Transcript
AI TRANSCRIPT
This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person — it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.
[1:48]
Okay, we've got you. Thank you.
[1:52]
All right, I call this regularly meeting and planning zoning commission to order on Wednesday, January 13th, 2026 at 6 p.m.
[1:59]
May we have a roll call, please?
[2:00]
Sure, can. Will you make it? Sure.
[2:01]
We're Michelle Burluson. Here.
[2:03]
David Case. Here.
[2:04]
We can go see him. Here. We're ahead, done. Here.
[2:06]
Amy Minks. Here.
[2:07]
David Spell. Here, we're right here.
[2:09]
We have a call.
[2:10]
I had on my schedule today that this would be over by eight, but it looks like we're here much longer than that.
[2:14]
So I want to ask everybody to please sign us for cell phones that
[2:17]
commission may only discuss I was posted on it's nice agenda, all the
[2:20]
anchors you forward to the staff, the commission was strive to ensure
[2:23]
the meetings are conducted in a courteous manner and an atmosphere
[2:26]
free of intimidation, defamation, personal and souls profanity or
[2:29]
threats of violence.
[2:30]
This now brings us a citizen comment period, we have John Mayberry,
[2:36]
Michael Wayland, David Swank, Jose de Zano, if you please make
[2:41]
away the podium,
[2:49]
this sir, we have three minutes.
[2:50]
Good evening, Chair, commissioners, John Mayberry, the applicant for the Data Center Project at 904 Francis Harris Lane.
[2:57]
I want to speak specifically about jobs.
[2:59]
We'll kind of jobs.
[3:00]
This project creates who fills them and why their impact extends well beyond the construction site.
[3:06]
This project is expected to generate approximately 1,200 skilled construction jobs over several years.
[3:13]
These are not temporary one-off positions.
[3:15]
This is sustained phase construction, requiring electricians, linemen,
[3:19]
HVAC technicians, controlled specialists, concrete crews, project managers,
[3:24]
over an extended build period.
[3:26]
At full buildout permanent onsite staff is estimated at 50 jobs,
[3:29]
whose roles span highly skilled technical positions,
[3:32]
such as critical systems, technicians, and network operations,
[3:36]
as well as many more security maintenance and facilities operations workers
[3:39]
that would be employed contractually.
[3:41]
But the most important point is who does this work?
[3:43]
That's an reconstruction in operations where I heavily on licensed skilled trades, particularly
[3:48]
electrical workers.
[3:49]
These projects are designed to be staffed locally, because local labor reduces risk, improves
[3:54]
response times, and builds long-term operational knowledge.
[3:58]
That means real opportunities for local electricians, apprentices, and technicians to work
[4:02]
on some of the most complex electrical infrastructure in the state.
[4:06]
This kind of project is career defining, working on high-voltage substations, redundant power
[4:11]
systems and mission critical infrastructure,
[4:13]
accelerate experience requirements and opens the door
[4:16]
to master electrician licensure,
[4:18]
supervisory roles, and long-term at that advancement.
[4:22]
These are resume building projects
[4:24]
that raise earning potential for decades,
[4:26]
not just for the duration of construction.
[4:28]
Beyond direct jobs, there is a significant layer
[4:30]
of ancillary and supplier employment.
[4:33]
Data centers depend on local vendors from materials,
[4:36]
logistics, equipment servicing, security services,
[4:39]
landscaping, and ongoing maintenance.
[4:40]
these dollars circulate locally supporting small businesses and regional suppliers year after year.
[4:46]
Finally, there's the opportunity this creates for education and workforce pipelines.
[4:50]
Projects like this open the door for partnerships with the School District and Texas State.
[4:54]
For internships and technical training to apply an engineering IT facility management and energy systems coursework.
[5:00]
Data Centers increasingly serve as real-world laboratories for power management, cooling systems, and digital infrastructure, exactly the kind of disciplines that Texas State teaches.
[5:10]
Data Center for Structure doesn't just support servers, it enables advanced manufacturing, life sciences, financial services, logistics technology, and software companies that require reliable power and connectivity.
[5:20]
For a city-like San Marcos, that infrastructure raises the floor for economic development and opens the door for business development within the city and region.
[5:27]
I expect we will be hearing a lot more tonight from local voices who this work matters to very much.
[5:33]
Thank you.
[5:34]
Thank you Mr. Mayberry.
[5:36]
Michael Wailing.
[5:37]
Thank you.
[5:38]
Michael Wailing.
[5:39]
100 Congress lost from Texas.
[5:41]
It passed meetings.
[5:42]
We spent a lot of time walking through technical details and we're always available to do that again.
[5:46]
But tonight I want to focus on one main point.
[5:49]
We showed up.
[5:50]
We listened and we put real enforceable commitments into this project, not just promises.
[5:55]
In your backup, you'll see a restrictive covenant that reflects direct feedback from planning and zoning, city council, staff and residents.
[6:04]
That covenant runs with the land, meeting, meaning it's binding not just on the current owner, but on any future owner or operator.
[6:11]
And those commitments are meaningful.
[6:13]
It cuts the approved water usage for this property in half.
[6:16]
It requires stormwater performance 10% better than code.
[6:19]
It limits impervious cover below that of what L I zoning would otherwise allow.
[6:24]
It sets a flat 75 decibel noise limit in all times, which is better than code.
[6:30]
And it commits the project to pursuing lead certification, which we have already registered for.
[6:36]
So these are not minimum standards. They are above code protections that are written directly into a legally binding document.
[6:43]
Now I want to address an enforcement because that's where some concerns are raised last time here.
[6:48]
As a city, a city attorney can confirm, this covenant is enforceable by injunctive relief.
[6:54]
That means violations are not handled through warning letters or fines.
[6:58]
They are addressed through immediate court-ordered compliance.
[7:02]
Operationally, that is the strongest enforcement tool available for a data center.
[7:08]
An injunction could mean forced equipment changes, suspension of operations, or shut down
[7:13]
of certain systems.
[7:14]
That kind of uncertainty is unacceptable in this industry.
[7:17]
These facilities serve hospitals, utilities, public safety systems, and enterprise networks.
[7:24]
So compliance with the RC is not optional.
[7:26]
It is mandatory.
[7:27]
Compliance is engineered into the design and operation of the facility from day one.
[7:33]
And importantly, this level of enforceability only exists because this project is inside the city limits.
[7:42]
Subject to this covenant and city authority.
[7:46]
Not out in the ATJ where none of these protections would apply.
[7:50]
This project won't stress city emergency services, park systems or street maintenance.
[7:55]
It's not in the floodplain or in a residential area.
[7:58]
Instead, it will generate long-term revenue to support city services while operating under tighter restrictions than city code requires.
[8:06]
So when we talk about accountability, this is not about trust, it's about the law and operational
[8:12]
reality.
[8:13]
We've done the work, we've put in real commitments, these commitments are on paper, and we're
[8:17]
asking for your support for a project that is both highly regulated and highly beneficial
[8:22]
to the city.
[8:23]
Thank you, and obviously we're all here to answer more questions.
[8:27]
Thank you.
[8:32]
Yes, there we have three minutes.
[8:33]
Yes.
[8:33]
Davis, Mike Dallas, Texas, my background is primarily in the Electric Utility Industry for the
[8:37]
last 35 years served as engineering operations as well as CEO for many of those years as well
[8:43]
multiple utilities.
[8:45]
I want to address electricity used directly because a lot of what's been said about data
[8:49]
centers and the grid does not reflect how the Texas electric system actually works.
[8:55]
First and most importantly, this project will not increase electric rates for residents.
[8:59]
Data centers are classified as high load factor customers, meaning they use power steadily
[9:04]
in sharp peaks. In Texas, grid stress and price volatility are driven by peak demand,
[9:13]
scarcity, not by steady predictable usage. In fact, predictable demand improves forecasting,
[9:20]
improves dispatch efficiency and supports long-term planning. From a utility standpoint,
[9:26]
that kind of load is easier, not harder to serve. Second, this project does not reduce
[9:32]
availability for residents or businesses. In Texas, large new loads are required to fund the
[9:38]
infrastructure needed to serve them. That typically includes new or expanded subsations, redundant
[9:44]
high voltage feeds, relay protection, coordinated with ERCOT and transmission upgrades. All that
[9:50]
infrastructure is paid for by the developer, not by ratepayers, and it becomes part of the broader
[9:55]
electric system that future growth can rely on.
[9:58]
In other words, growth pays.
[10:00]
That's how the Texas grid is designed to work. As someone with more than thirty-five years of energy utility, I can say this clearly, a well-planned data center builds out a tremendous amount of high capacity, high quality infrastructure that both the utility and the community benefit from long after construction is complete. It also provides stable, reliable demand, which is incredibly important for long-term system planning and race stability. And it's important to be precise about responsibility here.
[10:30]
Interconnection approval, system planning, and reliability standards are governed by a
[10:34]
ricott, the Public Utility Commission, and the Electric Provider, not by the developer.
[10:39]
This project only moves forward after those entities confirm that adequate capacity exist
[10:46]
or is being built to serve it safely and reliably.
[10:49]
So the conclusion is straightforward and supported by how the grid is actually structured.
[10:53]
This project does not burden the electric system.
[10:55]
It strengthens it by funding infrastructure and proving predictability and expanding long-term capacity all at private expense.
[11:05]
Thank you for your time.
[11:06]
Thank you, sir.
[11:13]
Hello, ma'am.
[11:13]
I'm Jose Lusano.
[11:14]
And I live here in the city of Samarcos.
[11:18]
So I know there's a lot of big arguments which what's better if it's the single-family development or the data center.
[11:24]
And what I do want to point out is that this property is located at a unique area where both resources needed which is water and power are available.
[11:35]
This property is also located right at the edge of the city limits.
[11:39]
The water provider is CCSUD, crystal clear, not the city as a mark was, which means that if an opportunity arises,
[11:48]
A data center could be built right next door using the exact same resources and the CD would receive zero benefit out of it.
[11:57]
The accounting has fewer regulations when it comes to building permits.
[12:01]
The CD, on the other hand, reviews, projectings, much more greater detail starting from the building permit from some water and anything related to environmental.
[12:11]
So I have read the restrict the covenant and it includes the following requires plus whatever
[12:17]
the CD requires already.
[12:19]
They put restrictions on water, which is great.
[12:22]
They also put storm water 10% more retention than what the CD requires to make sure that
[12:27]
there is no flooding with the property neighbors.
[12:30]
They are also requiring TCQ rules to be treated at 80% total suspended solids, which is not
[12:35]
required in this area and is not required by the county either.
[12:38]
and it's also pursuing lead certification and their compliance with the no-slable
[12:43]
ornaments from the city. So from my perspective, this approach offers the best of both worlds.
[12:50]
The developers are going above and beyond by adding restrictions through this
[12:53]
covenant to address any environmental concerns while at the same time the
[12:58]
city gains a significant expansion of its tax base. That's it. Thank you guys.
[13:04]
Thank you, Mr. Lezano.
[13:07]
Going forward, if we miss anybody, we will bring the names up at the end, so I don't
[13:10]
want to think anybody is going to be overlooked if you're not here at this moment.
[13:13]
We will keep going in order.
[13:15]
We have Jennifer Lindsay, Cares Blackstone, Patrick Blackstone, and Mike Martin.
[13:24]
Chairman, I may just, we will quick ask everyone online if you're not speaker, I haven't
[13:28]
been called on if you can please mute your mics and cut your video until we call on you.
[13:33]
Appreciate that.
[13:34]
Thank you.
[13:40]
And we have three minutes and it's time starts when you start speaking and say your name.
[13:45]
Jennifer Lindsay, 312 Valley Acres Drive, New Bronsils, Hayes County.
[13:50]
Good evening.
[13:51]
I'm here to speak out against agenda items 4 and 5, and to persuade members to vote no on these items.
[13:58]
On October 15, 2024, the Samarcus City Council adopted a comprehensive plan that established the goals and vision for the future of Samarcus.
[14:08]
Over the next 20 to 30 years, this document required years of diligent thought by experts
[14:13]
and community members to develop.
[14:16]
A guiding principle set forth in the comprehensive plan labeled strategic and complementary
[14:21]
states, Samarkis strives to ensure the development adds to the greater whole of the community,
[14:28]
and that the long-term impacts of development are considered in short-term decision-making.
[14:33]
I do not see how P&Z members can reconcile this principle with documented reports showing
[14:40]
the devastating impacts to people, water, and power grid resources by data centers.
[14:46]
The existing preferred scenario, conservation cluster, identifies areas where development
[14:51]
would be discouraged over the life of the comprehensive plant, and what development that
[14:56]
as occurred within the conservation and reservation areas.
[15:00]
Should be low impact to the natural environment by using a variety of development techniques and strategies.
[15:08]
Again, I do not see how P&C members can reconcile these statements with these two proposed PSAs when they run completely contrary to each other.
[15:19]
Highlander LLC received accommodation for the 136 acres with a PSA already.
[15:26]
This acreage was changed from conservation cluster to CD2.5 to build single family homes
[15:33]
on.
[15:35]
Not being happy with that business decision does not mean Sam Marcus City staff, council members,
[15:41]
P&Z members, or community members must bear the burden of correcting it for him.
[15:46]
Concern of our people living next to a power plant is understandable, but if people choose to buy homes there, they make a choice based on knowing there is a power plant there.
[15:57]
A decision sum of current residents were never fortunate to be granted as we already lived out there before the power plant.
[16:03]
If you, yes, for these agenda items, four and five, you will be creating a hub of heavy industry, a domino effect.
[16:11]
It's your job to implement the comprehensive plan and to adhere to its guiding principles.
[16:19]
Even the 2025 strategic plan states implement the comprehensive plan.
[16:25]
Engage residents protect neighborhoods natural, cultural, and historic resources.
[16:30]
Residents have been engaged in saying no to this development and requested PSAs.
[16:36]
Vote no for your community and your city.
[16:39]
Thank you.
[16:43]
Thank you, Ms. Lindsey.
[16:54]
Wait, please.
[16:55]
Okay.
[16:57]
I can do it all night long.
[16:58]
So I ask that you please be respectful out there,
[17:00]
keep the clapping to the minimum,
[17:01]
and please allow the people here to speak.
[17:04]
You have me three minutes, and please state your name.
[17:06]
Hi, my name is Karis Blackson.
[17:09]
I have been a Hayes County resident, my entire life,
[17:12]
and I am completely against the Clapper's AI data center
[17:14]
being built in San Francisco.
[17:17]
I'm very concerned about the noise and air pollution
[17:19]
the state of center will bring as well as the extensive water usage needed for cooling
[17:23]
the servers. I am very concerned that these issues along with the many others that come
[17:28]
with the state of center will harm the city of St. Marcus and other cities. I understand that
[17:34]
many aspects, the construction of the state of center, things have already begun and hands up
[17:39]
and tied, but I hope that this zoning change will be denied and the land being developed now
[17:44]
can remain a conservation land to help preserve as much of the St. Marcus I have grown up in.
[17:50]
Thank you, Ms. Baxter.
[17:59]
Hello, I'm Mike Martin.
[18:01]
I want the first thank you guys and all of you all that you do.
[18:03]
They're from San Marcos.
[18:06]
It's so amazing.
[18:07]
It's an amazing thing to do.
[18:09]
But I'm having the speech film,
[18:12]
some of that high accurate read memory for me in opposition to this.
[18:19]
Thank you, Mr. Martin.
[18:22]
Did we have Patrick Blackstone?
[18:24]
Sir, if you please come forward.
[18:26]
I'm reading on Mr. Martin's behalf.
[18:29]
Good, I apologize, I'm so sorry.
[18:32]
It's okay.
[18:34]
Good evening.
[18:34]
I've lived in and around San Marcos since I came to college here in 1965
[18:39]
and taught school for 50 years, 35 plus in San Marcos.
[18:44]
It is my hometown.
[18:46]
I am one of the neighbors of the proposed data center
[18:49]
and it is my home of 25 years.
[18:51]
I want to go on the record that I am truly against to the proposed data center for obvious reasons.
[18:58]
The environmental effect of it would be devastating, devastating to my place, my home, and all of the neighbors around it.
[19:08]
The environmental effects of an astronomically large plant would be catastrophic to the environment and the people living anywhere near it.
[19:16]
By the heat, it would create the stress it would put on our water supply, the aquifer, and the stress it would put on our electrical power.
[19:25]
I can't understand why the city would approve and annex a plant that basically does not benefit the community, and that the neighbors disapprove of.
[19:36]
Thank you.
[19:37]
You cannot apologize for that.
[19:43]
So if you just date your name, you got three minutes.
[19:45]
Good evening.
[19:46]
My name is Patrick Blackstone.
[19:48]
I've been a Samarkis resident for 11 years.
[19:51]
And I would like to say that I am not in favor of the construction of the A.A.
[19:55]
Identisator, Data Center, and Samarkis.
[19:57]
Thank you for your time.
[19:58]
Thank you for your time.
[20:00]
If we could have Tory Martin, Lydia Rodriguez, Luke Craft, and Highett
[20:11]
Cronfell, QUR, UNFUL, I apologize.
[20:18]
Tory Martin, 13-0 on your pick road, New Bromwell's Texas, Hayes County. Once again, I am here to speak against the data center on tonight's agenda.
[20:26]
The zoning conservation cluster states, development that does occur within conservation and reserve areas should be low impacts the natural environment.
[20:34]
Buckle up because I'm going to talk fast because I have a lot to say as the immediate
[20:37]
neighbor I am very educated in what it is like who live in this neighborhood. I can tell
[20:41]
you we are ready to experience regular brownouts and our water should off monthly for hours
[20:46]
at a time. From 18-wilers driving down our roads, breaking our pipes, resulting in receiving
[20:51]
boil water notices to have to wait for the bacteria to leave our lines before we can resume
[20:56]
our water consumption. This being said, Francis Harris wrote is not structurally
[21:00]
down to stand the estimated 3 to 5 years, the weighted construction equipment on this road,
[21:05]
resulting in more of the town's chalk dollars to constantly fixing the road. We are scared
[21:09]
to not have water. Five metal three-store structures that will be a radiating heat are electricity
[21:14]
bills will go up. Our units are going to be working harder and less efficiently than before
[21:19]
because of the brownouts and costing us more money. I hate to think of what this will do to
[21:23]
our livestock, which my neighbors and I all depend on financially. We are ready seeing a mysterious
[21:29]
deaths in horses, sterile cattle in horses, not breeding, not producing calves, or foals,
[21:34]
near-data centers. And when they breed, will they be developing properly in the womb,
[21:39]
horses can hear heartbeat from four feet away. So yes, their behavior would change from hearing
[21:43]
an industrial site being developed feet away from them, and will hear the frequencies we cannot daily.
[21:50]
Will they become dangerous to ride? When I use them for jobs because of this, and obviously
[21:55]
complete neglect to the wildlife that doesn't have much rural land less.
[21:59]
Let's talk about flooding. It's not on the floodplain, but everything below that hilltop is.
[22:03]
And all are ready to drain down on us on your creek road, which is all in the floodplain.
[22:08]
But you cover that hilltop with 70% concrete. It's really going to come down into our homes and
[22:12]
into our ponds that are livestock drink out of. And then I swim in our wildlife will be transporting
[22:18]
from whatever is in their attention ponds to ours. And that's just some of the way. These forever
[22:22]
chemicals are going to get into our property and our wells and our water and us and in our livestock and spread.
[22:28]
It will not be confined to their 200 acres. They will bleed all over impacting the neighbors.
[22:35]
We have heard many times in this room that conservation cluster is just a placeholder.
[22:39]
My neighbors and I are not a placeholder. These are our homes, our ranches, and our livelihood.
[22:44]
And most have been there for generations. We are not a placeholder for you to play with.
[22:49]
We're agricultural, and we're raising your cattle that you depend on, you depend on a clean water and clean food.
[22:56]
You cannot depend on a data center.
[23:00]
Thank you, Ms. Martin.
[23:09]
I'll do craft through six credit avenues, same work as Texas.
[23:15]
I'd like to highlight some concerns raised in the previous meeting mainly the cost associated with this project.
[23:21]
I'll be reading from some statistics source from the National Telecommunication and Information Administration,
[23:28]
the Alliance for Affordable Energy and the International Energy Agency. According to the National
[23:35]
Telecommunications and Information Administration, the need for data centers is expected to increase
[23:41]
by 9% each year and so at least 2030. By 2035, data centers, US electricity demand is expected to
[23:50]
double compared to today. In Louisiana, currently, the Alliance for Affordable Energy is challenging
[23:55]
that is Louisiana data center, along with energy, Louisiana's bid to build three new gas
[24:01]
power plants to support it.
[24:06]
At the previous meeting, an issue was raised on how code would be enforced if the neighboring
[24:11]
co-satua expand or broke their promise. I think many people here are scared. I think people
[24:17]
are fearful of change, especially such rapid change.
[24:23]
According to the International Energy Agency, the US accounted for the largest share of global
[24:29]
data center electricity consumption in 2024 at 45%.
[24:34]
People in favor of the state of center have argued that Mayberry offers a better solution
[24:39]
than those in Louisiana, in Tennessee, in Virginia and across the country.
[24:45]
But so those who say, there won't be more after Mayberry, there will be.
[24:48]
This is a watershed moment for Sandmark is because if one day the center is built, there will be more
[24:55]
Especially when our state and federal government offer incredible tax cuts
[25:00]
For data center of which the cost falls on the taxpayers, I'm urging this committee to reconsider
[25:05]
there is much more value in this land. Thank you.
[25:09]
Thank you, spacecraft.
[25:17]
I outcome full, 16-0-4-old, Rancho 12.
[25:21]
For months we have been coming to advocate for our town and quality of life. Since our calls have
[25:26]
been falling on mostly willfully deaf ears, I come to you with your own handbook
[25:30]
values to point out the many reasons of ODE against the data center is a vote in favor of the existing strategic plan you all released in 2025.
[25:40]
There are five goals of the strategic plan I will address each goal and the related outcome to make my points.
[25:47]
Quality of life and sense of place, outcome A.
[25:50]
Out the gate, outcome A of our first goal is negated by our ongoing discussion and retaining this proposal.
[25:57]
To amend the comprehensive plan and the outline it provided within a year and a half of its tenure,
[26:03]
shows a blatant lack of commitment to this goal by the staff, management and the majority of the council of the city.
[26:10]
Outcome B is to engage residents.
[26:12]
We have been engaged in promoting our own sense of belonging while being misled by city staff and other members of council
[26:18]
that this proposal would bring us benefits.
[26:21]
A continued relationship with a party who continues to ignore and minimize feedback and put an engagement is not a healthy one.
[26:28]
Are you truly following the strategic plan?
[26:31]
Two, economic vitality.
[26:33]
Outcome A, state's little utilize the city's comprehensive plan and other master plans as guarding principles.
[26:39]
Is this really what's taking place when you're so quick to consider making exceptions for one special interest?
[26:44]
Is this truly your intention when you're not asking the hard questions?
[26:47]
advocating for your constituents, ensuring their future quality of life and only basing your
[26:52]
hope on thin promises of potential financial gain while not taking into account the devastating
[26:58]
financial, ecological, and infrastructural consequences of this decision.
[27:03]
This will further drive the wedge of financial disparity in our town.
[27:06]
Are you truly honoring the strategic plan?
[27:09]
Three, public safety, core services, and fiscal excellence, to collaborate to prioritize
[27:14]
an enhanced public safety.
[27:16]
This experience isn't building trust with our city, if anything this prolonged and drawn-out
[27:21]
experience has lessened trust in our community. Staff has not only accommodated, but at
[27:26]
time seem to support the changing narrative and goals of this ill-defined data center. While
[27:30]
hundreds of citizens have repeatedly continued to come out, express themselves with facts and
[27:35]
backup to support their arguments, most of you all have sat up their willfully ignorant
[27:39]
and unwilling to change your thinking or truly think for yourselves.
[27:42]
P.J.M. interconnection in the largest U.S. grid operator that serves over 65 million people
[27:48]
across 13 states. Projects that it will be a full six gigawatts short of its reliability
[27:53]
requirements in 2027 due to the increased demand of data centers. Just last week the
[27:59]
Austin American statesmen reported that a new analysis written by the Office's City Manager
[28:04]
found that data centers have the potential to overwhelm the city system given they need more
[28:08]
power, then, can possibly deliver, be delivered with current infrastructure.
[28:12]
Are you taking the strategic plan into account?
[28:15]
For mobility and connectivity, outcome C. Have you seen how many trips it takes to build
[28:20]
a new data center? Do you think our small town and country roads can take the wear and
[28:25]
tear that a project of this magnitude would require?
[28:28]
There's more.
[28:32]
Listen to us please.
[28:34]
Thank you.
[28:41]
Lydia?
[28:43]
Lydia?
[28:45]
Please just stay here.
[28:47]
Lydia Rodriguez.
[28:48]
Good evening.
[28:49]
My name is Lydia Rodriguez.
[28:51]
A third generation ranch owner.
[28:53]
I'm here to speak in opposition to the proposed data center on Francis Harris.
[28:58]
Sam Marcus is a community defined by its neighborhoods.
[29:01]
It's natural resources and it's responsibility to future generations and this proposal threatens all three of them first of first off water
[29:12]
Central Texas is facing an increasing water drought risk and a water insecurity a
[29:17]
Provena project that adds major industrial water vans is reckless these data centers consume millions of gallons of water
[29:25]
Once water is gone or degraded, we can't get it back
[29:29]
Second, there is the issue of land use and compatibility.
[29:37]
Francis Harris Lane is not an industrial corridor.
[29:40]
It is surrounded by homes, families, and rural character that people move to preserve.
[29:46]
A data center brings massive buildings, constant mechanical noise, substations,
[29:51]
bathtub generators, heavy truck traffic, and around the plant operations.
[29:56]
Residents will deal with noise from cooling systems, generator.
[30:00]
Increased traffic on roads not designed for it and the visual light of warehouse scale buildings. Property values and the peaceful enjoyment of homes are at risk.
[30:10]
Also, a private corporation can benefit while offering very few permanent jobs in return, which leads to my next point. The economic argument does not hold up.
[30:19]
Data centers employ very few people and long-term strain on public resources.
[30:25]
San Marquish should prioritize development that provides real jobs, support local families,
[30:30]
and align with our comprehensive plan. Not projects that extract value while given little back.
[30:36]
Finally, this is about who we are as a city. San Marquish has long-priced itself
[30:42]
on environmental stewardship, thoughtful growth, and a community engagement.
[30:47]
I'm proving this data center on Francis Harris Lane with contradict those values.
[30:52]
Growth is inevitable, but how and where we grow is a choice.
[30:56]
I urge you to listen to the residents who live here, who drink the water, who raise their families here,
[31:02]
and who live with consequences long after developers move on.
[31:06]
I'm asking to please deny this proposal and protect the characters, resources, and future of sandwiches.
[31:12]
Thank you for your time.
[31:14]
Thank you, Ms. Rodriguez.
[31:17]
We now have Charles Secting, Jeremy Hendrix, Cainin Kennedy, Jimmy Neville, and Colt Taylor.
[31:27]
Tell me when to start.
[31:28]
Sir, after you say anemia, three minutes.
[31:30]
Thank you.
[31:30]
Charles Secting, SOECH, T-I-N-G, and I live at 107 Oaks Shadow,
[31:35]
which is just a joining the E.T.J.M. Sandmarkers.
[31:38]
But I've been here 75 years, so other than Mike Martin,
[31:41]
I may be the oldest person here.
[31:43]
I have been here long enough to know that things are going to change.
[31:47]
Nothing we can do to stop that.
[31:49]
But what we have now is, and you've all asked to be on this commission.
[31:52]
Nobody put a gun to your head and said, you've got to be on it.
[31:55]
You chose to be on it, and you have to make hard decisions.
[31:59]
And what are the decisions we have to decide is,
[32:01]
what the sandmark is going to continue to exist?
[32:04]
Because anybody says we're not short of water.
[32:07]
Anybody says we're not in dire danger of not having water
[32:10]
is not dealing with reality.
[32:12]
I remember when the Blanco River several years ago had seven or eight feet of it.
[32:17]
It may have three inches right now.
[32:19]
I remember when Jacob's well flowed, it no longer flows.
[32:23]
I took my swimming lessons at age six at city park, and that water is down considerably.
[32:29]
What I'm asking you to do is the commissioners, you're going to have to make some hard
[32:33]
decisions.
[32:34]
It comes with that.
[32:35]
I was a state democratic party chairman.
[32:37]
I had to make hard decisions and sometimes it didn't like it, but in this case, there
[32:41]
There's no reason to approve something.
[32:43]
My family moved out there.
[32:45]
Secting road is about two miles from this venue in the 1850s.
[32:50]
So I know a little bit about this area.
[32:52]
Still go out there and some of my relatives,
[32:54]
steal little signs off the road from time to time.
[32:57]
But it's a beautiful place that does not need to be disturbed.
[33:01]
Sandmarkers, we don't have the water.
[33:04]
We don't have the water.
[33:05]
Weak sit there and say we have the water.
[33:07]
Say wish we had the water.
[33:08]
We're 240 miles from the Tualan Desert, we're a semi-aird place to start with at some point in time
[33:15]
the commission has to just say and you're going to be able to vote against this just based upon
[33:21]
the rules and the way the rules are to be applied. But I'm just asking you to think about when you
[33:27]
get up and look at your children, are you grandchildren? Are you going to leave them a place that
[33:34]
It looks like this here at desert.
[33:36]
You can leave them something good decent like we had at one point.
[33:40]
Maybe we'll get back someday when we stop taking advantage of these natural springs we have,
[33:46]
which are here to give us life, here to give us water, here to give us the life that we enjoy.
[33:52]
Not help some big, and I'm sorry, Mr. May very, may be a very nice man.
[33:57]
I don't know him from Adam, but at the end of the day, at the end of the day, what he's
[34:02]
wanting to do for Hayes County and San Marcos is not good for anybody but Mr. Mayberry and
[34:08]
his investors and shareholders. That's all I have, but I ask you to vote your conscience
[34:13]
and do the right thing by the citizens of San Marcos who count on you to do the right things.
[34:18]
Thank you. Thank you, sir.
[34:25]
Okay, I was going to wait until after I said this in comment
[34:27]
for this remark, I'm about to make. We are now going to have a minute, three strike rule.
[34:31]
We do need everybody out there to be courteous. Please be respectful of people who are speaking.
[34:35]
Please ask you to please control your claps. Please control your applause. It's probably the more appropriate way to say that
[34:43]
Johnny Hendrix, Katie Kennedy, Jimmy Neville, Coach Taylor
[35:09]
I'm sorry if you please stand here name, you have three minutes. Jeremy Hendrix.
[35:15]
Thank you very much. Good evening, Mayor council members. My name is Jeremy Hendrix. I'm here on behalf of the Labor's International Union of North America. We're representing the skilled construction workers who build, maintain, and really keep central Texas moving. I'm an Austin. I'm proudly cover all of Texas, for Launa. And I'm here tonight to respectfully ask for your vote and favor of items four and five. I'm sporting these items of this project because it represents
[35:40]
It's real opportunities for working people in San Marcos, not just for short-term jobs, but
[35:46]
long-term careers.
[35:48]
These are the kind of jobs that allow families to put down roots to plan for the future
[35:52]
and stay part of this community that they help build.
[35:56]
Loan members know what good jobs look like.
[35:58]
They mean family supporting wages, they mean health insurance, and real dignity that comes
[36:03]
a steady work, a apprenticeship, and training.
[36:07]
That opens the doors for local workers to create true career paths in the trades.
[36:12]
These are not temporary jobs, their opportunities to build a real life for workers.
[36:17]
And when workers are in good wages, we know the whole community benefits.
[36:21]
They support local businesses, strengthen neighborhoods, and help keep San Marcos a place where families can work,
[36:27]
can live, can thrive, and can raise their children, and keep their children living here for generations to come.
[36:32]
Item 4 and 5 are a chance to bring these opportunities to more people in this community, a chance to invest in the workers that live here and the workers that will live here and in future generations and in families and in a long-term strength of this community.
[36:47]
So I respectfully ask all of you to please vote in favor items 4 and 5 tonight because this project will be good for this community and good for workers.
[36:56]
Thank you for your time and consideration.
[36:58]
Thank you, sir.
[37:05]
Oh, and youngs has come up.
[37:11]
Good evening to Bill.
[37:13]
Good evening.
[37:14]
Good evening, and thank you commissioners for the opportunity to speak tonight, as I said,
[37:17]
my name is Jim Neville, and I'm your fellow members of the Laborers International Union of North America.
[37:22]
We represent local to 95 covering San Marcos and thousands of hardworking men and women across the state of Texas.
[37:29]
I want to be very clear.
[37:30]
We are here in support of rezoning the land on Francis Harris Lane for this new data center project.
[37:37]
Projects like this bring real value, tax revenue that strengthen cities, opportunities for local businesses,
[37:45]
and most importantly, good jobs that build real careers, and not just any jobs.
[37:52]
This developer has made a written commitment to work with Union Labor on this project.
[37:57]
That means the highest safety standards, the most skilled workforce in the industry,
[38:02]
Fair wages, health insurance, and a path for workers to support their families and retire with dignity.
[38:11]
I know this personally. I came up through the Labor's apprenticeship program.
[38:15]
I worked on projects just like this one for nine years to provide for my family before being trusted into a leadership role.
[38:24]
And before that, my father fed our family for 30 years and is now drawing a retirement due to projects just like this.
[38:30]
These are the kind of jobs that put food on tables that give kids stability that turn hard work into a future.
[38:40]
We've already begun working with the developer and we've also reached out to city officials to start building real partnerships with Sam Marcus.
[38:47]
Our goal is simple to connect local residents to these careers.
[38:51]
From experience tradespeople and this community to young men and women graduating from local schools, we're looking for real opportunities.
[38:58]
We have hundreds of members building data centers across Texas and thousands across the country,
[39:04]
and everywhere this model is used with strong safety standards into union labor, communities, and families benefit.
[39:13]
Sandmark is deserves the same opportunity, because the reality is this.
[39:18]
If projects like this aren't welcomed, they don't just disappear. They go somewhere else.
[39:24]
And with them goes the jobs, the training opportunities, and the chance for local hardworking families to build a stable future.
[39:33]
So tonight we respectfully ask you, support rezoning this property, continue the conversation, and allow the project to move forward in a way that benefits this community.
[39:43]
Sam Marcos has a real opportunity here to invest in its people, to strengthen its workforce,
[39:49]
and to create lasting economic stability for families.
[39:53]
We ask that you make the most of it.
[39:55]
Thank you.
[39:55]
Thank you.
[40:02]
Colt Taylor, I work for the Labor's Union, and I support this data center project because it would create good paying jobs and also through our partnership program we look forward to work with a community, bringing in, in recruit and train local workers for long-term careers and I'd support the project. Thank you.
[40:24]
things are now in Manuel go to Randy Harris Michael Hernandez and Bobby Levinsky and
[40:51]
any
[40:51]
such order you can just kind of the podium with Statue Namibule, Structure 3 Man.
[40:54]
Yeah, we got it. Jumping on line. I mean I think it's coming in.
[40:59]
Randall Harris with the Laborers International Union of North America and I'm here to strongly
[41:03]
support this project. Encourage all of you to strong support this project. I understand and some
[41:09]
folks have said, you've got some tough decisions to make. This is, there's a lot of passion
[41:14]
on both sides of this. However, what these kinds of opportunities do are not just one
[41:22]
off opportunities. These are literally generational changing opportunities for communities.
[41:30]
For the next 23, 40, 50 years workers and residents of this community will have an opportunity
[41:39]
to get into a skilled trade, to develop a career, to buy a home, to stay here, to build a family,
[41:48]
to volunteer at the schools, to give back, to be a part of this community every single day.
[41:57]
And there's a lot of folks out there. I recognize that that what I'm saying here,
[42:01]
especially for that large group out there, is not the most popular thing in the world.
[42:05]
But, again, these tough decisions, this is a community of over 90,000, I guess the question for
[42:13]
this body is, are you going to be swayed by this vocal minority or the silent majority?
[42:21]
Over 90,000 residents of this community, and there's a few hundred out there, we represent
[42:25]
over 5,000 workers in the state of Texas, over 500 in and around San Marcos in this part of the
[42:33]
We encourage you strongly to support this project to go out, do the right thing, support
[42:39]
family, support training, support good careers.
[42:42]
Thank you.
[42:43]
Thank you.
[42:50]
Good evening.
[42:51]
My name is Manuel Guadoy, I'm a member of a Labor's Union Local 1095.
[42:57]
I'm here tonight in support of this data center project.
[43:02]
I built an entire career on projects just like this.
[43:05]
Union construction work is how I provide for my family it's how I was able to buy a home here
[43:13]
It's how I stayed it's how I stayed work stayed at work. I get health insurance and the future
[43:22]
I can plan around
[43:24]
These are long-term careers. They give people stability. They give family security
[43:30]
Knowing that this developer has committed in writing to work with a union labor
[43:35]
matters a lot to people like me, because it means work will be safe, professional, and don't
[43:43]
write,
[43:46]
and that local workers will have a real opportunity.
[43:49]
Please support this rezoning, allow this project forward.
[43:53]
Thank you very much.
[43:54]
Thank you, sir.
[44:01]
Mike Ornandas, Chandler, Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, Lewis and Maine, Saint Joseph Indiana,
[44:11]
I'm sorry, weren't in Virginia, College Station, Texas.
[44:15]
You know what all of these have in common?
[44:16]
They're all part of a growing list of cities that have voted to keep data centers out of their communities.
[44:21]
All of these have had committees and city councils actively listening to their constituents
[44:25]
and ensuring that all of their concerns are being heard.
[44:28]
Here we are in the same position that we were in last March.
[44:30]
Voicing our opposition to allowing a data center to be built within the city limits of same markets
[44:34]
and next to our neighbors who rely on their land and their property for their livelihood
[44:38]
and for their survival. Are you listening to us? Can you hear us?
[44:43]
Since last year we've learned very little about the proposed data center going in off of Francis
[44:47]
Haris Lane, and ultimately this is because the developer has been under an NDA all of this time.
[44:52]
Once he did get permission to disclose his buyer, we held a town hall that provided us with
[44:56]
zero answers and that buyer got spooked and went back into hiding.
[45:00]
The lack of transparency throughout it all has been appalling. How can anyone even consider approval without any knowledge of what they're proving and to whom?
[45:10]
I will tell you what we have learned. We have learned from the City Utilities Director, Tyler, I can't pronounce this last time, so I'm not going to butcher it.
[45:18]
That this proposed data center will use roughly two and a half times the amount of power that the entire city of Sam Marcus uses per day on peak power usage days.
[45:25]
Imagine that, one cluster of five buildings using the same power as two and a half cities of 70,000 people.
[45:32]
We know that heavy usage raises bills even though experts say it won't.
[45:37]
We've learned that with power comes water usage.
[45:40]
An average of about 12,000 gallons per megawatt use.
[45:43]
That is in addition to whatever number of gallons are going to tell the system that they'll use in their closed loop system,
[45:48]
which has not been approved by crystal clear.
[45:50]
In addition, we learned from the North American Electric Reliability Corporation
[45:53]
and their yearly assessment published in November 2025 and Google it,
[45:57]
that Texas and the ERC grid are labeled as an elevated risk.
[46:01]
And Laman's terms, it means that the grid is more susceptible to failure even more so,
[46:04]
than the winter storm of 2021 due to the rising amount of data centers being built in the state of Texas.
[46:10]
Tonight, you're going to hear a lot of information from a lot of citizens,
[46:13]
citizens who have come out to every monthly meeting, PNZ and City Council since last March,
[46:17]
unlike all the laborers coming out of the woodwork for the first time, no offense.
[46:21]
I hope you are listening to us.
[46:23]
We are the ones that are doing the research and putting in the work to provide you with an influx of information.
[46:28]
You keep asking the developer for answers, but they're not the data center.
[46:31]
They're giving you the same answers you got last year, where to differently.
[46:34]
They just see the color of money.
[46:36]
Tory Abigail Jennifer married in all of the other concerned neighbors in citizens.
[46:40]
See the different type of green, the green of their land, their homes, and their lives.
[46:44]
You are on the right side of history ten months ago.
[46:47]
Please stay that way so we can add same markets to the list of communities,
[46:49]
communities exercising their voice. Thanks. Thank you Mr. Hernandez.
[47:03]
My name is Bobby Levinsky, 248 Camaro Way, Simarko's Texas. I have 20 years of
[47:08]
experience in land use policy and I have been an attorney in that space for the
[47:12]
last 10 years. I object to the consideration of PSA 2513 and Zoning case 2513
[47:20]
tonight on the grounds that they have not complied with the waiting period of the
[47:25]
less than six months ago, the cases that you are scheduled to hear tonight were denied by the City Council,
[47:31]
both the preferred scenario amendment and the zoning change are the exact same cases.
[47:37]
Neither of them should be on your agenda tonight without a request to wave the waiting periods.
