential area, I'm fine with those kinds of specifications. It's not as important if a data center is making more noise and it's surrounded by other industrial projects, then

2:19:52obviously that's an industrial area, but I'm concerned with when it's near people's homes. Um, so I think that's actually I wrote you a letter and that of course uh those are my you know

2:20:04official comments. This is also my official comments but this is just more of you know my comments on that. So >> thank you ma'am. >> Um thank you >> Jennifer >> Mr. Miller you can go ahead.

2:20:19>> Can you hear me? >> Yes. Uh, Mayor Collins, members of the governing body, Charles Miller, on item 18, I ask you to address two legal risks before final reading. Over broad

2:20:31confidentiality and uncertainty about the relationship between development agreements in the city's continuing authority. These are not hypothetical subjects. Courts have addressed them and

2:20:39the lessons are directly relevant to drafting this ordinance. First, public records. In Sheridan newspapers vers city versus city of Sheridan decided in

2:20:471983. The Wyoming Supreme Court said the public records act receives a liberal construction in favor of disclosure and against withholding and exemptions are

2:20:58construed narrowly. The court rejected blanket withholding of police record categories merely because some records might contain exempt information. It also explained that sensitive

2:21:08information should be removed and the balance disclosed where possible. That case is concerned to police records, not development applications, but it's

2:21:16public records reasoning matters here. Do not treat an applicant's confidentiality designation as the legal determination. Require the custodian to identify the applicable statutory basis.

2:21:26Evaluate the particular information and release the portions that must remain public. Protect legitimate security information and trade secrets where the law requires it. Do not use those

2:21:35concerns to conceal unrelated information about public obligations, costs, or governmental decisions. Second, development agreements. The constitutional problem runs in both

2:21:45directions. In United States Trust Company versus New Jersey decided in 1977, the United States Supreme Court invalidated the repeal of a financial covenant protecting bound bond holders.

2:21:55The government could not simply invoke a public purpose to escape its contractual obligations. The decision also discusses the principle that government cannot

2:22:03bargain away essential attributes of sovereignty. That does not mean every development agreement is unlawful. It means drafting matters enormously. Do not promise contractual protection so

2:22:14broadly that future councils face avoidable disputes over their authority. And do not tell the public that inserting the words police power automatically defeats contractual

2:22:23rights. Specify what an agreement may modify. What remains governed by generally applicable law and what procedures apply when health and safety requirements change. Third, translate

2:22:32those principles into concrete safeguards. Publish the final agreement and amendments subject to lawful redaction. Identify every departure from ordinary development standards and the

2:22:40authority permitting it. State who pays for infrastructure, what conditions trigger improvements, and how compliance is verified. Explain which provisions apply to existing projects, later

2:22:48phases, and expansions. These cases do not establish that this ordinance is automatically invalid. They establish why broad promises and broad secrecy provisions deserve careful limits. I

2:22:57request a revised draft before final reading that makes those limits explicit. The public should not have to litigate to discover what the city withheld, what it promised, or what

2:23:05authority it retained. Write those answers into the ordinance now. Thank you. >> Jennifer, do you have anybody else? >> Mr. Fiori, did you want to speak? Aaron, are you there?

2:23:32You might be on mute. I >> I think it's just um I Zoom changed their menu so I It might be me. It might be my error. >> No worries. >> Sorry. >> All right. Anybody else in the audience

2:23:45want to speak to this? Mr. Lloyd, >> Mr. Mayor, members of the city council, Seth Lloyd at the Planning and Development Department. I just wanted to um make a quick clarification as to what

2:23:57the sound element applies to. Um it does not apply to construction uses. Um per the fi proposed 5.8.9 only certain regulations apply to construction and um the

2:24:14noise regulations within the UDC do not apply to that. Um, there are noise regulations in the municipal code that would probably still apply, but the noise regulations in this code are not

2:24:22proposed to include construction uses um because that is not included at this time in 589. Um, at the moment, this proposal only affects the definitions of industrial uses. So, this is a

2:24:35definition of discernable noise. The term discernable noise only appears in defining what level uh an industrial use is. So it just classifies you know this

2:24:45is a normal industrial use and then this becomes a heavier industrial use as you get noisier is essentially what it does. Um it is written in such a way that we

2:24:53could come back later and add other um definitions or uses to that but at this time it only applies to classification of industrial uses. That's the only

2:25:02thing that it applies to. I'm available for questions on any part. Um but that's all I wanted to say ahead of time. >> Dr. Alder did you have a question?

2:25:10>> I do have a question. Mayor Collins for you. So, as I'm reading through this, um, Seth, I So, when we're talking about residential limits at night and that type of thing,

2:25:26what you're saying is the current proposed ordinance, the way it's written, would only be for industrial areas. It does not include construction companies like MSI. It doesn't include

2:25:38um any of any other use. It's just for industrial areas, not anything to do with residential. So this where it says all other zone districts including residential use is not

2:25:54>> Mr. Chair. So um Mr. Mayor, if I may, um Dr. Aldridge, so the um classifications in the table is the receiving property lines and so if a noise is being

2:26:05produced on an industrial site, that 40 dB is the residential property line that's receiving the sound. So if there's a residential property within 100 ft, that residential property line

2:26:14has to be down at 40 dB. So it's the receiving property line, not the generating property line. That's what that table means. So that way we're capturing if we have an industrial site

2:26:25and they produce a lot of noise and there's a sliver parcel between that industrial spot site and a residential site, we still want to check and make sure that residential site is not

2:26:34adversely impacted by that noise. And so that table is the receiving property line for residential uses. >> Dr. followup. >> Okay. Anybody else? >> Mr. Wolf. >> Oh, go ahead, Mr. President.

2:26:45>> Mr. Secret, >> it it doesn't matter. Go ahead. >> Thank you, uh, Mr. Mayor, through you. Um, thank you, Mr. Lloyd, and maybe this is a question both for you, Mr. Lloyd,

2:26:58and and for the mayor. Um let and let me just sort of sit here and try and absorb this vast amount of information almost all of which has come to us this weekend. Uh so we get a email

2:27:15from Mr. Bloom on Friday night last this is the last Friday we get a memo from Mr. Rand over the weekend. We get Leed's memo today on Monday and we get testimony about all the things they'd

2:27:35like to have changed. Um, we get Miss Madrid's uh memo late this afternoon and we're being asked to make probably one of the most consequential decisions that affect at least data

2:27:51centers, but they're also apparently broad-based concern um about uh effects on just every other kind of industrial activity. Uh, and so I'm I'm sitting

2:28:05here trying to figure out, okay, so what do we do on second reading now? Because if we if you like the 40 decibel number, then you want to support the resolution. But if you want to

2:28:23keep the current standards, which don't have that, then you would vote against this. But there are also a whole bunch of other things that are in this not just noise.

2:28:37So, and then um uh Councilman Renie has an amendment to this. So, we have I don't think I mean noise is this is science. This is professional expertise.

2:28:54It's not something that we the council can without significant consequences, you know, just sort of say, "Oh, well, this is okay." Part of this is because the way, and maybe everybody in the

2:29:10council and the audience know this, but sound is measured on a logarithmic scale. So when you go from 40 to 50, that's you're actually doubling the sound that humans perceive.

2:29:28So if you go from 40 to 60 that's 10 times or no it's four times the amount of sign sound people perceive. So, you know, people will say, "Oh, it's just 40

2:29:42to 45, but in fact, that's a significant increase in the sound that humans perceive." And 40 to 50 is quite substantial. And I have lots of of sympathy for the

2:30:00people who are operating industrial equipment and who are operating data centers and are trying to build them, you know, within the the their permitting rights, but also build them

2:30:12to be sensitive to noise levels. So I guess maybe I throw up my hand and say, what do we do now? One thing we could do is excise the noise levels out of this

2:30:26proposed ordinance and just set them aside and say this needs a heck of a lot more work. Um, and but I don't want to presume that without some discussion

2:30:40obviously of the and everybody's views on that whether that's the best way to do that. But but in truth, and I think we've heard this from everybody, there's

2:30:49a lot more here than than we're prepared to do and particularly prepared to do tonight. >> Thank you, M. Mayor. >> Mr. Moody. Oh, excuse me. I'm sorry, Mr. Secret.

2:31:02>> Mr. Mayor, I'm going to follow up. Uh, Councilman Wolf, um, and maybe you can help me here. What is the genesis of this ordinance, >> Mr. Mr. Mayor, this ordinance was started at my

2:31:20request. Um, and actually it started with the water portion in that I wanted um to make sure that it was codified that we were requiring clo closed loop systems or something as

2:31:40efficient or more efficient than that. Um then at some point so the staff started working on that at some point I suggested well maybe we should address noise and um

2:31:54and light requirements as well. And so they've so they've added that in. And then um along the w line the staff has added in NDAs and some of the construction um

2:32:10uh amendments in that sometimes we were not getting construction sites cleaned up afterwards like we wanted. So it it has you know it's it has mushroomed. I

2:32:22would agree. But essentially it is an attempt to codify I mean to say to the public that we have listened over the last six seven months to all the all the

2:32:35um comments about data centers and that we want to um and that we want to codify the practices we're doing and we want to put on some guard rails. Now this

2:32:46doesn't have to be the end all. I mean, I'm not going to be here in another after what is three more meetings. So, the rest of you can continue to work

2:32:55this and and you know, as time goes on, make amendments um as required just like we do with the UDC. But, it's a start and I think we need to make a start and I think we need

2:33:05to make a statement to to the people of Cheyenne that yes, we have listened. Yes, we are putting on some guard rails and yes, we are responding. Now it seems that

2:33:16everybody is pretty well happy with all of it except the noise issues and um even the industry is happy except for the noise issues. So um it is only on second reading. I know one of my

2:33:31colleagues beforehand asked can we postpone for two weeks but we do have two weeks to perhaps massage the sound portion of it before we get to third reading. So anyway that's a long answer.

2:33:43I'm sorry, but that was the genesis. Um, we're already having discussion. Perhaps as a point of order, mayor, we should >> Yeah. >> Um, have a motion on the floor before we

2:33:52do any more discussion. >> I That was another concern of mine. We're still in public comment, but but since you >> There hasn't been a motion yet. >> When you let us start questioning staff,

2:34:03I guess, Mr. Mayor, my point is I I I have no issue if we want to codify existing standards, including sound, and and get that out there. But it seems like this has morphed from a desire to

2:34:24um codify closed loop water systems into a fullfledged discussion on various aspects of of sound and noise and um you know is it is is it at the residential lot line is it I mean

2:34:42there's so many questions going on here that uh I don't think any any of us really have a clear idea of what we're being asked to vote on. So, if if we can't simplify it and keep it

2:34:57to the current standards for this rendition, uh I will have to be a no vote. Thank you. >> Anybody else in the audience want to speak to this? >> I just had a quick question. >> Nope.

2:35:12>> Okay. Dr. Roberts, can we get a motion, please? Mr. Mayor, the recommendation of the public services committee is to approve on second reading and I so move. >> Second.