[47:42]
Section 2.3.4.1A requires a six month waiting period from the date of denial from any development application that was denied.
[47:51]
Section 2.5.1.2.F requires a one-year waiting period for a zoning change that was either,
[47:59]
this is really important, denied, or withdrawn of the same request to change by the applicant
[48:08]
after the city council meeting, at which the change is to be considered has been called to order.
[48:13]
that meeting was called to order, the zoning case should not be on your agenda tonight.
[48:21]
With respect to the PSA, both the applicant and the staff memo indicate that because the
[48:26]
rezoning case was not approved due to a failure to achieve a supermajorie vote, the application was not
[48:33]
technically denied. That interpretation is very inconsistent with basic statutory construction
[48:39]
In the absence of a statutory definition, court use the words common or nary meaning, meaning you just look at the dictionary.
[48:47]
Mary Webster's dictionary defines denied as refuse to grant that occurred.
[48:53]
This is consistent with the American Heritage Dictionary as well to decline to grant or allow refuse.
[49:00]
There should be no dispute that the outcome of both of those items was refused and declined to be granted by the City Council.
[49:07]
that's the entire reason the applicant resimitted these requests.
[49:12]
The applicant and staff seem to be under the impression that the City Coads requires an affirmative vote to deny an application.
[49:18]
However, that is not how the code is constructed.
[49:21]
The code requires an affirmative vote of a super majority of the Council when the Planning Commission has didn't recommend a denial.
[49:27]
The public hearing was held on the PSA and following the public hearing, the City Council refused or declined to approve the request.
[49:34]
It was therefore denied.
[49:36]
The applicants probably aware of this weakness of the argument, which is why they argue that it wasn't denied per se, it just didn't become effective.
[49:43]
That just doesn't, that's an absurd result that the courts would not accept.
[49:46]
And I really would encourage this commission to use your authority to decide that that is a ground for denial for both of these requests because it does not comply with the waiting period.
[49:59]
It is within your...
[50:04]
I think it's within your right to grant it to a thought based off of the justice that I'm waiting for. Thank you.
[50:11]
Thank you, Mr. Levinsky.
[50:12]
We now have Maxfield Baker, Amy Camp, Saunders Drucker, Chad Bartling, Rocco Moses.
[50:24]
And you may come up in any order and please state your name and we got three minutes.
[50:30]
Yes sir.
[50:33]
I was already, I guess so.
[50:37]
Hey, yeah, I'm Maxfield Baker, I sat in the seat and I also sat on city council and
[50:45]
So it's hard to know what to say when people are a lot more eloquent than you and have
[50:50]
like science and research and you know all that good stuff.
[50:54]
I know some of you all voted against this before, really hope that you do it again.
[50:59]
If you're worried about legal consequences, then just stay quiet and vote no, you have
[51:04]
that right.
[51:04]
We see people doing it all the time, not justify a single reason why they vote, they just vote
[51:08]
the right way.
[51:10]
Also if you're worried about legal repercussions, the city's got you covered, right?
[51:13]
That's what we pay into these administrative things for.
[51:18]
It's not lost on me that this process took a long time,
[51:21]
and in between the last time, and this time,
[51:24]
it's very likely that some of you have been lobbied by this for Mayberry.
[51:27]
Some of you have tried to lobby our community members through text messages,
[51:31]
direct communications to tell us to back off,
[51:33]
get a better understanding of it, meet me in private.
[51:35]
Let's see if I can get you to understand what I'm saying, right?
[51:38]
And that's kind of dirty. That's not great.
[51:40]
We don't have a lobbying ordinance that stops that from happening.
[51:44]
So, I would ask you to ask each other because obviously you don't have to answer to us,
[51:49]
but you would hope that you would respect your colleagues and answer them.
[51:52]
Have you all been lobbied?
[51:53]
Has city staff been lobbied by Mr. Mayberry, by these union folks out there.
[51:59]
The injunction is kind of a misplaced thing.
[52:03]
It's just the cost of doing business for them to stop.
[52:07]
And this isn't going to be a silver bullet for our budget.
[52:11]
The reason our budget is in dire straits because we continue to let global extractive capitalists,
[52:17]
blah, blah, blah, take money from our community and leave us on a pile of nothing except
[52:22]
promises that we don't even know that they'll keep, especially with a state and federal government.
[52:27]
They're just willing to put their boot on us at any point.
[52:29]
We saw that when Governor Abbott threatened our ceasefire resolution, something that I know
[52:33]
legal base to do.
[52:36]
But there's no doubt in my mind that they're watching us at that level.
[52:41]
And that they might too, trying to come after these restrictive
[52:43]
covenants, they're promising you, yada, yada.
[52:47]
Behind closed doors, it's also pretty clear
[52:49]
that staff has been putting their own boot on your neck,
[52:52]
reminding you, quote unquote, what your jobs are.
[52:56]
You don't have to listen to them.
[52:57]
Some of them don't want this because they think
[52:59]
it's going to make their job easier.
[53:01]
Some of it, one as a resume builder, and I know I have just a little bit left.
[53:07]
It's nice that City Council has like the actual bar so you can see it.
[53:10]
But everybody out there cheering and applauding, it's great.
[53:13]
Snaps are better because you're eating into our own speaking time.
[53:17]
Just, you know, we're as a community trying to get up here and talk, so love all the support
[53:21]
definitely on your side, but just from a flow, we'll get through more of us if we all
[53:25]
just kind of snapper fingers or do something, you know, the little jazz hands, all that's
[53:29]
great.
[53:31]
And again, it's not lost on us that we've been doing open records requests, right, so if you all don't want to be honest with your colleagues about the communications between you and outside agencies, expect an open records request. Thank you.
[53:44]
Thank you, sir.
[53:46]
Yeah, thank you. That's good.
[53:50]
Please touch your name for your minutes, sir.
[53:53]
Hi, Sauners Drucker. I'm a resident here in St. Markos. Thank you for letting me come and speak today.
[53:57]
I'd also like to address that if they have not already been allowed to, there's a bunch of
[54:02]
people who showed up at five o'clock expecting to be able to sign up to speak.
[54:06]
They should be able to speak once all the people who signed up earlier can.
[54:11]
Next, I'd like to say, we've been in this for a year, okay?
[54:16]
But it's been back and forth.
[54:18]
I've not prepared anything to talk today because I'm kind of tired of doing that.
[54:22]
And I understand that a lot of their claims might make this proposal sound really good if the entire world was contained within this room.
[54:32]
But it's not. If you go outside of this room, you'll see a few different things.
[54:37]
One of them is that there are two different types of data center news headlines.
[54:41]
Either about towns fighting them, fighting tooth and nail to keep them out of their jurisdiction,
[54:47]
or towns that have been destroyed by them and are now dealing with those negative repercussions.
[54:53]
If you go outside of the room, you will find not a bunch of residential homes out there at nine.
[55:01]
We'll find some undeveloped ranchland. And that's what it is now acting as a buffer between existing
[55:08]
residences and the industrial area of the power plant. That power plant was put there against
[55:15]
those people's wish to meet a demand. This data center is now coming to try and parasite barnacle off
[55:21]
of that area to grow the industrial zoning in that part of town. They've argued quite a few times before
[55:29]
that it's unethical to have these multi-family homes right next to an industrial area and then
[55:37]
their argument is to expand the industrial area to be next to existing single-family homes.
[55:43]
They are furthering the problem and planning to solve it. Next, you have a
[55:50]
unenforceable restrictive covenant. You have a restrictive covenant that they are already planning
[55:56]
break. I say that because I have right here a whole bunch of environmental violations from the
[56:02]
state of Virginia against Cyrus one, the company that backed out of their thing, but is probably
[56:07]
still behind it, in which they repeatedly violate air and environmental assessments, not by going crazy
[56:16]
over their limits or anything, but by building generators that they weren't permitted for before
[56:21]
they had permits for them going a little bit above squeezing these regulations and factoring
[56:27]
the fines and all of the things that you're going to do to them into their construction
[56:31]
costs. They have already accounted for whatever we're going to do whenever they violate
[56:38]
their own confidence. There's evidence of them doing it for the past 14 years in Virginia and
[56:44]
New Jersey, likely that the company is going to do the same thing here. Secondly, any jobs in
[56:51]
jobs, I understand as much in union guys here, but honestly, construction jobs are not in short
[56:56]
supply.
[56:57]
Thank you.
[56:58]
Thank you, sir.
[57:03]
Rock O'Moses.
[57:06]
Gentlemen, our earlier said watershed moment.
[57:08]
I think that that is very, ever po, I think that these facilities, whenever you pull the
[57:13]
lens up a little bit, represent something that is happening across the country.
[57:17]
This is not isolated, and there is no way, these gentlemen, they all speak in favor of
[57:25]
The only people that speak in favor of these have fiscal interest directly in them, you know, and there's a playbook because if you've lens back a little bit
[57:34]
You look at how minutes of palies are worked over by people like this, and I don't you know you're looking at me, but it's it's a real thing
[57:41]
They follow a playbook
[57:44]
They initiate projects
[57:46]
Then they the the communities come out and they say please don't do this and then there's a stall process and they they wear people down
[57:53]
And once they're embedded, and they can draw resources, and create noise problems, and create
[58:00]
air pollution problems, and create drainage problems, and all of these myriad of issues
[58:06]
that come with these facilities, they're there, the electrical gentleman said, all the
[58:13]
city can enforce these things.
[58:14]
The city can't do anything once they're there, because they're already embedded.
[58:18]
They're parasitic by nature.
[58:20]
If that is what these facilities are.
[58:24]
And as far as the Union people, there's lots of other jobs.
[58:27]
And the reality is that it also plays to the example
[58:30]
of that the only people that support these projects
[58:33]
have direct and personal fiscal interest in them.
[58:37]
And so I share the emotions of everybody here,
[58:41]
but it really is a watershed moment.
[58:44]
Because the first one represents a huge marker,
[58:48]
Because when it opens up floodgates, and it drains the resource that we, it's a, it's something
[58:59]
to get very emotional about the, the water table, as it is, the process that these people
[59:07]
can say that even suggesting usage rates at this scale is not absolutely detrimental in the
[59:16]
of a water table is, it's laughable, it's criminal in reality, but if you watch the track
[59:24]
across the country of what these facilities do to the water table and the health of the people
[59:28]
that live around them, it's tragic.
[59:32]
And it's tragic. So thank you. Thank you, Mr. Moses.
[59:51]
Good evening. Ladies and gentlemen, the council, fellow citizens of San Marcus, my name is Chad Bartling.
[59:58]
A son of this great suit.
[1:00:01]
I can't imagine the weight that you all have on your shoulders to make this decision tonight. I want to say quickly, I respect the opposition and all their positions. They're well researched.
[1:00:16]
I want to speak from a single perspective, and that's from a tradesman's perspective. I've lived and worked in this community for 46 years.
[1:00:23]
Sam Marcus Wrattler, class of 1998, for the bulk of their careers, my mom and dad both
[1:00:29]
worked at St. Mark's Telephone, later became St. Mark's Telephone, and since my in-laws
[1:00:35]
under restaurant in this town for many years. This city in this community has been a blessing
[1:00:40]
and a joy to me. That's why I chose to base my electrical contracting company here back
[1:00:47]
we opened in 2013. So to speak, my boots have been in this dirt for most of my life.
[1:00:54]
As I said, I want to speak from a tradesman's perspective.
[1:00:59]
While it's true today, I own a company of 70 plus employees, it's based here in San
[1:01:04]
Marcus. I started out in the field putting my work boots on every day, putting on a
[1:01:09]
tool belt and fabricating things. And I'm proud to say and be able to drive around our city
[1:01:15]
and see many of the buildings and the businesses that help construct.
[1:01:21]
Projects of this size type and scope cannot be understated in their value to the tradesmen and trades women of our city and our county.
[1:01:31]
Projects like this data center with its size and expected duration and phasing will provide not only a long runway of job opportunity for those already in the trades.
[1:01:41]
But we'll also open the door for solid growth and opportunity for young men and women who are exploring opportunities in the traits for the first time, which by the way we're in dire shortage of.
[1:01:54]
The truth is this and this has been mentioned before, this project will be built.
[1:01:59]
Now, depending on the outcome of tonight's vote, it may or may not be built here, but rest assured it will likely be constructed somewhere.
[1:02:08]
when it does, it will require a massive amount of labor resources in order to be able to execute.
[1:02:13]
I speak from experience. Again, we are an electrical contractor.
[1:02:18]
We do have an opportunity as a city to support our tradesmen and women with this vote,
[1:02:23]
with well-paying, dependable, safe, and most importantly, local work opportunities.
[1:02:31]
In addition, when an opportunity we have to support other small businesses,
[1:02:34]
as they support this labor force with ancillary services in goods during the construction of this project.
[1:02:42]
So I ask the city and the ladies and gentlemen of the Planning and Sonning Commission
[1:02:45]
to consider joining me in support of this initiative and to approve the project in San
[1:02:51]
Marcus.
[1:02:51]
Thank you.
[1:02:52]
Thank you, sir.
[1:02:56]
I apologize about what I'm about to do.
[1:03:00]
Avidas, senior to Thoskin,
[1:03:09]
Brett Harris, Aaron Brown, feel pleased coming to the podium.
[1:03:23]
To your credit, you got closer than most.
[1:03:25]
I appreciate that.
[1:03:27]
All right.
[1:03:28]
Hello.
[1:03:28]
Good evening.
[1:03:29]
Thank you all for your time.
[1:03:31]
Here we are again.
[1:03:32]
My name is Avedi Symerjabashi, and I'm a native of Central Texas, graduate of Texas State.
[1:03:37]
And I've had a long and dedicated career, working in Habitat Conservation and Ecology.
[1:03:41]
with much of it spent in and around Sam Marcus and Central Texas Hill Country.
[1:03:46]
This unique sensitive part of the world means a lot to me and it obviously means a lot to you all
[1:03:51]
as well as public servants and stewards.
[1:03:54]
That common shared love of our community environment is why surely we must all agree once again
[1:03:59]
that rezoning a residential and facility construction of the Mayberry Data Center
[1:04:03]
represents a serious misuse of land and trusted to all of us as residents and stewards.
[1:04:09]
which we've already agreed upon.
[1:04:11]
Fundamentally, this project, the notion of further-scrined land to develop that beyond residential
[1:04:15]
is a blood of public trust and a gross misallocation of fuel, land, energy, and water.
[1:04:21]
At the most basic level, this seems to be a balance of costs.
[1:04:26]
Costs we can afford and cost we can't.
[1:04:28]
With a proposed 75 megawatt power usage for each of its buildings, representing nearly two
[1:04:33]
times the amount of energy needed to power this entire city, the very notion of another
[1:04:37]
and some of demand be offset by your constituents and residents as is the case with similar
[1:04:42]
projects around the U.S. It's tantamount to a little more than financial exploitation.
[1:04:47]
It's a bright estimated tax revenue and to add the bottom line of tech companies bloated
[1:04:51]
pocketbook. The fact that this rezoning is up for debate again is a glaring evidence
[1:04:55]
that the opinions of the public might matter less than the whims of the highest bidder
[1:04:59]
in short.
[1:05:00]
For example, of questionable profits over real people. As much as I love to see the praises of her caught, and its glowing track record of efficiency and accountability, the facts remain that once more increasing energy demand of a grid, which still imperfectly makes half the far from natural gas, is one more track in a critical piece of infrastructure that has already failed Texans and this community multiple times, and will continue to do so at our greatest times of need. It's no secret then that the energy needs of this data center may take precedence over our own.
[1:05:30]
while we continue to offset the cost after having our own communities voice to be
[1:05:34]
underblind by those with the deepest pockets.
[1:05:37]
As citizens, the fact that we are having this conversation again to prevent the abuse of
[1:05:41]
our water, land and infrastructure to short-term thinking, and only serves to benefit those
[1:05:46]
with plenty at the top, and our own expense is beyond reproach.
[1:05:50]
While the dangled problems of temporary construction support jobs and our faces with little
[1:05:54]
regards to the future of water and power and central Texas, they pick our pockets and energy
[1:05:58]
and leave us to foot the cost and cover their mess when inevitably this whole project sucks us dry.
[1:06:05]
We said no once and last I check that's a complete sentence.
[1:06:10]
The construction of this money, but it shouldn't be our burden as previously agreed upon.
[1:06:14]
Thank you for your time.
[1:06:15]
Thank you, sir.
[1:06:24]
Hi guys, Brad Harris.
[1:06:26]
I'm part of the small crowd that's outside that you all can't see that wraps around the building that they've mentioned about earlier.
[1:06:33]
I'm a local guy. I've been here 14 years. My family lineage goes back to Edward Doby, part of
[1:06:39]
whimperly. I'm here because I'm concerned about what's going on here. There's some things that
[1:06:43]
other people brought up and obviously if you live here, you understand that we had to
[1:06:48]
spend no apocalypse, power outages, we have drought and issues that we've had where we've
[1:06:53]
had to restrict our water use. I asked you guys just, I think you guys also for listening
[1:06:59]
to me stand here and babble to you guys,
[1:07:01]
but these are all heartfelt concerns
[1:07:03]
that we're all saying from our own experience living here.
[1:07:06]
This is the community we care about, we love.
[1:07:09]
There are a couple of things that we're not discussed,
[1:07:12]
and these are some things that are off the top of my head
[1:07:14]
that I wanted to bring up to your attention.
[1:07:17]
If we have a data center here that we are going to be
[1:07:21]
possibly building here, if it is approved through you guys,
[1:07:25]
which I'm hoping to not.
[1:07:26]
But the data center here, it opens up a real big potential for espionage to be focused on our community.
[1:07:35]
One of the first things that people attack are data centers and our electrical source.
[1:07:41]
If we have a electricity that's generated to be able to support this kind of deed,
[1:07:45]
and if we don't, what are they going to do to correct that?
[1:07:49]
We give them tax incentives and tax breaks to basically have a payment of taxes
[1:07:55]
to find the infrastructure to build, but we don't necessarily get a payback for that because
[1:08:01]
we're paying from our own taxes because the tax statements that they don't pay.
[1:08:06]
I may be totally wrong about that, but as far as I understand how it works, if we have
[1:08:11]
a lack of power supply to build to provide them, what may happen also eventually is what
[1:08:18]
other communities are seeing that are in some of the petrochemical industry.
[1:08:21]
There are things called PMSs, which is a portable modular, let's say sorry, but I don't think it's out there, it's basically a small modular reactor, a PMR, portable modular reactor, and these are small electrical sources because we know that our electrical systems are so unadept to build to provide power.
[1:08:45]
So other corporations are actually looking at doing this to have reliable power.
[1:08:52]
The other thing that I'm looking at is that we have technology that's being developed right now.
[1:08:56]
This is actually antiquating what we're even thinking about implementing for this data center.
[1:09:02]
We may not actually need to have something that scales go up inside and uses much water because of technology that is advancing all the time.
[1:09:08]
We're going to take a warm match for things that are basically might be antiquated by the times they're completed.
[1:09:14]
And jobs. Yeah, we might have some jobs to build a build these things. And if you're a union member, that's cool. You got a job.
[1:09:21]
But the rest of us students and people that are lay people that are coming out of high school or whatever else in this community.
[1:09:28]
Thanks guys. Appreciate it. Thank you, sir.
[1:09:34]
Hey, y'all doing it today. I'm back. Aaron Brown, I'm a local Sam Marcus residents since 2015.
[1:09:42]
technically.
[1:09:44]
I actually was not prepared to speak to you tonight, but I'm going to speak to you
[1:09:49]
because I've been against the status center from the start. We've already voted this down once,
[1:09:54]
right? We've already forced it into a super majority of its city council once.
[1:10:00]
Why we're even back here? That's rules. Now, where do we go from here? The only cause, the only course you have from here, is the same course you had 10 months ago.
[1:10:13]
Bring it back up to city council with the city for majority vote and let city council say yes or no.
[1:10:20]
Here's the points that everybody keeps bringing up. We're talking about jobs. Right now we're talking about short-term jobs. We're talking about building jobs.
[1:10:26]
Yes, it is going to help these these men and women exponentially grow their cells throughout the coming years.
[1:10:33]
Is that going to keep sustainable jobs in San Marcos?
[1:10:37]
We don't know because we still have not gotten a decent figure on 50 or 100 jobs or 200 jobs.
[1:10:44]
As far as I know, I'm coming back to this after a couple months off.
[1:10:48]
So when we talk about jobs, are we really creating jobs?
[1:10:51]
maybe? Are we creating the high paying jobs that are needed in the sound? And maybe.
[1:10:58]
When it comes down to it, it is up to y'all to decide whether we're going to look at the
[1:11:02]
finances of this versus what the city is telling you. Because this is the city out here.
[1:11:09]
Yes, it is a lot of young folks. I agree. It is a lot of young folks and I normally don't
[1:11:14]
stand on the same side as many of the people out here. But I am right now because I believe
[1:11:19]
this data center is wrong for St. Marcus. Thank you, sir.
[1:11:27]
Real quick, we'll go
[1:11:33]
cading, Kennedy. I might have missed you.
[1:11:38]
Cading, Kennedy, if you want to go to the podium.
[1:11:42]
Okay, we'll switch over to your bed that's online right now and we'll come back and we'll let other people speak.
[1:11:49]
In the chambers. Chargers may note that the one person we had signed up online
[1:11:52]
As an appear to be on right now those that are on online now are signed up for the actual
[1:11:59]
The other the other items coming up for late. Okay, the data center when we go to the public hearing portions. Thank you any bells and the chambers which is speak
[1:12:06]
Man, would you like to speak?
[1:12:12]
Well, you're here now. So let's just take your name and you got three minutes. Okay. Thank you. Yes, ma'am
[1:12:18]
My name's Dean of Fleming. I'm a San Marcus resident
[1:12:21]
Last month a letter was sent to Congress calling for a full nationwide moratorium
[1:12:26]
on the approval and construction of data centers.
[1:12:29]
The petition was signed by more than 230 national state
[1:12:33]
and local organizations from across the country
[1:12:36]
and called for full nationwide moratorium
[1:12:39]
on the approval and construction of new data centers.
[1:12:43]
The massive harms from AI data centers include enormous
[1:12:46]
electricity consumption, unsustainable water consumption,
[1:12:50]
and acceleration of climate change due to their reliance
[1:12:53]
some fossil fuels, skyrocketing electricity costs,
[1:12:58]
and extensive job losses.
[1:13:01]
That's actually the ambition of artificial intelligence
[1:13:07]
through efficiency to replace and to get rid of jobs
[1:13:12]
and therefore increase their profits.
[1:13:15]
In Texas, the signatories include,
[1:13:18]
among others, climate conversation,
[1:13:21]
and Brazilian county and Texas physicians for social responsibility.
[1:13:27]
It is frustrating to see the relentless push the city is making towards pursuing this type of industry.
[1:13:34]
It feels as if the city is not only indifferent to the voice of her citizens,
[1:13:38]
but also detached from the entire socio-economic and environmental reality our world is facing.
[1:13:45]
The presentations made by city staff have briefly talked about negligible
[1:13:52]
concessions in restrictive covenants that do not address the core issues.
[1:14:02]
The water consumption that is referred to is only on-site is ignoring the water
[1:14:08]
energy nexus and most of the water consumption is through energy production or fracking to obtain the fossil fuels.
[1:14:22]
People, I appreciate that people have a right to earn a living and the construction people that are here today,
[1:14:30]
But Mr. Mayberry does not have any say over whether we use local construction or not, he's a real estate developer.
[1:14:40]
Whoever is running the, whoever in charge of building a data center is not here today.
[1:14:47]
So we do not know. Also data centers are moving towards modular construction some of them.
[1:14:55]
That work modular is being thrown around to a lot, I heard it was being used in terms of people.
[1:15:00]
Electricity, generation, there are also SMR small modular reactors, which are pop-up nuclear reactors
[1:15:09]
that are being pursued, they're being perfected right now, and a lot of data centers, knowing
[1:15:15]
they cannot meet their energy needs, even through fossil fuels, are planning on going nuclear.
[1:15:21]
Thank you. Thank you, ma'am.
[1:15:27]
I signed up to speak during public comment, but my name hasn't been common, called, so.
[1:15:32]
It's okay, it's okay.
[1:15:34]
It's Abigail Lindsay, 308, Valley Acres Drive, New Bromphal's Texas, that is in Hayes County.
[1:15:42]
I live about a mile as the crow flies from the site.
[1:15:45]
I was not paid to be here.
[1:15:48]
It's become harder and harder to come up and say the same things about agenda items 4 and 5.
[1:15:53]
I feel at this point if you are not committed to voting against these items, nothing will persuade you.
[1:15:59]
Last year, eight of you voted against the preferred scenario amendment and zoning change for
[1:16:03]
904 of Francis Harris Lane.
[1:16:05]
I will hope you will do the same tonight.
[1:16:07]
The newest version of the Samarkis Comprehensive Plan was adopted in October 2024.
[1:16:12]
The preferred scenario amendment and zoning request by Highlander began in November 2024.
[1:16:18]
One month after the release of the Comprehensive Plan.
[1:16:20]
Your job is to guide growth based on principles set forth in the Comprehensive
[1:16:24]
which is ensuring the conservation cluster category includes areas that should be held off on developing.
[1:16:31]
Highland has received accommodation for 136 acres by PSA from conservation cluster to CD2.5 to build single family homes.
[1:16:41]
Not being happy with that business decision does not mean a year later our city staff, city council members,
[1:16:47]
P&Z members in the community have to bear the burden of correcting it for him.
[1:16:52]
Concern over people living next to a power plan is understandable, but at people chose
[1:16:56]
to buy homes there, they are making a choice based on all available information.
[1:17:00]
Current residents never had that option, we were already living there before the power plant
[1:17:03]
went in.
[1:17:05]
I don't know how we can make it more obvious that we don't want this request to prove.
[1:17:09]
The city has no obligation to make this change.
[1:17:12]
I assure you the money will come from other businesses that will not put such a burden
[1:17:16]
on the residents. There's a new H.E.B. in a book he's coming which will bring in millions.
[1:17:21]
The city will not see the full tax revenue potentially for at least three years from
[1:17:25]
this project. How did the buildings depreciate? Also, whoever owns that land will protest
[1:17:30]
those taxes. Cyrus Run and San Antonio protest their taxes every year. The restrictive
[1:17:36]
covenants is only as good as it is enforceable and there is still a lot of questions on
[1:17:40]
how and who will be enforcing it and how much money it will cost to city. With all this information
[1:17:44]
out there and so many of us speaking out against this, against items 4 and 5, please listen and vote against this.
[1:17:52]
One thing I want to point out is that all of our electricity rates will go up and that is a fact.
[1:17:58]
And anyone who says that it won't has been paid to say that or is out and out lying to you.
[1:18:06]
Cloudburst has broken ground and it's horrible. The security cameras and alarms that go off all the time
[1:18:13]
because of the wildlife walking by, the land clearing has started, and I'm sick.
[1:18:19]
It is devastating already what's happening across the road for me.
[1:18:22]
Don't make it ten times worth, ten times worth allowing another.
[1:18:27]
Each and every day I drive by Cloud Burst, and I will be driving by Highlander,
[1:18:31]
to drive my son to school.
[1:18:33]
And he's going to have to go by at least two data centers, maybe three, maybe four.
[1:18:37]
Once was a beautiful land is just being destroyed and an alarming rate.
[1:18:42]
Clouders just already messed up on their permits,
[1:18:45]
I've already reported them, and yet still nothing's been done.
[1:18:49]
Please don't allow another one to take place.
[1:18:51]
If you don't believe me, please drive out there.
[1:18:53]
You can look and see what they've done already.
[1:18:55]
It's horrible.
[1:18:57]
Alarm's go off at two or three in the morning, wake us up,
[1:19:00]
inside with AC on the windows closed.
[1:19:02]
They don't care.
[1:19:04]
There's been no communication.
[1:19:06]
It's horrible.
[1:19:06]
And it's only going to get worse.
[1:19:08]
And there is a rumor that Claude Berser's bought more land.
[1:19:10]
And they plan to expand.
[1:19:14]
Please don't do this.
[1:19:15]
Y'all voted against it once.
[1:19:16]
You can do it again.
[1:19:18]
And once again, I wasn't paid to be here.
[1:19:20]
And the people that are speaking for this,
[1:19:22]
most of them have been paid.
[1:19:25]
Thank you.
[1:19:26]
Thank you, Ms. Lindsey.
[1:19:27]
I checked our packet.
[1:19:28]
Your name will be overlooked again.
[1:19:30]
So thank you very much.
[1:19:33]
Any of you else who has come to the podium, you may.
[1:19:35]
Please just state your name.
[1:19:36]
And we have three minutes.
[1:19:37]
Thank you. Thank you for allowing public comment. I appreciate the chance to be heard.
[1:19:44]
My name is Carmen Rumbout and I live in Senior Apartments on the South Stage Coach Trail.
[1:19:51]
I'm not a wealthy, powerful member of the San Marcos community, but I hope that.
[1:20:01]
How these data centers will affect me and others at my level is still of interest. I've heard some of the problems caused by data centers, that they're noisy. They create light pollution, use tremendous amounts of water and electricity, leading to scarcity and higher prices. They're not a real source of long-term jobs other than the building part.
[1:20:25]
And I'm glad that they're willing to use Union.
[1:20:31]
But I will focus on what doesn't seem so obvious other than those.
[1:20:39]
These data centers are apparently driven by the AI bubble,
[1:20:43]
the artificial intelligence push in the financial markets.
[1:20:49]
I personally like the idea of AI.
[1:20:52]
But, at this point in its development, it is an amorphous idea with speculative funding.
[1:21:02]
It's hot.
[1:21:03]
AI stocks have skyrocketed in recent years,
[1:21:09]
a looming bubble that will burst like the dot coms of the 90s,
[1:21:14]
if you are around.
[1:21:16]
My hunch is that builders are starting
[1:21:21]
without complete payment that owners are in over their head and debt and that the expected
[1:21:27]
results won't be known for at least another year. They will run out of cash flow and
[1:21:33]
fund it by debt. In capitalism, the stock markets, in speculative investments, there are
[1:21:40]
big winners and big losers. And I don't want San Marcos to be a big loser. I would
[1:21:46]
other way to here and see whether the predictions are true if there can be data centers built
[1:21:54]
that don't suck up the water and increase the price of water and electricity in the surroundings.
[1:22:03]
I think there will be plenty of money and interest for these investments, but we won't
[1:22:09]
have to gamble with San Marcos, our businesses, the real estate, the protection of our
[1:22:15]
and water and the unimportant people like me who will pay an increase in water and electricity.
[1:22:22]
I suggest we wait just wait a year. By then you'll have sufficient information on which to make this decision.
[1:22:30]
Thank you.
[1:22:31]
Thank you, ma'am.
[1:22:35]
Mary, a little field divine. I live at 2545 York Creek Road.
[1:22:39]
New Bronfell's Hayes County and my back gate is at 1470 Francis Harris, very close to the proposed data center.
[1:22:46]
I am here to oppose agenda items four and five.
[1:22:51]
I'm also here to express my concern that Mr. Mayberry was told
[1:22:55]
that he had to wait to come back for a year.
[1:23:00]
And we're back already.
[1:23:02]
And I don't know how to go up the chain of command to find out
[1:23:05]
what it takes to oppose that or why it was allowed.
[1:23:09]
I do appreciate the idea of in industry hiring union labor.
[1:23:16]
My father was in various unions and the secretary of his union.
[1:23:20]
When I was growing up, however, in the state of Texas, the trades are regulated by TDLR.
[1:23:28]
And their landmark hallmark slogan is transparency and accountability.
[1:23:34]
And I feel that we're not seeing that here at the meeting.
[1:23:38]
And the reason that I feel that way is because I came to essentially all of the meetings last year that we're related to the data center and I heard Mr. Mayberry and his paid representatives coming in and making pie in the side sky statements that we're not evidence-based and we're not factual promising technology and industry that doesn't actually yet exist as if they can still yet.
[1:24:06]
execute and deliver this in our community with no risk to us. It is nonsense. It's a form of gas lighting. I feel like we're being gas lit again.
[1:24:18]
It's a manipulative mind control kind of a thing that interferes with our normal thought processes to be told that things can occur in a certain way
[1:24:26]
that's not scientifically possible and that developers don't need to follow the rules and that the local government also doesn't need to follow the rules.
[1:24:34]
I'm concerned also because data centers in and of themselves are associated with an increase in cognitive dissonance.
[1:24:41]
And that's what we have on the rise here at these meetings every time.
[1:24:45]
I urge you to vote against these agenda items, preserve our quality of life and our way of life as farmers and ranchers in that rural corridor conservation community where our livelihoods.
[1:25:00]
Should not be sacrificed for another person's livelihood and if Mr. Mayberry wants to hire the union,
[1:25:06]
I support that he could put in his housing development and there would be a lot of jobs.
[1:25:10]
Thank you.
[1:25:11]
Thank you.
[1:25:17]
Hello.
[1:25:17]
My name is Syl Vasquez.
[1:25:19]
I'm a graduate of Samarkis High School as well as Texas State University.
[1:25:24]
Samarkis is the only home I've ever known.
[1:25:27]
When my younger brother died, I gathered three vials of water from headwaters and I placed
[1:25:33]
one in his casket. I could never imagine that I would have to place another one in my mother's
[1:25:37]
casket so soon after. I did that as a representation of everlasting life. Time and time
[1:25:44]
again, I've returned to these waters for peace. The current runs through me, the way my mother's
[1:25:50]
love once did. It is the only thing that keeps me connected to her. Well, that in music, she really
[1:25:56]
loved to dance and sing. Her name was Louisa Vasquez. And she showed me how to swim at
[1:26:03]
How to remain fearless against the current.
[1:26:07]
Please, save these waters.
[1:26:09]
I want more mothers to be able to teach their children how to swim here.
[1:26:14]
Like they have for the past over 11,000 years.
[1:26:17]
Thank you.
[1:26:18]
Thank you.
[1:26:29]
Excuse me.
[1:26:30]
Chris B. Polanco.
[1:26:35]
I don't know if I have anything that I could say right now that hasn't already been said tonight.
[1:26:39]
somebody even already talked about the AI bubble.
[1:26:43]
I might have been the only new thing I had.
[1:26:45]
Thanks a lot.
[1:26:50]
I guess I'm up here because I just didn't want to feel left out.
[1:26:55]
But I'm not even really against data centers in general.
[1:26:59]
As a blind person, I use tool data tools and AI tools that help make it through
[1:27:05]
day to day life all the time.
[1:27:07]
I just think data centers need to be built responsibly.
[1:27:10]
in areas that can sustain them, and this is not one of those areas, and honestly, as a socialist and our current system, there's no, it's not possible to build and responsibly sustainably when profit is the pure motive.
[1:27:31]
And somebody mentioned that we're representing a vocal minority.
[1:27:36]
We're the vocal minority of a silenced majority,
[1:27:42]
silenced by jobs that keep them asleep,
[1:27:46]
to working hours and wages that they need just to survive,
[1:27:49]
because capitalism does not recognize the right to live.
[1:27:54]
Um, and that yeah, this is just going to keep being a little bit disjointed.
[1:28:00]
Um, there's the AI above, or you're not going to see a lot of revenue from the data center
[1:28:05]
due to tax invatements, data centers tend to, I only have a life cycle of about 10 years
[1:28:12]
and between that and the AI above, there's no benefit to this, so to all the trade
[1:28:17]
people that are talking about all the benefit to everything like, if you're willing to pay
[1:28:22]
the high cost of the water, the power, and everything else, just to enrich yourself, and you
[1:28:29]
don't actually care about this community.
[1:28:33]
Point blank.
[1:28:35]
I'm just going to go ahead and just
[1:28:38]
have a little fun with this conduct a little experiment. I hope my friends and neighbors outside
[1:28:44]
don't let me down because this might be embarrassing if it doesn't go my way. But if anybody here
[1:28:52]
Once to see this data center die and die permanently, like it should have died several months ago.
[1:29:01]
When I ran for City Council this time, I made up a Wolf character, El Lobo Ciego, the Blind Wolf.
[1:29:06]
Well, don't you guys just show a little disrespect for my time and give me a big wolf how.
[1:29:25]
I've never got to use that before. It's some excited that I was able to. Thank you for the opportunity.
[1:29:30]
You please touch your name on me.
[1:29:32]
You name only.
[1:29:33]
We have three minutes.
[1:29:34]
My name is Barbara Hanksson.
[1:29:36]
I am a paraprofessional education educator at the Kylo Elementary.
[1:29:41]
I'm a resident of Sam Markis.
[1:29:43]
Something that I want to mention that I haven't heard anybody else mention.
[1:29:46]
Something that really upsets me when I learned it.
[1:29:48]
What I was a child, they told us that 3% of the water on earth was drinkable.
[1:29:52]
Our children today, your children today, are learning that only 2% of it is drinkable.
[1:29:57]
And that is being used currently.
[1:30:00]
22, handle our data centers. Houston Advanced Research Center shows that existing data centers approximately consume 25 billion gallons of water that was the estimate for 2025.
[1:30:14]
We are already on drought watches and do rolling blackouts for energy conservation. And I live right next to the new bookies that's being built, actually.
[1:30:22]
I watch animals who have been forced from their homes
[1:30:26]
dive on the busy and dark road of post road
[1:30:29]
on the back where there's no street lights or anything.
[1:30:33]
So I've seen a lot of the what's happened
[1:30:37]
to our environment when animals are displaced,
[1:30:43]
when we see things being built that don't necessarily
[1:30:48]
need to be built.
[1:30:50]
I ask the question because a lot of people have mentioned the jobs.
[1:30:55]
Is your job worth the soul of our community?
[1:30:58]
And I ask what is the use of healthcare to children who are dying of thirst
[1:31:03]
and to doctors who can no longer wash their hands?
[1:31:07]
Morality begs you to please, hear our please.
[1:31:10]
Listen to your citizens to your children and say no to the data centers.
[1:31:13]
Thank you.
[1:31:14]
Thank you.
[1:31:19]
evening, Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, my name is Peter Bane and although I'm not a resident of the city, I am in the
[1:31:26]
ATJ, I'm in the SMC ISD, and I have had the 786 Mark of the BCIP code for the last 55 years.
[1:31:36]
So, thank you very much for allowing us free parking and access to our parks, most recent, and other parks and wreck, but a lot has changed since I committed to attend
[1:31:45]
in SWT in 1969, small college towns got in now a world-class university. Traveled all over
[1:31:53]
the world growing up as well as chasing industrial business, and what we're dealing with
[1:31:57]
here is not a first world issue at all. We did live north of post road, so it was a neighbor
[1:32:04]
that spoke. I should see her because we have enough light to light up a lot out of that neighborhood.
[1:32:10]
In 1997, we enjoyed the stars at night till C-Fan moved in,
[1:32:16]
and so light pollution is a big part of our world these days.
[1:32:19]
But during that time, we're surrounded by Sam Marcus,
[1:32:24]
and the most notable change in our neighborhood
[1:32:26]
is transition from the Blanco River to what now
[1:32:29]
should be more accurately defined as the Blanco Gulch.
[1:32:32]
And so as a correction to barrister Charles Sikting,
[1:32:36]
there's not three inches of water there.
[1:32:38]
There's nothing after a six inch rain, we barely get any water over the dam at all.
[1:32:43]
The County Water Projects like the Alliance Water Treatment of the Carriesville Wilcoct
[1:32:48]
Resources, desalination projects that are going to be bringing fresh water up
[1:32:53]
in our lifetimes quite likely are very real.
[1:32:56]
One of the things that I'm very hopeful of, though, is that we're at the task here
[1:33:00]
of comparing a data center investment with 500 new homes in that same piece of property.
[1:33:07]
homes that will be consumers of water, of power, of
[1:33:11]
maintenance, police, and fire costs, and additional
[1:33:15]
light pollution. And so the new bucket, yes, it is a new
[1:33:18]
business, and it will be contributing more to the
[1:33:21]
light pollution as well as the moon towers or whatever
[1:33:24]
we may call those. But we have there in our area,
[1:33:31]
Griffithford, Redsheim, and Seaphan, United
[1:33:34]
technology over a million square feet of the Amazon warehouse, which is
[1:33:40]
dwarfed by all the rest of the millions of square feet of
[1:33:44]
workers there, a new car max, steel, Hyundai.
[1:33:48]
We also have the proposed Polka logo that's going on up there.
[1:33:53]
We got a lot going on north of town.
[1:33:56]
So what we have here is the latest thing, which we will enjoy,
[1:34:01]
I say that tongue and cheek is a new Cassata tiny homes tiny homes for those that don't know or mobile homes ain't got no wheels
[1:34:08]
But what they do have is another 300
[1:34:12]
Automobiles it'll be on post road and that's gonna make it more challenging the growth of our community is because more than just the people that are here
[1:34:20]
Love the community, but the growth of the communities needs to be sustained by the investments and so I would encourage you to invest in those and vote for the four and five
[1:34:30]
Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen.