2:35:21>> Seconded by Mr. White. Mr. Moody. >> Yep. I just have another question, Mr. Lloyd. Um, based on what's in here, I mean, I do definitely support some noise limits with data centers because

2:35:36is a constant humming, but way is currently written, this would apply to any industrial site. So just to clarify, Magpool, the steel, the cat food factory, am I correct,

2:35:51>> Mr. Mayor? Seth Planning Development Department. Um, it would apply to all industrial uses. I I have a hard time understanding the difference between a

2:36:00data center noise versus another style of noise. And I wonder if we could legally regulate sound differently for different uses like that. Um, so if if

2:36:11we have a consistent noise at a certain hum level, whether that's a generator at a cat food factory or a generator at a data center, I think we should be regulating it the same.

2:36:26>> Anybody else? Dr. Aldrich, >> Mayor Collins, I I believe that uh I would move to amend by substitute. Is that what we're doing here, Mr. Dr. Winnie? >> Oh, [laughter] well. Um, so yeah,

2:36:48Mr. Mayor, to my to my colleague from from W three, >> um, I do have a proposed amendment, but that amendment does not address the sound. So, I didn't know if my

2:37:01colleagues wanted to do anything about sound before I proposed my amendment. >> Mr. Mayor, >> Dr. Aldridge, >> I I would like to uh I I am in agreement that we need to codify what we're

2:37:15currently doing. If we codify what our current standards are, I am all about that. Um I am not about passing this on even the second reading if we don't withdraw the entire section on noise

2:37:33um before we pass either the substitute or the um proposed ordinance change. >> So Dr. Aldrich, are you uh wanting to make a motion to change the the noise level to our

2:37:50current levels? Do you want to I mean I guess I didn't quite understand. >> Well, I I think even on the substitute there is there are some concerns about

2:38:00uh rooftop fans. There's some concerns about um the amount of time for testing. There's some concerns about um the discernable noise in section 1.4.3. that's uh pointed out in the 5.7.1.

2:38:17But unless we can just codify what we currently have, um I am not willing to vote in favor of this without withdrawing without drawing out the noise section separately.

2:38:30Folks, I don't know how you guys feel about it, but it feels to me like uh what started off as a simple ordinance has kind of morphed into something that

2:38:36is um very complicated and uh um maybe more challenging and I'm not quite sure we're ready for that. So, um I don't know if that means we just need to

2:38:47reject it and send it back for more work or um if you think we can get that done in two weeks, what what the thought process is on the governing body. >> Mr. Mayor, >> Dr. Renie,

2:38:58>> I would request that we be given at least two weeks. Maybe we can sort some of this out before public service committee on Monday. >> Mr. Moody, >> Mr. Mayor, I move to postpone for two

2:39:11weeks. >> All right, Mr. Moody moves to postpone for two weeks, followed by Mr. Wolf. Comments from >> We'll go out to the audience first real quick. >> Can I ask a clarification?

2:39:25>> Yes. Uh, Mayor Collins, are we postponing? This is the postponement of the original, not the substitute. >> Yeah, we don't have a substitute before us yet to my knowledge. So, it is a

2:39:37motion to postpone the ordinance on second reading. >> Um, Jennifer, >> Mr. Miller, you can go ahead. >> Hey, Mr. Miller. >> Can you hear me? >> Yep. You were going to call me, remember?

2:39:55You said you would and you for now a couple months I've been asking. You haven't done that. Are you going to call me? >> Um yeah, if we could maybe uh communicate via email that would

2:40:04probably be uh could be could be beneficial. >> I I you have my email address, but I don't have yours, sir. >> So, uh >> I could I could I could get you my email. Um >> you promise?

2:40:18>> This is Charles Miller speaking to the motion to postpone the original ordinance for two weeks. I support postponing the original ordinance so the council and public can

2:40:27evaluate it alongside the pro proposed substitute. Um but please make the procedural status clear before voting. What version remains pending what happens to the

2:40:40substitute proposal and what exactly will return in two weeks. Postponement should not leave the public uncertain about which text is under consideration. I request three three

2:40:50things during that interval. first publish both versions, the original ordinance and the proposed substitute with a sidebyside comparison identifying every substantive

2:41:02substantive change. The original should remain available. The substitute should be clearly labeled as proposed, not presented as though the council has

2:41:11already adopted it. Second, explain the proposed removal of noise language. Is that language being moved to another provision, replaced by a different standard, or removed without an

2:41:21equivalent replacement? If another rule would govern, identify it, and explain its scope. I'm not claiming that deleting one section necessarily eliminates all noise regulation. I'm

2:41:30asking you to establish whether the remaining rules cover the same facilities, equipment, operating conditions, and affected properties. That distinction needs an answer before

2:41:39this returns. Third, provide a meaningful opportunity for public review. Please make the documents available promptly. Identify where comments should be submitted and provide

2:41:48staff's explanation before the next consideration, not for the first time during that meeting. If the proposed change concerns technical accuracy, explain the technical problem. If it

2:41:58concerns duplication, identify the overlapping provisions. If it reflects a policy decision to reduce or change regulation, explain that decision openly. The council should not have to

2:42:07choose between retaining unclear language and deleting it without understanding the consequences. There is room during this postponement to identify a better alternative. I also

2:42:15request the clerk retain the original of the proposed substitute and the motions associated with them as separately identifiable parts of the record. When

2:42:22this returns, residents should be able to see what was proposed, what was changed, and what the council is being asked to approve. My support for postponement is not an endorsement of

2:42:30either version. It is support for an informed decision based on an identifiable text and a clear explanation of its effects. Please postpone the original ordinance, clarify

2:42:38the status of the substitute, and use the two weeks to resolve those questions publicly. Delay alone does not improve an ordinance. clear instructions and

2:42:45accessible documents can. Thank you. >> Jennifer, do you have anyone else? >> All right. Comments from the governing body on the postponement. Mr. Wolf or Mr. White >> to clarify,

2:42:57there's no substitute before us. >> Correct. >> So, let's just get that out of the way. Um, second, and I guess I would uh defer to Mr. Brody and and you don't have to answer

2:43:10this now, but quite honestly, I think in other communities across the country, um kind of to Mr. Lloyd's point that there are specific uh guard rails just for

2:43:22data centers and not for other uh industrial uses. And so, um I'm going to be doing some research during uh the postponement period on um the legality

2:43:34of that as Mr. Lloyd alluded to. Uh, but I think it can be done because I'm pretty sure it already has. Um, third, I can't stress enough how much I appreciate uh this particular ordinance

2:43:49because one of the things that we've all heard over the last nine months, and I can't believe we've been dealing with it that long. If you had asked me in February of 2026 if uh what a data

2:44:02center was, I probably wouldn't even be able to have told you. But I sure could now, much to my chagrin. Um, but I really appreciate this ordinance because

2:44:13again, one of the things that we've been accused of for nine months is not listening. And so by bringing this ordinance forward, by developing some specific guard rails that are going to be

2:44:26codified that are going to um hold data centers accountable uh for things such as light pollution, um noise, although obviously we've got some work to do on

2:44:39noise, um other things that that many residents have expressed concern about. It does, as Dr. Renie said, show that we are listening and we are trying to take

2:44:52steps to address their concerns that we've heard consistently over the last seven, eight months. So, um I'm going to support the postponement and uh I just

2:45:06really appreciate the fact that we have listened and we we are working on something that's going to address the concerns that we've heard. >> Dr. Rainey, >> uh Mr. Mayor, I will yield to the

2:45:19councilman from W 3. I saw that he had his light on, too. >> Uh, thank Yep. Thank you, S. I just want to let you know, my colleague from W one, uh, next to the mayor, there are

2:45:29municipalities across the country, even some counties, couple in Pennsylvania that have it just for data centers. >> Dr. Renie, >> Mr. Mayor, I would argue against the

2:45:40postponement for two reasons. One, it's on second reading. We have two more weeks to try and sort this out. And if we don't get it sorted out at public at

2:45:49PSC next week and when it comes back to council in two weeks, then I would welcome a two-week postponement. Secondly, there was an amendment made in committee that we haven't even got to

2:46:00yet. So, I would like to be able to have that introduced and either adopted as an amendment or not before we po if if the body's intent is to actually postpone

2:46:14and make this a four-week process. I would at least like this amendment incorporated before we get to that point. Thank you. >> Any other comments? Mr. Leborn. [cough]

2:46:25>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I speak in favor of the postponement for obvious reasons. uh this is a very complex and scientific matter that uh I've attended [clears throat]

2:46:42meetings of the uh planning commission where they wrestled with this issue uh particularly the the sound but other issues here and uh in general perhaps we uh are making progress uh and

2:47:01that's a good thing But what really concerns me, Mr. Mayor and members of the council, is the way we're getting this information at the absolute last minute.

2:47:15And that is something that is uh relates not only to this particular uh ordinance but to other ordinances as well. when we have uh [snorts] important legal matters coming before us

2:47:31and we're getting information uh from city staff as well as uh very responsible parties like the data center folks. And yet we're dealing with something here that

2:47:52certainly [snorts] in my experience we didn't used to deal with this kind of technology and this kind of evolving issues. So I believe that uh this postponement

2:48:06is in order and I believe that certainly that'll have some opportunity for some of us to educate ourselves and uh learn more and be able to uh and certainly I appreciate

2:48:24uh more information about noise levels because this is actually uh a lot more even And then the uh data centers it is uh bitcoin mining it is uh automobiles and trucks

2:48:45and it we have a very limited ability to monitor. So, um, this postponement is an order, >> but more than that, it's in order that we >> respect each other's ability to absorb information

2:49:03and deal with it. So, we're not making real substantive amendments on the fly verbally. Uh, that's perhaps sometimes that's okay. But um I >> um don't have a scientific background.

2:49:29I don't know who does but uh these are critical decisions and certainly the point is well taken that we've had a lot of people come to us and ask us to develop

2:49:46uh standards that are going to be useful or reasonable and and that's absolutely a good point and that's the reason I think we need to take our time and do this right.

2:50:02To the best of our ability with the assistance of knowledgeable third-party interpretation and so that we can actually get to the point where probably we won't be here

2:50:17but some of us will most. Um, but where is that complaint process going to be developed? Is that something that's a police power? Is that something that is a uh something we can hire?

2:50:41What is it? Um so uh again I believe this postponement is in order and I look forward to uh really avoiding in the future uh important information coming to us

2:51:00hours be or the weekend uh before the meeting. We can do better than that. Thank you >> Mr. Mayor. >> Mr. I would argue argue against the postponement. I agree with Dr. Renie

2:51:15that we have two weeks and then a opportunity at that point if we're not ready. Um I don't really see the benefit of the postponement at this point. Um the same

2:51:28work can be done with the potential for a postponement later if needed. So I'm going to vote against the uh postponement. Thank you. >> Dr. Aldrich. >> Mayor Collins for you. I'm going to be

2:51:39voting for the postponement and part of that um is a large part of that is because we are headed into um a holiday season and I think that there is a lot

2:51:51of information gathering to be done um especially around noise. Um I know that there um are some experts that um we would have access to um for a work session or for more information. And I

2:52:07think that um looking forward at the calendar um while I recognize that our soontobe good senator has done a lot of work on this and he he may not be here for the final uh harrah. um if we

2:52:21postpone this, I think that we need to um make sure we have all the information and I just don't know that we can get it done um prior to public services committee meeting next Monday.