[1:34:32]
Good, thank you, sir.
[1:34:37]
Hello, my name is Abby Wetzel.
[1:34:39]
I'm at 1717 Quail Run, Samarkas.
[1:34:42]
This year marks 20 years in Samarkas.
[1:34:45]
I feel like I'm having deja vu.
[1:34:47]
Here we all are, back at planning and zoning,
[1:34:49]
talking about a matter that has already been debated
[1:34:51]
in the public has overwhelmingly said no to.
[1:34:55]
Should the preferred scenario map be changed
[1:34:57]
from conservation cluster to commercial employment
[1:34:59]
Let's go.
[1:35:00]
Hello, for the property on Francis Harris Lane, and should the zoning be changed from future development to light industrial. As a citizen that lives five miles away from this property, I say no. The preferred use map was decided on as part of the comprehensive plan only 15 months ago in October of 2024. It took two years of public input to decide upon this plan, which is supposed to be in place for the next 10 to 20 years. We all know that developer Mr. Mayberry plans to build a massive data center.
[1:35:28]
On the property and that these data centers
[1:35:30]
goes a water, use copious amounts of electricity
[1:35:33]
that raise citizens utility bills
[1:35:35]
and cause greenhouse gas pollution,
[1:35:37]
light pollution, and destroy wildlife habitat.
[1:35:40]
As the data center boom is upon us,
[1:35:42]
citizens around the nation are coming to realize
[1:35:44]
that data centers should not be built near
[1:35:46]
where people live.
[1:35:48]
I urge you to look into the effects
[1:35:50]
that are being documented around the nation.
[1:35:52]
Look at Memphis, Tennessee, Newton County, Georgia,
[1:35:55]
Colton County, South Carolina, and Dallas, Texas,
[1:35:58]
here in our own home state, data centers belong in their own zoning category, and is not
[1:36:03]
light industrial. If you take a dive into the effects of data centers on their environment,
[1:36:07]
you will see that they belong in a heavy industrial zone, not near where there are established
[1:36:11]
communities. Please listen to the community and vote against the changes to the preferred use
[1:36:16]
map and zoning. The former planning and zoning committee and the former city council members
[1:36:22]
have already said no to these changes. I really don't understand why we have to keep fighting
[1:36:27]
so hard for something that benefits a few at the cost of many.
[1:36:31]
And some notes that I took while everyone else has been talking.
[1:36:34]
In terms of the families putting down roots, those roots will need water to grow.
[1:36:39]
We need to protect our water resources.
[1:36:41]
In terms of the new jobs, Mr. Berry said, he said 50 jobs.
[1:36:45]
That is not that many jobs.
[1:36:47]
Our water is more important than that.
[1:36:49]
And please don't listen to the people.
[1:36:51]
Mr. Berry had a desperately calling for help.
[1:36:53]
Listen to the people that live here.
[1:36:56]
Thank you.
[1:36:56]
Thank you.
[1:37:01]
Mr. Chairman, commissioners, my name is Mike Camelander, I'm the president of the Hayes
[1:37:05]
College of Public Development Partnership, and I am paid by the city of San Marcos and Hayes
[1:37:10]
County and other municipalities throughout these two counties to be here.
[1:37:15]
We think about recruiting advanced manufacturing.
[1:37:18]
It's important to recognize the foundational role that data centers play in today's industrial economy.
[1:37:24]
Modern manufacturing is no longer about assembly lines.
[1:37:26]
It's about automation, robotics, machine learning, and advanced supply chain integration.
[1:37:32]
All these depend on secure resilient digital infrastructure.
[1:37:35]
Days have to provide three critical functions that directly influence
[1:37:39]
size selection for manufacturers.
[1:37:41]
They create a digital infrastructure backbone.
[1:37:43]
Next, generation plans to run on data.
[1:37:46]
From predictive maintenance and AI-driven production lines to quality control
[1:37:50]
through real-time sensors, these systems require constant power for processing and
[1:37:56]
A strong local data center presence ensures that manufacturers who do create thousands of jobs,
[1:38:01]
good-paying jobs, can operate efficiently and scale with confidence.
[1:38:06]
They provide reliability or redundancy.
[1:38:08]
They really do.
[1:38:09]
Everything that was said earlier from an actual expert on power and how that works is right.
[1:38:17]
They manufacturers evaluate companies about risk.
[1:38:20]
They need to know about downtime than what happened.
[1:38:23]
This has been redundant power systems, robust fiber connectivity and built-in cybersecurity.
[1:38:29]
They also have provided ecosystem multiplier.
[1:38:31]
While data centers themselves employ highly skilled technicians and engineers,
[1:38:35]
the greater impact comes from enabling the attraction of manufacturing as I mentioned.
[1:38:40]
A single advanced manufacturing facility may employ hundreds of thousands of workers.
[1:38:44]
The presence of data centers signals that this community is equipped for industry 4.0,
[1:38:48]
which directly increases our competitiveness in national and global recruitment efforts.
[1:38:52]
In short, data centers are not isolated facilities.
[1:38:56]
Their economic infrastructure.
[1:38:58]
Just as highways and railroads, power 20th century industry, data centers power 21st century
[1:39:03]
manufacturing.
[1:39:04]
By supporting data center growth, we strengthen our ability to attract next-generation employers
[1:39:08]
to create high-waves jobs.
[1:39:09]
We do not recruit data centers.
[1:39:12]
The partnership does not do that.
[1:39:14]
They are coming here and because of our infrastructure that exists, no new power plants are being
[1:39:20]
for this data center it'll use existing electrons on the grid and it will be, it will be built.
[1:39:27]
Hopefully here in St. Marcus where it can be regulated, watched and controlled as well as
[1:39:33]
good tax benefits. That is the point of economic development. Thank you. Thanks, sir.
[1:39:43]
Hi, my name is Elizabeth Riley. I am a 25-year resident of St. Marcus and I did not plan to speak
[1:39:49]
tonight. You know, I want to speak, so I'm off the cuff and you'll excuse me. I want to
[1:39:55]
speak to the gentleman who is before me that they're coming here to benefit from our infrastructure.
[1:40:01]
We've outpaying for it. They want to pollute our community and have a vested monetary interest where
[1:40:12]
the only interest for all of the people who are here speaking in against the Senate Center tonight
[1:40:18]
have the interest of living in this community, instead of just making money from it. And I want
[1:40:24]
to say this. I am a mother in this community. I love two of my children at home. I am missing
[1:40:29]
their bedtime. There is not a small minority who are against this AI data center. There is
[1:40:36]
a small minority of people who can clear their schedules to come to a meeting at 6pm after
[1:40:40]
a full day of work. There is not one single committee member that I have spoken to that
[1:40:46]
is interested in this data center whatsoever. And the proposition that they've offered is,
[1:40:52]
let us build it here and we'll play by the rules. We'll build it whether you like it or not.
[1:40:56]
And that is not exactly the building box for a good economic or community project.
[1:41:03]
And I just cannot believe that we are here again, having the same conversation when this
[1:41:09]
committee has spoken, the community has spoken, everybody has spoken, and the only people
[1:41:15]
who seem interested in the comments for the community are the people who are directly benefit
[1:41:22]
monetarily from it, okay. They don't care that we are here speaking against it. They want
[1:41:28]
to develop us against our will, and that is just completely inappropriate.
[1:41:36]
I don't seem
[1:41:36]
to be able to see my clock, so I just want to say that there are more community members
[1:41:42]
that are against this than are for it, and we are a, this is local government, and we
[1:41:47]
should listen to the local people who are speaking up rather than the huge financial people
[1:41:53]
who are having a vested interest in it.
[1:41:56]
Thank you.
[1:41:56]
Thank you.
[1:42:01]
Hello, my name is Samantha Sharbano.
[1:42:03]
My voice might be shaky.
[1:42:04]
I'm very nervous to speak tonight.
[1:42:07]
I am a, I'm a lifelong resident of central Texas
[1:42:11]
and a recent graduate of Texas State University
[1:42:13]
with a degree in international studies
[1:42:15]
with a concentration in Europe.
[1:42:18]
I am reacting specifically to the construction
[1:42:20]
at labor union and others in support of the data center
[1:42:24]
who say that if these jobs are such steady reliable jobs that are similar to the ones that
[1:42:33]
they were able to build their careers on, that they have been able to have in these past
[1:42:37]
decades, first of all, where did those jobs go?
[1:42:39]
They're still the university here, anyway.
[1:42:43]
If there's such stable reliable jobs, where were they 10 years ago?
[1:42:46]
We didn't have to have them 10 years ago.
[1:42:50]
The demand for the monumental processing of data was not here 10 years ago.
[1:42:58]
We didn't have AI companies trying to get into our personal professional academic lives
[1:43:06]
that we didn't have social media trying to feed into trying to consume our consumption
[1:43:11]
habits in order to ascend them back to like in order to manipulate us in order to buy
[1:43:16]
more things in order to do what they want us to do.
[1:43:22]
It was all of the issues that we think about that we talk about now of internet and data and
[1:43:28]
social media and AI ruining the futures of our kids ruining everything for that.
[1:43:33]
And there are so many ethical, economic and environmental reasons not to do the data sensory
[1:43:38]
just physically, but then there is the social aspect of what the data center will do.
[1:43:43]
The only people at the profiting from this are those at the top that are akin to the Robert
[1:43:48]
Barons, the railroad barons that complain of children with coal in their lungs in the 19th century.
[1:43:53]
It's military men going, it's military men sending representatives into the Appalachian mountains saying,
[1:43:59]
We have stable reliable jobs at a nuclear factory.
[1:44:01]
We have this factory job for you and you'll be able to have a pension for all of the years of your life.
[1:44:05]
Completely ignoring the doctors that afterwards wonder why the rates of cancer go up in every person who eats drinks,
[1:44:12]
breathes anything in the area, and so that's not the question you have to ask now.
[1:44:17]
It is the question of what will be breathes, where will the food that we eat be grown,
[1:44:22]
what water will grow it, how are we going to have a future that these jobs will apparently
[1:44:28]
provide for? That is all I have to say. Thank you.
[1:44:32]
Thank you.
[1:44:40]
All right, I'm a little short.
[1:44:41]
Hi. My name is Adriana Montoya. I'm a resident of San Marcos. I just wanted to illuminate
[1:44:47]
commission on a few different facts. First of all, KUT reported last year that at the rate
[1:44:52]
we're going, some articles will not be able to meet municipal water demands by 247. That's
[1:44:56]
in two decades. I'm a graduate student at Texas State.
[1:45:00]
We're on studying historical water use, and I'm surrounded constantly by researchers who specialize in water management.
[1:45:06]
And a scary reality that I want to communicate to you from what I hear from my colleagues is that our existing projections that predict water demand are based on old data, which is based on older projections.
[1:45:16]
So that 2047 year I mentioned is almost certainly inaccurate, and we actually have fewer years between now in serious water scarcity time.
[1:45:24]
But I shouldn't need to be a water researcher for you to take what I'm saying seriously.
[1:45:29]
I'm a human, made up of roughly 60% water.
[1:45:32]
As are you, as everyone else here in this building that is sitting on land where water has been
[1:45:39]
disappearing from the ground for the last few decades.
[1:45:42]
13,000 years, the San Marcos Springs have flowed from the bedrock beneath us.
[1:45:47]
This region holds the title as the oldest continually occupied place in North America because
[1:45:51]
of our springs that I've never dried up.
[1:45:53]
We exist in the blink of our springs ancient eyes, and as stewards of this stolen indigenous land,
[1:45:59]
we have the power to extinguish that title within this blink.
[1:46:03]
Is this city going to be the one responsible to do that?
[1:46:05]
I really hope not.
[1:46:06]
And as a side note, though I am always a supporter of Union jobs just because they offer Union contract to build the death star.
[1:46:11]
It does not mean we need to build the death star.
[1:46:13]
So thank you to those who are standing outside.
[1:46:15]
This is the most packed I've ever seen city hall.
[1:46:17]
Do not give up hope the data center rebellion is here.
[1:46:19]
It has come in.
[1:46:20]
It's a long fight, but we must continue holding the line.
[1:46:22]
I love you, San Marcos. Thank you.
[1:46:24]
Thank you.
[1:46:28]
Good evening to commissioners. My name is Matthew Gonzales. I am the business manager
[1:46:31]
of Labor's Local 1095. We cover 93,000 square miles in Central Southwest Texas with San Marcos being in the heart of it.
[1:46:40]
We represent over 1,000 members within our jurisdiction. Right here in San Marcos, we have a union
[1:46:54]
local presence. I want to before I go further state that I am not paid to be here. I am here
[1:47:03]
not for my own benefit but for the benefit that our organization offers communities across
[1:47:09]
this country. Those opportunities result in higher wages and better benefits. As one of my colleagues
[1:47:17]
said earlier, we have a written commitment from the developer that if this moves forward, it will
[1:47:23]
Union. What that equates to is a starting hourly rate of 2590 an hour for
[1:47:29]
journeymen laborers on the job. For entry-level first period of
[1:47:33]
priness, that equates to 2331 an hour. A first period of priness has little
[1:47:38]
to no experiencing construction. So imagine your fresh graduate from high
[1:47:43]
school or a young adult who has no direction and you choose to pursue
[1:47:48]
construction, that's a great starting rate. By the way, these positions come with employer paid
[1:47:54]
medical insurance that covers the entire family. Life insurance, pension for retirement,
[1:48:01]
Department of Labor Register training, that allows them to skill up and develop and progress
[1:48:06]
both personally and professionally.
[1:48:11]
I'm very respectful of the different perspectives that are
[1:48:18]
located within our last visit several months ago.
[1:48:22]
It was an eye opener to see the passion and the dedication that the residents bring here
[1:48:27]
today.
[1:48:28]
But this is an opportunity for you as a commission to vote in favor of extending those
[1:48:33]
opportunities to the men and women who work in construction or will work in construction
[1:48:39]
from this community.
[1:48:41]
Thank you.
[1:48:41]
Thank you, sir.
[1:48:46]
Good evening.
[1:48:47]
My name is Jasmine Castellanos.
[1:48:49]
I'm a new resident of Sam Marcus, but I grew up swimming in the Sam Marcus river because I lived in Martin Dale for a number of years.
[1:48:59]
I have a stepfather who's been a professor at the University for 25 years. My mom is a small business owner here.
[1:49:05]
They live in Sam Marcus and now so do I.
[1:49:09]
They were able to make it tonight because they're caring for my grandfather who's recovering from surgery.
[1:49:14]
Otherwise, they'd be here and I think that a lot of people who are here tonight probably
[1:49:18]
know loved ones and others who would like to be here but can't.
[1:49:24]
This is not in my normality, this is a group of people who is able to show up out of majority
[1:49:34]
I think of the residents of this city.
[1:49:39]
I wasn't prepared to speak tonight, especially after all the comments already made, I feel
[1:49:43]
They don't have a whole lot left to add so I'm speaking off the cuff.
[1:49:48]
But I'd like to say that I believe that Sam Marxist is a community that depends on
[1:49:56]
the water resources not only to live.
[1:50:00]
We vent into the stain of our community, but also because that is the lifeblood of our culture.
[1:50:07]
It is the reason why people move here. It is a reason why people stay here. I gained confidence
[1:50:13]
waiting in the San Marca's River as a young girl, and I hope to continue to call San Marca's
[1:50:21]
etched access home for many, many years. Franckley, our region does not have the water resources to
[1:50:27]
sustain a data center like this, and then many more that will follow if we allow this one
[1:50:32]
to proceed to be built. I oppose this and I urge you to do the same. Thank you so much for
[1:50:38]
your time, and thank you to everyone who has dedicated their entire evenings and probably
[1:50:44]
preparation time, and much time over the past year to opposing this data center. Thank you.
[1:50:52]
Thank you.
[1:50:58]
Good evening, City Council.
[1:51:00]
My name is Randy.
[1:51:01]
I'm not a native San Martian, but I am a native Texan.
[1:51:05]
I grew up here coming to the different rivers and central Texas from here, San Marcos, New
[1:51:12]
Bronfills, Freo River, et cetera.
[1:51:16]
And since I've moved out here, I've noticed a difference in how low the water in the river
[1:51:23]
has gone.
[1:51:24]
Last time I came up to speak to you guys about that
[1:51:27]
I talked about how when I go that the notice of when I go tubing is that
[1:51:34]
The rocks will like in the lion's club area have like hit my butt and it I gone bruises on my butt
[1:51:41]
So it's really annoying especially after a day of tubing and drinking till I get up just to walk
[1:51:49]
So I can get into some water to reckon continue to float down
[1:51:54]
But I'm just here with the majority of the people that are out here in opposition of these
[1:52:00]
data centers being built, because as everybody else has stated, it's doing no service,
[1:52:08]
more than it's doing no service, it's doing harm.
[1:52:12]
And for as long as I am going to be a Texas resident, I'm here to fight to keep Texas
[1:52:20]
beautiful, keep our waters, keep our land and all that beautiful, while job opportunities sound
[1:52:28]
like a good thing. I would like to see that instead of something like this data center being
[1:52:33]
built, that if the city of San Marcos and the residents here, if we can come up with job opportunities
[1:52:42]
that are more of a solution to protect our environment and protect our waters and I would like to
[1:52:48]
San Marco's be a leading city like to do something like that, you know, that's all I wanted to say to you guys.
[1:52:58]
Thank you so much for giving me the time to speak up.
[1:53:00]
Thank you very much.
[1:53:05]
I'm just going to have a timer so I know what's going on with the time.
[1:53:09]
Thank you for your patience.
[1:53:16]
My name is I go by Ariel. My name is Shelby though.
[1:53:20]
I've been living in such a Texas my whole life. I have family from Austin all the way to San Antonio.
[1:53:25]
So, and something we all share is our water comes from the aquifer.
[1:53:29]
Each one of these springs is fed by this aquifer, and I ask if you have already close
[1:53:36]
your hearts and ears because there are so many different passionate views open them once
[1:53:41]
more to the pain that all of our relatives are experiencing those out on that land already
[1:53:48]
who are seeing the harm, those crying here for the water, the mothers who want their daughters
[1:53:54]
and sons to touch this water, you and I don't have to be scientists to know that we will die
[1:54:01]
without clean water. Not only the water, but the air, not only the air, but the invisible magnetic
[1:54:09]
things that are going through this room, each other right now that we know, cause cancer,
[1:54:14]
cause disease, cause harm. And so I'm asking you, please say no to this data center, give more jobs
[1:54:22]
to your communities through more sustainable practices,
[1:54:26]
y'all make so much money through all the people
[1:54:28]
that come here every year to float on this water
[1:54:32]
and look at it and take pictures of the beauty of St. Markos
[1:54:36]
do not be part of the legacy.
[1:54:39]
That spoils it.
[1:54:42]
That water has been prayed over for thousands and thousands
[1:54:45]
of years in my ancestor Edward Burlison,
[1:54:48]
wherever he was in his space.
[1:54:49]
He was part of that dam.
[1:54:51]
that before that was Ocarita Dan, that was Edward Brooks and Dan, and while he made harm
[1:54:57]
on the native communities, he, that Dan.
[1:55:00]
We have the only sacred wild rice in Texas. Only in clean waters can this grow. There have been this good medicine in all of these waters.
[1:55:12]
And so we need each other as cities to gather and protect our water, our energy, and give real true jobs to our unions.
[1:55:23]
Why aren't we making more money and being able to live?
[1:55:27]
Why do we have to fight for a hundred people to make that money?
[1:55:31]
When there's thousands of people who are going to lose out on water on their life, on their peace,
[1:55:38]
that's not worth it. That will never be worth it.
[1:55:43]
Thank you. Thank you for hearing me.
[1:55:46]
Thank you for letting it touch your heart and just know money will never feed us
[1:55:51]
When money is gone, we will be here, the water will be here, our ancestors will be here, and we all came from ancestors who care about the earth,
[1:56:02]
who know that God made not only us, but each green thing, each living being that is relying on this water.
[1:56:11]
There are better ways, there are more ways that we can come together, make great money, and not be a harm to each other.
[1:56:20]
Thank you.
[1:56:22]
Thank you.
[1:56:26]
Thank you.
[1:56:27]
Good evening.
[1:56:28]
Thank you for the opportunity to speak.
[1:56:29]
My name is Dr. Kristen Hook and I am a scientist.
[1:56:33]
I have a PhD in animal behavior and I'm actually running for Congress in our district
[1:56:38]
in the 21st Congressional District of Texas.
[1:56:41]
But most importantly, I'm a new resident of San Marcos.
[1:56:45]
And the scientific evidence of data centers is clear.
[1:56:49]
They pollute our water, they pollute our air, they are a public health nuisance, they
[1:56:58]
lead to sound that is a nuisance for residents.
[1:57:04]
And in terms of the public health costs, which are estimated across the country to be in
[1:57:10]
the range of $69 billion in public health costs, I ask you, and this body, what about
[1:57:18]
Those one in five Texans who don't have access to health care, what are those Texans going
[1:57:24]
to do, what are those San Marcos residents going to do.
[1:57:27]
We also know that these data centers is so many others have spoken before me, pointed out
[1:57:33]
our water guzzlers.
[1:57:34]
And I actually looked at the data earlier from the water sources that we have by my estimates
[1:57:40]
that looks like we're looking at competing for 20 to 30 percent of the water in San Marcos
[1:57:47]
with these AI centers, residents shouldn't have to compete with AI computing centers for water.
[1:57:54]
This is a very precious resource that we need to protect. And as to the issue with jobs,
[1:58:01]
we know that AI data centers don't create jobs, they destroy them. AI is going to take and replace
[1:58:09]
millions and millions and millions of jobs in our country, and this data center is going to help
[1:58:15]
do that. So I ask this body, who do you work for? Is it the billionaires who are going
[1:58:23]
to benefit from these systems? Or is it the residents that are going to be harmed by them?
[1:58:29]
Thank you.
[1:58:30]
Thank you.
[1:58:37]
My name is Jacob Allen. I'm going to make this short. I wasn't prepared to speak today,
[1:58:42]
but I wanted my voice to be heard. There are just a few things I wanted to reiterate.
[1:58:46]
One, I'm not paid to be here. I showed up on my own free will.
[1:58:50]
There are a lot of people outside that are on my side and we're all in this together and the people that didn't show up couldn't show up for other reasons such as work or they were unaware that it was happening tonight.
[1:59:02]
The big thing that I want to say is that I've been an avid outdoorsman my entire life. I love the outdoors. I love nature. I love this state.
[1:59:11]
And I just want to see, I want to see my children and my children's children continue to love and respect that space the way that I have.
[1:59:22]
So I beg y'all, please make the right choice and please make decisions that are going to benefit us and the long run rather than just a few people in this short term. Thank you.
[1:59:33]
Thank you.
[1:59:37]
Hi.
[1:59:38]
I'm Emma Gravel.
[1:59:39]
I've lived in St. Marcus for 11 years.
[1:59:42]
I own a home here.
[1:59:43]
I have three children in the schools here.
[1:59:45]
I pay taxes here.
[1:59:46]
I've shop small businesses here.
[1:59:49]
I work at a small business here.
[1:59:51]
So I'm very invested in this community.
[1:59:54]
And one of the things that makes this community worth being invested in is that we have a commitment.
[2:00:00]
Two green spaces and two the environment. I'm also a biologist. I care very deeply about sandmarkas and it's green spaces and you have a choice to represent your constituents or to represent those people who don't live here.
[2:00:17]
Thank you.
[2:00:22]
Hi there.
[2:00:22]
My name is Sarah Winkfield.
[2:00:25]
I am.
[2:00:25]
I wasn't prepared to speak today, but I struggled a few things down.
[2:00:28]
I'd like to support all of the folks that have come before me that are also
[2:00:32]
Fellows and Martians that feel the same way that I do.
[2:00:36]
But first and foremost, I'd like to speak to you briefly as a former
[2:00:40]
Bostonite. Born and raised, I was disappointed to see how my city, my beautiful, weird city,
[2:00:49]
was taken over by technology. I watched that beautiful community lose its wonderful
[2:00:54]
weirdness. As a transplant, the soul of this city is the minimal tech, the beautiful spaces
[2:01:00]
and the care for the community members. As a transplant, I found the soul here that is that was,
[2:01:10]
It's carried by the water, it's carried by the people, the people have spoken, and not just with feeling, but with data and research to support their claims.
[2:01:22]
As a new community member in love with this town, I may not know much about water, but I am employed by the water and my colleagues are water and ecology experts.
[2:01:32]
I like to think in my role that I help them speak for the water, the way the Lorax speaks for trees.
[2:01:38]
The data centers are not ready for San Marcos.
[2:01:41]
They're not efficient enough to help us maintain our resources
[2:01:46]
to keep this town as beautiful as it is.
[2:01:50]
The community members have spoken and at this point I do believe
[2:01:54]
that it is a little bit wasteful to continually come back to this topic.
[2:01:57]
I thank you for your time and for listening to each and every one of us.
[2:02:02]
Thank you.
[2:02:07]
Hi.
[2:02:07]
Good evening.
[2:02:08]
My name is Amy Olivery.
[2:02:11]
I am a resident of San Marcos and I've loved San Marcos since I first moved
[2:02:15]
here from my undergrad in 2016.
[2:02:18]
I'm a National Resource Specialist by Trade and I grad student at Texas State now.
[2:02:26]
I'm just sorry.
[2:02:30]
I grew up playing outside and I really cherished the outdoors.
[2:02:32]
my whole career has been connecting people with the outdoors and growing up my mother was very
[2:02:39]
Catholic and there's one thing that's really ingrained in me and that's to love thy neighbor.
[2:02:45]
Water is life and this community is the most important thing that we have. We all know that this
[2:02:50]
is not environmentally sustainable and this data center is not in our best interest. I plead with you
[2:02:56]
to listen to your community here and please love thy neighbor and say no to this data center.
[2:03:02]
Thank
[2:03:07]
you.
[2:03:08]
Hello, everyone.
[2:03:09]
I'm Ben Aguayo.
[2:03:10]
I've led you to Sam Marcus from my life and I got you to Sam Marcus High School.
[2:03:14]
I kind of like go to UT Austin from a chemical engineering.
[2:03:16]
And as someone grew up low income and had a father who was a union member,
[2:03:20]
and had his family that mostly worked in construction.
[2:03:23]
I understand the union members saying that they want to have this project.
[2:03:26]
It's like they can have jobs and happen if it's.
[2:03:28]
But I want them to understand that.
[2:03:30]
There's a lot of stuff that the blue collar felt don't tend to see, which is that AI is a speculative bubble.
[2:03:36]
It's a lot of essential funding.
[2:03:38]
As in, if you just look at the dot com bubble, nothing that they're saying is actually promise.
[2:03:42]
Those benefits, those higher wages are just a carry on to stake that are leading you off a cliff.
[2:03:47]
So I kind of want to plead to the union members to reconsider their position to think, hey,
[2:03:52]
am I actually going to benefit from this?
[2:03:53]
Or am I just upon someone's gay rich quick scheme?
[2:03:56]
So I just kind of want to leave that out there.
[2:03:59]
Thank you very much.
[2:04:03]
My name is CJ Satina. I've been a resident of San Marcos since 2019 when I transferred
[2:04:09]
to Texas State and I graduated back in 2022 because I fell in love with community of
[2:04:14]
San Marcos and communities what we're seeing outside. We're seeing so many new faces. I'm
[2:04:19]
always here at City Council, heckling about whatever. Hot button issues going on but the fact
[2:04:24]
that we have so many new faces speaks to democracy and it's kind of ignorant in my opinion that
[2:04:30]
wanted to listen to the voice of a minority of folks that don't even live here.
[2:04:36]
As a union member, I understand the needs and struggles of why we have so many labor
[2:04:40]
people here.
[2:04:43]
I'm a union member, that's opposed to data centers, because I mean as the guy in front of
[2:04:47]
me spoke about, I mean at what cost, we know AI is going to come for so many jobs.
[2:04:52]
As somebody that was struggling to find a job earlier this year, AI is the enemy.
[2:04:56]
I mean, we have, I mean, you, a new age.
[2:05:00]
Should be coming in a new bookies? I mean, that's, I think, enough, but the fact that we are wanting
[2:05:06]
to listen to a 1% of folks at what cost, at the cost of the environment, the area, we breathe,
[2:05:12]
the water redring, and even the health of people. The fact that they want to, they chose
[2:05:18]
San Marcos, and they want to build this on the historic east side, which is mostly brownfrox.
[2:05:24]
That speaks to environmental racism, and we need to call that out, and the fact that they chose
[2:05:28]
All the staff and members of the Board of the Board of the Board of the Board of the Board of the Board of the Board of the Board of the Board of the Board of the Board of the Board of the Board of the Board.
[2:05:33]
Thank you.
[2:05:38]
Yeah, we have to do it all.
[2:05:39]
My name is Josh with old, I'm a Sam Marcus resident.
[2:05:43]
I'm not much born and raised here.
[2:05:45]
I'll look there for last 25 years.
[2:05:49]
I'm going to throw out a couple of numbers, 906.
[2:05:52]
That's number of days that the Crystal Clear especially to what it did to us has been staged through
[2:05:57]
out of restrictions, another number for y'all, 30 million, it's never a gallons that this
[2:06:04]
data center would use over those 996 days. It's not worth it. I saw a new works in tech.
[2:06:13]
I've spent the last 12 years in an out of data centers. You know, things ranging from tier one,
[2:06:19]
although I have to tier four, that leverage some of the best tech that's out there, things like
[2:06:26]
waterless cooling as well as 100% renewable energy sources
[2:06:30]
for some of the data centers.
[2:06:33]
These people out here, these people in here,
[2:06:35]
and y'all are up here.
[2:06:37]
Y'all are here because y'all think
[2:06:38]
that this is a special city, that we, as the residents
[2:06:41]
of this town, deserve the best.
[2:06:44]
I'd ask y'all to ask Mr. Maybury if this data center
[2:06:47]
is going to be up to those standards.
[2:06:48]
If it's going to be waterless cooling,
[2:06:50]
it's going to be 100% renewable energy.
[2:06:52]
And when he tells you no, because it's not possible,
[2:06:55]
It's because it's not profitable and I asked the child to tell him to send this backspack and
[2:07:00]
Maybe he can drop off that union guy up in Austin on his way home. Thank you. Have a good day.
[2:07:06]
Thank you,
[2:07:09]
sir.
[2:07:09]
Hello, my name is Manio, a lot of Granados and I oppose any data center or any rezoning for data centers
[2:07:17]
We do not have the water for this data center. We're as the previous
[2:07:24]
Samarkis citizen said we're in a drought three restriction or policy for Samarkis.
[2:07:31]
If you go to five-mile dam, you see it's completely dry.
[2:07:35]
You go to Canyon Lake.
[2:07:36]
These are areas like right next to Samarkis.
[2:07:39]
This area from San Antonio to Austin is projected to go by 3,000,000 people by 2050.
[2:07:45]
There are going to be construction jobs.
[2:07:47]
I support union workers, but there are going to be construction jobs around here.
[2:07:56]
This city is not only the people of San Marcos, but also the river.
[2:08:01]
The river is a fragile ecosystem and any AI data center whether directly or indirectly
[2:08:08]
will affect it.
[2:08:11]
Please protect our river and our people.
[2:08:14]
Thank you.
[2:08:14]
Thank you.
[2:08:18]
Hello, my name is Marco Pena.
[2:08:19]
I live in San Marcos.
[2:08:21]
I oppose the data center as I believe we shouldn't destroy
[2:08:26]
and hurt our community to line the pockets
[2:08:28]
with a few business men and shareholders.
[2:08:31]
These people don't live here.
[2:08:32]
They don't care what will happen
[2:08:33]
about how they'll drain our water and crease
[2:08:35]
or our utility bills.
[2:08:37]
I urge you to put community over profits.
[2:08:41]
Thank you.
[2:08:44]
Hello, my name is Athena.
[2:08:47]
I am a resident of San Marcos.
[2:08:49]
I have lived here for about seven years, graduated from Texas State, and environmental studies, geography, resources, and minor and horticulture.
[2:08:59]
So there is not anywhere on Earth. I would have rather studied the environment. It is just the most perfect place on Earth.
[2:09:05]
I could have possibly imagined or wished to work to be here. And that's why I'm still here.
[2:09:10]
So I'm here to strongly oppose the reintroduction of data centers to our area once again.
[2:09:16]
I've come to realize that even if the data center used a couple gallons of our precious water a year, we still wouldn't want it here because of the risk.
[2:09:28]
It honestly sounds crazy and even to continue to even let us have these discussions as insulting when the decision should be obvious.
[2:09:35]
I believe in November this past fall, we were around 11 or 12 inches underneath our annual rainfall rate.
[2:09:42]
For some reason, Crystal Clear says that we're in stage three, but pretty sure we should be in stage four.
[2:09:48]
The other day, I was in the river and I broke down crying because I looked at my weight.
[2:09:55]
I was like, well, wait, hold on. The river is at my waist right now at girls.
[2:10:00]
This is next year.
[2:10:03]
I have a picture in my phone where it was up to, let's say, my ribcage, like the top of my ribcage. So that's about a foot of water. So I really can't imagine about four years, another foot of water disappearing from the river. We don't have anything to share. We don't have the water. We don't have the resources. And I'm not really sure what time and so I'm just going to babble for a bit. But I don't have anything to share. We don't have the water. We don't have the resources. And I'm not really sure what time and so I'm just going to babble for a bit.
[2:10:29]
With this being said, let's see what was it like oh he also sophomore in college
[2:10:33]
We had the freeze so the entire grid shut down. So the idea that a data center would come here for our infrastructure is entirely
[2:10:39]
And fathomable as well because it literally failed. So I don't know what sort of stance. That's really
[2:10:45]
perpetuated on also the fact that the wild races here. I mean, I feel like that should be a
[2:10:52]
infringement on the endangered species act in general. I've always wondered how this was even possible at a federal level
[2:10:59]
but then, you know, we know what's going on.
[2:11:01]
But how is it possible that we're able to bypass
[2:11:04]
such a beautiful biodiversity place
[2:11:06]
that is seriously at risk right now,
[2:11:09]
like at terrifyingly low levels,
[2:11:11]
how we could even fathom bringing something
[2:11:15]
that would hurt it?
[2:11:16]
It's honestly beyond me, including the fact
[2:11:19]
that we have proposition A, which we just passed.
[2:11:22]
So as far as construction goes,
[2:11:23]
I'm sure that we're gonna be bringing in some income
[2:11:25]
by destroying that earth that we're destroying
[2:11:27]
with all the highway and 32 package highway lanes as well.
[2:11:32]
So, it's an absolutely horrible idea,
[2:11:35]
and I really hope that you guys oppose it.
[2:11:37]
I would love to see this place continue to flourish
[2:11:40]
the way that I knew it and I came here to know it
[2:11:43]
because this isn't sustainable, it's a lie,
[2:11:46]
it's all a lie, it's not sustainable.
[2:11:48]
Anyone saying that this is sustainable is wrong, thank you.
[2:11:50]
Thank you.
[2:11:54]
Hey guys, I'm Sam, I live six minutes down the street.
[2:11:58]
It took 1.8 billion years for the ground we were on to form in the way that we see it.
[2:12:03]
And every morning I go out for a walk I think, wow, it's so beautiful.
[2:12:07]
I hope everyone does as well.
[2:12:11]
It took, let's see, for 200,000 years humans have almost sapiens sapiens, that's everyone.
[2:12:17]
Everyone, we've been bearing our loved ones in places that we think are beautiful.
[2:12:23]
And 10 billion people have died and been buried in places that hopefully were beautiful.
[2:12:29]
And here, for 11,000 years, people have been living here right here, because I think it's beautiful, and they want their loved ones to be born and die here.
[2:12:40]
And in a hundred years, everyone, all of y'all, everyone, as listening to me, is going to be dead as well in the garden.
[2:12:49]
And I want to be buried somewhere beautiful.
[2:12:53]
I don't know if I'll be buried here, but I hope when you see this place and if you love it,
[2:13:03]
you hope that you will be buried somewhere that is not dry and poison in somewhere that's
[2:13:06]
beautiful and lush.
[2:13:07]
Thank you.
[2:13:12]
Hello, my name is Jordan Moser and happy new year and glad to be back repeating the same
[2:13:19]
that conversation. We could last year, guess 2025 was so great we just wanted to repeat it
[2:13:24]
again. But you know, I heard that the word of the year for 2025 was slop. So here's
[2:13:32]
to slop. I love all of the intelligent people who've come up here and spoken against this
[2:13:37]
plan, this insistence on infinite growth on a finite planet. I'm on a campaign to spread
[2:13:47]
more new vocab words, how about AI psychosis? Look it up. But, you know, I would love to
[2:13:54]
see 2026 have a new word. Okay, let me introduce you to a new concept. It might be new to you,
[2:14:00]
but it's a very old term. And it existed all over Turtle Island before colonization. And it's
[2:14:07]
Wendy Go. As a concept, the Wendy Go can apply to any person, idea, or movement, infected by a corrosive
[2:14:15]
drive towards self- and grandizing greed and excessive consumption, traits that slowly, that
[2:14:22]
so disharmony and destruction, if left unchecked. It is easy to see American colonialism
[2:14:28]
and manifest destiny as the cannibal monster that it is.
[2:14:32]
Wendy goes our agents of social cannibalism, who know no provincial or national borders,
[2:14:44]
all
[2:14:44]
The National Identity is relevant to this borderless horror.
[2:14:48]
Today, we learned that grock is going to be used by the US military.
[2:14:54]
The same LLM that is doing very heinous ethical violations of-
[2:15:00]
Our young people and causing lots of suicides because of sexual exploitation. The creators of this
[2:15:08]
technology are either quitting and sounding the alarm or making sociopathic comments in public about
[2:15:13]
making fortunes off of the end of the world. Look it up. These AICEOs are enabled by
[2:15:19]
Meghammoniical billionaires to further their Wendigo campaign of disaster capitalism at the expense
[2:15:26]
of all life on Earth.
[2:15:29]
We are told about the endless inevitable march of technology forward, but I really really implore
[2:15:34]
you from the bottom of my heart, each one of you, really explore in your heart and think
[2:15:41]
in your mind, your intelligent mind, who benefits from this please, please pose the rezoning
[2:15:46]
and let's just end this conversation, because it's going to continue, but it doesn't have
[2:15:51]
to be in San Marcos.
[2:15:53]
Thank you.
[2:15:57]
Hi.
[2:15:57]
My name is Hadden Stoffer.
[2:15:59]
I'm an environmental science student at Texas State.
[2:16:03]
The Edwards Aquifer, as it is, is already being overpumped
[2:16:08]
and pretty bad drought right now.
[2:16:12]
There are a lot of environmentally sensitive sort of recharge zones,
[2:16:16]
all over San Marcos, and I think more construction
[2:16:20]
would just be a bad thing.
[2:16:26]
Thank you.
[2:16:27]
Thank you.
[2:16:32]
Declan Stevenson, I'm a chemistry and biology student at Texas State, and I heard someone else say earlier that this was a vocal minority, but like I had to wait like 15 minutes before I was even able to get in here, people are spilling out the doors.
[2:16:48]
Like, there's just so many people here that oppose this, I think like I came here with more talking points.
[2:16:56]
I've heard them all said, I think that shows how many people are here talking about this.
[2:17:02]
I also heard someone else say that John Mayberry said that this was going to create 50 jobs,
[2:17:08]
but that's not true.
[2:17:10]
He said 1250 until a council member pressed him on that.
[2:17:14]
And he was like, well, 1200 construction jobs, only 50 highest estimate permanent jobs.
[2:17:21]
So I think if he was deliberately misleading on that,
[2:17:23]
I'm sure there's other things he's deliberately misleading about.
[2:17:28]
I think, again, my voice is super shaky.
[2:17:31]
Like, I got a really care about something
[2:17:33]
to voluntarily public speak.
[2:17:36]
But yeah, that's about, that's all I got.
[2:17:40]
Thank you.
[2:17:46]
My name is Brooke Schumacher.
[2:17:47]
I live on Bishop Street.
[2:17:48]
I've been a resident here since 2022.
[2:17:51]
I have posed the building of a data center
[2:17:54]
in C limits not only now, but always.
[2:17:56]
I am a Texas State Geography major, I am educated about the realities of water scarcity.
[2:18:02]
I am a civil servant for this city, I plan and hopefully will continue residency here
[2:18:08]
beyond my school career depending on how things look.
[2:18:12]
I grew up in Houston and I grew up passing miles and miles of refineries all the time seeing
[2:18:22]
what technological innovation can look like.
[2:18:25]
When I came here, I fell in love with the accessibility and natural beauty of the environment and advocacy of the people to protect that environment.
[2:18:34]
I understand there are complexities and logistics and livelihoods to consider.
[2:18:39]
I, as a civil servant, have seen it firsthand.
[2:18:42]
Consider, please, what kind of city are we building?