2:52:38>> All right, we have a motion to postpone for two weeks. Any last comments, >> Mr. Mayor? >> Yes, sir. Dr. Ernie, >> I just want to say I would respectfully

2:52:47disagree with my colleague from W one. This was not This information was this was introduced two weeks ago. So, and it was discussed at public service committee. So, it's

2:52:59not like we have been all of a sudden been piled information on us at the last minute. We've had two weeks to look at it. We have two more weeks to look at it. So, I just um

2:53:11as I said, I just in my opinion that I disagree with that interpretation. Thank you, >> Mr. Mayor, >> Mr. Wolf, >> um, we just got Leeds memo today. Today.

2:53:29>> Now, we did have a discussion. I went to the planning commission meetings and they've uh tussled over this. Um, but and leads is purporting to represent the data center industry.

2:53:44Uh and so and and we owe them a lot of respect and just listening to the comments um tonight. I mean just those comments alone are significant and they're not ones that are going to

2:54:02take you know we should just sort of think we can do and and this week is we're all tied up this week or a lot of us are. I'm going to the business alliance. Um I've run this all through

2:54:15AI. I can send you the results of that, but there's lots more we could do. I would I I think we can benefit from it two week and you know I mean I have

2:54:24personally say I I I do want to express my um thanks to uh Dr. Renie. Uh when this initially came to us I was sort of miffed but I appreciate you know the the

2:54:38thought that that you've given to that. Um and um and and what this tells us is that this is going to be a longer process than we all thought and particularly the noise which is probably

2:54:52you know the most sensitive issues issue in a lot of respects. Um and but we want to make sure we get it right and I think two weeks postponement would help us now

2:55:06and um then see where we are. Thank you, Dr. Evans. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm gonna vote against the amend. Yeah, the amendment for this reason. >> Postponement.

2:55:21>> Postponement. I'm sorry. Um I believe that we need to take the sound out, just pull that out completely um at the next public service committee meeting. But we've been so adamant that

2:55:39we will get something on the books for for parameters, guidelines, whatever you want to call it for data centers. And I keep saying we can walk and chew gum and

2:55:54I know I keep getting hit in the head with that statement. However, I believe we can. Um, so I would like us to go to move forward with it. um so that we hear

2:56:07it at the public service committee, but then with the intention of pulling the sound out and pushing forward the water and the NDA and some of those things that we know have been hot button

2:56:21issues. So for that reason, I'm going to vote against the postponement. >> Any other comments? All right, we have a motion to postpone for two weeks. All

2:56:32those in favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. I >> those opposed >> no >> Dr. Rainey Dr. Emmens and Mr. Craver's no are nos the postponement passes um we're on to the next item

2:56:48next item is number 19 ordinance first reading creating section 5.7.1 data centers of the Cheyenne unified development code to establish specific use standards for data centers

2:57:00>> we'll send this one to the public services committee >> ordinance first reading amending sections 1.4 4.3 1.4.4 and 5.1.4 and creating section 5.7.14

2:57:11of the Cheyenne Unified Development Code to create definitions and established use allowances for power generation facilities. >> This one will also go to public services committee.

2:57:20>> Ordinance first reading amending various sections of chapter 6.08 animal care and control regulations generally of the municipal code of the city of Cheyenne,

2:57:28Wyoming to exempt farm and farm related operations. We'll send this one to the public services committee. >> Ordinance first reading amending sections 8.60.30

2:57:39nuisances prohibited and 8.60.35 care and maintenance of right-ofway adjacent to private properties of the municipal code of the city of Cheyenne, Wyoming to exempt farm and farm related

2:57:49operations. >> This one will also go to the public services committee. >> Next item is number 28B on page five. Contract modification number two to contract number 7782 between the city of

2:58:04Cheyenne and DHM Design Corporation for the Reed Avenue Rail Corridor Design Project. >> All right. We have before us a contract modification on our council goal for um

2:58:15bringing Reed Avenue to bear and we'll ask anybody in the audience want to speak to this. >> All right. Hearing none, Mr. Escoel. >> Mr. Mr. Mayor, the recommendation of the

2:58:26finance committee is to approve an amount not to exceed 1,166,647 and I so move. >> Second. >> Seconded by Mr. uh White. Comments from members of the governing body on the

2:58:40contract modification. Mr. Leborn. >> Mr. [clears throat] Mayor, I speak in favor of this because of the complexity and the longstanding issues we've had in

2:58:52terms of putting this whole project together and getting the approval of the Burlington Northern Railroad and the support of the uh individuals who have invested and are uh ready for this to

2:59:09proceed. Um, also as the chairman of the Reed Avenue steering committee, we met and looked at this issue and uh, strongly recommended as well as I think everyone

2:59:22got a letter from the downtown development authority and their support for it. So while recognizing it is a very very substantial uh contract modification,

2:59:36I believe that when you look at it in to uh Mr. Cobb has added uh important pieces that probably weren't considered early enough. And I would have to say

2:59:51that uh having been involved in this for many years, it's very unfortunate that the visionaries long ago uh didn't really understand that their vision was going to take this

3:00:06kind of work. But uh it's definitely a project that's going to be very beneficial. And I'd point out that uh in the entire west side here, we're seeing

3:00:18some real strong indications that things are no longer the way they were. And by that, I would particularly point to the apartment complex nearby. So, uh there is substantial

3:00:34uh investment here and it's time for us to press on to collude to conclusion. Thank you, >> Mr. White. >> I'm sorry. >> You know, Mr. >> Mr. Secret, >> Mr. Mayor, I'm I'm not necessarily

3:00:51opposed to this. I just would like to get some clarification on the on the record. I have read in the paper that there's been some significant progress with the Burlington Northern, but I

3:01:01really don't know what that consists of. Um, I did read that they want to use this as some type of a model project. Um, does that mean they're willing to contribute or what are they what are

3:01:14they willing to do to help with that? Um, maybe maybe an update is what I really need. What has changed in the last pick a number um 6 months uh that warrants this type of funding.

3:01:28>> Do you want me to start? So, we had a Mr. Cobb and I had a meeting with uh a number of members from the Burlington Northern Railroad and what what I learned at that meeting was

3:01:40they're all in to let us do this project. Um they have a a timeline of uh approvals. They have to go through the uh the plans if they want to approve them all in in

3:01:52mass and then uh at that point um we should be free to uh pay for the rideway or the use of the rideway and then be able to construct the project on the eastern side of the uh

3:02:05of the railroad as we kind of envisioned it in the beginning. Uh, and we've also talked about needing some pedestrian connectivity on the western side of it.

3:02:14And so, uh, it looks like they're going to allow us to be able to do that. What I heard from them is, uh, I wouldn't say it's excitement, but, uh, approval for

3:02:22our vision for what we want to do and their willingness to allow that to go through uh, forward. Um, but uh, during that meeting when I asked about money,

3:02:31um, the money we're going to get from the FRA and the money we bring into it, I think will be the the money that we will have for this project. So, Mr. Mayor, if we approve this funding,

3:02:42is this the final piece to get the approval, >> Mr. Cobb? I'm not sure how to answer that. >> Mayor, I I I would throw you to Councilman Crave. I would say that um to

3:02:58guarantee final approval, but there's a couple of more steps, and the mayor alluded to it earlier. There's a construction and maintenance agreement that we have to execute with the

3:03:06railroad. Um approval of the plans, yes. But as far as final final money, no sir, because we will have to, as the mayor alluded to, compensate the railroad for

3:03:18any utilities that we place in the ground in their rideway and also any use. So that would include the pedestrian c the prominad on the east side and any pedestrian connection on

3:03:30the west side. I hope that answers your question, sir. >> Mr. Cob, would it be fair to say that what we're trying to do here is to get all the planning documents and

3:03:38everything ready to go so when the final approval from the Burlington Northern does happen, we don't have to wait a year for more plans, we'll be ready to

3:03:43execute right away. That's that's really that's really the purpose of this contract model. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay, >> Mr. Mayor. >> Yes, sir. As a followup to President

3:03:55Cra's questions, then um city engineers said that we have to pay BN for the use of the pedestrian walkways and um so my question is that a one-time payment or

3:04:08are we leasing those from the end? >> As I understand it, Dr. Rainey, uh we're having an appraisal done and it'll be a one-time payment and then we'll have that used for I guess use by right

3:04:19forever. >> Okay. But it's a onetime payment. giving us use by right. It's not actually a purchase. >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> Did I say that correctly? >> Mayor, I concur. Yes, sir.

3:04:38>> Mr. Secret, did you have comments? >> I think we're still a long ways away. Unfortunately, I my understanding is this will get the designs done, but I I still don't have

3:04:54the warm and fuzzies that that this is going to happen in the next 6 months or 12 months or 24 months. Um, and every time we think we've climbed that mountain, there's new

3:05:08new issues. So, um, I I want to be positive. I want to get this done, but it just seems like every time we get to where we think we're really going to make some progress, um the railroad

3:05:23comes back with more and more and more. Two years ago, we didn't know anything about closing for or I didn't about closing for uh streets and and so it just seems like it's a constant

3:05:36drum beat on their side. And so, you know, I'm going I'm going to support this tonight, but I'm I'm cautious and I'm I don't I don't want the public to

3:05:47think that that this is a is a imminent um buildout because I don't think it is at this point. Thank you, >> Mr. Speaker. I I agree. I think we're still a year away from getting approvals

3:05:58from the BNSF. They told us what, six months ago was 18 months to go through this process. I think we still have a year to go through all of their reviews

3:06:06before they're going to issue us the permits to get in the rightway and work. So, um I would concur. However, for the first time since uh I was elected mayor,

3:06:15I actually feel like we're going to get this project done now. um that for the first time I heard from the vice president in charge of these kinds of things from the railroad that they are

3:06:24committed to uh uh to doing the work um to work with us and uh all we have to do is go through the final steps that they've identified and we'll get the permit to be able to work in the

3:06:35rightway and to build this as we've envisioned it on the eastern side. So it's kind of a half a loaf. We wanted to do both sides. Um they want to keep the

3:06:42western side for a uh um a rightaway for them to work on on the tracks. Um but they are going to allow us to be able to put a pedestrian walkway so as people

3:06:52who cannot come across can walk through those closed areas to uh crosswalk and be able to come over to the eastern side. So I I really appreciate what you're saying because it's been for six

3:07:03years now a very frustrating process and for the first time ever I feel like we're we're finally at that point. >> Dr. Mr. Mayor, one other question on the in regard to the four crossings

3:07:16that are being closed. My understanding is that pedestrians will not be allowed to use those or has that been changed? >> Um, as I understand it, uh, Dr. Rainey,

3:07:24there will be no crossing, pedestrian, motorized, or anything. It'll be fenced off completely. Um, I have been arguing that we ought to at least allow people

3:07:31to walk across there. Um, so they're not jumping fences and do we would we could control where they come across, but at this point it's a total closure.

3:07:38>> Yeah, that would make sense, Mr. Mayor pedestrians could at least use it. Otherwise, they're going to have to walk three or four blocks to get >> correct

3:07:44>> actually six if it just looks like they had sir through through you sir. Um Dr. Renie the and I think when the conversations with the railroad that's

3:07:53how we began that discussion about that 8-foot path on the west side. Um the mayor eloquently pointed out to them and he did a great job of doing this to them

3:08:04that uh these folks are going to jump the fence if we don't allow them an access. And so that's when they began to realize that yes indeed we should give you that pedestrian area on the west

3:08:14side so those connections can be made pretty readily. We've got 17th 18th the longest section would be two blocks that someone would have to walk. That does

3:08:22that would be the worst case scenario would be 17th and 18th. Um but that's if you're on the one end or the other um if that makes sense sir. >> Yes Mr. White.