[2:18:46]
Keep San Marcos beautiful.
[2:18:49]
I just want to point out that Exxon executives knew for a very long time what was wrong with continuing to push for petroleum to be used, what is wrong that we already don't know about still.
[2:19:05]
We know so many bad things about AI and data centers already and there is definitely more that we do not know about that is being hidden from the public and will continue to be hidden from the public until terrible things happen.
[2:19:17]
I started watching fallout recently in the future, post-Nuclear War, their money is backed by
[2:19:25]
water. I want to say when our spring has run dry, we will not be able to drink money. Every
[2:19:34]
circle I run in multiple circles around the city finds this consideration appalling and does
[2:19:39]
not support it. We are not a vocal minority. I also think that's a really ambitious plaque back there.
[2:19:46]
there are a lot of spaces for future people and if we are considering
[2:19:51]
a data center to be built here, I highly doubt we will be able to fill all of them in the future.
[2:20:00]
The A.I. bubble is definitely going to collapse sometime soon.
[2:20:06]
Yeah, that's it. Thank you.
[2:20:07]
Thank you.
[2:20:09]
Sir, just one moment, please.
[2:20:11]
If I could ask a legal question, am I able to take a recess right now?
[2:20:15]
Or do we need to make sure we finish this such an item?
[2:20:23]
You may take a recess.
[2:20:24]
Okay, let's take a time and a recess.
[2:20:28]
15. There we go.
[2:20:30]
844.
[2:20:31]
If I could ask everybody to please calm down outside.
[2:20:34]
we do have an announcement that we need to make an interest of time. And so it asks anybody
[2:20:38]
in line if you are going to speak on the topic, please speak on something that has been
[2:20:41]
spoken of already, we are going to get to a point where we could possibly be entertaining
[2:20:45]
of recess to postpone this to the following day that is something we do not want to entertain.
[2:20:51]
So as you please, if you're in line, please just be responsible with your time and you're more
[2:20:55]
than welcome to speak, just please a responsible. Let's try not to duplicate the comments that
[2:20:59]
So if you please a stage of name, you have three minutes.
[2:21:07]
I'm here opposing data centers for San Marcos.
[2:21:10]
One of the things I wanted to touch on that I don't believe was touched on previously is
[2:21:13]
while I cannot speak directly for some of the first speakers that we had here
[2:21:16]
talking about their experience living across from these sites.
[2:21:20]
As somebody who recreates regularly, near River Ridge Parkway, near epic piping,
[2:21:24]
I can completely understand why there's no residential construction going on in that area.
[2:21:28]
So I implore you guys that to put a site similar to that in both
[2:21:32]
pollution creation, not necessarily water consumption, but necessarily sound creation.
[2:21:37]
Next to these residential sites is a terrible idea. Beyond that, I see that, I mean,
[2:21:46]
the very epitome of sustainability that I believe that we should represent as responsible
[2:21:52]
leaders in our community is something that does not represent this project. And so I think
[2:22:00]
something that while we've had a clear history of 10,000 years of occupation in this area and
[2:22:06]
this wonderful oasis that is near Hill Country and the Chihuahuan Desert border, I believe that
[2:22:11]
we should try and further that to another 10,000 years if possible. So thank you all for your time.
[2:22:16]
Thank you.
[2:22:20]
Hold up. Is that allowed?
[2:22:23]
Okay. I had to ask. Please say your name and three.
[2:22:27]
Hello. Yeah, my name is Joseph Morris. I live in St. Marcus since 1997. I went to St. Marcus High School.
[2:22:32]
I got a business degree from Texas State University.
[2:22:35]
I paid for my business degree by working on home renovation job sites, by working in mechanic
[2:22:41]
shops and by working in factories.
[2:22:44]
And having worked in factories, I think it's important that we think about how much, if
[2:22:49]
the goal is to create jobs, how much natural and public resources are we using per job created.
[2:22:55]
So this area has a manufacturing base.
[2:22:59]
we've got C-Fan epic piping, a thermon, we've got quite a few factories in this area that
[2:23:06]
are creating a lot of jobs, but they're not using as much resources per jobs created.
[2:23:10]
If our goal is to save water and also create jobs, I think there's better decision making
[2:23:15]
to make both into these data centers into our industrial landscape.
[2:23:22]
And then another thing to think about, I think one thing that is pretty obvious to me is that
[2:23:28]
These data centers aren't going to create long-term construction work.
[2:23:32]
We've got people talking about how they work in the construction industry and this will help them out.
[2:23:37]
However, I don't think there's going to be 50 years of construction jobs generated by these data centers.
[2:23:43]
I think it's a short-term benefit for the people who are seeking employment.
[2:23:49]
And I think that there's other ways where we can create economic value without using as much resources and hopefully benefit every goal here.
[2:24:02]
Thank you.
[2:24:06]
You can do that?
[2:24:07]
Yes.
[2:24:10]
My name is Amanda.
[2:24:11]
My family's been in San Marcos since the 70s and I graduated, but I had a natural resources degree.
[2:24:19]
I am against this abhorrent data center because when our Earth is inhabitable because of
[2:24:25]
overconsumption and greed, nobody will need jobs because we all will be dead.
[2:24:31]
I understand that there's been some repetition, but repetition comes when people don't
[2:24:37]
feel like they're being listened to.
[2:24:40]
So I would think about that.
[2:24:43]
I believe in conservation over corporate greed.
[2:24:46]
This land was set for conservation, it's such a slap in the face to anybody who is still caring when everything seems like it's falling apart
[2:24:55]
You know, we look to our local governments to maybe have a little less corruption and if this goes
[2:25:00]
The way I fear it does, then we can't. I wanted to address the comments about our being disrespectful for clapping after a citizen speaks.
[2:25:10]
What I find disrespectful is the condescending dismissive willfully ignorant rhetoric to line one's pockets with blunt money.
[2:25:20]
Be respectful of our planet, be respectful of our residents, be respectful of your own comprehensive
[2:25:28]
plan.
[2:25:29]
That's a no-brainer to me.
[2:25:32]
If you want to talk about jobs, we should talk about jobs.
[2:25:35]
What is y'all's job?
[2:25:36]
It's to help the citizens of the city, right?
[2:25:39]
Not line your pockets with more money.
[2:25:43]
Do you want to be known as the council that ended the health of our city?
[2:25:49]
Think about that.
[2:25:52]
Thank you.
[2:25:57]
Good evening.
[2:25:58]
Honorable committee members.
[2:26:00]
My name is Amber Lensford.
[2:26:01]
I live here in San Marcos.
[2:26:03]
1312 Baylor Avenue.
[2:26:05]
I'm here tonight representing my family.
[2:26:07]
My two children and my husband who grew up here in San Marcos.
[2:26:10]
And we firmly oppose any decision to promote or allow a new data center to be developed here inside Markos indefinitely.
[2:26:22]
We all know by now that data centers put a huge strain on our energy grid and our water resources and community impact newspaper actually just published last year that we're already on track to run out of water within 30 years.
[2:26:38]
You know, within our lifetime, within the lifetime of our children, and so you have an extreme burden of choice here and a huge responsibility to be the ones that have a stay in that and how our water will be maintained or lost.
[2:26:56]
And so, when it comes to big corporations and big money coming in here saying that you can trust them
[2:27:02]
because they have the contracts and the resources, well look at Wimberley and Jacob's well,
[2:27:08]
where they lost millions in revenue in the past year due to Jacob's well-being closed,
[2:27:13]
meanwhile, aqua Texas is having no accountability because they have the money to not be accountable.
[2:27:20]
And so they said they would take a certain amount of water.
[2:27:24]
They took millions of gallons more.
[2:27:26]
And we all see that who live here.
[2:27:29]
We see how the blanket is dry.
[2:27:32]
And how Jacob's well is closed.
[2:27:35]
And as people who live here, we know our wealth comes from the river.
[2:27:39]
You know, sadly we have to say it like that.
[2:27:42]
But our livelihood and our love for this land comes from the river.
[2:27:46]
And so the choices that we make day-to-day make a big difference.
[2:27:50]
When Blanco, a community decided to put their waste water in the water.
[2:27:56]
And then there was discussing algal, bloom, and all the nasty things.
[2:28:01]
That was their choice that they made.
[2:28:03]
And thank God they eventually decided to undo that.
[2:28:06]
But this is a very serious decision.
[2:28:09]
And it may seem like, oh, it's worth it in the short run.
[2:28:12]
For the money, look what happened to those communities.
[2:28:16]
They actually lost tons in other ways.
[2:28:20]
And so if we really want to preserve the wealth
[2:28:23]
for our children to come, we need to prioritize the water first and foremost.
[2:28:29]
And opposing data centers is the bare minimum.
[2:28:31]
We need to do much more.
[2:28:33]
That statistic by community impact newspaper
[2:28:36]
didn't even include adding in data centers.
[2:28:38]
And so, even if we oppose data centers, we need to be doing more.
[2:28:43]
We need to be educating the community.
[2:28:45]
We need to be doing things systemically with how we treat the landscape, planting native plants,
[2:28:51]
you know, preserving the water we already have and being a lot smarter with how we're
[2:28:56]
developing.
[2:28:57]
And so, I hope you guys can make the right choice for all of our future generations,
[2:29:01]
all of the people that will come after us here.
[2:29:05]
Thank you.
[2:29:05]
Thank you.
[2:29:12]
Good evening planning and zoning commission. My name is No Brock and I live in the San
[2:29:17]
Marcus E.T.J. It's been a while since I've been here and I hope you're all doing pretty well.
[2:29:23]
I'm here to point out some potential misleading information that's in the presentation that
[2:29:27]
you're going to see later. On slide 22 there's a comparison of LUEs which are living unit
[2:29:34]
equivalents between a data center development and a residential development. It appears the goal
[2:29:39]
This slide is a point out that a data center will use less water than houses built on the same land.
[2:29:44]
While that may be true, a data center will take 235 living unit equivalents of water from San Marcos.
[2:29:53]
Excuse me.
[2:29:54]
L-U-E's are not actually supporting living units when they're...
[2:30:00]
At a data center. If the property were developed for residential, the 557 or 819 LEDs would be supporting living units. And just in case you haven't figured this out yet, living units equal people. A vote for a preferred scenario map amendment here would be less water for residents in San Marcos.
[2:30:22]
In the PSA application, terminology is used to make it sound like light industrial zoning would be better than CD2.5 because the property next door is heavy industrial.
[2:30:35]
If this does become industrial, all of that, all that will do is move that industrial closer to the existing residents that are already in that area.
[2:30:43]
Just because heavy industrial is next door does not mean more industrial is needed.
[2:30:50]
That mindset leads to widespread industrial development clusters throughout the city.
[2:30:55]
It just keeps expanding and expanding.
[2:30:58]
The majority of the neighboring property is unzoned, ETA, not industrial.
[2:31:04]
Conservation, cluster, and commercial employment low, or both of the preferred scenario
[2:31:10]
designations when the smart terminal became a thing. Now we have over 700 acres of heavy industrial
[2:31:17]
with a promise from this city to make it over 2000. Don't do the same thing here. Vote no on this
[2:31:24]
preferred scenario map amendment and the Associated Zone. Thank you.
[2:31:35]
Hello planning and zoning commission
[2:31:36]
my name is Annie Donovan. I'm here to ask you to vote no on agenda items 4 and 5. The community
[2:31:42]
out here now to tell you that we don't want this. Don't throw away all the hard work that the
[2:31:47]
comprehensive plan oversight committee worked on. Additionally since I've been here, I've heard
[2:31:53]
many union workers tonight discuss how this construction of the single data center will give
[2:31:58]
them jobs. One thing I wanted to ask is what's going to happen to all those jobs once the data
[2:32:04]
centers built? The construction jobs are temporary. The negative effects of a data center
[2:32:10]
permanent. Thank you.
[2:32:12]
Thank you.
[2:32:17]
Hello, my name is Wiley LePort.
[2:32:19]
Thank you in advance for hearing me out
[2:32:20]
if any of my words resonate with you.
[2:32:24]
I'm a small business owner in New Rompools.
[2:32:27]
My home is Quail Run Drive St. Markos.
[2:32:31]
I try to think of any pros about having a data center
[2:32:34]
but all I worry is the horrendous causes and effects.
[2:32:38]
We live in a world where people prioritize convenience
[2:32:40]
rather than community.
[2:32:43]
Part of my livelihood is having a thriving business, more importantly, the pleasure of being rich
[2:32:49]
in life in terms of working with my animals around this beautiful space.
[2:32:55]
I wonder how my big animals, like my horse, is going to feel comfortable.
[2:33:01]
I've read data centers, vibrate, there are surrounding the areas affecting homes in livestock.
[2:33:06]
I fear of personal relocation and moving everything I built to have a comfortable environment.
[2:33:14]
Things are happening and breakneck speed already.
[2:33:17]
I don't know if this next part is allowed, but on behalf of my partner who is on call and cannot be here,
[2:33:24]
alignment in the San Marcos Maxwell area reaching to Austin.
[2:33:29]
I actually talked him into moving into this area,
[2:33:32]
And we both now want to leave depending on cause and effect, whether it's, he would get more money and all.
[2:33:41]
We've both already dreadfully solved the relocation, but are still crossing our fingers hanging on hope we can build to live richly again with their space and animals,
[2:33:50]
if San Marcos decides to drop such a strong moral that brings and keeps people here.
[2:33:55]
This decision really chooses where we build our home and family.
[2:33:59]
Again, that sounds like a soft story, but my heart needs San Marcos to continue to have safe moral.
[2:34:09]
And I am against the data centers.
[2:34:11]
Thank you.
[2:34:12]
Thank you.
[2:34:16]
Hello, my name is Karen Loper-Fito, a San Marcos resident.
[2:34:22]
And I would like to speak against the proposed data center.
[2:34:24]
I know you guys have heard all about how much water data centers use and how few jobs they provide after construction and how the immediate neighbors are strongly against the project.
[2:34:36]
And you asked for some new information so today I want to talk to you about a different and even more disturbing element that AI is adding to the situation.
[2:34:45]
Trigger warning for the audience I'm going to be talking about some intense subjects.
[2:34:50]
As of current date, grock the AI owned by Musk is making it available to the public to create deep fake news and undress anyone of any age.
[2:34:59]
And I'm going to say that in-
[2:35:00]
Again, so you can think about the implications of that. Of any age,
[2:35:07]
and showing them nude or in revealing
[2:35:08]
of bikini with the click of a button, imagine you here on the city council vote against
[2:35:13]
the interest of your constituents and allow this to pass and imagine an image circulating
[2:35:17]
of you all sitting in these chambers completely undressed and photorealistic. Now to be clear,
[2:35:23]
I've never used AI, chat, GPT, X or any of these so-called technologies and wouldn't do something
[2:35:29]
like that. But I do know that women and young girls are committing suicide in increasing numbers
[2:35:36]
because non-consensual images are being created by men and boys mind you using our pressure
[2:35:41]
shrinking water and electricity to power these AI data centers to be able to make these images
[2:35:46]
and share them. This is the intersection of environmental rape and the continued disrespect of women's
[2:35:52]
bodies now via AI-generated public emulation rituals leading people to death. In addition to
[2:35:58]
those horrors, more and more stories are coming out about people who are going into chatGPT
[2:36:03]
and do psychosis and killing themselves or members of their families or their partners.
[2:36:08]
AI isn't just funny pictures and viral videos.
[2:36:11]
It's robbing us of jobs, culture, creativity, privacy, problem-solving skills, friends, critical
[2:36:17]
thinking, water, the list goes on.
[2:36:21]
So what world are you voting for?
[2:36:23]
For a few thousand dollars in the city budget, in all seriousness, what is the point of
[2:36:28]
when the river is dry and the bees have all died.
[2:36:31]
There's no planet B, so let's vote down this bogus plan by another desperate white man looking to make a dime off stolen land.
[2:36:39]
What I want you to consider when you catch your vote against this proposition is that you are voting for humanity,
[2:36:45]
you are voting for community, human and non-human, and this is literally life or death.
[2:36:51]
Thank you. That's what I had to say at an earlier as I haven't used up all my time.
[2:36:56]
I went to high society on the way here to fuel up before this talk and there was a kid's
[2:37:02]
coloring page and it is AI generated and the employees were complaining about it and I was
[2:37:06]
loudly complaining about it and there's a little thing that they obviously typed in, oh this
[2:37:10]
and that it says T-E-A-T rental, T-T rental. So you want to explain to your kids what a T is and you
[2:37:17]
can't hire someone to spell out to correctly. Thank you. Thank you.
[2:37:26]
I'm at Divers and Marcus
[2:37:28]
President.
[2:37:31]
I am praying and asking you all to do what's right for the San Marcos
[2:37:34]
residents and about no again. To this application to reason near residents and wildlife
[2:37:41]
and farms, I was surprised after your last vote this was on again. I hope you've all
[2:37:46]
had been on deeper into researching AI data centers as did our beloved Jim Graber. He's
[2:37:51]
spent a lot of extra time researching and found out how it takes electricity at 80,000
[2:37:56]
homes for one data center.
[2:37:58]
I watched a video of a family living near a data center.
[2:38:01]
They built near their home.
[2:38:02]
Their electric bill went from 200 a month to 400.
[2:38:06]
If you vote yes, then your vote will.
[2:38:08]
No question will cause extreme undue stress on thousands
[2:38:12]
of San Marcos families already stress from rising prices.
[2:38:16]
Data centers should be building their own electric sources.
[2:38:19]
You've heard over and over about the water loss
[2:38:21]
that will happen.
[2:38:22]
and you know, we are still in drought condition.
[2:38:26]
All the wildlife ranchers, goat farm,
[2:38:29]
beekeepers, and people will.
[2:38:30]
I stress will be negatively affected.
[2:38:33]
Your jobs are very important because your vote
[2:38:36]
can end up affecting thousands of residents.
[2:38:40]
I ask you to drop into your hearts and search for your vote.
[2:38:45]
Hearing from all of us that are counting on you to vote for the people,
[2:38:50]
the families and wildlife.
[2:38:52]
Not for a corporate entity that has proven no interest in respecting families while our
[2:38:59]
beautiful river otherwise they would not be trying to build in this farm area.
[2:39:04]
If they cared about towns and citizens they would build far away from families while life and
[2:39:09]
farms but no they are back. Please open your eyes and hearts and vote no.
[2:39:15]
Your no vote to resolve this family area is very important and does have great weight on the outcome.
[2:39:23]
Along with the no vote for approval of this project, please motion and approve as majority denial for once and for all.
[2:39:32]
And thank you for voting no and for the citizens.
[2:39:35]
Thank you.
[2:39:38]
Good evening.
[2:39:39]
My name is Jerry.
[2:39:41]
I've been a proud local 1095 member for almost 10 years now.
[2:39:45]
choose into join the union as one of the best decisions I've ever made.
[2:39:50]
Over the years, I've come truly appreciate not just the work we do, but the people we do it with.
[2:39:57]
What we do matters our work has helped strengthen our...
[2:40:00]
Our communities and support the people who we depend on who depend on it. Knowing that our efforts
[2:40:06]
make a real difference is something I take a lot of pride in, and in return the union has
[2:40:12]
done great things for me as well, giving me opportunities, stability, and a sense of belonging.
[2:40:18]
I've enjoyed every chapter of the journey so far, and I look forward to continuing it.
[2:40:24]
I plan to stay with the local 1095 until the day I retire, and I'm thankful to be part
[2:40:29]
of something that truly stands for its members.
[2:40:34]
With that said, I ask you to support the Data Center project
[2:40:38]
because of the opportunities it will provide
[2:40:41]
and create here in Senate Marcus.
[2:40:44]
Thank you, with respect.
[2:40:49]
Good evening, commissioners.
[2:40:50]
My name is Ron and Conroy.
[2:40:52]
I'm here to support the Data Center's owning request
[2:40:54]
because it creates real career opportunities
[2:40:57]
and helps working families and Sam Marcos.
[2:41:00]
Thank you for your time.
[2:41:06]
Good evening, my name is Moira. I live here. All I can hear of the proposed benefits of this project is jobs.
[2:41:17]
I'm a musician and an artist. I work in the creative sector.
[2:41:20]
And I've been watching a lot of creative jobs disappear to AI, which is a great concern of mine.
[2:41:26]
My best friend is a teacher as well. And she's up to her neck.
[2:41:30]
in assignments that are clearly made using AI.
[2:41:35]
And I can imagine in the university as well
[2:41:37]
it's been a large frustration
[2:41:39]
to both the teachers and the students
[2:41:41]
who are having difficulty clarifying
[2:41:43]
whether or not their work is AI or just proper punctuation.
[2:41:49]
And when it comes to opportunities,
[2:41:51]
I think that we as a city have a golden opportunity
[2:41:55]
to honor the character of this town,
[2:41:58]
which is a river town.
[2:41:59]
And set an example to the nation and to the world by standing up for the springs and the
[2:42:04]
aquifer that are the reason that this town exists in the face of a new industry which we
[2:42:11]
don't fully yet understand the implications of.
[2:42:15]
And the implications that we've found so far don't seem to be very healthy for the population.
[2:42:20]
I hope that you will take the opportunity to stand with your citizens, the overwhelming majority
[2:42:27]
if I don't believe would be working to build this project or working at it and don't make your
[2:42:33]
decision based on money, but on the representation of your citizens. Thank you for your time.
[2:42:39]
Thank you.
[2:42:46]
Hi, my name is Blake Cohen. I'm a Sam Marcus resident.
[2:42:50]
A lot has been sent here tonight. I'm not going to redo what they've already said. I'll just point
[2:42:56]
out the Houston Advanced Research Council says that for every megawatt hour of energy produced,
[2:43:04]
793 gallons will actually be needed to produce that energy.
[2:43:08]
This puts the data center according to the specifications that they have brought.
[2:43:14]
That means that it will use up to over 798,000 gallons of water per hour.
[2:43:22]
But really, this is more of a question of who are you listening to?
[2:43:26]
Are you listening to the money?
[2:43:28]
Are you listening to the people?
[2:43:29]
And I think that that's an important, I think that John should sit with that.
[2:43:33]
Thank you.
[2:43:35]
Thank you.
[2:43:38]
Good evening.
[2:43:38]
My name is James Pustle.
[2:43:39]
I live in the city of Kirby.
[2:43:42]
I'm a parent to urge this council and this wisdom to approve this project.
[2:43:47]
I feel that this project will promote prosperity and progress in the 40 year
[2:43:51]
citizens of San Marcos.
[2:43:53]
In closing, I'd just like to say that the union provides school labor.
[2:43:57]
We're very, very, very good benefits of pension and health and welfare.
[2:44:02]
And close again, I would just like to support this project.
[2:44:05]
Thank you.
[2:44:06]
Thank you.
[2:44:11]
Hi, my name is Jennifer Corboy.
[2:44:13]
Thank you for the opportunity to speak.
[2:44:15]
I am a Texas resident.
[2:44:17]
This project represents a real and timely opportunity for working families, particularly women in the trades.
[2:44:25]
These jobs provide benefits.
[2:44:27]
and I've seen firsthand how initiatives like this do more than create jobs.
[2:44:32]
They create stability, career pathways, and long-term economic mobility.
[2:44:39]
When women are given access to quality work, training, and supportive job sites,
[2:44:43]
the impact extends for far beyond the individual. Families gain financial security,
[2:44:51]
workplace becomes stronger and communities benefit from skilled and committed
[2:44:56]
workforce.
[2:44:58]
Supporting this project is an investment.
[2:45:00]
assessment in people and along and long-term results. I strongly encourage the board to support this project and the opportunity it provides for workers, families, and the future of this community. Thank you.
[2:45:12]
Thank you.
[2:45:23]
My name is Louis Schwartz. I've looked at my whole life, and I've posed the data center. Folks have done a beautiful job touching on, perhaps the more noble reasons to oppose it.
[2:45:34]
But if we're considering profits, I just want to say that it doesn't have to be a choice between creating jobs and what the people want, because you can have both.
[2:45:48]
Like, our entire tourism industry is the river. People don't come here to see a data center.
[2:45:55]
So, they come here for the river. And if we don't have the river people aren't coming.
[2:45:58]
So, I just think like what will create more local jobs.
[2:46:04]
One data center or the entire tourism industry of the city.
[2:46:08]
Thank you so much for your time.
[2:46:09]
Thank you.
[2:46:15]
Hello, my name is Kira Utter.
[2:46:17]
I live at 1-2-1 Cronic Avenue here in Samarkis, Texas.
[2:46:22]
And I was also here a little less than a year ago,
[2:46:26]
also speaking out against this proposition,
[2:46:28]
is a little bit disappointing that I do have to be back.
[2:46:31]
But I can't say much that hasn't already been said, but I would like to highlight the difference between those who are four and against
[2:46:39]
more specifically those who live here who are speaking against this and those who don't who are speaking for this.
[2:46:46]
Workers and working class people should not be pitted against each other, but that is clearly what is happening here, but it is not them or even us who is winning.
[2:46:57]
This is a top versus bottom problem who is actually winning with this data center
[2:47:03]
and not the citizens and not the workers, but it is in fact that top class of money.
[2:47:09]
People who are making the most money in the world and it's definitely not the people who live here.
[2:47:16]
A vote for this data center is a vote against the city and its citizens.
[2:47:20]
I know you all are probably falling asleep up there, but I implore you all to listen to your people and be an accurate reflection of our citizens.
[2:47:27]
of the people who actually live here.
[2:47:30]
And this conversation does extend beyond the people.
[2:47:33]
It is for the wildlife and the ecosystems and the natural river
[2:47:37]
that has attracted people for thousands of years
[2:47:39]
and will hopefully be able to continue garnering beautiful crowds
[2:47:44]
to give them a chance to experience this beautiful wildlife
[2:47:49]
that myself and some people have that urge people
[2:47:52]
to speak out against it.
[2:47:54]
It's a very strong feeling that we're all feeling.
[2:47:56]
So please vote to know for this data center and I hope I don't have to be back here.
[2:48:02]
Thank you.
[2:48:04]
Thank you.
[2:48:09]
I'm Brandon Blocker.
[2:48:11]
I live here in San Marcos on 2-3 Fairfax.
[2:48:14]
I work in New Bromble's Texas.
[2:48:17]
And I just want to reiterate that I'm the water problem with the data centers pretty unique because
[2:48:23]
unlike farming or something where water goes back to the community data centers.
[2:48:28]
It uses up the water and then it evaporates and then they pollute the water and it doesn't
[2:48:35]
go back to the river at any point in time so when you take it away it doesn't necessarily
[2:48:40]
get recycled or anything like that when it evaporates it moves farther down and when you're
[2:48:44]
using water day and day out it's going to cause a problem and we'd like to use that for
[2:48:51]
better infrastructure that's going to be like you know something.
[2:48:54]
I recall it's related, and that's all I have to say.
[2:48:57]
Thank you.
[2:49:05]
Good evening.
[2:49:06]
Good evening.
[2:49:07]
My name is Frank and I live in New Bromfels,
[2:49:09]
just 25 minutes down the 35 on a good day.
[2:49:17]
I've been a member of the Lyona family for just over 12 years
[2:49:22]
and during that, my family has grown into five.
[2:49:26]
I'm here this evening to share the importance
[2:49:29]
and what are the importance and I want to show my support for the Data Center Zoning
[2:49:36]
request.
[2:49:37]
This project creates construction, careers, not just temporary jobs, as so many people have
[2:49:44]
said so far.
[2:49:47]
The phrase union standards means training, apprenticeships, huge family supporting wages,
[2:49:54]
and benefits.
[2:49:55]
These are crucial, so local workers can build.
[2:50:00]
Long-term futures, strong jobs,
[2:50:06]
and if the strong jobs lead to safer work sites, skilled labor, and stronger communities, in short,
[2:50:18]
union work, builds America, and we will build San Marcos.
[2:50:26]
I support this project and I ask you to do the same. Thank you for your time and consideration. I have a wonderful life.
[2:50:33]
Thank you.
[2:50:40]
My name is Lazarus Faskas, and as you've heard from the majority of this room, I'm vehemently
[2:50:45]
against these AI data centers.
[2:50:48]
What could I say that hasn't already been said tonight?
[2:50:50]
How these data centers guzzle our water, disturb us with the greatest noise, and pollute
[2:50:54]
the nature of Samarko's pride to self-worth, offer this sake of fitness misinformation
[2:50:59]
and cobbled together by a machine.
[2:51:02]
If not things more sinister, I refrain to mention in this building, but y'all should
[2:51:06]
that no one I'm talking about.
[2:51:09]
How they promise unsustainable jobs that'll
[2:51:11]
fizzle away as quickly as a water level,
[2:51:14]
how the heads of these data centers have no care,
[2:51:18]
no love for San Marcos North people,
[2:51:20]
only the money and resources they can take from us.
[2:51:24]
You've heard these things, hopefully no these things.
[2:51:27]
I hold their respect to now our city council
[2:51:29]
as aware of the people you represent,
[2:51:31]
of the crowd behind me and further outside.
[2:51:34]
You know what you want,
[2:51:35]
we're telling you what we want directly, we don't want these data centers, we want our town
[2:51:42]
and our dignity as Sam Martians to be respected. First it comes into our town, next it comes
[2:51:47]
out of our taps. Thank you for your time. Thank you.
[2:51:57]
You're meeting everyone. My name is Jessica
[2:51:59]
Modena and I am here to represent myself and my husband who could not be here tonight. We are residents
[2:52:06]
of this community, we also work here, and we're homeowners in this community as of 2022.
[2:52:13]
I had prepared to share all kinds of reasons that have already been shared tonight about
[2:52:17]
why my husband and I oppose the zoning changes for this data center project, but again,
[2:52:26]
I want to save the time for others and get us all back home tonight, and so I'm deciding
[2:52:31]
to share some things kind of off the cuff.
[2:52:34]
I think the first thing I wanted to share is that we have extended family and El Paso
[2:52:38]
Texas who have been impacted and their water crisis there has already been exacerbated
[2:52:43]
by the metadata centers and so we're seeing this and we've heard from many people already
[2:52:48]
about what these environmental impacts will be and I want to share some additional cooperation
[2:52:55]
with something current set earlier today. I am a domestic and sexual violence advocate as well
[2:53:01]
and I can attest to everything that has been shared by
[2:53:03]
Corinthians testimony today and all of the things
[2:53:06]
and damages we're seeing to our young people in particular
[2:53:09]
with regard to AI and all of the things
[2:53:12]
that folks are able to do now.
[2:53:15]
But I also want to share something because I have a
[2:53:17]
deep relationship and connection to construction workers
[2:53:20]
and I want to share stories from that perspective
[2:53:23]
as we're hearing from all of the labor union folks here
[2:53:26]
tonight.
[2:53:27]
My father, my grandfather, they built this state.
[2:53:30]
And I deeply respect the work that our labor folks are doing for us to keep our cities running.
[2:53:39]
A couple years ago, Elon Musk came into the Austin community to build things for Tesla and build a big Tesla empire here in Texas.
[2:53:48]
One of the young people that I love and care about here in San Marcos was a welder and went on to work for the Tesla company.
[2:53:54]
And it worked out really well for many years for him, but just like we're hearing tonight those jobs aren't going to last and what happened to this young man is he was laid off after about two to three years of making really good money.
[2:54:07]
And guess what, he's back here now. So I admire and love that you all are unionized, but I also want to say that that does not make long-term jobs here in San Marcos.
[2:54:18]
Okay, it just doesn't and what we'll see is similar to every other developer who who sells us these lies
[2:54:26]
and sells us these intentions for our communities
[2:54:28]
but the reality is once they get what they need from us, those promises are not going to be kept
[2:54:34]
and these promises are not going to be upheld.
[2:54:38]
And so we've seen that happen with other projects in our state.
[2:54:41]
We are going to see that happen here if you all allow this zoning change to continue.
[2:54:45]
You've heard from us time and time again, we do not want this here.
[2:54:50]
We do not want this in our sacred community and to impact our sacred waters.
[2:54:54]
Please, please, hear our cries, and please, please know that this is not what we want.
[2:55:04]
Hi, my name is Laura Day. I grew up in the Dallas area and got out of there as quickly as I could. At 18, I came to equate my home state with a culture that was above all fiercely disrespectful to the environment.
[2:55:16]
I sent my child in and out of emergency rooms because I had that asthma.
[2:55:20]
As about enough that a young child threatened my life. As with it, no to help was exacerbated if not caused by the fact that my child had homes at under the flight pass of DFW Airport.
[2:55:30]
I respect the union folks here trying to support their family, but I would encourage them to do a little research into what this center would mean for CO2 emissions.
[2:55:38]
And if it's really worth it to take a paycheck that a lot in the long run makes it harder for your kids to breathe.
[2:55:44]
I hold back in love with my home state and part because I found in South Texas a culture that respected the land in a way North Texas has failed to do so.
[2:55:51]
You also think social down here and I hope you continue to respect it.
[2:55:55]
Thank you.
[2:55:59]
Hi, my name is Brenda Hatinger.
[2:56:01]
I moved to Sandmarkis, actually just in September.
[2:56:05]
My decision to move here was based on your decision in March to retire from teaching after
[2:56:13]
37 years and to move to Sandmarkis.
[2:56:15]
It's something that I've been wanting to do since I was 17 years old.
[2:56:19]
I moved here for many reasons.
[2:56:22]
the river being one of the greatest reasons and the natural resources and also the people in
[2:56:28]
the community are very friendly and supportive and I feel at home here, I'm very happy here.
[2:56:36]
What I'm not happy to hear is that you want to go in and not y'all but big companies go in,
[2:56:45]
I lived in Katie, I saw the industry come in, you lost your lights, you didn't get to see
[2:56:50]
the stars at night, I mean, it's here for peace and quiet and also for the structure that
[2:56:56]
you do have a lot of infrastructure already here, medical infrastructure that can support
[2:57:01]
families. And I just pray and hope that you vote against this. It's just not right for
[2:57:10]
San Marcus. Thank you. Thank you.
[2:57:17]
Thank you.
[2:57:18]
My name is Justin James Bridges. First of all, I do have to express my disappointment
[2:57:23]
at the fact that we're even having this conversation because of one man making a bad investment
[2:57:28]
and his greed trying to push to recover the funds from that bad investment.
[2:57:33]
You made a bad investment. Stop trying to destroy our city. Stop trying to destroy the environment.
[2:57:39]
This is ridiculous.
[2:57:41]
You know, it hurts me to see these union members out here.
[2:57:44]
You know, I support unions. I've stood on picket lines with unions in multiple states.
[2:57:48]
I've stood by them trying to help with higher wages with them.
[2:57:51]
I've stood by them on many times.
[2:57:53]
They've called and asked for support.
[2:57:54]
I've stood out with unions.
[2:57:55]
I'm disgusted that they're looking to destroy our city.
[2:57:59]
Most of those union members, I don't even know if any of them live here in this city.
[2:58:03]
So that money is just going to be going out of town.
[2:58:06]
More money just getting sucked out of Sam Marcus plus our resources being taken away from us.
[2:58:12]
This is absurd.
[2:58:14]
This is absurd.
[2:58:15]
The fact that you're even considering this and have brought this forward, y'all should
[2:58:19]
We all really, that's a disgrace on the city.
[2:58:22]
You all should be disappointed in yourselves.
[2:58:24]
I'm disappointed in this.
[2:58:25]
Like this is really absurd to me
[2:58:27]
that we're still having this conversation.
[2:58:29]
The city has spoken.
[2:58:31]
The community has spoken.
[2:58:33]
We don't want this.
[2:58:35]
It doesn't belong in San Marcus.
[2:58:37]
I have friends that live all over this country.
[2:58:39]
I have friends that are fleeing other cities
[2:58:41]
that put data centers there
[2:58:43]
because now they have rolling brownouts
[2:58:45]
and their water doesn't run all the time.
[2:58:49]
it destroys communities. Sam Marcus is one of the longest consecutively inhabited places in North
[2:58:55]
America. Why would you want to destroy that? Why do you want that to be your legacy?
[2:59:02]
Mech the right decision. You have the power to make the right decision here. Do the right
[2:59:08]
thing. Don't let greed control what's going on here. Listen to the people. Thank you.
[2:59:16]
Thank you.
[2:59:19]
Hi.
[2:59:20]
My name's Georgia Parker.
[2:59:22]
I've been a citizen of Samarkis for 26 years.
[2:59:27]
I almost didn't come up and speak because it was hard for me to imagine how I don't
[2:59:32]
know that y'all would even consider approving this change in zoning.
[2:59:39]
But just in case you are, I would hope that this would be an easy decision considering we've
[2:59:44]
gone through this process already and we've all made our voices heard and I think you have an
[2:59:50]
opportunity with your vote to change this zoning whether or not to change the zoning to inspire
[2:59:56]
Here I hope across the state of Texas, across...
[3:00:00]
House, the country, and across the world, and make Samarkas a place that is known for what it is,
[3:00:08]
a place that has a strong sense of community that gives us shit, and that cares more about
[3:00:18]
each other than billionaires. Thank you.
[3:00:22]
Thank you.
[3:00:25]
Hi, my name is Albert Lannum. 30-year member of the Labour's International Union with America,
[3:00:30]
I'm here representing the folks of local 1095.
[3:00:35]
I just want to say that, you know, I've heard a lot of people get up here today and, you know, say they've got this college degree or that college degree.
[3:00:43]
What a project like this does is it offers an opportunity for high school graduates and folks coming from other areas to build a career in skill traits.
[3:00:53]
So, if you were to pass this project and have it move forward, I think it would give a lot of folks
[3:01:00]
opportunities to build a career and sustainable life here in the St. Marko's area.
[3:01:06]
Thank you.
[3:01:07]
Thank you.
[3:01:14]
Hi there.
[3:01:15]
I'm Jess Bowers.
[3:01:16]
I'm a resident of the city.
[3:01:18]
I like many people move here for the college.
[3:01:21]
I started going to college.
[3:01:23]
But then I stayed here because I fell in love with the city.
[3:01:26]
And I'd really like to die here.
[3:01:29]
There was a gentleman earlier who said that he'd lived here
[3:01:31]
for 75 years.
[3:01:32]
I'd like that to be me one day.
[3:01:34]
So I'm going to be here for a while.
[3:01:36]
And I oppose the building of a day to a eye center here.
[3:01:40]
I'm a resident.
[3:01:41]
I don't want it for the reasons already
[3:01:43]
enumerated by my neighbors.
[3:01:46]
All of the arguments against, I haven't
[3:01:48]
had heard a single word that I disagree with.
[3:01:51]
I agree with all of my neighbors that are against it,
[3:01:54]
all of their words are mine.
[3:01:55]
what they've said, that's what I think too.
[3:01:59]
So if this comes back to this council,
[3:02:03]
I'll show up again.
[3:02:04]
If I live here for 70 years,
[3:02:06]
I'm gonna be showing up in front of this council.
[3:02:08]
So I'll remember the things that this council decides.
[3:02:12]
I'll tell you about it.
[3:02:13]
And so pretty short.
[3:02:15]
You've already heard it all.
[3:02:17]
So I'll go.
[3:02:18]
But that's my thoughts.
[3:02:19]
I'm against it.
[3:02:19]
Thank you so much.
[3:02:21]
Thank you.
[3:02:23]
Hi.
[3:02:24]
My name is Yiddie Nichols. I'm a resident of Sam Markis. I'm here to ask y'all to vote against
[3:02:30]
Many planning and zoning changes that would allow the data center to be built here
[3:02:35]
I do understand that two of the largest revenue sources for the city are charges for electricity and water
[3:02:43]
And while the data center being built here my increases revenues for city
[3:02:47]
I think it would come at a large cost for a city. I
[3:02:51]
understand that there has been a lot of concerns raised about, you know, the increase in
[3:02:57]
electricity bills and how that does get pushed on to residences and small business owners
[3:03:02]
in the area and I do believe that those increases could cause future residents and future
[3:03:08]
small business owners to exist here which would lead to lost tax revenue for the city and
[3:03:15]
impact our long-term growth. I do believe that that outweighs the, you know, the positives
[3:03:23]
of the temporary labor construction jobs that are going to be available and then the small
[3:03:29]
amount of permanent jobs that the data center just offer. Thank you. Thank you.
[3:03:37]
Good evening. My name
[3:03:38]
is Sam Benavitas. I didn't plan on speaking this evening. I just came from a three hour long board
[3:03:44]
meeting and my brain is really fried, but after listening to talking about people speaking
[3:03:50]
favor of this, I felt called to come and voice my concerns about the status center and
[3:03:56]
go on the record. So I've got some quick thoughts. I jot it down. I started on the neighborhood
[3:04:01]
commission, so I've heard this presentation and I had the opportunity to ask some questions
[3:04:06]
of the developers and I was deeply unimpressed and concerned with their responses. First of all,
[3:04:12]
that I don't want to answer any questions about the war users,
[3:04:15]
they actively discourage questions about that.