3:08:35>> Thank you mayor through you. Just one quick comment for the benefit of my colleagues. The other thing that BNSF had communicated to us is not only do

3:08:43they uh approve of our vision, but they want to uh utilize this project as a demonstration on um how BNSF can work in collaboration with communities. So they

3:08:59actually want to use this project as an example, which I think is very important and kind of shows that at long last they're they seem to be energized and excited uh by the project as well.

3:09:13>> And maybe just for the people listening in the audience what when this project was put on the uh the ballot in 2017 was on the six penny sales tax ballot uh the

3:09:22founders as Mr. Labbourne likes to call them um uh didn't realize that in 1908 I believe it was the city of Cheyenne gave that rightway to the Colorado Railroad. Well, the successor

3:09:36railroad to that is a Burlington Northern. So, when we went to do this project, we realized we don't have the right to go in in what used to be our own rightway, but it's now theirs. And

3:09:44so, we spent the last 5 years trying to find a consensus with the railroad. And basically what we learned was the railroad has no interest in working with

3:09:52us. But if we could improve safety on the line, that would be the carrot that that they would want to do. And so what they came back to us was and said if you'll close some of the roads that

3:10:01cross Reed Avenue 17th 18th 21st and and Dylan Avenue that that would be enough incentive for them to be able to cooperate and do this project. So we've agreed to close some rightway. I mean

3:10:12there's only a couple hundred cars a day but it's going to be inconvenient for those 200 cars a day that use those roads. And uh and that was the the magic

3:10:19sauce that got us to be able to get to this point. And uh since that time things have been moving along fairly well. So we've understood finally railroad talk which is for a railroad it

3:10:28has to be all about safety and for us it's all about being able to do our project. All right we have a motion before us to uh approve contract modification number

3:10:37two. Uh all those in favor please signify by saying I. >> I. >> Those opposed. >> Mr. Moody is a no. >> The contract modification is approved. >> Next item is number 3A on page six

3:10:52voucher report. >> All right. All right. Is there anybody in the audience or in the on the governing body that would like to speak to the vouchers? All right, Jennifer, let Mr. Miller in.

3:11:06>> Can you hear me? >> Mr. Miller, we can hear you. All righty. >> I'm over here. Um, Mayor Collins, members of the governing body, Charles Miller on item 30A, the

3:11:25voucher report. I have specific questions about the report covering October 17th through November 2nd. I'm not alleging fraud. I'm requesting documentation to distinguish legitimate

3:11:35se possible duplication or inaccurate description. First, page nine. Model one commercial vehicles appears twice for exactly $164,455. and 15 cents. Both entries are dated

3:11:49October 21st. Both descriptions say three 20 passenger buses. The city identifies end in 5 the city identifiers end in 5103 and 5104. Together they total 300 $28,910.30.

3:12:07Are these separate vehicle purchases, installments, accounting allocations, or a duplicated entry? >> Yep. our director of uh that works on the transit is nodding her head yes.

3:12:17>> Oh, okay. Uh well, please identify the original vendor invoices, purchase authorization, vehicle identification numbers, and receiving records. Different city entry numbers do not

3:12:26explain why the amounts and descriptions are identical >> because we bought the identical vehicles twice. >> BLM design group twice for $1,923.75 under contract 8352.

3:12:39Both entries have the same date and description on call drainage engineering services. Their city identifiers ended 4832 and 4833. Please identify the separate task orders, service periods,

3:12:49and original invoices according those charges. Third printed page 12 three plan one architects entries reference contract 8267. Two describe the municipal court and senior buildings.

3:13:01The third describes municipal building renovation design. Does the same contract cover all those projects? Are the descriptions correct? Please identify the authorized scope applicable

3:13:09amendments, project allocations and deliverables supporting payment form printed page 8. Lotus engineering is listed for $12,252.50 under contract 8449 for data center

3:13:20research services. What research was delivered? When was it received? Who accepted it? Where can the public inspect the non-exempt work and how was it used in developing the proposed

3:13:28regulations? Finally, printed page four includes a $10,770 payment to DHM design for the Reed Avenue design contract. Please identify the work covered and distinguish it from

3:13:38the additional scope considered under the contract modification. I recognize that this is a report of transactions and that payments may already have occurred. I'm not asking you to pretend

3:13:45that a report discussion automatically stops completed payment. I'm asking finance to reconcile these identified entries, providing the supporting non-exempt records and explain any

3:13:53correction required. Please retain these questions in the record and identify who will provide the written response. A payment register tells us what was

3:14:00recorded. invoices, contract authority, receiving records, and documented acceptance established what the city actually purchased. The public deserves that connection. Thank you,

3:14:08>> Mr. Mayor. >> Yes. >> Uh Mr. Mayor, I would encourage Mr. Miller to come down and visit with uh Treasurer Lachman. I am sure that she would be more than happy to go through

3:14:22those documents with you if you're really interested in finding out what that information is. Just a thought. >> Thank you. All right. Anybody else on the vouchers on either the governing

3:14:35body or in the audience? >> All right. Next item, please. >> 30B. Announcement of a public hearing to be held November 23rd, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. in city council chambers, 21101 O'Neal

3:14:46Avenue, Cheyenne, Wyoming, and via electronic conference meeting for a bar and grill liquor license application filed with the city clerk's office for Fig in Olive Eats LLC doing business as

3:14:56Fig and Olive, 1719 Central Avenue, Cheyenne, Wyoming. Other business. >> All right. Is there anybody in the audience that'd like to speak to us under other business? Mr. Miller,

3:15:14>> can you hear me? >> We can hear you. >> Mayor Collins, members of the governing body, Charles Miller, under other business. My closing comment is about

3:15:24follow through. A meeting can end with a vote while leaving the public's most important questions unanswered. I'm asking you to make sure those questions

3:15:32do not disappear when we adjourn. First, publish the actual text of your decisions. Where an ordinance was amended, publish the version incorporating the amendments. Where an

3:15:42item was postponed. Identify the pending version and the next consideration date. Where a substitute was proposed, distinguish it from language actually

3:15:50adopted. The public should not have to reconstruct the law from a recording of motions at the microphone. Second, connect assurances to enforceable provisions. When the city says a farm

3:16:00can continue operating, identify what that means for its actual activities. Livestock, seasonal production, farm stands, parking, fencing, and ordinary maintenance. Explain which activities

3:16:11are permitted by right. Which require approval and which depend on existing use protections. If an answer remains unresolved, say so. An honest limitation

3:16:20is more useful than an assurance that later proves incomplete. Third, make the postponements productive. During the discussion of noise language and the proposed

3:16:29substitute, I requested a comparison explaining what would remain and what would change and what might no longer be covered. Please provide that comparison

3:16:38before the item returns. Residents deser deserve an opportunity to examine the proposed rules while their comments can still influence the outcome, not merely learn the final interpretation

3:16:49afterwards. Fourth, answer the voucher questions with records. The report contains two model one entries with identical amounts and descriptions and two GLM drainage engineering entries

3:16:59with matching amounts, dates, and descriptions. Those similarities are not proof of improper payment. They are specific reasons to reconcile the entries against the original invoice and

3:17:08supporting records. Please identify who will respond and provide the explanation in writing. Finally, make the public record usable. Retain the ordinance versions, proposed substitutes,

3:17:17supporting reports, public submissions, and media. Identify the documents relied upon for the decisions. I'm not claiming that asking questions automatically

3:17:26establishes a legal violation. I'm asking for a process that allows the public to test the answers. Disagreement with a decision does not make a resident

3:17:33an obstacle to the government. Scrutiny is part of an accountable government. The standard I'm requesting is straightforward, clear rules, identifiable costs, documented

3:17:41decisions, and written follow-through. Please do not let tonight's unresolved questions become the next meeting's forgotten questions. Assign responsibility. Publish the answers.

3:17:50Correct any errors openly. The strongest answer to public criticism is a record that stands up to examination. Thank you. >> Mr. Miller, I'm going to remind you

3:17:57you're going to call me, right? >> Okay. Anybody else on the audience hearing? None. Mr. White, >> Mr. Mayor through you. Uh, thank you. And um just wanted to let everybody know

3:18:14that there's a ribbon cutting this Thursday evening uh at the West End Flats across the uh Caddy Corner from Black Tooth on a long- aaited project that both council and the

3:18:29public have been waiting for. um 101 unit apartment building that the Stencil Development Group um was able I I guess it's complete now if we're having a

3:18:41ribbon cutting. And uh I remember when that project came up for a vote, the gentleman from Stencil said without the tax increment financing uh initiative that

3:18:58the council had passed a few years ago, that project would not have been able to move forward. So um I want to credit uh my colleague Dr. Renie. He's only got a

3:19:09few meetings left, but he and I worked very hard on that TIFF um that TIFF resolution and and um ordinance so that we could do projects like this. And what

3:19:22you're seeing um and what we're all going to see Thursday night is a project um that that was the is really the whole reason why we uh brought the tax

3:19:34increment financing to the council for a vote. the previous ad if Mark you if you remember the previous administration had no desire to move forward with it. Um

3:19:45Brendan Ames had worked uh former chief economic uh officer for the city had worked with Dr. Renie and I uh to bring that forward and um previous administration had no desire but um Mr.

3:20:00mayor, you did um you had told us both that you were familiar with TIFF because of um the work that your sister had done with it down in Colorado and so now

3:20:11we're seeing these great projects here. Truly transformative for downtown and for the west edge of Cheyenne. So very excited about Thursday night, >> Thursday. >> It is Thursday from 4 to 7.

3:20:24>> Ribbon cutting is at 5 >> and is open to the public. >> The ribbon cutting I think is at 5 o'clock. Mr. Secret, >> Mr. Mayor, I just want to u remind everyone that that Wednesday is uh

3:20:37Veterans Day and I want to say thank you. Thank you to all all of our veterans that are employees and all the veterans in our community. Obviously, we're a military community, so we have a

3:20:49a lot of uh veterans here and I I just want to acknowledge you. Thank you, >> Dr. Aldridge. Uh, Mayor Collins through you. Uh, just a reminder that we will be

3:20:59having council and coffee in Ward 3 on Saturday, November 21st. Um, and it will be from 8 to 10 a.m. because we are having uh an exciting ribbon cutting in

3:21:10Ward 3. A Dunkin Donuts is going to finally open and so they're doing their ribbon cutting at 10 a.m. that morning. Also, the Silent Witness March, uh, which is brought to, um, to our

3:21:20community by the Zanta Club, will be on, um, November 21st also at 10:00 a.m. starting at the Wyoming State Supreme Court. So, would love to have people

3:21:30join that event as well. But, I think a I think a lot of great things are happening in Cheyenne. If you looked at the chambers uh, eblast today, I believe

3:21:40that there were five or seven uh, ribbon cutings going on this week. Um, it's a huge number. quite honestly of a lot of really small businesses, not necessarily

3:21:50large corporate partners. And so I think that's exciting um to see the services and the businesses coming. And contrary to popular belief, they are not all

3:21:58banks, coffee shops, or car washes. [laughter] >> Anyone else? >> All right. Again, I echo Mr. C. Graves comments on Veterans Day. Thank you for all who have served. And with that,

3:22:13we're adjourned.