[3:04:17]
Kind of preempting questions that they thought would come up,
[3:04:21]
but not letting us ask questions,
[3:04:22]
or not welcoming questions about water usage,
[3:04:24]
I had a question about, I heard that it became so contaminated
[3:04:28]
that has to be shut down and wanted to ask about that.
[3:04:31]
I wasn't able to, I hope that you all are able to ask that tonight.
[3:04:34]
I also want to say to all the workers
[3:04:37]
depending on this project for work,
[3:04:40]
I want you to have secure jobs.
[3:04:41]
I want you to make a living wage.
[3:04:44]
I want you to have steady income that allows you to support your family and meet your needs.
[3:04:49]
I want that for everyone.
[3:04:51]
And I hate that it's being framed as coming at the cost of destroying our planet and destroying
[3:04:55]
our water supply.
[3:04:57]
I know that each of you have seen that KVC article about the death of the dead.
[3:05:09]
May we dream of a world and work towards a world where we don't need to pick between stable jobs and the health of our environment, and may each of you be leaders in that fight tonight. Thank you.
[3:05:21]
Thank you.
[3:05:24]
Good evening.
[3:05:25]
My name is Patricia Herrington.
[3:05:27]
I'm a resident of San Marcos.
[3:05:29]
One thing that I haven't heard addressed very much is the impact that this will have on
[3:05:35]
the very lives of the people that are living close by, but how it might affect all of San
[3:05:40]
Marcos.
[3:05:41]
I haven't heard anything at all about what possible levels of radiation would be released
[3:05:48]
through the data centers and how the frequencies that will be emitted will affect not only
[3:05:57]
the comfort of humans, but will affect their physical body.
[3:06:01]
There are more and more people who are becoming sensitive to environmental issues.
[3:06:05]
I would think that this would not be something to just look at loosely, but maybe to delve
[3:06:13]
into a little bit on what the impact would be on human life, on plants, and on animal life.
[3:06:21]
We know that it's not safe to live near or next to electrical plants because of the release
[3:06:29]
of the emissions from that.
[3:06:32]
Many people are affected, I'd personally from that.
[3:06:35]
So I just asked that you would think about that and maybe consider that in your vote and
[3:06:41]
I encourage you to vote against the data centers.
[3:06:45]
Thank you for your time.
[3:06:47]
Thank you.
[3:06:52]
My name is Daniel Gamma's Gomez.
[3:06:54]
I'm a resident of San Marcos.
[3:06:56]
I am tired of this talk of improving our city.
[3:07:00]
When all evidence seems to point to a commitment
[3:07:03]
to its destruction, we know that data centers
[3:07:06]
will extract far too much water.
[3:07:08]
We know it will raise the strain on our power grid.
[3:07:11]
We know it won't bring enough jobs
[3:07:13]
to justify changing the zoning in the first place.
[3:07:17]
We know that they make the surrounding areas, they inhabit borderline unlivable.
[3:07:21]
Yet, we stand here today at this precipice, distracted by passing clouds when we should
[3:07:27]
be considering the treacherous drop to the dry, unforegiving earth below.
[3:07:33]
The land we stand ready to betray will not be kind to our selfish machinations.
[3:07:37]
These plans are not limited to San Marcos, but are actually part of a nationwide effort
[3:07:43]
to push the big investments behind AI and its data centers
[3:07:46]
onto an unwilling populace.
[3:07:49]
And as a natural result of that,
[3:07:50]
we are a part of a nationwide resistance here tonight
[3:07:53]
to being killed slowly.
[3:07:56]
The water will drown us in its absence.
[3:07:59]
The animals will return to eat us
[3:08:01]
when we found we cannot eat or grow our crops.
[3:08:04]
And land will erode under the shaky foundations
[3:08:07]
we're building upon and swallow us whole.
[3:08:10]
But if the Earth's lack of forgiveness is something you are willing to ignore, I hope you were prepared for us to never forgive or forget the mistake you could make tonight.
[3:08:23]
I have stood before City Council who much like this commission stood post to portray the wishes of hundreds of people who voiced their wishes
[3:08:30]
And when they did, people stood by and did nothing.
[3:08:34]
We must hold this commission accountable.
[3:08:36]
If you vote in favor of the data center tonight,
[3:08:39]
we will not sit idle.
[3:08:41]
Your names and faces will be remembered,
[3:08:43]
and your careers will not.
[3:08:45]
In case the mass support present here tonight
[3:08:48]
didn't make it explicitly clear,
[3:08:50]
almost no one wants to see these parasites extract.
[3:08:53]
What makes this place worth living in?
[3:08:55]
I say almost because we know certain commissioners
[3:08:57]
think the city and inevitable destination
[3:08:59]
for these data centers. This is false. We know this is false because we're seeing data centers failed
[3:09:05]
to be built nationwide. Why? Because people know they are not necessary for our survival
[3:09:10]
and thus are resisted just as it's being done tonight. They are an elaborate, ruse meant to fool
[3:09:16]
us into letting developers erase us from afar for their personal enrichment. But we are not fooled.
[3:09:23]
We see what the developers are doing. There are two sides here tonight. The side of the living
[3:09:28]
and the side of the damned, you know what to do. Thank you. Thank you.
[3:09:41]
Hi, I'm Syfreedy. I did not plan. I did not write anything.
[3:09:50]
This is kind of beyond the point of sharing facts,
[3:09:53]
but I am stuck alarms that people who are in positions of decision-making authority.
[3:10:00]
And people lived in this town for a really long time, and were very smart and well informed, still don't understand, like basic facts about the harms of data centers. I did a radio interview today with Diane Wassnik, and she was shocked by some of the stuff that we mentioned on air today.
[3:10:16]
But a few facts, and sorry if this is kind of hot pod, I'm still very anxious about public speaking.
[3:10:24]
We use more water to generate electricity than we use to irrigate crops in this country, and the grid of Texas's set to double because of data center demand.
[3:10:38]
Utility rates around data centers have gone up by 250% in some places, and also y'all are going to see a presentation that really like in this project to existing data centers.
[3:10:52]
It's really important for us to understand that the scale of AI data centers are unlike.
[3:10:58]
I've said this before, and it startles people when I say this, but I know that Mayberry
[3:11:03]
has taken counsel, you know, encouraged touring of existing data centers in the Austin
[3:11:07]
and San Antonio areas. I think they're going to show an image of a data center in San Antonio.
[3:11:12]
That's a 10 megawatt data center.
[3:11:14]
And this data center is a 375 megawatt data center.
[3:11:20]
That's five times San Marcos' average, you know, people have said this tonight.
[3:11:25]
It's two and a half times what we use at the hottest day of summer, but it's five times
[3:11:29]
what we use on an average day, so the grid overhaul that will be required for these large
[3:11:34]
loads, not only will it make blackouts more likely, it's also going to increase utility rates
[3:11:41]
for regular people, it's been mentioned tonight also that, yeah, it startles me, you know,
[3:11:50]
this 247 number that's been thrown around, it's not, it's not, it's actually far worse
[3:11:57]
than that because that number doesn't account for data centers, that number doesn't account
[3:12:00]
for climate change.
[3:12:01]
I met with Joe Pentelian within the last week and it seems like policymakers here are just kind
[3:12:09]
and resigned to our drinking our wastewater before too long, and that I think most of us are pretty
[3:12:18]
appalled by, especially given that we're inviting industry into this community that plans to
[3:12:25]
poison that water with proprietary cocktails where we won't actually even know what's, what's in it,
[3:12:30]
and PFAS we know cannot be removed by wastewater, municipal wastewater treatment plants.
[3:12:35]
But I guess two closing points, one, think everyone here is ultimately on the same side.
[3:12:41]
I think this is like those who...
[3:12:46]
Thank
[3:12:49]
you.
[3:12:50]
We will now close the system comment period.
[3:12:54]
If our colleagues do not mind, I would like to move item number six before item number four and five,
[3:13:03]
five, moving C.C. 25, 13, essentially before the data center
[3:13:08]
does anybody have any issues with that?
[3:13:14]
Brings to our consent agenda?
[3:13:15]
Oh, make a motion to approve the consent agenda.
[3:13:19]
Motion to approve, I commit your spell.
[3:13:20]
The second one, commissioning me.
[3:13:22]
Oh, I'm embarrassed.
[3:13:23]
Was that no longer good?
[3:13:28]
I mean, I've been here before.
[3:13:29]
Do you guys want to know what I was?
[3:13:32]
Yes, I'm online, waiting to speak.
[3:13:35]
Was here for a citizen comment?
[3:13:36]
other people that are here, that are waiting to speak as well.
[3:13:43]
Well, you know, let's back on up. Why don't you speak?
[3:13:48]
Need your name? You get three minutes, sir.
[3:13:57]
Sir,
[3:14:02]
I don't know why you wish to speak.
[3:14:03]
There you go. My name is Doni. Well, I live at 524 West
[3:14:07]
Hopped and Street. And I'm new to San Marcos here.
[3:14:11]
I love the community,
[3:14:15]
voting for this seems to be going
[3:14:19]
against the San Marcos Comprehensive Plan.
[3:14:22]
It seems that the decision was made,
[3:14:24]
and then we're back tracking on it.
[3:14:28]
We have a developer who scents his days and nights committed to this.
[3:14:33]
We're just local citizens coming in
[3:14:35]
and wanting to have a voice in this.
[3:14:40]
Sometimes it's thought that no never means no for developers,
[3:14:44]
but yes, it's forever.
[3:14:46]
I don't think we need to vote, yes, it's forever on this.
[3:14:50]
There are other ways in which today the centers get water, one in which the technology that is being used, it's using brine, there's plenty of...
[3:15:00]
Prime out West Texas, through the oil companies to be happy to share with them, might start with
[3:15:07]
cities such as McCamey, Rankin, Big Light, they'd welcome a day to center out there in the
[3:15:14]
infrastructure and all the growth and development, because certainly they need jobs more than
[3:15:18]
we do here.
[3:15:21]
Appreciate what the union members have to say. I was an union out in West Texas. I worked
[3:15:27]
the cement plan. Great. Love my time there. But the idea that we have 25 union workers here
[3:15:36]
in San Marcos and thinking that this is going to create more jobs for people here once the
[3:15:42]
buildings built, those jobs vanish and you go elsewhere. That's just the way it is. If you move on,
[3:15:49]
if you're not willing to move on, well then you're going to have to find someplace else to work.
[3:15:53]
I just share here that a data center that was opened up in the Dallas and Oregon, you can go online and get this information from
[3:16:02]
data centers.com.
[3:16:04]
They talk here that they invested $1.8 billion in the Dallas and established a long-term commitment to the region and state.
[3:16:12]
Now, a fully operational site, we've created over 200 total jobs.
[3:16:17]
And we work hard to support the communities in which our employees live and work.
[3:16:24]
Since 2009, Google has awarded over.
[3:16:28]
Listen, 14 million in grants to nonprofits and organizations based in Oregon, 14 million
[3:16:35]
for the whole state and invested 1.8 million in a 1.8 billion in the data center,
[3:16:44]
don't
[3:16:44]
get it.
[3:16:45]
I'm pro-union, biking in jobs, but I don't think it should come at the cost of destroying
[3:16:53]
the very livelihood of the community, the community's centered around the river, tourism,
[3:17:00]
the quality of life.
[3:17:02]
That's too high a price to pay.
[3:17:06]
And this commitment to create jobs, people can commit to do anything, but that's not a contract.
[3:17:14]
people back out of commitments, happens all the time. We built inner state 30 here and they
[3:17:21]
so yeah we're going to create all kinds of jobs. They're going to be 24 hours because
[3:17:24]
they're going to have people that have to man these booths when people get off.
[3:17:28]
So I'm sorry I'm going to stop you right there. That's our three minute time.
[3:17:32]
All right. Thank you. Thank you. Do you have any bells online that wishes to speak?
[3:17:38]
I would love to. My video has been disabled on y'all side, which is okay.
[3:17:42]
That's okay. We just need your name and you have three minutes.
[3:17:45]
Okay. Elizabeth Embersen.
[3:17:48]
I live at 503 Harvey Street.
[3:17:52]
And I'm here to ask you to please vote against agenda items four and five.
[3:17:57]
I think changing the zoning designation for the Mayberry property would go against.
[3:18:06]
or I'm sorry it's currently designated as a conservation cluster in San
[3:18:11]
Marcus's comprehensive plan and preferred scenario map that took over two years to come together
[3:18:16]
and finally after extensive communicating and workshop being a kangaroo fruition in just October
[3:18:23]
of 2024. It is designed to guide development for the next 10 to 20 years and changing it after just
[3:18:31]
15 months would undermine the community's trust and long-term planning in our city.
[3:18:35]
According to the City of San Marcus, a planning and zoning committee's member, their job is to uphold the comprehensive plan established by the city.
[3:18:46]
Regardless of what mayor may not be developed on the property, it's irresponsible and undermining for the zoning chain request to be allowed in my opinion.
[3:18:55]
It is my hope that the simple reminder is enough evidence for each of you to vote against
[3:19:01]
this out of town developers request it undermines our city, it's residents, it's trust,
[3:19:07]
not to mention months of coordination and planning between our citizens, public servants, and
[3:19:12]
elected officials.
[3:19:13]
Thank you.
[3:19:15]
Thank you.
[3:19:20]
Is that wrap up online?
[3:19:24]
Let's repeat.
[3:19:25]
Please consent agenda.
[3:19:26]
I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda.
[3:19:29]
Second.
[3:19:30]
Motion to approve.
[3:19:31]
Commissioner Spell, give it a Commissioner Meeks for a second. Any further discussion on
[3:19:35]
this item?
[3:19:37]
See, nine. We'll call that, please.
[3:19:40]
Sure, Michelle Rolison.
[3:19:41]
Hi.
[3:19:41]
David Case.
[3:19:42]
Hi.
[3:19:43]
Luke Christian.
[3:19:43]
Hi.
[3:19:43]
We're at Dunn.
[3:19:44]
Amy Meeks.
[3:19:45]
Griffin Spell.
[3:19:46]
We am Agnew.
[3:19:48]
All right.
[3:19:48]
The motion to approve carries.
[3:19:50]
It brings the presentation item number two.
[3:19:53]
Receive a staff presentation on the vision SMTX Comprehensive Plan Implementation Report.
[3:20:04]
Good evening, commissioners.
[3:20:12]
So this evening, I'll be presenting a brief overview of the comprehensive plan implementation report,
[3:20:20]
and really progress we've made on that plan recently.
[3:20:25]
So the vision SMCX comprehensive plan was adopted in October of 2024. It was a multi year engagement process,
[3:20:31]
which included 31 member steering committee, 23 subcommittee meetings and over 8,000 comments.
[3:20:38]
The complaint establishes the vision and goals for St. Marcus and policy direction for the next 20 years,
[3:20:44]
and it's really intended to be flexible, adaptable, and really guide how our community grows every time,
[3:20:49]
but it's really a high level document that really meant to guide decision makers.
[3:20:54]
The complaint is an umbrella document to the integrates high level of direction into various
[3:20:59]
implementation tools, such as master plans, like the transportation master plan, new
[3:21:04]
development, city streets, and infrastructure, small area plans, which you have many going
[3:21:09]
on now, and then also just the council's annual strategic plan as well.
[3:21:14]
The plan includes 7 topics shown across the screen here, which have a total of 23 goals,
[3:21:20]
130 actions and 59 objectives, so what's going on in that plan?
[3:21:25]
The implementation of the plan is guided by a council appointed Comprehensive Plan
[3:21:29]
Oversight Committee, whose charge is to review the plan actions and discuss priority actions
[3:21:34]
for consideration by staff and city council.
[3:21:37]
Other key steps in implementation include a staff review of all of the actions, the progress
[3:21:42]
and updates on those actions, and consideration of actions into our annual work plans.
[3:21:47]
I'm an annual presentation to the Planning of Zoning Commission and City Council, Planning of Zoning Commission is happening this evening,
[3:21:53]
and then lastly, keep our ideas identified by the Conference of Plan Oversight Committee to be considered by Council
[3:21:59]
into their strategic plan that occurs and is worked on every January.
[3:22:05]
So there are a variety of methods to implement those 130 actions over the next 20 years, including regulatory initiatives like updating the development code,
[3:22:15]
infrastructure projects like adding bike lanes to some of our city streets and
[3:22:20]
then creating resources like a small business guide as well.
[3:22:26]
The annual
[3:22:26]
implementation report is in your packet and provides a status update
[3:22:30]
from staff on all 130 different actions including the lead department,
[3:22:34]
progress status, updates or comments on the progress is made and then
[3:22:38]
also metrics the staff begins to explore how do we keep track of progress
[3:22:42]
over time.
[3:22:45]
So the progress plan oversight committee identified eight
[3:22:47]
top priorities for 2026, which are provided in a committee recommendation resolution, which is in your packet.
[3:22:55]
And you'll see Mr. Robert EB over here at the podium. He is the chair of our comprehensive
[3:23:00]
plan oversight committee, and he's actually going to present the next couple slides on the
[3:23:04]
communities behalf, and just kind of give a quick highlight of the implementation progress.
[3:23:08]
So I hand it over to you. Thank you very much. As Andrew said, I'm Robert EB,
[3:23:14]
and I had the distinct honor being in the current chair of the comprehensive plan.
[3:23:17]
over-site committee, one in.
[3:23:20]
As I already mentioned, our job is to uphold and advance the actions that are stated in our prestigious Comprehensive Plan.
[3:23:28]
The first priority, the committee prioritized was transportation1.1 to update the 2018 Transportation Master Plan to be consistent with the preferred scenario map and address current transportation issues.
[3:23:44]
As part of the TMP update, the committee also recommended the TR2.2 and TR3.8 be prioritized for discussion within the TMP update process.
[3:23:57]
This includes evaluating the need for a city staff position to manage transportation demand management programs,
[3:24:04]
and to ensure the safe crossing options under I-35 corridor and other major roads that connect neighborhoods and residents.
[3:24:11]
A few key considerations from the committee on this T01.1 is that we wanted to stress the importance
[3:24:21]
of the transportation policy on both existing and future residents, as well as the importance
[3:24:26]
of being connected to regional transit partners. We also want to stress the importance
[3:24:32]
of evaluating pedestrian and bike crossings for safety improvements at key intersections and
[3:24:37]
longer blocks. The details of these can be found in their resolution.
[3:24:43]
The current status of these items is that city staff is actually kicking off a transportation
[3:24:49]
master plan update process and the transit master plan is also currently being updated.
[3:25:01]
Under land use, the next priority we identified is to create a tool to analyze the fiscal sustainability of new development proposals, which I think would be a relatively useful tool for tonight's big discussion.
[3:25:19]
If we had this to which I will emphasize does not exist, I'm sorry.
[3:25:25]
The committee is interested in exploring budgetary impacts of development on infrastructure, utility capacity, and rates, and the environmental costs of development.
[3:25:36]
The committee discussed the importance of this tool to evaluate the cost benefit of development proposals with regards to the city's fiscal health to inform city decisions.
[3:25:48]
Education on long-term fiscal sustainability and return on investment will be an important component of implementation.
[3:25:56]
Implementation of this item will require a consultant to support the development of the tool
[3:26:02]
and to assist with education and be a collaborative effort with multiple departments.
[3:26:14]
Housing and neighborhoods 4.3 discusses coordinating land use and transportation planning with proposed development
[3:26:22]
to ensure safe and convenient connections to multi-modal infrastructure networks from residential neighborhoods.
[3:26:30]
The key factor of safe and convenient connections is proximity to goods and services.
[3:26:35]
The committee stresses the importance of multi-modal connectivity to neighborhood centers and changes to the development code,
[3:26:43]
transportation, master plan, and the transit master plan.
[3:26:47]
All three of these plans are currently in progress.
[3:26:49]
The
[3:26:54]
next priority is HN, or housing in neighborhoods 1.1, to update review and adopt a housing action plan.
[3:27:02]
The committee stresses the importance of adopting a plan to address housing affordability challenges,
[3:27:08]
and emphasizes the topic of availability of diverse and adaptable housing, aging and place, and empowering incremental development as part of these discussions.
[3:27:20]
Staff, city staff, are currently reviewing an updating data in the draft strategic housing
[3:27:25]
action plan that was developed in 2019.
[3:27:29]
The updated plan will include new data and opportunities for a public input.
[3:27:42]
ECD or economic development, 2.1, discusses protecting and promoting land uses the support
[3:27:48]
targeted industries, support diversification of the city's tax base and enhance economic
[3:27:54]
development by using tools such as intentional infrastructure planning, recruitment, and the use
[3:28:00]
of the land entitlement process.
[3:28:03]
Implementation should include a balance about the retention of small business and talent
[3:28:09]
alongside the attraction of new businesses.
[3:28:12]
Implementation has been explored through a future update to the economic development policy
[3:28:18]
and city staff are exploring a method to track private investments and fiscal impacts
[3:28:23]
to the city. And I will put aside note that there is currently an economic development director
[3:28:31]
position that's being filled.
[3:28:38]
In the final priority that we wish to emphasize for the next
[3:28:42]
year is environmental 3.4.
[3:28:49]
ENV 3.4 encourages developers to implement green building practices
[3:28:53]
and conservation-style development.
[3:28:56]
The committee supports cluster-style development types that preserve enhanced or augment the Green Belt Network.
[3:29:03]
We also discussed regulatory incentives that may be needed for the implementation of a Green Billing Policy,
[3:29:09]
and that city capital projects should also implement Green Billing and Sustainable Site Standards as a model and as a leader of this Green Billing Policy.
[3:29:21]
The implementation has been reviewed as part of the planning area district and the development
[3:29:25]
code update, and has also addressed in the draft historic preservation plan, and that's
[3:29:32]
the priorities that we identified for this upcoming year.
[3:29:37]
Thank you.
[3:29:39]
Thanks, Robert.
[3:29:40]
So, this presentation is also going to be provided to City Council on January 20th and full service
[3:29:46]
resource for city council, again during their visioning process.
[3:29:50]
Implementation worksheet is also on the city website, and it's in your packet if you want to
[3:29:54]
kind of look at some of those items as well, and then we'll be coming to you every single year.
[3:29:58]
This concludes our presentation.
[3:30:00]
It's just informational and so new action is needed at this time. Thank you.
[3:30:05]
Thank you.
[3:30:06]
Does commission have any questions for staff at this time?
[3:30:10]
All right. Seeing that, we'll move on to public hearing. Item number 3.
[3:30:15]
CUP-2568, Stoner's Pizza Join, hold a public hearing and consider a request by Tobi Tobi Lee May on behalf of Stoner's Pizza Join for renewal of a conditionally use permit to allow on-premise consumption of beer and wine located at 7.48 and with LBJ Street 1-02.
[3:30:32]
Will open public hearing?
[3:30:35]
Good evening, commissioners, Caitlin Buck with Planning and Development Services. The subject properties approximately 1-3rd of an acre and is located on the southeast corner of Forest Drive and North LBJ Drive.
[3:30:43]
The subject business is an existing restaurant.
[3:30:46]
The subject property is zone community commercial.
[3:30:49]
The current CEP expires on January 14th of this year.
[3:30:52]
No changes have been made to the site plan or floor plan.
[3:30:55]
Staff recommends approval with the following conditions.
[3:30:58]
The permit shall be valid for three years provided standard dormant.
[3:31:01]
No outdoor amplified music shall be permitted after 10pm.
[3:31:05]
And the permit shall be located in the same area
[3:31:07]
and manner as the certificate of occupancy.
[3:31:10]
These conditions are unchanged from previous approvals
[3:31:12]
That concludes my presentation.
[3:31:17]
Thank you.
[3:31:17]
With the public like to speak in favor of your permanent at this time,
[3:31:21]
we'll see you may come to the podium.
[3:31:23]
That is okay.
[3:31:25]
Any of us in the chambers which is speak?
[3:31:27]
Any be online which is speak?
[3:31:29]
We'll close the public hearing.
[3:31:30]
As you chair, I'll make a motion to recommend approval of CUB-2568
[3:31:36]
with staff recommendations.
[3:31:37]
All second.
[3:31:38]
All right, let's do a preview by Commissioner Spell,
[3:31:40]
seconded by Commissioner Brillison with staff recommendations,
[3:31:43]
any further discussion on this item?
[3:31:46]
So you're non-roll call, though, please?
[3:31:47]
Dr. Davy Case.
[3:31:48]
Hi.
[3:31:48]
Ludwig Costia.
[3:31:49]
Hi.
[3:31:50]
Mara Dunn. Hi.
[3:31:51]
Amy Meeks. Hi.
[3:31:52]
Griffin Spell. Hi.
[3:31:53]
Mara Dunn. Hi.
[3:31:54]
We have Agnew.
[3:31:55]
Michelle Brullison. Hi.
[3:31:56]
Hello, Mr. Proof Careous.
[3:32:01]
I'm number four, which is now number six.
[3:32:08]
Item number six.
[3:32:09]
ZC-2515.
[3:32:11]
1537 Post-Road.
[3:32:13]
SF-6-2-C-D-4.
[3:32:14]
Hold the public hearing and consider requests by Shelton
[3:32:17]
new banks on behalf of McGill and Ever-Rosalis for a zoning change from single-family 6s
[3:32:22]
SF-6, 2-2-2-4, CD-4 or subject consent of the owner and other less-intent zoning district
[3:32:27]
classification for approximately 2-9-4 acres comprising a lot five block one in the WN
[3:32:33]
go for the first suburban addition, generally located on the western side of Post Road,
[3:32:38]
approximately 100 feet southwest of the intersection between Post Road and Yulid Road.
[3:32:43]
Well, open the public hearing?
[3:32:45]
Good evening everybody, Julia Clarice and your planner.
[3:32:48]
The request this evening is for a zoning change from single family to character district
[3:32:53]
four.
[3:32:54]
The site is located on post roads just across from the intersection with Uland Road and it
[3:32:58]
is currently within the city limits.
[3:33:00]
Next slide.
[3:33:04]
So this site currently contains one single family structure in terms of surrounding uses.
[3:33:08]
We have single family residential, multi-family, open space and also of course you have
[3:33:13]
railroad across the street. This is, effectively, proposing to be part of the same application
[3:33:21]
of the Bismarck Time Homes, which the Commission approved from single-family 6 to CD4
[3:33:27]
back in February. They were part of a request during the Comprehensive Plan. The developer actually
[3:33:35]
worked with this city to get those lots changed to mixed use low, and this is kind of a remainder
[3:33:43]
track that wasn't included in the application, but is proposing to come in now to effectively
[3:33:47]
join that wider development next slide, please.
[3:33:52]
So the site is currently zone single-family six, SF6, which is kind of exactly what it says
[3:33:58]
in the 10 allows for single-family uses accessory dwelling units with limited home occupation
[3:34:03]
and civic uses and they are proposing character district four, which allows for a variety
[3:34:09]
of residential uses smaller apartments, town homes, and things like that, with limited commercial
[3:34:14]
uses on corners. Next slide, please.
[3:34:18]
So as I said, this was part of a wider request to
[3:34:22]
update the comprehensive plan to mixed you slow. So mixed you slow are characterized by
[3:34:30]
smaller commercial sensors that are walkable, typically in or near neighborhoods, so residents
[3:34:34]
have convenience, safe, and extra access to services, and they should be distributed throughout
[3:34:38]
the city such as a long quarters and near major intersections. Next slide please.
[3:34:46]
There are table 4.1 vision SNTX. The zoning district they are requesting character district
[3:34:54]
for should be considered in mixed use low designation. Next slide please.
[3:35:00]
As I said, a characteristic forelaze for a variety of residential uses, with limited commercial or mixed uses. On the corner, one thing that makes, it doesn't, it doesn't allow for multi-family, it does allow for apartments. One thing that distinguishes it from CD-5 is currently there is a block-lines maximum of 120 feet. There are proposed amendments to the code that would get rid of this, but that would require a maximum unit size.
[3:35:29]
So you wouldn't typically live for large scale apartments, and it does have a height restriction
[3:35:34]
of three stories next slide please.
[3:35:38]
In terms of environmental constraints, it is located within the Edres Act for Transition
[3:35:43]
Zone.
[3:35:44]
It is not located within the floodplain or the floodway, and it is not located within this
[3:35:48]
and Marcus River corridor or the river protection zone next slide please.
[3:35:54]
They will be required to improve the streetscapes.
[3:35:57]
The block premise of standards will be required and utilities will be provided by city of
[3:36:02]
some markets for their water, wastewater, and electric services next slide, please.
[3:36:07]
And staff is recommending approval of CC-2515 as presented that concludes my presentation
[3:36:12]
and we do have the applicant in the room, I believe, for any questions.
[3:36:18]
Thank you with the opportunity to speak in favor of your permanent this time.
[3:36:25]
Let's serve you to state your name and address and we have three minutes.
[3:36:29]
My name is Shelton. You banks I live at 136 hours in New brothels, Texas.
[3:36:35]
This is basically when we had our property resummed to CD4.
[3:36:40]
We extended behind the neighbors a lot.
[3:36:43]
and since the conversations with the neighbor they would like to go to CD4 as well that would be
[3:36:49]
can join it as one larger property. So the Rosalysis had me do their, you know, the application.
[3:36:58]
So I enjoy it pretty much explained what it was. It's just a continuation of what's already there.
[3:37:04]
I'm going to have to answer any questions if you have any. Thank you, sir. Thank you.
[3:37:09]
Anyone else in the chambers? Which is speak? Anybody online? Which is speak?
[3:37:13]
All right, seeing that will close public hearing.
[3:37:16]
Mr. Chair, I'm going to make a motion to recommend the approval of the ZEC 2515.
[3:37:22]
I'll second.
[3:37:23]
We got motion to approve by Commissioner Spell's seconded by Commissioner Costia.
[3:37:28]
Any further discussion on this item?
[3:37:30]
Seeing that roll call, please?
[3:37:32]
Sure.
[3:37:33]
Thank you, Christina.
[3:37:34]
All right, done.
[3:37:35]
Amy Mix.
[3:37:36]
Hi.
[3:37:36]
We're out of an article.
[3:37:38]
Hi.
[3:37:39]
William Agnew.
[3:37:39]
All right, shall we listen?
[3:37:41]
Hi.
[3:37:41]
David Case.
[3:37:42]
The motion to approve the carries.
[3:37:45]
Okay.
[3:37:46]
And it points to our bylaws.
[3:37:47]
It's 10 o'clock.
[3:37:48]
We will consider a motion to...
[3:37:51]
What is the proper wording for this?
[3:37:53]
Here I'm going to make a motion to continue the meeting after a 10 minute recess.
[3:37:57]
Okay.
[3:37:59]
The motion to approve a motion to continue the meeting after a 10 minute recess.
[3:38:02]
We have a second.
[3:38:04]
I'll seconded by Commissioner Brillison.
[3:38:06]
You've heard the discussion on the recess.
[3:38:09]
See you then, roll call vote.
[3:38:10]
Sure.
[3:38:11]
More ahead, done.
[3:38:12]
Hi.
[3:38:12]
Amy Weeks.
[3:38:13]
Griffin Spell.
[3:38:14]
Wait a minute.
[3:38:16]
All right.
[3:38:16]
Shelby Wilson.
[3:40:32]
The meeting back to order at 1017 p.m. brings us to item number.
[3:40:43]
No, it's item number 5, but it was 6, and so forth.
[3:40:51]
For PSA-2502, Francis Harris Lane, may vary data center, preferred scenario amendment, hold public hearing, and consider it request by arm rust and brown PLLC on behalf of Highlander SM-1, LLC and Donald and Germain tough to amend the preferred scenario map from conservation cluster to commercial employment low.
[3:41:10]
for $199.49 acres of land, more or less, generally located on the western side of Francis
[3:41:16]
Harris Lane, south of the intersection between Grant Harris Road and Francis Harris Lane
[3:41:20]
in Hayes County, Texas.
[3:41:22]
What's up in the public hearing?
[3:41:24]
Good evening, everybody.
[3:41:25]
Julia Clarie, senior planner.
[3:41:27]
So, this is a re-submittal of the preferred scenario amendment PSA 2501 for a proposed
[3:41:33]
death-to-sensor, which was brought to the Planning and Zoning Commission last year.
[3:41:38]
The site is approximately 200 acres, and is located on Francis Harris Lane.
[3:41:43]
The majority of the site is within the city limits, however, approximately 60 acres is still
[3:41:48]
in the ATJ, and so there is also a pending annexation case being considered separately
[3:41:53]
by council.
[3:41:55]
In terms of surrounding land juices, we have rural residential, along the northern boundary
[3:41:59]
on Grant Harris, agricultural to the southeast, and the Hayes Energy Power Plant, southwest
[3:42:05]
of the site on the other side of Francis Harris Lane. I will note that although the property
[3:42:10]
on the eastern side of Francis Harris Lane is vacant in June last year, Council gave initial
[3:42:17]
authorization to negotiate a development agreement for a separate data sensor with Savi and that
[3:42:23]
is currently under review. There is a cemetery surrounded by the wider site that little square
[3:42:29]
in the middle there. However, that is not owned by the applicant and so is not part of this request.
[3:42:34]
There are two associated cases, the ZCC-2513, that you'll hear next, which is a resubmittal of ZCC-2502,
[3:42:43]
which is also recommended for denial by P&Z back in March.
[3:42:47]
And then the annexation case, A and 2502, for the 60 acres in the ETA, which was approved on first reading.
[3:42:55]
Earlier this year, however, the second reading was deferred at the request of the applicant, until they received their preferred zoning district.
[3:43:02]
next slide please. So just a brief overview of the timeline, so as stated previously, in March
[3:43:10]
last year, PNZ voted to recommend the NIL for PSA-2501. Per city code, if PNZ recommends the NIL,
[3:43:20]
a sixth-one vote from Council is required for the item to be approved. In August, Council voted
[3:43:26]
five to in favor of the request, however, the motion failed as it did not have sufficient votes
[3:43:32]
for the supermajority and then in October, the applicant resubmitted a new request, PSA-25
[3:43:38]
or two, and the nature of the request is the same.
[3:43:44]
So this slide shows a picture of the existing
[3:43:47]
slide for context that's taken from Francis Harris Lane looking south. As noted, it is across
[3:43:52]
the street from the Hayes Energy Power Plant,
[3:43:55]
per staff's understanding the existing infrastructure
[3:43:58]
alongside the power plant is one of the main draws
[3:44:02]
for data center requests in this area.
[3:44:05]
Next slide, please.
[3:44:08]
So the request we are discussing this evening
[3:44:10]
under the site, is to change the place type
[3:44:12]
in the comprehensive plan from conservation cluster
[3:44:15]
to commercial employment low in order
[3:44:18]
to facilitate the construction of a data center.
[3:44:20]
This would match the designation of the adjacent power plant, which would shown in pink on the map.
[3:44:28]
So the objective of the current play-stipe, next slide, sorry.
[3:44:33]
The objective of the current play-stipe is to identify areas and conserve and reserve for future development,
[3:44:40]
as a means of focusing more intense development in other areas of the community.
[3:44:44]
development, that does occur when within conservation cluster areas should be low impact
[3:44:51]
to the natural environment by using a variety of development techniques and strategies.
[3:44:57]
And the critical thing here is per table 4.1.
[3:45:00]
When someone comes to request the zoning district, they may request character districts, they may request
[3:45:04]
MH, manufactured housing, CM commercial, which is probably our least intense commercial district.
[3:45:11]
Ft future development and low intensity planning areas, so that does not allow for the light industrial
[3:45:18]
request that the applicant is making in the next zoning change. The proposed designation
[3:45:24]
would facilitate lower density, auto-oriented retail office and industrial type uses, primarily
[3:45:31]
characterised by light to heavy industrial, warehouse and distribution lower density office
[3:45:36]
and general commercial, additionally used as main cloud civic institutional and hospitality.
[3:45:41]
And, critically, this allows all special districts, so that's our commercial non-residential
[3:45:47]
districts, including its light industrial, heavy industrial, heavy commercial, except from the
[3:45:52]
In fact, you're housing, character districts 4 and 5 on employment center planning areas.
[3:45:58]
Next slide, please.
[3:46:02]
So the site is currently the majority of the site is zone character district 2.5, which
[3:46:08]
allows predominantly single family uses. With the exception of the power plant, you'll see on this map to the left.
[3:46:15]
The surrounding, which is zone heavy industrial, the surrounding land is predominantly located outside the city limits.
[3:46:22]
And so it's not subject to zoning.
[3:46:25]
There are no known environmental constraints on the property that you'll see on the map to the right.
[3:46:29]
It is not located on the floodplain or floodway.
[3:46:32]
It is not in the San Marcos River Quarter, the River Protection Zone.
[3:46:36]
And in addition, I would note the applicant did progress.
[3:46:39]
Some of the way through the permit process for a single family subdivision for the land,
[3:46:44]
which is zoned CD2.5.
[3:46:47]
And as part of that, they had to do an environmental assessment with their Phase One Watership
[3:46:51]
technical plan, which concluded that there were no federally endangered species within the site.
[3:46:56]
Next slide.
[3:46:59]
So, here we have the city's stirrup plan and the water waste motor map.
[3:47:04]
Grant Harris wrote, I will note along the northern boundary was identified by the city as a
[3:47:11]
thoroughfare in our transportation master plan, and so the developer would be required to
[3:47:15]
incorporate it into their development at the time of plating.
[3:47:19]
That's a separate process if somebody wished to amend the transportation master plan that would be done separately.
[3:47:26]
To the right, you will see the city's water and water and wastewater map.
[3:47:31]
One thing to note is that the site is in the CCN for crystal clear and not the city and so the water would be provided by crystal clear.
[3:47:40]
Although, I will note that per data obtained from Crystal Clear's website, their water
[3:47:47]
is sourced from the Edres Aquifer Lake Dunlap, Curiscal Wilcox Aquifer, and the Sunmarkous
[3:47:53]
River.
[3:47:55]
Staff have not had any correspondence with Crystal Clear regarding the State of Central
[3:47:59]
Project.
[3:48:00]
However, prefer the applicant the intent to use a closed lip water system that can be accommodated
[3:48:05]
by the amount of water that was previously agreed upon to serve the single family.
[3:48:10]
subdivision next slide please.
[3:48:15]
So the applicant has stated that they are
[3:48:17]
amenable to search in restrictive covenants and a draft of those covenants are
[3:48:21]
included in your packets for reference because they're part of the application.
[3:48:27]
The applicant is proposing a prohibition on warehouse and distribution and waste
[3:48:32]
release services which are typically allowed under late industrial zoning and if a
[3:48:36]
The data center is developed, water usage at the site will not exceed 235 liwis, or 75,000
[3:48:45]
gallons per day, which would be achieved through a closed lip water system, which recirculates
[3:48:51]
the water to kill the servers.
[3:48:54]
Drainage facilities would be designed and constructed so that the rate of run-off from the
[3:48:58]
site after construction shall be 10% less than the run-off prior to construction for 2,10,
[3:49:04]
25 and 100-year storm frequencies,
[3:49:09]
and in addition, the draft also references work of protection
[3:49:12]
provisions in accordance with state and federal law and a statement that water quality
[3:49:16]
facilities will be constructed, then the TSS or total suspended solid removal requirement
[3:49:22]
of at least 80% of the site, next slide, and then additionally in the short of covenants.
[3:49:29]
Inpervious cover would be limited to 70% compared to 80% that's permitted on to the light industrial zoning.
[3:49:38]
The building would be lead certified and the sound at the property line shall not exceed 75 decibels.
[3:49:45]
So for contrast, current city code limits noise to 85 decibels between 10 a.m. and 75 decibels between 10 p.m.
[3:49:53]
on 10 a.m. I would like to reassure it to the commission that although the draft
[3:49:58]
restrictive covenants have been included in it.
[3:50:00]
Our packet as part of the application package for reference, restrictive covenants are funds immensely under the
[3:50:06]
purview of city council. However, any specific suggestions are requested made by the commission will be included in the meeting summary in the staff report, which is then forwarded to council.
[3:50:18]
So, this is the timetable following PNC's recommendation. It will then go to council for two public hearings with a second reading in March if it is approved. Next slide, please.
[3:50:30]
So, as we did at our last meeting, I am going to present, the next few slides which were
[3:50:36]
presented by the City Manager's office to cancel during the August meeting for PSA-251 and
[3:50:43]
so we're also providing them for P to P and Z for additional, for added context, I will note
[3:50:50]
that where feasible figures have been updated to reflect current data next slide, please.
[3:50:56]
So, the first slide section pertains to noise and impact on adjacent neighborhoods.
[3:51:02]
Next slide. This is a map of 370 existing and planned data centers located in various cities and counties across Texas.
[3:51:11]
Next slide, please.
[3:51:14]
As shown on the map, next slide, sorry.
[3:51:17]
As shown on this map, over 180 data centers are located in the Dallas Fort Worth area.
[3:51:23]
about 150 in Houston market area, nearly 50 in the San Antonio market area, and 36 in the
[3:51:31]
Austin market area. You have heard public concerns, raised about noise from data centers,
[3:51:36]
and some of the related health effects. The most frequently cited example is Grandbury
[3:51:41]
Texas, which has generated significant complaints that has come the poster child for data
[3:51:47]
center noise problems, Grandbury has an air-cult facility, which is not proposed here.
[3:51:55]
Next slide, and then next slide again, please.
[3:51:59]
Closer to home.
[3:52:02]
Here is an existing data center complex, located within the San Antonio City limits.
[3:52:07]
These four data sense of buildings are located directly next to a single family neighborhood
[3:52:12]
and also adjacent to a school in the west over Hills community in San Antonio next slide.
[3:52:20]
It is important to note that data centers very widely in their design, equipment, layout
[3:52:25]
and cooling technologies.
[3:52:27]
From a visual and noise standpoint, you can see structured walls, structural walls built
[3:52:31]
around their outdoor generators through an open records request it was determined that there
[3:52:36]
were no noise complaints on record for this particular site.
[3:52:39]
I would not have a ver, and I think this was spoken to during the citizen comment period,
[3:52:44]
that this is just one type of data sensor, and there are data sensor satellites,
[3:52:48]
which are substantially larger in scale and power usage than this example.
[3:52:53]
Next slide please.
[3:52:57]
So the proposed site is directly adjacent that Hayes Energy Plant,
[3:53:00]
which is zoned heavy industrial, and it already produces some periodic noise.
[3:53:04]
There are already restrictive covenants in place on the Mavery property,
[3:53:07]
which was planned for residential subdivision to help protect new homeowners from noise from the
[3:53:13]
power plant next slide. From a land use perspective, the question before you is whether it's more
[3:53:18]
appropriate to place 470 single family homes on a data center next to the power plant.
[3:53:25]
While some may wish for a third alternative, the property is already zoned and entitled for single
[3:53:29]
family homes. The decision before you tonight is whether to allow industrial zoning instead next
[3:53:34]
slide.
[3:53:37]
Now we will discuss water and energy demand next slide. Historically, many data
[3:53:43]
sensors have used evaporative cooling systems which require significant amounts of water
[3:53:48]
and lose much of it as steam. The project before you tonight has committed to a closed
[3:53:52]
loop non- evaporative cooling system next slide.
[3:53:58]
Using a closed-loop system, the proposed data
[3:54:00]
center's allocation is 75,000 gallons per day, or 235 land use
[3:54:05]
equipment, L-U-E's, or single family homes.
[3:54:09]
By comparison, the residential subdivision that can be built already
[3:54:12]
had more than twice this water contracted and allocated by Crystal Clear
[3:54:16]
Special Utility District. Next slide.
[3:54:20]
Actual daily usage was stated as 4,000 to 7,000 gallons per building across
[3:54:24]
five buildings, this equals 20,000 to 35,000 gallons per day.
[3:54:28]
By comparison, the 470 homes of division would use considerably more water, at least at least
[3:54:35]
twice as much, even under drought restrictions.
[3:54:38]
So in practical terms, the data center would use less water from our local water supply
[3:54:42]
than the residential subdivision alternative next slide.
[3:54:48]
Concerns have rightly been raised about the large power demands of the data center industry
[3:54:52]
and the water used to generate that power.
[3:54:54]
Our COAT and transmission service providers such as LCRA managed grid connections by evaluating
[3:55:00]
Whether there is adequate generation and transmission capacity to a data center site.
[3:55:05]
Data centers are placed in a queue for approval as power and transmission capacity or system upgrades are identified.
[3:55:12]
The graphic on the right was taken from the ERCOT website and shows different electricity services across the state.
[3:55:18]
The water used to generate power varies widely depending on the power source.
[3:55:22]
Solar and wind power uses little to no water, natural gas plants may be water cooled,
[3:55:28]
thin cooling towers which are losing water to evaporation or air cooled, thin air cooled gas
[3:55:33]
turbines, not using no water.
[3:55:35]
Because of this mix of power generation sources, it is impossible to identify the actual
[3:55:39]
slush of water or calculate the exact amounts of water that would be required to generate
[3:55:44]
grid power for this facility or any other customer on the ERCOT grid.
[3:55:48]
However, it is clear that some power generation facilities across the state do use significant
[3:55:54]
amounts of water.
[3:55:55]
This is one reason why some suggest the data-centric contract directly with his energy,
[3:56:00]
which uses reclaimed waste water with the city of St. Marcus for cooling, next slide.
[3:56:05]
Next we will talk about financials, next slide.
[3:56:10]
The city faces growing financial challenges, including state-imposed revenue caps, declining
[3:56:15]
commercial and residential property values, declining sales tax revenue, increased costs
[3:56:20]
from state mandates and increasing population to serve. Combined, these factors are projected
[3:56:25]
to lead to large budget shortfalls, which will ultimately mean reduced services for residents
[3:56:30]
and less new revenue is identified next slide.
[3:56:35]
Property tax revenues from the proposed project are generated from the land and the buildings
[3:56:40]
which typically increase in value over time and the servers and other equipment housing
[3:56:45]
side, which depreciates over several years, but are eventually replaced.
[3:56:50]
This project anticipates a minimum investment of $1.5 billion on the $200 acre site.
[3:56:57]
The chart includes a $500 million and $1.5 billion tax revenue projection, so you can
[3:57:03]
see the amounts of revenue to the city, school district, and county next slide.
[3:57:09]
So to summarize, next slide.
[3:57:12]
For a data center that is proposed to be built within the city limits, we have the ability
[3:57:16]
to regulate and limit onsite water use to achieve higher levels of flood and storm
[3:57:21]
water quality protection, the ability to regulate noise, and finally the ability to capture
[3:57:26]
tax revenue to fund city services for our residents.
[3:57:30]
However, whether a data center is built within the city, in the county or somewhere in the
[3:57:35]
region, every new data center that pulls power from the ERCock grid continues to strain
[3:57:40]
and already strained state electric grid, and will require some level of water to generate
[3:57:47]
power somewhere in the state.
[3:57:50]
So I'm going to go back to the planning staff presentation next slide.
[3:57:55]
So staff is recommending a approval of this request as presented.
[3:57:58]
This recommendation is predominantly based on the fact that the majority of the property
[3:58:03]
is currently zoned for single family, and they're proposed late industrial zoning in
[3:58:07]
the associated zoning case.
[3:58:09]
It's considered to be more compatible with the adjacent heavy industrial power plant than a single family neighborhood.
[3:58:16]
That concludes my presentation.
[3:58:19]
We have the applicant and I think many other people in the room wishing to speak.
[3:58:25]
Thank you.
[3:58:27]
Thank you.
[3:58:33]
With the applicant like to speak in favor of your permit at this time.
[3:58:47]
Please state your name and address.
[3:58:48]
We have three minutes.
[3:58:51]
Thank you, Michael Whalen, 100 Congress Avenue in Boston, Texas, chair, commissioners.
[3:58:58]
I want to address two related questions that are both reasonable and important.
[3:59:03]
How long this facility lasts and what happens is technology changes in how that values assessed.
[3:59:10]
Julie, just covered that a little bit first on lifespan.
[3:59:13]
The tax revenue begins once each building is completed and placed on the tax rules,
[3:59:18]
because construction is phased, revenue will accrue incrementally as each building comes online.
[3:59:24]
Modern data centers are not short-lived facilities. The building shell itself is a long-duration
[3:59:30]
asset designed to last multiple decades, far longer than conventional industrial buildings.
[3:59:37]
What changes over time is not the structure, but it was just noted the equipment inside.
[3:59:43]
And that distinction matters. The servers, racks, and supporting systems and data centers
[3:59:47]
are not static assets.
[3:59:50]
They are refreshed on regular cycles driven by technological innovation, not physical decay.
[3:59:56]
Hardware is replaced, density increases, and efficiency improves.
[4:00:00]
In other words, the facility evolves continuously rather than aging into obsolescence. So this leads to another important point about the assessed value, because data centers behave very differently from most industrial uses, most industrial facilities follow a familiar pattern. You build them, they peek in value on day one and from that point forward, they depreciate.
[4:00:22]
Equipment ages, productivity declines, and over time, the tax base slowly erodes in a typical industrial building.
[4:00:30]
Data centers do not follow that pattern because the equipment inside a data center is routinely upgraded.
[4:00:36]
The business personal properties continually re-reported and re-value as technology advances.
[4:00:42]
The capital invested inside the building is renewed rather than allowed to run down.
[4:00:48]
From an appraisal standpoint, that means this is not a shrinking tax base.
[4:00:51]
It is an evergreen one.
[4:00:53]
Instead of steady depreciation, the reinvestment inside the building causes ongoing reinvestment
[4:00:58]
that sustains and grows assessed value over the life of the facility.
[4:01:03]
That makes it a far more durable and predictable contributor to the tax base over the long
[4:01:08]
term.
[4:01:09]
Finally, on the question of an obsolescence, if technology changes the response is not abandonment,
[4:01:14]
it is retrofit and reuse.
[4:01:16]
These facilities are designed to adapt, even in some distant future, for facility wherever
[4:01:21]
to cease operations, the building itself, remain a high-quality service-ready industrial asset,
[4:01:27]
capable of reuse or redevelopment under existing regulation.
[4:01:30]
The conclusion is straight forward.
[4:01:32]
This is not temporary use.
[4:01:33]
It is a long-lived, continually upgraded facility that aligns well with long-termly and
[4:01:38]
use planning and provides a stable, renewable source of the assessed value for the community.
[4:01:44]
Thanks.
[4:01:46]
Thanks, there.
[4:01:48]
Mr. Swank, please get your name and address and three mayors, swank, Dallas, Texas.
[4:01:52]
I would like to just speak for this moment about the fairness issue on the electric grid
[4:01:56]
and demand as a whole. In Texas, as many of you know, large data centers are subject
[4:02:02]
to what is recently been passed, the Senate Bill 6, which requires on-site backup generation
[4:02:08]
capable of supporting operations during grid emergencies. This is not voluntary, and that's very important
[4:02:14]
note, it is not optional. It is a statutory requirement under state law. What that means
[4:02:20]
in a very practical terms. During winter storms or during extreme heat, time frames or
[4:02:28]
any particular type of event, this facility is designed to operate independently of the electric grid.
[4:02:35]
It does not compete with residents of electricity. When backup systems are running, the facility
[4:02:40]
is not drawing power from the homes, it is reducing demand at precisely the moment when the grid
[4:02:46]
is most vulnerable.
[4:02:47]
And this is one of the benefits that really data centers provide because it begins to create
[4:02:50]
a elasticity in the grid that the grid is needing, so desperately today.
[4:02:56]
It's also worth noting that Senate Bill six passed with large bipartisan majorities in both chambers
[4:03:01]
of the Texas legislature, and it was supported by the Lone Star chapter of this e-air club.
[4:03:06]
In other words, this law was crafted not just with economic growth in mind, but with grid
[4:03:11]
reliability and environmental responsibility, front and center.
[4:03:15]
The goal was to require major financial commitments from large users, improve her
[4:03:20]
cost demand forecasting, and ensure that facilities like this actively support grid stability
[4:03:26]
during emergencies.
[4:03:28]
In addition, hercotting recently relies on pertailment, what I mean by pertailment is dropping
[4:03:33]
a load. In other words, the load goes off the grid. And demand response programs as one reliability
[4:03:39]
tool. Large facilities like this are engineered specifically to participate in those programs.
[4:03:46]
And this is important note, shedding load, or operating off-grid, when directed to help prevent,
[4:03:51]
not create, but help prevent brownouts that have been brought up this evening and blackouts.
[4:03:56]
That capability is not incidental. It is designed into the project. So this directly answers the
[4:04:02]
question. This project operates under strict requirements more strict than residential. It pays for
[4:04:08]
its own infrastructure. It installs redundant systems. It is interruptible when necessary,
[4:04:14]
and it is regulated and monitored under ERCOT and state law. The idea that a data center would somehow
[4:04:19]
keep power while residents go without is simply incorrect. Under Texas law and grid operations facilities
[4:04:25]
like this are designed to take pressure off the grid during emergencies not add to it. So be
[4:04:30]
It is cleared for the record. The project complies with Senate Bill 6. It complies with
[4:04:34]
the record. Reliability protocols. It is not increased rates. It does not crowd out
[4:04:39]
future growth. And it does not put residents at risk during extreme events. Instead,
[4:04:44]
it represents a privately funded, highly regulated investment in resilient infrastructure
[4:04:49]
that supports hospitals, emergency services, utilities, and everyday digital activity.
[4:04:54]
Thank you very much.
[4:04:56]
Thanks, sir. Mr. Mayberry. Namely trust, please.
[4:05:00]
John Mayberry, 2505, Austin Lane, Austin, Texas. I want to focus on three simple points on the zoning front. First, this is the right use for this location. The site sits next to an existing heavy industrial zone power plant at the convergence of major power gas and fiber infrastructure. From a land use standpoint, this is exactly where light industrial uses belong. Second, the alternative development is a worse outcome from the city on every metric.
[4:05:28]
Today, this property is entitled in zone for a large-dense single-family subdivision.
[4:05:32]
Let's be clear, this is not zone to conservation cluster. It is zone already CD2.5.
[4:05:39]
That used means significantly more water demand, far greater demand for city services,
[4:05:43]
no jobs, and a fraction of the tax revenue.
[4:05:47]
Third, if data centers are coming to this particular note of infrastructure, and they are,
[4:05:51]
this is the right way to do it, and for the city to set the gold standard.
[4:05:54]
The question isn't whether these facilities will be built, the question is whether they locate inside the city,
[4:05:59]
subject to city regulation, or whether they get pushed into the county where the city has no control and receives no benefit.
[4:06:05]
With this project, via the restrictive covenant that's included in your packets and summarized in the handouts, the city gets protections,
[4:06:13]
commitments, union labor, engagement, environmental standards, and tax base support that simply does not exist outside city limits.
[4:06:18]
Think of what this means for other data centers coming to the area, or even the broader
[4:06:22]
data center industry.
[4:06:24]
Sam Marcus will be putting a stake in the ground such that any new development will
[4:06:28]
be held to this standard.
[4:06:29]
Any neighboring jurisdiction can look at data center development, I say, why can't you
[4:06:33]
make the commitments that were made in Sam Marcus?
[4:06:35]
This is an opportunity for Sam Marcus to lead.
[4:06:38]
Now it's important to emphasize once again the facts about the water on this project.
[4:06:43]
Water service will be provided by Crystal Clear under established CCN boundaries through
[4:06:47]
this steam water supply contract. The allocation for this site was originally sized for residential
[4:06:52]
development, which would have required far more water for daily household use in irrigation.
[4:06:57]
A data center is fundamentally different. This facility uses a closed loop, non-evaporative
[4:07:01]
cooling system, enshrined in the restrictive covenant. Actually, actual water use will be substantially
[4:07:05]
lower than what the property was already entitled to use, like I said, that's in the restrictive
[4:07:10]
covenant. The staff has consulted with other cities about the impact of data centers and confirmed
[4:07:14]
that there's been no formal complaints and comparable facilities.
[4:07:18]
So what you have before you is not a risky or speculative proposal.
[4:07:21]
It has a change from a buy-right residential outcome to a lower impact.
[4:07:25]
Infrastructure appropriate use that is compatible with the adjacent power plant
[4:07:29]
with enforceable operating conditions, lower water use, lower water use, fully funded infrastructure,
[4:07:37]
and long-term fiscal benefit to the city.
[4:07:39]
We've stayed engaged, we've worked through the process, we've worked with staff
[4:07:42]
the community to put real commitments into writing that are binding. And for this reason, we think
[4:07:47]
this zoning and amendment is appropriate. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. We are now open this
[4:07:52]
one up to the chambers for our public hearing. I will list four names at a time. If you would
[4:07:56]
please come to the podium, Jose Lazano, Mary Littlefield, Divine, Tory Martin, and Charles
[4:08:06]
setting.
[4:08:11]
You may speak as first come first sir. Please state your name and address. We have three minutes.
[4:08:20]
My name is Mary Littlefield Divine and as I've already mentioned I live in Hayes County and I am a
[4:08:26]
goat farmer. I have ag exemption on my property. I'm very near this proposed development. I am confused about a lot of
[4:08:34]
things because I'm hearing conflicting information. One, this is supposed to be like a low employment setting.
[4:08:41]
but then we're also being told that it's going to be bringing jobs and that's creating a little bit of confusion.
[4:08:48]
Also, I'm concerned because the zoning for light industrial may not be the appropriate zoning for this facility.
[4:08:55]
There's a lot to consider regarding the reality that the energy demands and the capital investment,
[4:09:02]
though it is a low employment setting.
[4:09:05]
Bringing very few jobs to our community for the long term because many of those people will be working remotely from other areas.
[4:09:10]
and not necessarily paying taxes here, but at any rate, why are we considering this as light
[4:09:19]
industry, light industrial, when in many communities, they have to rezone to create their
[4:09:25]
own zoning for data centers, because they don't easily fit into any specific zoning, and
[4:09:31]
I think it just opens up the possibility for slippery slope where we aren't really clear
[4:09:37]
on what kind of industry is coming here and what the requirements are.
[4:09:41]
So I'm concerned about those things I've spoken again in time again about the impact on the
[4:09:46]
agricultural region, on our waterways, on our livestock, on our health, on the impact of
[4:09:54]
mental and physical health regarding insomnia, anxiety, cognitive dissonance.
[4:10:00]
On cardiac events, on respiratory events. And this whole idea that this is such a bed of roses when it's actually going to kill us to some extent.
[4:10:11]
I have provided CPR to a loved one. My husband who did die anyway. If you want to find out what that's like, you can ask me personally. I'm really not interested in living in an environment that increases the risk that that could happen for me again.
[4:10:23]
So I, again, oppose this and I feel that it is very confusing.
[4:10:29]
There's a lot being floated out there that isn't necessarily true.
[4:10:33]
And we know from national data that absolutely this impacts the local water supplies,
[4:10:38]
the brown-outs, the surge fires and other events.
[4:10:42]
And this is not something that is just going to be overcome because Mayberry says so.
[4:10:48]
It's not reality.
[4:10:49]
So please keep us in reality, so that we continue to be safe
[4:10:52]
And protect our loved ones, our investments, our ag land, our ag exemption, our livestock, our wildlife, our children, our family members, our loved ones, and our community, please stay with a plan that you spent so much time developing, I live outside City limits, I wasn't personally involved in that, but let's stick with the community that's sustainable and represents our value system, not those of outside investors who aren't going to live here and get all the environmental impact, mental health and physical health impact that could just be devastating.
[4:11:22]
stating to our lives. Thank you.
[4:11:24]
Thank you.
[4:11:30]
Well, guys, let's get back to it.
[4:11:32]
Where'd we go?
[4:11:35]
Mr. Luzada, if you please,
[4:11:36]
sit your name and address me in three minutes.
[4:11:38]
It's Hosello, so I'm not 11.
[4:11:40]
25 blue oaks on Marcos, Texas, 786, 666.
[4:11:45]
I think everything's been discussed already
[4:11:46]
to this point. It's not a lot to add.
[4:11:48]
The only thing I guess I want to add is
[4:11:51]
I know water is the biggest concern here.
[4:11:55]
Crystal clear has the infrastructure and also have the water rights of what the data
[4:12:01]
center is asking for. It's not like they don't have the infrastructure or they
[4:12:06]
don't have the water rights. It would be completely different if that wasn't the case.
[4:12:11]
Meaning that whatever comes to this area is going to be using that water anyway. It could
[4:12:17]
be this data center, it could be the house, it could be whatever comes to this area. That
[4:12:21]
same resources for water and power are there for to be used by somebody.
[4:12:29]
I know it's been said before, data centers are coming to the area and in the county there's
[4:12:36]
a lot less regulations here in the city, biggest thing is watershed protection and also
[4:12:42]
building permits which is the county doesn't have so that's a big big thing that the city
[4:12:47]
would be able to regulate, which I'm not saying this is stopping from
[4:12:52]
one coming in the county, right? That's not the case. But if
[4:12:57]
three come to the area, and we can regulate one, it's a
[4:13:00]
huge ruin for the citizen market, plus getting the tax benefits.
[4:13:03]
Thank you. Thank you, sir.
[4:13:17]
To remarten 13-0 on your creek road, New Bronfell's Texas,
[4:13:20]
Hayes County. I clearly wasn't built for this in public speaking,
[4:13:24]
but I'm pretty good at writing a horse and raising them.
[4:13:26]
Treating people and animals with respect in the land and the community
[4:13:29]
with respect and valuing most things over money, but when someone comes in and disrespects
[4:13:34]
the land takes advantage of elderly people and lies, sometimes you must do uncomfortable
[4:13:37]
things to defend what is right. I hope you can see he's working really hard to get rich and
[4:13:42]
I'm working really hard to stay poor. I'd like to ask you how you would feel seeing your home on a
[4:13:48]
PowerPoint every month for the whole city for the past 10 months and feel like you are not being
[4:13:53]
seen and considered, but maybe you're being told on PNZ not to feel. But if you're not supposed
[4:13:58]
taking consideration the community's alchry. Why do we have a citizen's comment period during
[4:14:02]
planning and zoning if you're not supposed to consider it? So it's not going to be good enough
[4:14:06]
for you to say that you're not voting on a data center. You're voting on just a zone change.
[4:14:11]
When we've been watching a presentation for almost a year on this data center,
[4:14:14]
so let me try to help untie your hands for you, PNZ, this is spot zoning.
[4:14:18]
Spositing is the practice of applying different, often incompatible, out of step zoning
[4:14:22]
with all surrounding land use, strictly a bit of fit the land owner at the expense of the
[4:14:26]
surrounding community or comprehensive plan. In Texas, spot zoning becomes unlawful. If it is
[4:14:31]
arbitrary, discriminatory, unreasonable, it doesn't serve the public's health, safety
[4:14:35]
morals, or general welfare. It is often illegal if it is unjustified and reasonable
[4:14:40]
change that disrupts the neighborhood character, increases traffic noise, or unfairly harms
[4:14:45]
adjacent property owners, often leaking to legal challenges. It is permissible if it aligns
[4:14:51]
with the community's comprehensive plan, overall city's master plan offers a public benefit
[4:14:56]
it and isn't just for a single land owner's private gain which
[4:15:00]
This does not fall into making this zoning change unlawful as it would be considered spot zoning and it does not provide a service to the public.
[4:15:08]
That is why I'm confident in telling you, this does not match the land use code and goes against the city of Samarcus's values and the entire comprehensive plan.
[4:15:17]
I can barely sleep in light night, but at least I can know and say I did everything I could to stop this to my home.
[4:15:24]
How are you going to sleep?
[4:15:25]
Well, you sleep better if you're bullied into changing your vote.
[4:15:28]
Norring you played a role in the greatest misuse of stewardship of Sam
[4:15:31]
Marcus's Edwards Aquifer.
[4:15:34]
Jim Garborset, if we're making decisions based on money, what does that make us?
[4:15:38]
Respectfully, I'll tell you what that makes you.
[4:15:39]
It makes you a sellout.
[4:15:40]
It makes you a sellout with land that is not yours to sell out.
[4:15:43]
You've heard don't mess with Texas.
[4:15:45]
It's not threat.
[4:15:46]
It's our state slogan.
[4:15:47]
And when you're supposed to abide by it and respect it and protect it.
[4:15:50]
But instead, we are neglecting Texas.
[4:15:52]
That's reminiscent of treason.
[4:15:53]
And you owe this town an alliance.
[4:15:55]
This would not be protecting it or preserving it.
[4:15:58]
This would be a betrayal.
[4:15:59]
And there's nothing more in patriotic than this.
[4:16:02]
None of these hogwash answers have been good enough for me
[4:16:04]
and they shouldn't be good enough for you
[4:16:06]
and they shouldn't be good enough for Sam Marcus.
[4:16:08]
Sam Marcus deserves better.
[4:16:09]
Thank you and I'm so thankful to that community out there.
[4:16:12]
It means so much to me.
[4:16:14]
Thank you.
[4:16:19]
We'll call on Charles Secting one more time.
[4:16:22]
Russell Curselli Matt Gonzalez.
[4:16:26]
Frank Zemer and Jerry Margot Witte,
[4:16:39]
sir, please get your name and address and we have three minutes.
[4:16:42]
Good evening, commissioners. Once again, my name is Matt Gonzalez. This is manager,
[4:16:45]
Labor's level 10.95, 1, 7, 9, 1, 7, basketball, or a bend.
[4:16:49]
I want the labor, the topic you heard earlier, some of my comments and advocacy for this project in the way of
[4:17:02]
the opportunity to further clarify and let the community know who we are as
[4:17:08]
organization.
[4:17:09]
The Labor's International Union of North America, we are 122 years old.
[4:17:14]
We have existing relationships throughout all of Central Texas.
[4:17:18]
We have a pre-apprentissiate program with SAISD at Sam Houston High School, where we are providing
[4:17:24]
dual credit curriculum and instruction for those students who participate in that program
[4:17:28]
to graduate and have the opportunity to enter into our apprenticeship program with advanced
[4:17:33]
placement.
[4:17:35]
We also partner with group of judges, Travis County, for diversion programs, to help those
[4:17:42]
who are in the criminal justice system.
[4:17:45]
We have long-standing relationships with TDCJ, so we are second-chance hiring, and then we
[4:17:50]
also work with our military veteran community.
[4:17:53]
All that to say, we are committed through and through to work with any community that we engage
[4:18:02]
to provide opportunity. I also serve as a board member of Fort Force Alamo. So we have long
[4:18:09]
senior relationships throughout all of the workforce solution offices in Central Texas. Again,
[4:18:16]
I simply say this just to share our commitment to this community should this project be approved.
[4:18:22]
We will commit to make sure that any and all jobs that are created from this project will be directed to the local residents.
[4:18:33]
Thank you, sir.
[4:18:35]
Frank and Jerry had to leave.
[4:18:41]
Thank you.
[4:18:45]
James Presley.
[4:18:47]
George Mendoza.
[4:18:49]
Ronan Conro.
[4:18:52]
Eduardo Levi.
[4:18:58]
And please correct me if I mispronounced your name, I apologize.
[4:19:01]
All four of us also left sir.
[4:19:03]
I don't roll.
[4:19:04]
Thank you.
[4:19:06]
Shannon Brown,
[4:19:10]
Coran,
[4:19:11]
Lopercito,
[4:19:13]
Jordan Moser,
[4:19:14]
Abigail Lindsey,
[4:19:16]
Manuel,
[4:19:17]
Good do.
[4:19:22]
I know we got some of them.
[4:19:28]
Jin Corby,
[4:19:30]
Bobby Levinsky,
[4:19:34]
Mike Canlander,
[4:19:35]
Virginia Parker.
[4:19:38]
And sir please first come first sir.
[4:19:40]
Please state your name and address and we have three minutes.
[4:19:46]
Thank you for the opportunity to speak again, Commissioners.
[4:19:49]
My name is Mayan Gaudolik, 4906,
[4:19:52]
Scream and Eagle Colleen with the Labor Union.
[4:19:55]
I'm here in support of the Tata Center Project.
[4:19:58]
One of the most important parts of the...
[4:20:00]
Project like this is opportunity. Union construction creates a pathway for local residents, where
[4:20:08]
that's someone already working on the trades, or a young person, graduating high school and
[4:20:13]
looking for a real career. These jobs come with training, benefits, and a long-term stability.
[4:20:22]
They give people a chance to stay in their community and build their life here. With
[4:20:27]
The developer's commitment to the Union Labor, this project can help bring up opportunities
[4:20:32]
just on multiple residents.
[4:20:35]
Please support moving this project forward.
[4:20:38]
Thank you very much for your time.
[4:20:40]
Thank you, sir.
[4:20:49]
Hello, Commissioner.
[4:20:50]
It's Bob Ilevinsky, 248 Camaro away here in Samarko's Texas.
[4:20:55]
I was one of the commenters on the comprehensive plan.
[4:20:59]
I spent my own free time commenting, I think, several of the dozen of the thousand
[4:21:04]
comments that were put in place before, you adopted the comprehensive plan.
[4:21:11]
It was a lengthy document that I spent a lot of time reviewing, a lot of people in the community
[4:21:17]
did.
[4:21:18]
We came to a community consensus on it.
[4:21:20]
And within two years, you are kind of willy-nilly considering a new plan amendment that
[4:21:29]
would kind of under contradict the entire plan.
[4:21:31]
Unsurprisingly, data centers are not mentioned in the comprehensive plan, and contrasts the comprehensive plan
[4:21:38]
adopt schools to facilitate reduced energy use, water consumption, and water production.
[4:21:45]
It establishes the conservation cluster of place type for areas where development would
[4:21:50]
be discouraged over the life of the comprehensive plan.
[4:21:54]
This place type was established after the city received significant community and stakeholder
[4:22:00]
input. It was developed as a concept work development would still occur within areas that are currently
[4:22:08]
open space, farmland, and, or otherwise, undeveloped, but would ensure San Marcos retains
[4:22:15]
many of these assets and maintains a high environmental quality. The intention of the conservation
[4:22:30]
will providing for cluster residential development in appropriate areas.
[4:22:36]
It is only because a data center, and the requisite, light, industrial zoning that it's
[4:22:41]
requesting, it would be incompatible with the comprehensive plan.
[4:22:46]
The applicant is requesting a plan amendment to cure that.
[4:22:50]
If the plan amendment were denied, the landowner would still be entitled to develop with the
[4:22:55]
less environmentally harmful development, according to the requirements of the comprehensive
[4:22:59]
plan and Apple goes on in category. Again, I am speaking in protest because this plan
[4:23:04]
amendment should not be considered tonight. It was denied by the council less than six
[4:23:09]
months ago. What do you think the waiting period is intended for? It's to avoid people
[4:23:16]
gaming the system when they needed a super majority vote. They failed to get it and now they're
[4:23:21]
getting a second bite at the Apple forcing this entire community to do this whole thing once again.
[4:23:27]
You were here for the residents of Samarcos, please vote against it.
[4:23:32]
Thank you.
[4:23:34]
Thank you.
[4:23:38]
Ms. Parker, please have your name and address.
[4:23:40]
We have three minutes.
[4:23:41]
Hi, commissioners.
[4:23:42]
My name is Virginia Parker, and I'm with the Samarcos River Foundation.
[4:23:46]
I want to say that I appreciate John Mayberry's communication.
[4:23:51]
And I hope he'll continue to discuss the project with Smurf if it continues to move forward.
[4:23:57]
So I say this very respectfully.
[4:23:59]
Here are the reasons that smurf is opposed to the changes in the preferred scenario map as well as the zoning.
[4:24:07]
Today, at the Edwards Aquifer Authority Board meeting, they showed a total rainfall graph for the past six years.
[4:24:14]
San Antonio, which has received more rain than our area, is 63.3 inches behind in rain.
[4:24:24]
And that's an equivalent of two years worth of rain in the past six years.
[4:24:30]
The Edwards Occ for authority climatologist models show average rainfall going forward over
[4:24:36]
the next several decades to be about average with very dry periods, paused with heavy rainfall.
[4:24:49]
That means less water soaking into the ground for drinking water and spring flow and more
[4:24:54]
off leading to flooding. This is concerning because the power needed to run a data center required.
[4:25:00]
There is huge amounts of water, more than what is needed on-site at the actual data center itself.
[4:25:07]
Hayes Energy uses GBRA water, crystal clear water, and CMarkis wastewater, which that part is a good thing.
[4:25:14]
That is a good use for wastewater. But the GBRA water and the crystal clear water pull from the same buckets that the city of CMarkis does.
[4:25:24]
One thing to note, the third data center proposed for coldball county will build their own power plant.
[4:25:30]
It'll be gas powered, but it's using technology that does not require water for cooling.
[4:25:36]
This is huge. This is what Texas should require going forward. Gas for gas powered plants.
[4:25:43]
For Smurf, it's all about the water. We're already in a water stress area with a growing population.
[4:25:49]
climate change is going to make this worse and we don't want to create more reasons for
[4:25:54]
our cotaptex, banding, grow the grid, further taxing or water supply.
[4:25:59]
Thank you.
[4:26:00]
Thank you.
[4:26:04]
We have Jeremy Hendrix, Caitlyn Posto,
[4:26:12]
Anna DeFrance, Carl
[4:26:17]
Bettencourt, Tyler Earl.
[4:26:25]
Please go there.
[4:26:26]
Stay named address me in three minutes.
[4:26:27]
Good evening, I'm Colbert in court, and I thought here to, as a retired union and
[4:26:33]
sheet metal worker, please have you reaffirm your original PSA denial.
[4:26:39]
The current designations for these tracks reflect that these sites provide the best value
[4:26:44]
to the community by being used for single-family homes.
[4:26:47]
I ended up in Hayes County because I got geographer out of my neighborhood of 33 years
[4:26:51]
in Austin when I retired just because of the lack of housing.
[4:26:55]
City Council here has realized that a restrictive covenant would address the proximity to the
[4:27:02]
power plant for the single-family homes, extra insulation in the houses would address sound
[4:27:07]
issues and provide better efficiency.
[4:27:11]
This area has been, as always, supported, humans with its land and water.
[4:27:16]
These two elements have shaped and nourished our community and individual growth.
[4:27:21]
Single-family homes do more to improve community character and spirit than industrial
[4:27:25]
uses. The compounding effects of families in the city living their lives will have more income
[4:27:32]
and quality of life than any industrial use. The amount of damage to access to the track
[4:27:39]
for construction of a data center will cause the city repair, cause way before any tax revenues
[4:27:46]
reach the budget. Most empty buildings don't generate road maintenance revenue for road repair
[4:27:54]
either.
[4:27:57]
Changing land use and zoning would replace the community of family and friends with a business
[4:28:02]
black hole-gobbling limited resources.
[4:28:05]
The proposed water utility crystal clear would have a new number one consumer of water
[4:28:10]
by its customer bay in its customer base.
[4:28:13]
If the data center exceeds 15,049 gallons per day, so the staff estimate and back up material
[4:28:21]
places is projected water consumption 8, 1.3 to 2.3 times more than that, and then of course
[4:28:30]
with the 75,000 gallons per day, that's even crazier. Lots of the water would only be used
[4:28:37]
to flush the filters in place, remove the total lots of spinach solids, so our hard water
[4:28:42]
doesn't gum up the works like it does in our homes, plumbing, and water heaters. One in the
[4:28:50]
Crystal clears what a plan it shows, one of the conditions calling for stage 4 restrictions
[4:28:56]
is a water level of less than 630 feet at the Edward Aquifer J17 well.
[4:29:03]
Today that number is at 628.8.
[4:29:07]
Most of the restrictions fall to residential users, and most extreme water control, I think,
[4:29:13]
to our growth payment, total pumping by the company is reduced by 44 percent while industrial
[4:29:22]
customers only have to cut back 10 percent. I guess small uses will have to pick up slack.
[4:29:28]
The other risk to our water resources is the previous five year average leak. Thank you.
[4:29:35]
Thank you, sir.
[4:29:39]
Bring us the Peter Bane, Elizabeth Emerson, Zachary Tendell.
[4:29:58]
My name
[4:29:58]
Zachary Tindall, a little bit.
[4:30:00]
614 Martin Luther King Drive, Sam Marcus Texas.
[4:30:05]
First of all, thank you for your careful consideration
[4:30:07]
of this matter tonight and at the meeting a few weeks ago. I appreciate some of the commissioners
[4:30:15]
asking some hard questions about the restrictive covenant. One important question that I want to reiterate
[4:30:24]
that y'all actually brought up was whether the city will be able to monitor the utilities use
[4:30:34]
and let's see trying to keep this short for y'all. Second I'd like to draw your attention to
[4:30:41]
a contradiction within the statements of Mr. Mayberry and his team last week and some of those points
[4:30:46]
been reiterated, or sorry, last meeting and some of them reiterated this meeting.
[4:30:54]
When asked about the increase load of the data center would put on the electric grid, and
[4:30:59]
let's remember that when we talk about electricity, we're talking about off-site water use as
[4:31:03]
well.
[4:31:05]
When we asked about the increased load, Mr. Mayberry claimed the electricity was already there
[4:31:09]
and by implication the data center would not result in an increased generation of electricity
[4:31:13]
or increased off-site water use, that's a very
[4:31:17]
perplexing statement, at best, perhaps he mispoke,
[4:31:23]
perhaps he meant that the infrastructure is already there,
[4:31:26]
but then that contradicts his own utilities expert, who claimed
[4:31:29]
that the infrastructure will grow to accommodate the
[4:31:32]
admittedly great power needs that this data center will incur.
[4:31:39]
So I hope that you all can, if you're even considering this,
[4:31:43]
all anymore. I hope that you can seek clarification on that matter. Don't let these
[4:31:53]
these, these, these, these, these contradictions slip past you. I think there has been
[4:32:00]
either through sincere ignorance on the part of some of the people pushing forward this application
[4:32:06]
or or malincent, I can't definitively say, but there's a lot of information that we're
[4:32:14]
not getting, questions that you've asked that you have not received answers for please press
[4:32:19]
for those don't don't take vague responses. I oppose the State of Center and both the agenda items
[4:32:27]
related to it. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Teddo.
[4:32:36]
Don E-Walt, I will come back to you, I believe you might be online.
[4:32:42]
Abby Witzel, Diana Briggs, Rocco Moses, in Abigail,
[4:32:49]
Leighton,
[4:32:53]
may just not sure we're
[4:32:54]
going to have one person online, and that's Mr. Hulzano, and I believe you spoke earlier.
[4:32:59]
Okay, thank you.
[4:33:01]
His name, we're also in the chamber, which is speak.
[4:33:04]
Please line up and states your name and address them in about three minutes.
[4:33:11]
Lisa Pruitt, Sam Marcus Texas, I'd like to thank you all for your service, you guys have
[4:33:19]
been debating this and deliberating this and listening to all of us for about 10 months
[4:33:24]
now.
[4:33:26]
I'd also like to thank this amazing community that has come before you tonight and honored
[4:33:30]
our river, our sacred springs, they've honored their neighbors, the neighbors work they
[4:33:36]
on their land, their health, their well-being, and this entire community.
[4:33:42]
We've also heard the negative impacts of water usage for these systems, as well as the
[4:33:47]
energy, the water that the energy will take to produce the use.
[4:33:51]
I want to speak to you guys about processes.
[4:33:54]
So we have a policy in the city that says when something has not been approved that it takes
[4:33:58]
six months to reapply, so I can't understand why this project was denied in March.
[4:34:04]
It was not approved in August, and in October they were allowed to come back in with the exact same project for an application.
[4:34:13]
Two along the way, wave that, and who was told that that was wave. Number one.
[4:34:19]
The second thing I wanted to discuss is, when the council deliberated on this and debated the mayor and the city council,
[4:34:26]
all agree to send this back to city staff to create a new zoning category because across
[4:34:32]
this entire nation communities are opposing data centers because of the water usage and
[4:34:38]
all the other types of uses and impacts that they have in the communities negatively.
[4:34:45]
That was five months ago.
[4:34:48]
Why have those zoning categories not been brought forward to you all to consider before tonight?
[4:34:56]
There are cities across the nation that have done that.
[4:35:00]
I'm going to mention a couple here in a second.
[4:35:08]
Cities like Luden County, Virginia, New Albany, Ohio,
[4:35:13]
Chandler, Arizona, has specific zoning for data centers, often creating overly districts, or special use permits.
[4:35:23]
And these are done to manage the impacts like power, water, noise,
[4:35:29]
why others like Gaffney, South Carolina,
[4:35:31]
created new classifications with strict requirements
[4:35:34]
for infrastructure and mitigation.
[4:35:37]
So we're supposed to be so progressive here in San Marcos.
[4:35:40]
Why have we not done that if other cities across the nation are doing that already?
[4:35:45]
A couple of other things I'd like to mention would be,
[4:35:49]
we keep talking about 400 homes or data center.
[4:35:52]
is there nothing else in between that we not have a more creative minds put together to find out what other
[4:35:59]
uses would be more compatible to that. So I think that that argument to me is not really valid.
[4:36:08]
And also I'm kind of curious when did it become appropriate to discuss revenues when considering
[4:36:16]
zoning changes. Thank you. Thank you.
[4:36:26]
Michael Hernandez, 722,000. I will exclude.
[4:36:30]
Do I have a speech? Just have had some questions pop up that I think should be considered
[4:36:36]
and I don't know if anybody has even thought of them because I have not heard of them.
[4:36:41]
Anybody ask? But first and foremost, there is a cemetery in the middle of this entire proposed project.
[4:36:49]
Let's say I have a loved one there.
[4:36:52]
How the hell am I going to get access to it?
[4:36:54]
These data centers are highly secured.
[4:36:57]
Some of them have guards with weapons.
[4:37:01]
What's the process?
[4:37:02]
Like, how are people going to be able to visit their loved ones in that cemetery?
[4:37:07]
On a random Tuesday or a random Wednesday anniversary of a death in a birthday of a loved one?
[4:37:12]
Something to consider something you all might ask since we can't ask directly.
[4:37:18]
Also,
[4:37:22]
brought up that, let's say, that there is a grid failure in that, you know, the data
[4:37:29]
centers aren't going to continue usage of the grid.
[4:37:34]
They're on generators.
[4:37:35]
What are the environmental effects of the generators that are going to be running?
[4:37:38]
Let's say the five or six days that there is grid failure.
[4:37:42]
We don't know, but there has to be some sort of environmental effect of the generators to keep those things running because if they're not running, they're losing all of their data and service and whatnot.
[4:37:56]
I'd also like to reiterate that at the moment, there's no contract with the water, with the crystal clear, it's not existent.
[4:38:06]
So, all of these are just hypothetical numbers and things of that nature, but they want to use, but that's that.
[4:38:15]
In addition,
[4:38:19]
the developer decided to reiterate that it is on for residential because he asked for it.
[4:38:26]
Well, it is on for residential, but I'd like to reiterate that that's what he asked for a few years ago is to reason it too residential.
[4:38:32]
It wasn't just, he didn't just purchase it residential.
[4:38:36]
So we're here a few years later trying to get it to be light industrial.
[4:38:42]
In city council, he said he didn't have a buyer anymore, but he has the contract right now.
[4:38:46]
What happens if no buyers come forward, then what?
[4:38:49]
We've reasoned it to something else.
[4:38:53]
The toughsland is conservation cluster.
[4:38:56]
Please do not demean us and look down on us as if we don't know what we're talking about.
[4:39:02]
It's literally the next item.
[4:39:05]
So that's all I've got.
[4:39:07]
But just some questions to think about.
[4:39:09]
Thank you, Mr. Hernandez.
[4:39:13]
Hi.
[4:39:14]
Sauner's Drucker, same Marcos.
[4:39:17]
I want to bring up something we haven't really talked about yet.
[4:39:20]
And that is tax abatements and tax subsidies.
[4:39:23]
Did you know that in 2025, Texas gave over a billion dollars
[4:39:28]
in subsidies to data center development.
[4:39:30]
it is the largest subsidy for any industry in the country.
[4:39:37]
Those subsidies go to the following, and I'm getting stuff here from the Texas
[4:39:41]
Comptroller's website, construction materials.
[4:39:45]
The servers, including server replacements, required every two to five years.
[4:39:49]
I'm really glad you brought that up, Mr. Wellen.
[4:39:52]
All those server replacements, so it doesn't get outdated.
[4:39:55]
We're going to be paying for those with our state and local tax subsidies.
[4:39:58]
as well as server-
[4:40:00]
Iraq's cabling for power data distributed data storage systems, securities, surveillance, firewall, encryption,
[4:40:06]
fiber optic cabling to the Internet, standby power generators, which some may
[4:40:11]
brought up the standby power generators that will be run whenever it's high loads. Those are
[4:40:16]
the same backup power generators that regularly violate EPA regulations in Virginia.
[4:40:23]
Moving on, we also pay for their uninterruptable power source systems, their power-grade connections with the
[4:40:32]
internal switches, distributors, and redundancies, their air, air, or water-based killers and cooler systems.
[4:40:39]
The ventilation, humidification, dehumidification systems, the fire protection equipment, the meatmeat rooms where telecom traffic
[4:40:46]
is managed, the operations sensor centers where 24-7 staffing monitors and troubleshoots as well
[4:40:52]
as the lobby entrance area and shipping. If you're interested to know more about this, we can
[4:40:58]
go look at the Texas Controllers website and see where we have given our subsidies. We pay
[4:41:04]
these people to build here. That's why they're coming to Texas because they can get insane
[4:41:10]
tax subsidies and build their crazy money making facilities off of our dollar.
[4:41:18]
The only thing else that I have to say is yes, we've all forgotten that there is a cemetery
[4:41:22]
there.
[4:41:23]
Alice Nichols is buried there.
[4:41:24]
I have gone and sat out by her grave site multiple times.
[4:41:27]
If any of you would like to do so, we can.
[4:41:31]
Legally, we're allowed to.
[4:41:33]
Thank you.
[4:41:34]
Thank you.
[4:41:39]
Justin James Bridges, 1318 Hazelton Street, St. Marcus Texas,
[4:41:46]
it's still crazy to me that we
[4:41:48]
are still here having this discussion. Like they said, they were turned down less than six
[4:41:52]
months before they applied again. This shouldn't even be an issue. This should just be thrown
[4:41:56]
out. You can do the right thing. You have the power to do the right thing. We shouldn't
[4:42:02]
have to pay as a community for his bad investments. That's just, that's, he made a bad
[4:42:07]
investment and then push to get it resowned and then realize, oh, this is a bad investment, I'm going to try to see if I can recover my money another way.
[4:42:15]
Why should we as a community, all these people that are out here, all the people that have land surrounding these areas?
[4:42:21]
Why should we have to pay for his poor decisions and his bad investments?
[4:42:28]
We are better than this.
[4:42:29]
You know, they said that Sam Marcus has the opportunity to be the gold standard.
[4:42:34]
They're 100% correct.
[4:42:36]
We can be the gold standard of saying,
[4:42:38]
No, we're not allowing you to have a data center here.
[4:42:41]
We don't have to take this.
[4:42:42]
Oh, it's either going to be a data center or 500 homes.
[4:42:45]
It got re-zoned to the homes because he made a bad investment.
[4:42:49]
That's not our fault.
[4:42:51]
He should have to eat the bad investment.
[4:42:54]
It should go back to conservation.
[4:42:56]
We shouldn't be going in the wrong direction and moving it towards industrial.
[4:43:00]
We should be going back and putting it back in conversation and conservation.
[4:43:05]
This is ridiculous.
[4:43:08]
This is absurd.
[4:43:09]
To even have this discussion is a disgrace and a stain on this city's great history.
[4:43:15]
We can be better.
[4:43:16]
We should be better.
[4:43:17]
This has to happen.
[4:43:18]
We have to stop this from happening.
[4:43:20]
We have to make these changes.
[4:43:22]
We are the gold standard.
[4:43:23]
Sandmark is can be the difference.
[4:43:25]
Let's make them known.
[4:43:28]
Thank you.
[4:43:38]
I'm Max Phil Baker and you know that. I live at 314 Shady Lane here in Sam Marcus, Texas
[4:43:47]
Yeah, you know so many things said so many times
[4:43:52]
for one
[4:43:53]
I was glad to see the new presentation included some of the stuff that staff and the city manager's office in particular
[4:43:59]
Who seems very in favor of this project are putting in front of you one thing that I thought was noticeable was
[4:44:05]
Tyler Stewart's last comments about this like effectively doubling the size of our city electrical load.
[4:44:11]
It seems pretty odd that that's missing.
[4:44:15]
I also understand, because I ran into this as a planning and zoning commissioner, as well as a city council member,
[4:44:20]
that you all have maybe been instructed as I was to not call on our community members that are subject matter experts to come and testify.
[4:44:29]
beyond just the citizen comment part.
[4:44:32]
You can call them up, just as you call it,
[4:44:34]
Mr. Mayberry time after time, to get a better sense
[4:44:37]
of what actual subject matter experts
[4:44:39]
and watery colleges and all that stuff know,
[4:44:42]
and aren't actually just invested in making you
[4:44:44]
understand our belief in, right?
[4:44:47]
But that's all of the discretion of the chair,
[4:44:48]
who we know is the only person to vote for this last time.
[4:44:51]
So I would hope that if you all do decide
[4:44:53]
to exercise that right, but the chair allows for it,
[4:44:56]
even though he seems to be in favor of this project himself.
[4:44:58]
I'm...
[4:45:00]
You know, it's funny that we keep going back to how these restrictive covenants are going to be super helpful and monitor, blah, blah, blah, but if those are monitored only by our city staff who our community does not trust, because we have seen city staff working to further this objective through, you know, bringing this back to the agenda, et cetera, and how can we trust them to also oversee it? Not to mention, when you are that far out, I have heard this from community members and from city staff
[4:45:29]
correctly, that our city staff, code compliance in particular, who would likely have to deal
[4:45:33]
with noise stuff, does not have the staff to go out and check on those things, right?
[4:45:39]
So here's this, you know, sound that we're not going to break these decibels, but guess
[4:45:43]
what?
[4:45:44]
We'll never be able to check that and hold them to account.
[4:45:46]
Notice we'll be missing in the restrictive covenants and aside from noise and use and stuff
[4:45:51]
is health.
[4:45:54]
Data centers are new and we're seeing environmentally injustice all over the place against communities
[4:45:58]
of color, I guess people that are lower middle income,
[4:46:02]
are industrial, sorry, are farming, community members.
[4:46:05]
This is going to impact them.
[4:46:07]
And so until I see a restrictive covenant that says,
[4:46:09]
and we will impact, we will monitor the impact of people's health
[4:46:12]
and animals' health nearby,
[4:46:14]
I think that we're sorely missing an opportunity
[4:46:16]
to actually do something for the wellness of our community.
[4:46:20]
They mentioned ERCOT, which I think is just kind of hilarious
[4:46:23]
in this context.
[4:46:24]
Yeah, that organization, we all applauded
[4:46:26]
for how well they did during the last winter storm,
[4:46:28]
and that we're held entirely accountable
[4:46:30]
for all of the mistakes that they made
[4:46:32]
at almost every level of the organization.
[4:46:36]
They mentioned that there are no complaints against that.
[4:46:38]
One is to tell you again,
[4:46:39]
do we even know that that's a comparable project?
[4:46:41]
We don't.
[4:46:43]
Thank you, sir.
[4:46:49]
Hello again.
[4:46:50]
I'm Moira McCollock, 84, Holt's Drive.
[4:46:53]
I just wanted to reiterate the point
[4:46:55]
that water is not the only environmental concern
[4:46:58]
that we have concerning this project.
[4:47:02]
carbon dioxide is one of the most existential threats that we have to the planetary environment
[4:47:08]
across the globe at the moment. And if I'm not mistaken, power plants do, and that
[4:47:16]
is a fairly significant amount of carbon dioxide emissions, especially if we expand the power plant
[4:47:26]
usage if they build new infrastructure for power that would add more carbon dioxide. And then
[4:47:32]
On the point of the backup generators, one person was confused or was wondering what exactly
[4:47:39]
could be expelled. According to my research, they run most often on diesel, and that
[4:47:45]
can lead to expulsion of nitrous oxide, sulfur dioxide, which can affect respiratory health issues
[4:47:52]
and people affected by it. And also carbon dioxide. So I do believe that that causes a concern
[4:47:59]
for at local residents near the area and also the livestock nearby so thank you for your time.
[4:48:06]
Thank you.
[4:48:12]
I definitely mean when I say it didn't come here to the talks and item actually a
[4:48:15]
resident named Kevin Ivy. I look about two models from this plant over this proposed area is that
[4:48:22]
not a Hayes County tax base payer. I live in Guadalupe County, but this is literally
[4:48:29]
our next door neighbor truly appreciate all the folks that come up there in
[4:48:35]
spoke there's a lot of context there's a lot of positive feedback of the
[4:48:41]
community we're all neighbors here right so I just thought I'd give it a little
[4:48:46]
different light I'm a third generation cattleman so I do know there's
[4:48:51]
thing that affects the cattle in the life second industry while the same
[4:48:55]
lines I build data centers for 20 years I've heard one guy say that he worked
[4:48:59]
in an operating facility, nobody's talked about building, okay.
[4:49:04]
So I do understand the complexities, understand what these are.
[4:49:09]
The water usage, it's real, right?
[4:49:11]
Okay, we're in the state of Texas, we've been talking about water restrictions, but water
[4:49:16]
issues for over 30 years.
[4:49:18]
When in 1992 I was, you know, 12, 13 years old, I walked across the springs in New
[4:49:24]
where we still swim, right, and land apart.
[4:49:27]
I walked across them.
[4:49:28]
They were dropped, okay?
[4:49:30]
We're still fighting those same issues.
[4:49:33]
Crystal clear, uh, pair myself.
[4:49:37]
Um, they have their own issues.
[4:49:38]
Go look it up.
[4:49:39]
I can say right now I pay the highest rates of any water utility around.
[4:49:43]
There's a reason for that, and it's not used.
[4:49:47]
Um, this data center, they talked about it via a closed loop system.
[4:49:52]
Before they even got a current talks about it, I already knew that was what it's going to be.
[4:49:56]
A lot of the folks that do this, the gone on, the Google, they did whatever.
[4:50:00]
Number online, figure out all the consumption usage on these data centers. I've personally witnessed it. I've personally built them. Virginia, Washington, the Mayo Clinic, Minnesota, all the way south. The cooling towers, the rapid coolers, those are the big waterwasters. Okay, not the closed lip system through looking at it. Does I make it right now? The reason I got up here speak is no matter what option we go with, it's either going to be rooftops or it's going to be data centers.
[4:50:30]
I'd love the fact that some folks got up here
[4:50:31]
and talked about the environmental impacts
[4:50:33]
and making a degree in space or whatever they envision, right?
[4:50:36]
Truth be told, it's going to be rooftops,
[4:50:38]
it's going to be a data center, okay?
[4:50:40]
Put 500 rooftops there, if you've been out there,
[4:50:42]
you know where this place is at,
[4:50:44]
they already cut in another 500 rooftops
[4:50:45]
across the road.
[4:50:46]
They already got a thousand above that.
[4:50:49]
2000 vehicles, what do you think the environmental impacts
[4:50:52]
that that is?
[4:50:53]
There is nobody going to get rid of those guys.
[4:50:55]
We got the trash, we got people shooting guns
[4:50:57]
during the Fourth of July poppin' fireworks,
[4:51:00]
the trucks flying by, just this, you know, just sitin' back.
[4:51:04]
I got worried about my own county fixing the roads,
[4:51:06]
and I look at you guys, y'all are in a bunch of deficit.
[4:51:08]
Road improvements, municipal services,
[4:51:11]
fire, water, or a fire on EMS, police.
[4:51:15]
That's also something you're gonna figure out, okay?
[4:51:18]
That is gonna be a huge cost, thanks for time.
[4:51:21]
Thank you, sir.
[4:51:27]
Luke Kraft, three or six credit avenue,
[4:51:32]
pretty tired, so I'm going to keep this short,
[4:51:37]
but to reiterate what's been a, someone said earlier about why does it have to be houses or data center.
[4:51:45]
If anything, we are experiencing a housing crisis nationwide, currently some of the houses wouldn't be such a bad thing, I mean people can live there.
[4:51:53]
And I'm sure that there will be more jobs if there was not a data center, jobs aren't disappearing.
[4:52:03]
You know, we have two Bucky's within a 30-minute radius, currently.
[4:52:09]
Textaud is building highways into infinity.
[4:52:14]
I think one of the union members came up here earlier and clarified that they weren't being paid to be here.
[4:52:22]
And I would agree with that, you weren't forced to take this job, you took this job and, you know, if this data center doesn't happen, I'm sure the union won't disappear, I'm sure they're fine jobs, I'm sure people won't be starving in the streets, you know, and if there aren't enough union jobs, then why is that? That's not the citizen's fault, that's someone else's fault, and maybe there should be more union jobs, so they have options.
[4:52:48]
So, they don't have to take a job that is so divisive for this community and pits people against each other.
[4:52:59]
Or maybe we can just leave the land B because, I don't know, 10, 20 years ago it was fine.
[4:53:06]
But all of a sudden we have data centers are kind of a fad and a trend right now.
[4:53:13]
So I think everyone's trying to hot bond to that.
[4:53:16]
And we just don't need it.
[4:53:19]
So thank you.
[4:53:21]
Thank you.
[4:53:36]
Thank you.
[4:53:37]
Chris V. Polanco, 669, Bandarist Street,
[4:53:40]
this out of Brook neighborhood.
[4:53:44]
A question that occurred to me while I was sitting out there
[4:53:46]
and granted, I don't know how true what I've heard is,
[4:53:50]
but I do have to ask, has maybe even paid the toast
[4:53:55]
for their property yet, just a question
[4:54:00]
throughout their Mr. Whalen brought up
[4:54:04]
like the lifespan of the data centers.
[4:54:10]
Where does all that equipment go when it becomes outdated
[4:54:13]
in the replace it?
[4:54:15]
It goes into a landfill somewhere.
[4:54:19]
What happens when it becomes not so cost effective
[4:54:22]
to update the equipment, well then the data center
[4:54:28]
if it costs too much to upgrade things they just won't do it.
[4:54:33]
In the past, Maxwell Baker has brought up how an injunction is probably something the city will not do if the covenants are broken.
[4:54:44]
The city council has already shown that they are afraid to stand up to the governor.
[4:54:50]
Yeah, this is just as disjointed as the last time I tried.
[4:54:53]
Sorry,
[4:54:57]
basically a problem I'm seeing here.
[4:55:00]
It is that may vary. And as people have not convinced the public of the value of this data center. And unfortunately, for us, they only have to convince you.
[4:55:14]
This is a chance not to get a data center that we have questionable control over for questionable benefits. It's a chance to say no to at least one data center.
[4:55:27]
If they want to go build outside of San Marcos,
[4:55:31]
let John May be able to go buy more land.
[4:55:34]
I don't think he'd ever get the land he currently has, DNX.
[4:55:38]
So if that's what he really wants to do, let him go do that.
[4:55:42]
And spend even more of his own money.
[4:55:45]
Find by me.
[4:55:46]
Sort of.
[4:55:51]
I don't know.
[4:55:51]
I just see this as a chance for you guys to show
[4:55:56]
Last time you only one person voted to recommend approval while the city council then needed the super majority and they didn't get it, though they did get a majority.
[4:56:08]
So this is just another chance for you guys to show that you're just at least that much better than the city council.
[4:56:15]
Yeah, I guess that's all I got.
[4:56:17]
Thank you, sir.
[4:56:26]
Again, a cure-a-utter of 1, 2, 1,
[4:56:29]
Chrotic Avenue, and I think it does take a lot for a bunch of young people,
[4:56:36]
especially like myself to come out here and talk about an issue that they are very passionate about,
[4:56:40]
and I hope that that action reflects in y'all's decision,
[4:56:44]
and then you take the people's words into consideration,
[4:56:48]
but I would like to point out a contradiction in the proposed data center plan.
[4:56:54]
I think you all said low environmental impacts as opposed to the other plan that we were just
[4:57:00]
talked about that we just heard a few minutes ago that one listed out the environmental impacts
[4:57:06]
and what would happen I think it was with the transportation stuff.
[4:57:12]
And I would like to see maybe a full fledged more research list of the environmental impacts of the data center
[4:57:18]
instead of just low environmental impacts because that doesn't really mean nothing.
[4:57:22]
That's all right, excuse me, that doesn't really mean anything.
[4:57:26]
And I would also like to point out that most of the people that are for this don't really live here.
[4:57:31]
They don't really live in Samarkis, they won't be experiencing the effects of this data center, and they probably don't want to.
[4:57:39]
So I would employ y'all to really process who is here and who is advocating against this and to do the citizens of Samarkis, a favor, please.
[4:57:50]
Thank you for your time, have a great night.
[4:57:59]
Hi, Gina Flemington, 13, Dartmouth.
[4:58:02]
Thank you for your patience this evening.
[4:58:04]
I wanted to say a few things about public, since a number of people
[4:58:08]
had mentioned public health effects.
[4:58:11]
I came across a research article this morning,
[4:58:14]
and I haven't had time to summarize it,
[4:58:16]
so I'm just going to read off some areas I highlighted.
[4:58:21]
The article is called the unpaid toll quantifying and addressing the public health impact of data centers.
[4:58:29]
It says across its entire life cycle from chip manufacturing to operation.
[4:58:35]
A data center contributes substantially to air quality degradation and public health costs through the emission of various criteria air pollutants.
[4:58:44]
These include fine particulate matter, which is referred to as pm2.5.
[4:58:50]
These are particles measuring 2.5 micrometers or smaller, and diameter that can
[4:58:56]
penetrate deep into lungs and cause serious health effects.
[4:59:02]
Also, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide.
[4:59:08]
Conqueredly, the server manufacturing process electricity generation from fossil fuels to
[4:59:13]
our data centers and the maintenance and usage of diesel backup generators to ensure continuous
[4:59:19]
data center operation, all produced significant amounts of criteria, air pollutants.
[4:59:25]
Exposure to air pollutants is directly and causally linked to various adverse health
[4:59:31]
incomes, including premature mortality, lung cancer, asthma, heart attacks, cardiovascular
[4:59:37]
disease, and even cognitive decline.
[4:59:42]
Criteria air pollutants are not confined to the immediate vicinity of their emission sources
[4:59:47]
that can travel hundreds of miles through a dispersion process, impacting public health
[4:59:53]
crossed vast regions. Further PM 2.5 is considered non-threshold.
[5:00:00]
There is absolutely no safe exposure level. Thus, compliance with national regional air quality standards does not necessarily ensure the air is healthy.
[5:00:14]
The public health impact of AI is a highly, unevenly distributed, is highly, unevenly distributed
[5:00:25]
across different counties and communities disproportionately affecting certain IELO often
[5:00:34]
low income communities.
[5:00:35]
It is imperative to address this substantial health impact disparities across communities.
[5:00:45]
Thank you.
[5:00:47]
Thank you.
[5:00:54]
Hi, Sifidi.
[5:00:59]
Gina was just elaborating on the health consequences of data centers.
[5:01:03]
I want to go over some of my notes sort of about the presentation.
[5:01:08]
And this isn't about, like, count of data centers.
[5:01:11]
This is not just one more data center.
[5:01:14]
I've said this before.
[5:01:15]
This data center would be bigger than all 84 currently
[5:01:17]
operational data centers between Austin and San Antonio.
[5:01:22]
People die in Northern Virginia, which has more data centers
[5:01:26]
than anywhere else in the world.
[5:01:27]
People are facing the health consequences there.
[5:01:32]
And just the track data center,
[5:01:33]
supposed to come to Calville County,
[5:01:34]
is going to be almost twice all of the data centers
[5:01:36]
and currently operational in Northern Virginia.
[5:01:41]
In March, I walked home from that meeting at 2am
[5:01:44]
feeling pretty elated.
[5:01:46]
Like I felt like we're all on this together.
[5:01:50]
I was looking forward to talking with Jim about it.
[5:01:55]
What I took away from that meeting,
[5:01:56]
some of the things y'all said was you were pushing back
[5:02:01]
against this ask between what y'all called
[5:02:04]
at the time, like a bad project and a worse project.
[5:02:12]
And it's not a, you know, you said at that meeting,
[5:02:15]
like actually we're actually being tasked with
[5:02:17]
is considering the land as it is and what he's proposing.
[5:02:29]
I want to say to, you know, when they say the equipment
[5:02:32]
will be refreshed, that's code for like a ton of E-Way
[5:02:35]
straight, also around Senate Bill 6.
[5:02:39]
Like, Gina was just saying, that means you're either going to die from a grid outage or you're going to die from all the pollution from the back of diesel generators.
[5:02:47]
I think it's hard for us to conceptualize the amount of emissions that these would create.
[5:02:51]
And also, lastly, I want to say, these are not inevitable. I realize a lot of people are starting from this defeatist position.
[5:02:57]
If it's going to happen, it's going to happen.
[5:02:59]
But an article just came out recently that showed that 40% of data center
[5:03:07]
developments that
[5:03:08]
Encountered sustained opposition were canceled. I like to think we have a better chance than that here in San Marcos, and I think that should be evident everyone here
[5:03:16]
I think we have a pretty good chance
[5:03:18]
actually
[5:03:19]
Because we love this place. We're deeply devoted. We're building a force and
[5:03:25]
I'm sorry, some of our, like the expert folks who were here to field questions actually went home,
[5:03:31]
someone from public citizen came out from San Antonio, she was an expert on power plants and diesel generators,
[5:03:37]
and Zane also with the Watershed Association, but we've been doing a ton of research, and we, like I've said before,
[5:03:44]
know more about data centers than John Mayberry does, and it's unfortunate that he gets so much time in the city,
[5:03:51]
makes these presentations for him that are so strangely
[5:03:55]
lopsided.
[5:03:56]
Another thing you all said in March was that it's not part of y'all's job
[5:03:58]
to be considering budget and considering that's like, as Jim put it,
[5:04:03]
the only pro.
[5:04:06]
Thank you.
[5:04:12]
Anybody else in the chamber, wish to speak?
[5:04:15]
And I take it we didn't have anybody online that wish to speak, did we?
[5:04:18]
Thank you, sir.
[5:04:21]
I'll close the public hearing.
[5:04:22]
I will make a motion to approve PSA25-02 as presented.
[5:04:35]
I have a couple.
[5:04:38]
Mr. Van Odekerke.
[5:04:39]
And I guess the first one is for our legal staff.
[5:04:43]
Because I do listen to what people say.
[5:04:46]
I listen to an open mind.
[5:04:49]
One of the questions that was raised tonight is about.
[5:04:53]
Do we have to wait six months after the council tonight?
[5:05:01]
So, I'm not going to be here to debate legal issues in public, but, you know, the item is for you, and you're, in all lengths of the question, but y'all's decision is based on the criteria and the zoning, you know, criteria, but the way we've handled things in San Marcos is most approvals require either approval, conditional approval or denial.
[5:05:26]
And it's true under typical robber tools, for example, sometimes a an approval motion that fails could be considered as a denial.
[5:05:36]
But when it comes to development applications, it's always been our position, and this has been the position for years in San Marcos that the way the code is written.
[5:05:44]
You need to have a denial or an approval, and that's how we've treated it as a formal denial.
[5:05:51]
So I don't see a problem with that.
[5:05:53]
I think you can probably just want to work for legal and of course lawyers can always debate forever, but that
[5:06:02]
And the answer is probably going to be the same to my second question the city council did ask
[5:06:10]
In my words, they did ask for another zoning type category. I guess and
[5:06:18]
That hasn't happened it will that having effect or what we're doing tonight
[5:06:24]
I'm not sure which you're getting in.
[5:06:26]
I believe the council, city council,
[5:06:29]
staff to come back with a different category for zoning.
[5:06:34]
Sam, can I respond to that?
[5:06:35]
Yes, yeah, I'll have it out.
[5:06:36]
There are, in our draft, code amendments,
[5:06:40]
I think, which planning is on a commission
[5:06:42]
and looked at in December
[5:06:44]
and should be coming back to you next month, I believe.
[5:06:48]
There is a specific, as drafted,
[5:06:50]
there are specific uses for,
[5:06:52]
But there's a new line in our land use matrix just for data centers.
[5:06:57]
So I think as drafted, it would be limited in heavy industrial and it would require a
[5:07:05]
conditionally use permit in light industrial zoning.
[5:07:10]
I don't know if this wouldn't necessarily apply to this particular project, but there are
[5:07:16]
additional standards that are being drafted and have been publicly circulated.
[5:07:19]
You're not a part of the Mr. I wasn't sure you were asking if there was a different category
[5:07:24]
That's currently allowed that somebody was proposing for this
[5:07:28]
So yeah, that wouldn't impact this decision tonight if that code amendment passes
[5:07:33]
Save this this item failed for whatever reason for council and and then a new code is a path it passed
[5:07:40]
You know
[5:07:42]
Property owners can come and reapply under the new code as well
[5:07:46]
down the line, but that would not affect tonight's recommendation or council's decision
[5:07:51]
the next meeting because it's not an effect yet.
[5:07:54]
I understand incorrectly what you're asking.
[5:07:57]
Thank you.
[5:07:58]
So you started a great trend.
[5:07:59]
I think we'll just kind of go around the table if Commissioner Brellison would like to say anything.
[5:08:04]
Commissioner Agnes?
[5:08:07]
Yeah.
[5:08:07]
Maybe yes, sir.
[5:08:08]
Yeah, something that has confused me, and actually at times irritated me, both in the staff
[5:08:17]
presentation in some of the applicants remarks is a comparison between the various aspects
[5:08:25]
of the data center and the single family home subdivision that was contemplated on the CD-5's
[5:08:34]
CD-2.5 so it was granted.
[5:08:38]
And that does not seem to me like a valid comparison and it's, I think, often somewhat deceptive.
[5:08:45]
and for reasons different than what Lisa Pruitt mentioned a while ago.
[5:08:49]
As I understand it, the single-family home development contemplated by the CD, 2.5,
[5:08:59]
zoning, proved not to be feasible and got abandoned.
[5:09:03]
That's what it sounds to me like.
[5:09:05]
And as a result, the applicant is taking a different direction.
[5:09:08]
And so I've kind of assumed a single-family thing is mood, or dead, or whatever
[5:09:16]
want to call it, and really not something we should even be worrying about right now.
[5:09:21]
And that's just not not a sound basis for comparison.
[5:09:25]
But I guess, and naturally when it's been brought up, it's always been favorable to the
[5:09:29]
applicant.
[5:09:30]
That's not comparison.
[5:09:31]
But the question I have, I think, for Mr. Mr. Mayberry, if, for example, this data center
[5:09:37]
thing did not go forward, would you consider going back and attempting a residential development
[5:09:43]
again?
[5:09:47]
Yes, so if we don't succeed here, that's our existing zoning, I know, that's what we would proceed with.
[5:09:57]
I mean, in the experience you had the first time, it doesn't.
[5:10:00]
Ladies you to believe there's still a triumph you could do that successfully. Yes. And I think Julia Cleary mentioned that we had actually started our construction plans and started the applications and it done the environmental studies and we're working with city engineers when this other use came up.
[5:10:19]
So, that's slightly different than how I've understood it.
[5:10:24]
All right, thank you.
[5:10:26]
Yes.
[5:10:26]
Before it ends in my turn.
[5:10:28]
Mr. Mayberry.
[5:10:28]
Mr. Mayberry, I haven't just a follow-up question with that.
[5:10:32]
So does that mean that a residential area was going forward until the data centers came to you?
[5:10:40]
I'm not quite sure what that means.
[5:10:42]
That's what it means.
[5:10:43]
Yes, that's what it means.
[5:10:44]
Okay, so it is feasible that a residential area could go in there.
[5:10:47]
We're moving forward and spending an engineering
[5:10:49]
dollars on the construction plans.
[5:10:51]
Okay, well that's thank you for clarifying.
[5:10:54]
All right, all right, thank you for that.
[5:10:55]
Okay, I do have, I want to go back to the legal
[5:10:58]
question that we were asking our city attorney.
[5:11:01]
I am a little bit concerned, just sounds like it's not
[5:11:07]
being clearly followed because, you know, the city does have
[5:11:11]
roles in place for help things are to proceed for
[5:11:13]
rules, that keeps everything on the up and up, everything clear if this happens, if A happens,
[5:11:19]
you know then B and C can happen, etc. It is clear that six months have not elapsed since
[5:11:26]
they first came through. It is also clear that this application, current application, is not materially
[5:11:33]
significantly different from the first, which would be the only reason they could apply before
[5:11:37]
the six months was over. What they have done in the application, the re-application process to my
[5:11:43]
I do appreciate it.
[5:11:45]
They answer a lot of the questions that came up, but it's not a different application.
[5:11:51]
So in my thinking, it should not even be a discussion yet.
[5:11:57]
It should not even be allowed to come to us and I'm wondering how legal can justify that.
[5:12:06]
Without,
[5:12:12]
I find it's City Council at them meeting in subsequently that it, it, a new
[5:12:19]
application can move forward, and I've said it that publicly, I said it to the council, and so, you know,
[5:12:26]
I don't know if we want to have a legal debate between me and my client.
[5:12:31]
You know, I mean we can do that, but that's the opinion I gave the council at that time.
[5:12:36]
And I gave that opinion that it could move forward because there was not a final denial of that matter.
[5:12:44]
Okay, so they did come to you.
[5:12:46]
Council came to you and asked. Well, in the public meeting, I'm not sharing legal advice that I gave
[5:12:52]
this was in a public meeting. I gave that opinion. Oh, okay, so the question was asked. Is it okay if they
[5:12:58]
come back before the six years time has elapsed? Yes. Oh, okay, so you then would be the decision maker,
[5:13:04]
because there was that term in there and I was wondering who is the decision maker this? Well,
[5:13:08]
I'm the one who gave the opinion. Yes. Okay. That it would be permissible. Okay, so that's how we are
[5:13:14]
So you're saying from Sam Marcus's legal standpoint, we're okay to proceed with the conversation tonight.
[5:13:20]
That's correct.
[5:13:21]
Okay, but it could be legally challenged.
[5:13:23]
I guess everything could be.
[5:13:24]
Lawyers can debate all kinds of things, but that was the opinion I gave you.
[5:13:29]
Yes, ma'am.
[5:13:29]
Okay, thank you for clarifying that.
[5:13:31]
One more question and I'm not sure who may be not you may be other staff,
[5:13:37]
but it is very clear that Council did give staff the directive after they denied.
[5:13:42]
They gave staff the clear directive to please come up with a new zoning.
[5:13:47]
I understand from staff thank you that they are working on that staff is working on that.
[5:13:51]
It seems to me very full hearty foolish on our part to be going ahead with this discussion
[5:13:58]
before we have a new zoning category specifically for data centers that is actually in process of being written.
[5:14:06]
I'm just not sure why we're even going on with this discussion because of that, because
[5:14:13]
of that as well.
[5:14:14]
Is there an explanation from staff?
[5:14:17]
So, I mean, I'll try.
[5:14:19]
I'm going to interrupt me if they want.
[5:14:21]
From Southfish Festival, if we get a zoning change request from a property owner and they meet
[5:14:25]
all the requirements in our code for a completed application, we're required to move forward
[5:14:30]
with that.
[5:14:31]
There's not necessarily an additional, we can definitely recommend, and then we're definitely
[5:14:35]
discussions with the applicant, potentially looking at a different time scale, but if
[5:14:41]
the end of the day of the applicant, as the property owner wants to move forward with that
[5:14:45]
application, we have to move forward with that.
[5:14:50]
I think they've made our criteria for a complete application.
[5:14:52]
I appreciate that, and that makes sense to me, you're just doing your job.
[5:14:55]
they send you a request and you're going to take the steps necessary to process.
[5:15:00]
Okay, and knowing that, I'm going to speak to my fellow commissioners up here, I just feel like we should really say, okay, let's put a hold on this, because we really do want to listen to what city council. Remember, you guys, we follow a city council. We are working at their request. We take our direction, our directives from them. If they have said, we want to see a new zoning category.
[5:15:30]
that data centers comfortably fit in, that I feel like we have no business overstepping
[5:15:40]
that ask on their part and going ahead and making a decision without the new zoning
[5:15:46]
in place.
[5:15:47]
So that's why I would ask if my fellow commissioners, maybe we should consider that.
[5:15:52]
I have a ready to go down and respond to what you can actually ask me.
[5:15:59]
As far as the zone, I'm sorry that I was trying to respond to our comment.
[5:16:03]
I don't see what difference a new zoning category would make in this case.
[5:16:11]
I don't think the issue here is light industrial versus some other zoning category.
[5:16:20]
I think the question here is data center versus no data center and I don't I don't really think that the cell a new zoning category make any difference to any of us, except possibly yourself
[5:16:31]
But I don't think that's that's really the issue here.
[5:16:34]
Can I respond to that my only concern is that we do know data centers are completely unique animal and we don't have anything in our LDC and our comprehensive plan speaks to that
[5:16:47]
we are going to. But it's not there yet.
[5:16:49]
And you're correct. It's not there yet. But there is a laying development
[5:16:52]
covenant amendment proposed for that.
[5:16:53]
I know, but that's my point. I would like to weigh just to be fully informed
[5:16:58]
before I vote on something that is not yet fully formed.
[5:17:03]
If I could ask you the question, I'm sorry. If we had this new zoning
[5:17:09]
district, would it make any difference to you?
[5:17:11]
Yes, it might. Because I think in the new zoning, every zoning category has
[5:17:17]
their own, their own specifics, and I would like to see what staff comes up with, what council
[5:17:23]
of crews, as an amendment to the LVC, as to what into the design, as to what that would
[5:17:30]
say.
[5:17:31]
I think that it would help us, it would help me feel more comfortable if I knew it fit into
[5:17:36]
what we have agreed in some markets can be a data center, so we would make a difference to
[5:17:41]
me.
[5:17:42]
Okay.
[5:17:45]
Can you raise your spell?
[5:17:47]
I want to follow up on that and ask them in our questions.
[5:17:50]
I think it's kind of a move point.
[5:17:52]
If Council gave direction that they wanted to use an incategory first, they can post
[5:17:57]
by no one Council gets it.
[5:17:59]
So Council has a discretion to do that regardless of what P&C does tonight.
[5:18:03]
So if Council wants to wait and see for a D.C.'s data center zoning category, and once
[5:18:08]
applicant to apply for that, they can do so by themselves. I don't think, and I wasn't
[5:18:15]
at the council meeting, I can't speak to that. I don't know if the direction from council
[5:18:19]
was to create a new zoning category first for this project, because that's very close to spot
[5:18:25]
zoning. I think that the direction was probably more than the direction of in the future,
[5:18:31]
because we may have future data center projects that come up before us, to have a zoning kind of
[5:18:35]
already ready to go, you know, down the road, you know, year from now or something, so that
[5:18:40]
we have a focus about category, but I don't know if there was direction from council for this
[5:18:45]
project to wait until that category was done. If I'm wrong, council could just do that when
[5:18:50]
they get it. I do want to ask staff, we had a, at the very beginning of the meeting, one of the
[5:18:58]
applicants, there was a term restrictive covenant that could be enforced by objective relief. My assumption
[5:19:05]
is that's pretty much standard for most of the governance?
[5:19:08]
Is that true?
[5:19:09]
When does the city have the ability to do that?
[5:19:13]
Well, first of all, the researcher
[5:19:14]
covenants have not been approved by Council
[5:19:18]
and have not been finally negotiated.
[5:19:21]
They've provided a draft.
[5:19:22]
Generally speaking, the draft they provided
[5:19:25]
does provide for injunctive relief
[5:19:27]
and potential monetary damages if I'm not mistaken,
[5:19:31]
which is fairly standard.
[5:19:33]
However,
[5:19:36]
while it's standard,
[5:19:39]
there's some complexities to a data center and of what phases,
[5:19:44]
those remedies would be available, and so if it moves forward and counsels, these fit
[5:19:52]
to consider this with the covenants, we would have to get into further legal negotiations
[5:19:59]
on the final.
[5:20:01]
So for example, when are those penalties assessed? Are some penalties unable to be assessed once it's built, for example.
[5:20:12]
So it gets a little complex. So there's going to be some layers to this if this moves forward.
[5:20:17]
And before final product. Yes. Injunctive relief is the typical remedy with a restrictive covenant.
[5:20:24]
And does the city have experience doing that in the past with other projects in our areas in the city?
[5:20:30]
We've done agreements with that, but we've never had that I can recall, and don't only this,
[5:20:37]
I can't recall, in case where we had to actually enforce something like this.
[5:20:43]
But we've entered into agreements that provide us in junk to relief.
[5:20:46]
And that's an even in contracts that we have certain contracts.
[5:20:50]
We have the ability for objective relief, but we've not had to litigate in recent memory that I can recall.
[5:21:00]
It is usually a pretty extreme step.
[5:21:02]
We've got to actually go to a judge.
[5:21:04]
Yeah.
[5:21:05]
That's correct.
[5:21:06]
And you can get a temporary injunction, permanent injunction.
[5:21:11]
And it's quite remarkable the power of a court order.
[5:21:15]
People have to stop something, didn't it?
[5:21:17]
They're tracks, right?
[5:21:20]
But we have, yes, we have other agreements whether it's restricted to covenant or just contracts that provide for injunct relief.
[5:21:28]
That's pretty common remedy.
[5:21:31]
Okay, and then I think one question is probably more for planning staff.
[5:21:35]
What are the speakers alleged that there were taxidaments on this property?
[5:21:40]
Has the applicant applied for city taxidaments or a chapter for 80?
[5:21:44]
Not to my understanding.
[5:21:46]
I believe that they were referencing their state tax abatements, I don't know a bit federal, but they're definitely
[5:21:53]
But they have an expert in the city from to my understanding. That's that's not something that we've received an application
[5:21:59]
They have this account for those
[5:22:01]
But my understanding is they have in the fly for one and it's a legacy
[5:22:04]
I see the school district
[5:22:06]
Is generally restricted they can't give tax abatements in general like at all pretty much is that correct?
[5:22:13]
I'm trying to say, I'm trying to say we're understanding is that school districts are
[5:22:16]
specifically limited that they can basically almost are very, very restricted in the
[5:22:21]
house.
[5:22:22]
I'm not aware of the abatements that school districts can provide it all in the
[5:22:25]
life of slatures made that clear because they've got no money to spare.
[5:22:30]
So I will defer to Commissioner Gosty.
[5:22:32]
Yeah, that they can basically can't do that.
[5:22:34]
It's going to be cities and counties pretty much.
[5:22:37]
Could we, I think it's SB6, the law that came into effect at the end of the year, related
[5:22:44]
to data centers, possibly having to shut down during extreme loads, can stop, can legal
[5:22:50]
speak that a little bit?
[5:22:52]
I, you know, what I would be giving you misinformation to try and interpret that live,
[5:22:57]
we're out about it, but I could not give you the details,
[5:23:02]
fortunately I don't want to
[5:23:03]
give you misinformation on that.
[5:23:04]
I understand.
[5:23:05]
Thank you.
[5:23:06]
That's all I have for now.
[5:23:07]
Well, I think that's great information to be noted though as well for Council to hear.
[5:23:11]
Commissioner Lippe, we can Mr. Kustia apologize.
[5:23:25]
In the sense of the discussion that's taking place, Commissioner, thank you, Commissioner
[5:23:29]
Vendor Corky for asking the questions regarding the legal aspects that I was going to ask.
[5:23:36]
regarding Commissioner,
[5:23:40]
Amy, I understand where you're coming from, as far as that's concerned.
[5:23:47]
So my question to you is going to be, is that if it says that with a new, any kind of ruling,
[5:23:55]
cause that comes out for data centers, is that something that you would support there, but it's okay there?
[5:24:00]
I'm sorry, what was the question to you?
[5:24:01]
So you're saying that you're waiting for the, the, the, the, the
[5:24:05]
knee coach to come out, recording after school, right?
[5:24:08]
So if it's something that covers that, are you saying that?
[5:24:11]
I mean, absolutely.
[5:24:12]
If it fits.
[5:24:13]
If you're supposed to support that.
[5:24:15]
I can also see a commissioner acting comments regarding that.
[5:24:21]
What we have before us.
[5:24:24]
And so what we have before us is nothing to do with what you're talking about.
[5:24:29]
So what are we going to do as a dies here?
[5:24:32]
Are we going to deal with what we have before us?
[5:24:34]
Or what are we going to do?
[5:24:36]
This is why I mean, that's why I'm saying is that it's completely changed.
[5:24:42]
The dynamic series for us, what we're doing, what exactly, what are we doing?
[5:24:47]
May I respond to that?
[5:24:49]
My point is that it doesn't fit what we have in the LDC.
[5:24:54]
And we're changing, they're asking us to change the preferred scenario amendment,
[5:24:58]
which was only of...
[5:25:00]
Okay, and voted in and blessed only a few years ago, and that preferred scenario amendment did not allow anything close to a data center, but yet that's what we are voting on.
[5:25:15]
And so that's why I'm saying, let's wait and see if the new zoning explanation, new zoning category,
[5:25:25]
makes it more reasonable that a data center could go there because in my opinion, it can't go there right now.
[5:25:33]
It's not the right place.
[5:25:35]
And for various reasons, we have a huge local elements saying, no, no, no, please don't do this.
[5:25:41]
It reminds me of the wood's apartment how many years ago
[5:25:44]
when City Hall was full of citizens saying,
[5:25:49]
please don't build the wood's apartment.
[5:25:52]
Planning is only located, City Council located,
[5:25:55]
people's lives were ruined.
[5:25:57]
People I know personally people,
[5:26:00]
who their life, they've never been able to recover.
[5:26:03]
They are now living, not in their house.
[5:26:06]
They just recently had to sell it.
[5:26:08]
They're living out, they can't even vote anymore
[5:26:10]
and say, Marcus, they live so far out in a trailer
[5:26:13]
that they could afford to buy.
[5:26:15]
So I am not willing to use my vote to harm people
[5:26:20]
that tell me they're going to be harmed.
[5:26:22]
I'm going to listen to that.
[5:26:25]
And at on top of that, that I don't think the current zoning
[5:26:29]
we have.
[5:26:30]
I feel like we're trying to push data centers
[5:26:32]
into light industrial.
[5:26:34]
They're not heavy industrial.
[5:26:35]
So we're going to make them fit into light industrial.
[5:26:37]
It doesn't feel right to me.
[5:26:39]
That's why I'm saying, look, I'm open, but not right now because I don't think we have the right document yet.
[5:26:46]
And Mr. Chair, if I could, I'm sorry.
[5:26:48]
Well, I was going to say further and more come a little bit.
[5:26:51]
All right.
[5:26:52]
Yeah, I mean, you mentioned that even if those new quotes come out that it would still not be something that would fit into this.
[5:27:03]
Does that what you said?
[5:27:03]
We don't know.
[5:27:04]
Well, now that I didn't say that part.
[5:27:09]
What exactly?
[5:27:11]
What exactly?
[5:27:11]
What exactly?
[5:27:11]
What exactly, correctly, is until the new code was adopted, the applicant just certainly
[5:27:17]
allowed to apply for what the code allows currently.
[5:27:22]
You all have criteria before you for approval of a comprehensive plan amendment, which
[5:27:27]
is specifically, meaning the preferred scenario, preferred scenario with in the comprehensive
[5:27:33]
plan.
[5:27:34]
And you've got your criteria and the only common I was going to add after your comments was just to remind the Commission.
[5:27:42]
We're talking a lot about the zoning and just for context really for the audience.
[5:27:47]
We're talking about a preferred scenario change that will allow within it certain types of zoning.
[5:27:54]
And so part of your decision is do we think this is a preferred, an appropriate preferred scenario based on the types of things that would be allowed within that just to kind of distinguish between that and then the zoning case that will come up after this a little bit of a distinction there.
[5:28:15]
But again, like so, I know that really the focus is on the data center, but you're really looking at a preferred scenario is that appropriate based on the surrounding land uses and so forth, general health safety and welfare and all this factors and are you satisfied with the zoning classifications that would be allowed within that and what's allowed within those zoning classifications, one of which is a data center.
[5:28:41]
So, you know, you can link them all together, but just again, separating the map of amendment from the zoning.
[5:28:49]
Yeah, I appreciate that, yes.
[5:28:50]
Can I ask a question, Ms. Mix?
[5:28:53]
One, it's no secret that one of the struggles I've been having with this, as I've said, and it's been
[5:29:00]
researched in the back-to-me that's even, that we're only here tonight in my mind to do the zoning to look at its own and change.
[5:29:07]
But we still know that there's a data center proposed there.
[5:29:11]
So we came, we came, we raised that.
[5:29:15]
So that's one of the things I've been struggling with,
[5:29:17]
but to your question,
[5:29:21]
maybe I'm leaning towards maybe we should postpone
[5:29:24]
it a little bit, because we know that there's some possible change coming down from city hall.
[5:29:29]
I'm a city hall, I'm a city council.
[5:29:32]
So, you know, and we're not, I don't know if we're talking weeks, months or years, but we know, we know that's coming, and I think we need to take a look at that.
[5:29:43]
But, there's a reason.
[5:29:45]
Okay,
[5:29:49]
it's fair.
[5:29:51]
Like, these people have been coming for two months.
[5:29:54]
We've all been dealing with this.
[5:29:56]
We need to...
[5:30:00]
Do what we were appointed to do. And that is to make a decision on what's before us. What's before us really isn't going to matter what council does after that. It happens all the time. I see them do something and then later on something else has changed. Maybe they have to come back into conform to that. I don't know, or maybe it wouldn't apply to them at all.
[5:30:26]
how watched that meeting and it was never said, we're going to stop this until there's another category, none of that was ever said.
[5:30:40]
All I remember is the major term to staff and said, I think it would be beneficial if maybe we created some type of something for data center or something to that effect.
[5:30:53]
in my wrong or how was it stated?
[5:30:57]
What, what, what, just that?
[5:30:59]
I was not at that meeting.
[5:31:01]
And we told not to move forward.
[5:31:03]
Like, why would we hear it that was said not to move forward?
[5:31:06]
Why are we then having this?
[5:31:08]
Why was this not postponed if we weren't,
[5:31:13]
if Council did need for us to go forward with this?
[5:31:17]
And again, I don't have that photographic memory
[5:31:21]
that those meetings if there's more than one, but there was not a moratorium on applications.
[5:31:30]
So the bottom line is on their direction as whatever zoning categories are in place and
[5:31:37]
allowable within the current preferred scenario map, there was no more moratorium on moving
[5:31:46]
they're allowed to apply for it.
[5:31:49]
Now, could individual commissioners looking at concerns they have with the current zoning
[5:31:53]
and whether it's appropriate under this preferred scenario, then that can be a factor
[5:31:58]
considering all the criteria in the code for preferred scenario amendments
[5:32:04]
to for their vote to be an upper down vote, right?
[5:32:07]
So that's another way of looking at it.
[5:32:09]
You know, you have concerns, you think it's something's not suitable with the current
[5:32:14]
zoning based on the Ferds scenario and the comprehensive plan, you know those are all factors
[5:32:21]
you can look at I think one of the criteria is that's a consistency with the comprehensive plan and so forth.
[5:32:29]
So you know all those factors you can look at based on the criteria and just decide on your vote whether
[5:32:36]
you know reasonable minds can view those criteria in different ways.
[5:32:40]
But the bigger issue here is we are recommending body. I appreciate every woman that has come here today to voice their opinion
[5:32:51]
But a lot of things that are directed at us need to be directed at council because they are the elected ones that are ultimately going to make this decision
[5:33:02]
We are recommending body
[5:33:03]
So when we vote here tonight
[5:33:06]
I hate even calling it a vote because it's a recommendation.
[5:33:10]
So when we vote here tonight, it has to go to Council for approval.
[5:33:16]
And a lot of the things that we're discussing here,
[5:33:18]
I don't even really think,
[5:33:20]
some say it's appropriate, I'm not so sure,
[5:33:24]
because what we're looking at is the preferred scenario and a zoning change.
[5:33:30]
All the other things, you know, the restricted governance,
[5:33:34]
all of that. We don't govern that. We really have no sight. I enjoyed reading it. I was
[5:33:41]
appreciative that it was in there just to have more information. But at the end of the day we
[5:33:46]
don't vote on that. So I don't see a reason for postponing this and continuing going back and forth.
[5:33:54]
We did do all this. In my opinion from where I stand, we need to recommend whatever we're going to
[5:34:04]
with the real issue.
[5:34:06]
They're the elected body.
[5:34:08]
And they're the ones that have the final set.
[5:34:10]
So I think that I don't see a reason not to move forward.
[5:34:14]
That's just my opinion.
[5:34:16]
Commissioner Dan, I missed you.
[5:34:18]
OK.
[5:34:19]
Commissioner Means?
[5:34:20]
Yes.
[5:34:20]
I just want to respond, because I do appreciate
[5:34:23]
what you're saying, Commissioner Burlison.
[5:34:25]
I suppose that I disagree with you a little bit
[5:34:28]
in that I do feel like our input, our deep dive,
[5:34:32]
is what City Council appointed us to do.
[5:34:36]
They deal with so many things, a myriad of things,
[5:34:40]
and ours is zoning, use of the land.
[5:34:44]
That is our, that is our lane, and so we should go deep.
[5:34:48]
I think we have to go deep.
[5:34:50]
We have to look at all the complexities that are involved
[5:34:52]
in every decision we make.
[5:34:54]
So I don't take our recommendation,
[5:34:57]
and finally, I think City Council...
[5:35:00]
The way the city has been created, our city charter, the city council really does seriously consider our recommendation. So for those reasons, all those reasons, I think we really do have to seriously consider everything. So to me, it's not just like, okay, we can say up or down and it won't really matter because in city council will do the heavy lifting.
[5:35:22]
that I think what I'm saying. Okay. Not at all what I'm saying. What we do here is very important.
[5:35:28]
It impacts a lot of people. The people that are here, we add a lot of other letters as well,
[5:35:36]
and a lot of phone calls from people that are also in favor. So when I'm here and I'm looking at this,
[5:35:42]
I'm listening to everybody's side of this. And I'm trying to make an informed decision based upon
[5:35:50]
what's in front of me.
[5:35:51]
All I'm saying is, when staff has something,
[5:35:55]
they have to bring it to us,
[5:35:57]
I just don't personally see the reason
[5:36:00]
to keep postponing things and putting these things off.
[5:36:04]
I just don't think it's gonna make a difference,
[5:36:07]
whether there's a category or not,
[5:36:09]
is what I'm saying, I just think for future use,
[5:36:13]
I think that would be a great idea,
[5:36:16]
and it probably should have already happened,
[5:36:18]
but these things came about, it's been what more than a year now, who knows it could take another year.
[5:36:27]
I just think that it's not fair to be applicant, it's not fair to staff, and it's really not fair to us because we've all been going through this.
[5:36:36]
We've all been reading, studying, doing research, listening to all the phone calls, everyone calling.
[5:36:42]
I just think that in my opinion, that's all I'm saying, in my opinion, we should just follow through on what's in front of us, that's just my opinion.
[5:36:59]
should probably, this isn't really what I was going to say, but I just, if we get a new
[5:37:05]
category, it's called data center, or a new zone even in the data center, and if some of
[5:37:12]
us up here say, oh, that's okay, we could now approve it because we have a category that
[5:37:18]
says data center, and we go to approve, I don't think these people out here are going to
[5:37:24]
to impress. I don't think they're going to disperse or snap their fingers in approval.
[5:37:29]
They don't care. I mean, they just truly don't care. I don't care personally. I could care less
[5:37:35]
whether we have a data center category or not, because I just don't think it makes any difference in this case.
[5:37:41]
That's just me. But anyway, I had something else I wanted to say, and I had to be proud to get off in that anyway.
[5:37:47]
And having maybe had the last word, I guess, a bit of a little selfish.
[5:37:49]
But, and this is very boring compared to what we've been talking about, but, well, go back to what
[5:37:58]
say I'm going to say a minute ago, I don't stay up as told us occasionally in the past
[5:38:04]
that the preferred scenario is not zoning and that's true, but in a way a preferred scenario
[5:38:13]
amendment is zoning, because in every case I've ever seen, the only reason a preferred
[5:38:20]
scenario amendment is requested is so a specific zoning can be requested.
[5:38:27]
So an amendment in a way, we really are, ultimately, considering zoning here, because, and
[5:38:33]
this is a dilemma to make personally, because if all we were looking at was a preferred scenario
[5:38:38]
amendment. And in this case, you know, two commercial employment
[5:38:43]
love for this location. I would probably be okay with that. I
[5:38:48]
think it fits okay. It's next to, it's next to the power
[5:38:53]
player, you know, right around the corner down old bass drop
[5:38:56]
highway is, is a lot of other stuff that you, it's probably, it's not
[5:39:00]
zone to the ETA, but if it were, it would probably be lighting
[5:39:04]
So just in itself I think the preferred amendments in area would be fine, but and I'm jumping ahead of myself
[5:39:11]
I'm having a hard time knowing what we should talk about here and what we should wait to talk about what we get to the zoning portion
[5:39:20]
But I am nowhere near as comfortable with the zoning that would result if we approve this preferred scenario
[5:39:28]
So you just can't ignore that, I mean, but if all we're dealing with is a preferred scenario, I'd be fine, but that's really not all we're dealing with.
[5:39:38]
We're dealing with the ultimate zoning.
[5:39:40]
One thing that I didn't want to point out, I don't know what this is worth, but it makes a difference to me when I look at this.
[5:39:46]
Because I'm looking here at the conversal employment loan page in the first area with staff gave a copy of.
[5:39:55]
And it says, well first, you know, the middle word.
[5:40:00]
And that is employment. You know, so those of us like myself who worry a lot about jobs. I don't think we're totally off base. I mean, employment is part of this category. And if you look further on down this, it says, the typical employment density of these areas is eight to 15 jobs per acre. Well, this is 200 acres. So that means that typically we should be expecting 1600 to 3000 jobs.
[5:40:30]
And that's not what anybody is just saying is going to happen.
[5:40:33]
I would say a hundred or less is probably what we're hearing.
[5:40:36]
So if you just look at that factor, that's a big discrepancy
[5:40:42]
from what commercial employment load count of place.
[5:40:46]
And that's something that has made a big impact on my thinking,
[5:40:50]
and then for what it's worth.
[5:40:55]
Yes, they're Commissioner Spell.
[5:40:58]
I have to disagree a bit with Commissioner Agnew.
[5:41:00]
I think there's a reason that these are agenizes two different items and they're legally two different processes
[5:41:06]
The commission has the ability and I'm not advocating for against this to recommend approval on the PSA amendment and the Nile of the zoning
[5:41:16]
What can't do the other way around, but it doesn't have to there's no condition of the commission has to vote the same way on both items or commission
[5:41:23]
We have to consider this a little bit, you know, considering the possibilities that could
[5:41:30]
be approved in the PSA, and then in more detail with the zoning, if and when we get to
[5:41:39]
that point with that's appropriate, I do want to highlight something that is relevant here
[5:41:43]
and that I think makes this property specifically and uniquely viable for something beyond conservation
[5:41:51]
cluster, and that is there are heavy duty high voltage power lines that run for the middle
[5:41:58]
of the property. And this came up when three years ago when Mr. Mayberry was applying for CD-5,
[5:42:05]
CD-2.5, the concern that's not really appropriate for you having high density electric
[5:42:14]
clients running right for the middle of your residential development, and the applicant at the time
[5:42:18]
that that that that was still viable and apparently is moved forward and still believed it's
[5:42:21]
viable. But those lines are preexisting to the property. They run through the property. And my
[5:42:27]
understanding is that part of the reason why a data center is being reposed in this area and again
[5:42:32]
the cloud the cloud versus facility down the road, which is not to say it limits, is because of the
[5:42:38]
existence of those heavy duty power lines. And so that is a unique feature of this property
[5:42:44]
particular, that I think does sense a lean toward the PSM and at least to be considered.
[5:42:59]
Commissioner Agnew, to your question that you just proposed regarding the commercial
[5:43:06]
employment load, the numbers that you came up with with your amazing map, can you tell me
[5:43:11]
any book that down?
[5:43:12]
Because I have a question regarding that number.
[5:43:13]
I'm sure I didn't hear the numbers.
[5:43:15]
You came up with like 12 to 15?
[5:43:17]
What was it?
[5:43:18]
According to the previous scenario, the description of personal employment law, it says the typical employment density is 8 to 15 jobs per acre, and this is 200 acres.
[5:43:32]
So if you just do this simple math, 8 times 200 to 1600 jobs, 15 times 200 to 3000 jobs.
[5:43:40]
So you would normally expect that there would be employment sort of within that range.
[5:43:44]
If that does that point to me?
[5:43:48]
My question, and maybe Mr. Mayberry,
[5:43:50]
I can clarify this.
[5:43:51]
They got up and said that this was going to potentially have
[5:43:56]
1200 skill jobs over the construction.
[5:44:00]
Yeah.
[5:44:01]
I'm not talking about construction.
[5:44:02]
I'm not talking about construction.
[5:44:03]
Are you just talking about infrastructure?
[5:44:04]
I'm not talking about infrastructure.
[5:44:05]
Okay.
[5:44:06]
It's not a long term situation.
[5:44:08]
Okay.
[5:44:08]
I'm talking about just permanent ongoing jobs as a data center.
[5:44:12]
Okay.
[5:44:12]
That was, yeah.
[5:44:13]
Thank you.
[5:44:16]
You know, as sites and sounds, we have to have one cup for every 500 people, it's a nice little formula, we just threw out there, just throw it out there.
[5:44:25]
I will say that I do think that the preferred scenario does is consistent with the complaint criteria.
[5:44:31]
For that reason, it's why I'm supporting motion to approve this one.
[5:44:33]
I do think there's some very valid points, especially talking about the zoning.
[5:44:37]
That may go into the next item that we're going to discuss.
[5:44:39]
But really, at the day I think it's another thing where we need to kick these to the people where these real decisions can be, the adjustments can be made appropriately.
[5:44:49]
We can keep postpone all we want, we can kick the can down the road, all we want.
[5:44:53]
We can recommend all we want.
[5:44:55]
But at the end of the day, this in my mind is consistent with the complaint.
[5:45:06]
I'd appreciate this discussion so much. When we're talking about changing the PSA, remember this, what
[5:45:15]
they're proposing, asking us to change. The conservation cluster, place type, is for areas, this
[5:45:21]
I'm just quoting, for areas where development would be discouraged over the life of the
[5:45:29]
is supposed to last for 20 to 30 years.
[5:45:33]
This is two years out, all right?
[5:45:36]
That's then the number one.
[5:45:38]
Remember, this place type was established
[5:45:41]
after the city received significant community
[5:45:44]
and stakeholder input.
[5:45:47]
This place type was, this conservation cluster,
[5:45:49]
they created it because the citizen said they wanted it.
[5:45:52]
It was developed as a concept where, quote,
[5:45:55]
The development may still occur within areas that are currently open space, farmland, or otherwise undeveloped,
[5:46:05]
but would ensure San Marcus retains many of these assets and maintain a high environmental quality.
[5:46:13]
And so that is my concern.
[5:46:15]
We have a lot of questions about the environmental impact.
[5:46:19]
And I know you guys are doing all you can, and I applaud that.
[5:46:23]
I just feel like we are too new to the game with data centers.
[5:46:29]
I feel like there is such a national pushback of cities that have approved them and now they're
[5:46:36]
saying, we wish we never had, we have all these problems.
[5:46:40]
I see those cities that are giving the pushback that are already in the fight, in the water
[5:46:47]
with them.
[5:46:48]
I feel like they are the canaries and the coal mine.
[5:46:51]
And I'm wondering why we're ignoring all the dead canaries, you know, so to me, it's just a little bit, it's just a little bit,
[5:47:07]
brash or I don't know, it's just a little bit irresponsible. I would feel irresponsible.
[5:47:13]
If I didn't mention all of these cautions that I have, if I didn't mention all of the concerns that I have, so that's why I'm mentioning them.
[5:47:22]
I guess just to show I guess what reasonable minds can differ or whatever.
[5:47:27]
My concern about this is that I know you've mentioned that you feel like this is consistent
[5:47:33]
with a comprehensive plan and my concern is that I don't and the reason I don't I mean
[5:47:39]
that the place types are part of the preferred scenario and they're probably what most important
[5:47:45]
parts of the preferred scenario. And commercial employment, low, is a place tight. And if
[5:47:52]
you read the description, it's clearly intended to be an area that's going to provide employment.
[5:47:58]
And the fact that it's not going to do that is what makes me concern, makes me question whether
[5:48:05]
this is consistent with a comprehensive plan. Just, you know where I'm coming from.
[5:48:11]
Because for providing clarification on that, why we came up with employment law when it does
[5:48:17]
have the specifications and they're for all the jobs.
[5:48:19]
The jobs?
[5:48:22]
I don't know.
[5:48:23]
I think I'll defer to you.
[5:48:24]
That's okay.
[5:48:28]
So why there's the ratio of nine to 15 jobs?
[5:48:34]
I'd have to go back and work through some of that discussion with the comprehensive plan
[5:48:38]
committee, but needing to have a place where we knew that employment would occur.
[5:48:44]
And I think the big distinction is between commercial employment, low and commercial employment medium.
[5:48:49]
We had a lot of discussion about the differences between those two.
[5:48:52]
That commercial employment medium is an area where you're actually going to have a higher density of jobs.
[5:48:57]
Commercial employment, low is the location of your lower density of jobs, your industrial uses, and that kind of thing.
[5:49:05]
I cannot remember, you know, at this moment some of that kind of data that went into that.
[5:49:10]
But it was just through that comprehensive plan process
[5:49:13]
and into kind of identify a number that shows
[5:49:15]
what types of jobs could be there for different uses.
[5:49:19]
But it can't expect all types of uses.
[5:49:21]
I suppose at that level.
[5:49:23]
Thank you.
[5:49:24]
Yes, sir.
[5:49:25]
Commissioner Wilson.
[5:49:26]
This is for staff.
[5:49:28]
I might be wrong.
[5:49:29]
Memory, it's like, I might be off on this.
[5:49:33]
But did we not just vote where the client is now updated
[5:49:38]
it on a more frequent basis because things need to be added like we're rolling things
[5:49:44]
or happening so fast, that that was the reason why now I think it's is it every five
[5:49:51]
years, seven years, and I think I think it was every five years originally, the amendment
[5:49:56]
it was changed up to 10 and then that was voted.
[5:50:00]
I believe, so it's still five. Remained in the charter, referring to the charter amendment. So yep, every five years we look at the comprehensive plan holistically, and you know, that can be a great opportunity to get community and council direction on some of those pieces. But at the same time, applicants always do have the ability to apply for a change the preferred scenario map. And that's been the, the same process, you know, even with the 2013 comprehensive plan. There's always an ability for someone to apply.
[5:50:30]
to change that designation and you all have seen many of those cases before you.
[5:50:37]
I would just like to gently say, I think all of our discussion now is exactly why I feel
[5:50:44]
it would feel most comfortable waiting for a new direction from staff about how they want
[5:50:50]
to handle data centers. You know, I think that that is-
[5:50:55]
Once staff gets it to council, then I think I would feel much more certain in what I was looking at what would be okay, what would not be okay.
[5:51:07]
And obviously the questions are the questions of them.
[5:51:10]
I feel like council would think very highly of your opinion and notate this.
[5:51:15]
And when we send that to them, they can manage this appropriately with the tools that they have.
[5:51:20]
They have the tools.
[5:51:21]
We do not have the tools.
[5:51:25]
And I know this sounds like I'm talking about both
[5:51:27]
sets of my mouth tonight, but my concern now was sending it back
[5:51:32]
to Council, which I still kind of lean that away.
[5:51:37]
But there's no time to remember to come back.
[5:51:40]
And in the meantime, you know, again, our applicants,
[5:51:42]
waiting on sure they don't mind waiting a little while,
[5:51:44]
but we don't have a timeframe.
[5:51:46]
And if it takes Council six months to a year,
[5:51:49]
and does everything just stop until they come back
[5:51:52]
with that category, or how do we proceed, how do we move forward?
[5:51:56]
I love saying that.
[5:51:57]
I mean, can I try to cancel it?
[5:51:59]
And one other thing is, you know, I'm hearing it, I should first of all, there has actually
[5:52:02]
hasn't been a motion to postpone, but I don't think we need to get there yet if Council's.
[5:52:07]
I mean, if the commissioners are fine having the dialogue, there's not a motion to postpone,
[5:52:12]
but the concern I have is even if a new categories come up.
[5:52:17]
I'm fairly certain that this application be allowed to proceed under the current zoning categories,
[5:52:22]
and typically when we've had code changes any pending or live applications have always been
[5:52:28]
allowed to continue through to the end. And so it's kind of, you know, for what that's worth,
[5:52:34]
you know, if you postpone it, I'm not sure where it takes you other than leaves the council without
[5:52:38]
a recommendation, but it's the point being is the application technically would be allowed to go through
[5:52:47]
as submitted, there's not an obligation for them,
[5:52:51]
for the applicant to move to the new code.
[5:52:55]
Now, could they be persuaded, voluntarily,
[5:52:57]
some of the course, you know, through the political process
[5:53:00]
and so forth.
[5:53:01]
But legally, you know, the application is allowed to continue,
[5:53:05]
even if a new code was adopted on that issue.
[5:53:09]
That's where the occasion.
[5:53:11]
I was going to point out this item, if we don't postpone it,
[5:53:17]
The dates of when it would go to Council are set.
[5:53:20]
They are posted, they are part of the presentation.
[5:53:23]
I don't think it's respectful to the people that came up and spoke tonight.
[5:53:27]
If we postpone it, we'd have to have a postmanate to a date uncertain.
[5:53:31]
And we'd just be giving the direction to the public.
[5:53:33]
Come back at some point in the future, we don't know where.
[5:53:35]
Let's do it all again.
[5:53:36]
I don't feel comfortable doing that myself.
[5:53:39]
That's not fair to the public.
[5:53:41]
Honestly, I'm not suggesting we postpone it.
[5:53:43]
I'm suggesting we say no to it because we don't have enough information to make an informed decision.
[5:53:51]
I have a question.
[5:53:52]
Mr. Wilson.
[5:53:54]
I thought we've had situations like this come before us in the past to where it might not have been the exact category or
[5:54:04]
like the preferred scenario.
[5:54:07]
But didn't we proceed with them or what is the, do you know what I'm saying?
[5:54:13]
Not quite, I mean, usually, you know, the process is our code allows changes to the
[5:54:23]
preferred scenario map.
[5:54:27]
There have been times where there was not a suitable category for proposed type of development
[5:54:33]
at all, and even among the existing categories, I think there might have been situations
[5:54:40]
were none of them just fit to the point where the only solution was we, maybe was taken
[5:54:48]
in under your old correct maize, where there may have been a determination that you're
[5:54:53]
going to have to actually create a new category for use that was never considered before.
[5:55:00]
Now, you know, we'd be going back months because that determination has already been made as to this application that there was a suitable category and so forth, but there has been that situation I believe. So it's a little bit different perhaps.
[5:55:13]
But I just thought we had proceeded in the past with ones that were suitable.
[5:55:18]
Like it wasn't, like I know we're talking about that as sinners, but like in the past
[5:55:23]
I thought there was something that we had that might not have been exactly suitable
[5:55:28]
It was in a different category, but we proceeded with it.
[5:55:32]
Like we hadn't postponed it to wait for a new kind of report.
[5:55:36]
I can't recall, I can't recall a time where that has occurred.
[5:55:40]
What you may be saying is like, okay, looking at the reasonable vine serious
[5:55:45]
that in a perfect world, you might feel as a commissioner that you're forcing maybe a particular
[5:55:52]
type of use within a category that you just don't feel so totally comfortable with, but
[5:55:57]
it's what you have available and you know the determination is made. Well we can make it work
[5:56:04]
here in our perfect world of different scenarios that we would have on our preferred scenario
[5:56:11]
map. We wish we had something like this but we don't. So we're going to fit it into this category
[5:56:16]
and that's perfectly permissible. I think we've had those situations where you know if we
[5:56:22]
could all have our perfect world scenario but we you know you move forward with what you had
[5:56:27]
available to you and of course that's part of the process too with your criteria. The way this
[5:56:33]
criteria written is all of you can look at it and almost every criteria can have two different outcomes
[5:56:40]
because there's a wide level of discretion in that decision made, unlike a variance, for example,
[5:56:48]
which has very strict criteria or plating in the old days when you did planning.
[5:56:56]
Thank you.
[5:56:58]
Can we check us here?
[5:56:59]
Well, it's like opening a...
[5:57:01]
Don't open up, can't do it's bugs.
[5:57:03]
Now, it's just concerning to me now because if we had the mayor make a comment or suggest putting a setting up a code for at that point in time, why did he still come to us?
[5:57:22]
I'm trying to, and I don't, I'm not going to be able to do that.
[5:57:25]
I'm going to shout it down a little bit.
[5:57:28]
We're also making assumptions here.
[5:57:30]
There were a couple things.
[5:57:31]
A couple things I think are important.
[5:57:33]
You have your criteria before you.
[5:57:36]
And don't forget about that when you make your decision.
[5:57:38]
The idea is, yes, it was suggested that there would be a code amendment
[5:57:44]
because in the perfect world scenario I'm talking about.
[5:57:48]
And our perfect world, we can all go back and make everything 20 times better after the fact.
[5:57:54]
But right now, we have a scenario that was approved, it's legal, it's a permissible
[5:58:01]
for any landowner to apply for these preferred scenario map amendments under the code as
[5:58:08]
written.
[5:58:09]
And it's there right to have a hearing and have it considered by the Commission for
[5:58:13]
recommendation and y'all to look at the criteria whether it's suitable or not, based on all
[5:58:20]
those factors.
[5:58:22]
And so one of the things is, do you like the types of uses that would be allowed based
[5:58:29]
on the zoning that would be allowed within that Ferds scenario?
[5:58:32]
Some of you may feel yes, some of you may feel no.
[5:58:35]
So that's really how you got to look at it, yes sir.
[5:58:42]
The council knows that this site is on our agenda tonight for tonight's meeting or because
[5:58:46]
morning's meeting. If they had attended that we had to postpone this item until after a DC
[5:58:53]
data set or zoning out zoning category was added, surely they would have sold somebody up here.
[5:58:59]
And I never got a phone call. What you're talking about there is some cities will have a
[5:59:04]
moratorium on certain types of things moving forward, which is extremely rare because there's all
[5:59:10]
of issues with mortuary, but they did not do that here, that's just an issue they want to explore,
[5:59:19]
but there's no more touring funding there. If there was some council direction or a more
[5:59:24]
touring from council, surely we would have heard about it before now. Well, you wouldn't even be here
[5:59:31]
because you wouldn't have, that's correct. Commissioner Van Odeckerky? Yeah, I think we've reached
[5:59:37]
the point where it kind of going in circles, regardless of if we vote for against this, it
[5:59:43]
goes like Commissioner Spell said it goes to the City Council, they're the ones that make
[5:59:46]
decision. We don't make that decision tonight. I'd like to see this move forward.
[5:59:53]
Thank you.
[5:59:53]
Yeah, I generally agree that we need to move forward and all that, but the one thing that is
[6:00:00]
And I think everybody here knows this. How we vote determines what kind of vote council needs. So what we do is significant to that extent.
[6:00:09]
I wasn't suggesting that it wasn't, no.
[6:00:13]
I don't think any of you are suggesting that at all. I think we're looking at different ways.
[6:00:22]
The rate of vote?
[6:00:23]
Call the question.
[6:00:24]
Could you please remind us of the motion.
[6:00:26]
Yeah, the motion is to approve as presented.
[6:00:28]
And Mr. Chair, just to remind the code for preferred scenario amendments requires for approval as six votes versus the typical five.
[6:00:41]
And that's despite the fact we only have eight here tonight.
[6:00:45]
We've done six votes.
[6:00:47]
And that's same with the council as similar kind of majority requirement for preferred scenario.
[6:00:56]
If it gets to them, I think they have five votes.
[6:00:59]
If I'm not mistaken, don't hold me that.
[6:01:03]
But you've heard the discussion.
[6:01:05]
We'll call it both, please.
[6:01:06]
Amy Meeks?
[6:01:08]
No.
[6:01:09]
Griffin Spell.
[6:01:11]
Hi.
[6:01:12]
Brian, have you been undercarguing?
[6:01:14]
Hi.
[6:01:16]
William Agnew?
[6:01:16]
No.
[6:01:18]
Shobrolson?
[6:01:19]
Hi.
[6:01:20]
David Cance.
[6:01:22]
Ludwig Garcia?
[6:01:23]
Hi.
[6:01:25]
Right, Dan.
[6:01:25]
the
[6:01:34]
motion to recommend approval passes, six and two,
[6:01:40]
six and two, six and two, yeah, it is late.
[6:01:42]
I'm going to bring this to item number, excuse me, but once again, it goes to council. Correct, correct.
[6:01:51]
Two here.
[6:01:57]
One, I'm looking at my numbers, I don't number five, but six now.
[6:02:10]
ZC-2513, Francis Harris Lane, Maverick Data Center, FD-CD-2.5 to L.I., hold the public hearing and consider
[6:02:20]
a request by Armbrozen Brown, PLLC on behalf of Highlander SM-1, LLC, and Donald and Germain
[6:02:26]
tough for rezoning change from future development FD and character district 2.5, CD-2.5,
[6:02:32]
to light industrial L.I. or subject to consent of the owner under the less intense zoning
[6:02:36]
just reclassification for approximately 189.49 acres of land, more or less out of the A&N,
[6:02:43]
as not a riser survey, abstract number six, generally located on the western side of
[6:02:47]
Francis Terrace Lane, south of the intersection between Grant Harris Road and Francis
[6:02:51]
Terrace Lane in Hayes County, Texas.
[6:02:54]
Pause.
[6:02:54]
Can we please have that gentleman removed?
[6:02:56]
He's been thriving.
[6:02:59]
I see you.
[6:03:03]
I see you.
[6:03:04]
I see you.
[6:03:04]
I see you.
[6:03:04]
I see you.
[6:03:05]
I see you.
[6:03:18]
see
[6:03:25]
you.
[6:03:27]
Are you done?
[6:03:31]
Are you done?
[6:03:34]
Are you done?
[6:03:36]
Are you done?
[6:03:37]
Are you done?
[6:03:38]
Are you done?
[6:03:40]
Disrupting?
[6:03:43]
Are you good?
[6:03:44]
Please go ahead.
[6:03:45]
Thank you so much.
[6:03:47]
We'll open the public hearing.
[6:03:49]
Good evening, everyone.
[6:03:51]
Julia Clarise.
[6:03:51]
Senior planner.
[6:03:52]
So this is the next slide, sorry.
[6:03:55]
This is the same site boundary that was discussed in the previous presentation.
[6:03:59]
It is approximately 200 acres across from the heat of energy power plant and
[6:04:02]
located within both the city limits and the ATJ with annexation being considered concurrently
[6:04:07]
next slide please.
[6:04:09]
The site is currently vacant with surrounding languages of brutal residential agricultural
[6:04:14]
asymmetry and the Hase Energy Power Plant the symmetry is not included in this request
[6:04:19]
next slide please.
[6:04:22]
The majority of the site is currently zoned character districts 2.5 which is a single
[6:04:26]
family district allowing up to 60% impervious cover for the 60 acres outside the city limit
[6:04:32]
that this is not currently subject to any zoning restrictions, however, they will be zoned future
[6:04:38]
development or FD upon ionization, which is intended to be a temporary zoning district with
[6:04:44]
30% impervious cover. The applicant is requesting light industrial, which allows for
[6:04:50]
light industrial uses, manufacturing and office uses add-op to 80% impervious cover by right. Next
[6:04:57]
I'd like, please.
[6:05:00]
The request is currently designated conservation cluster on the comprehensive plan, which does not allow light and industrial zoning per table 4.1 on the next slide.
[6:05:12]
Next slide please. The associated preferred scenario amendment would need to be approved in order for this zoning change to take effect. Next slide please.
[6:05:23]
The requested zoning district allows for general commercial and civic buildings, up to four
[6:05:29]
stories tall and 80% in pervious cover, although as discussed previously, there are
[6:05:34]
a restrictive covenants that would restrict this to 70%, uses a loud include manufacturing,
[6:05:40]
warehouse and distribution, wholesale trade, research and development, and light industrial.
[6:05:45]
John Cards are unwaist related services are not permitted by right in this district.
[6:05:50]
The applicant is proposing to construct a data center, which is considered to be a light industrial use.
[6:05:56]
Next slide.
[6:05:59]
There are no known environmental constraints on the property. The site is not located within the
[6:06:04]
Edwards Act for Recharge Zone, Contributing Zone or Transitions Zone. It is not located within the floodplain
[6:06:09]
floodway or the San Marcus River corridor or protection zone. Next slide, please.
[6:06:16]
We have already mentioned the proposed TMP road that will be required along Grant Harris Road.
[6:06:21]
However, one thing I did want to point out was block perimeter requirements, so the city requires
[6:06:26]
the applicants provide vehicle and pedestrian connectivity as they develop, even when they're
[6:06:32]
not proposing to concept their logs.
[6:06:35]
The maximum block perimeter in light industrial is 5,000 feet, and one of the things that
[6:06:40]
differentiates light and heavy industrial zoning districts is that in heavy industrial you
[6:06:44]
can automatically expand the block perimeter in order to accommodate large buildings of
[6:06:50]
of Amazon, for example, where as you can't enlighten industrial.
[6:06:55]
So if they're wanting to waive the block permits, or they would likely need an alternative
[6:07:00]
compliance request.
[6:07:02]
Regarding utilities, water would be provided by crystal clear.
[6:07:05]
The city would provide wastewater and the site is in the service area of Pernel's electric
[6:07:10]
next slide please.
[6:07:15]
So staff is recommending partial approval of the CC-20C-C-20513 for all of the requested
[6:07:22]
tracked with the exception of a 50-foot buffer along the northwestern property lane of
[6:07:28]
Highlander, SM-1 LLC tracks, adjacent the private driveway Grant Harris Road.
[6:07:33]
That will be on the next slide.
[6:07:35]
This 50-foot buffer is recommended for the less intense zoning district of character district
[6:07:40]
1 and is intended to avoid having the site immediately adjacent the existing residences
[6:07:46]
in the ETA.
[6:07:47]
We have discussed this with the applicant and understand that they are amenable to the request.
[6:07:54]
So this is a map of the proposed buffer, as I said.
[6:07:57]
So right of way is allowed in CD1 and so the CD1 buffer would either include the 50-foot street required by the TMP
[6:08:04]
or if the road were not provided through an amendment to the 3rd floor plan then it would be a 50-foot open space buffer
[6:08:10]
in addition to the 20-foot, between 20 and 35-foot transitional protective yard. For context
[6:08:17]
society has approximately 3,300 feet of frontage on Francis Harris Lane.
[6:08:24]
And that concludes my presentation. I did want to know that this is subject to approval. The
[6:08:29]
recommendation for approval is subject to the approval of the associated preferred scenario
[6:08:33]
amendment. And that concludes my presentation, and we have the applicant in the room for any
[6:08:37]
Questions?
[6:08:40]
I'd like to make these speaking favorite information.
[6:08:49]
Yes.
[6:08:49]
On Michael Wayland, 100 Congress have a new Austin Texas, given the hour, I'm going to keep
[6:08:54]
this extremely short.
[6:08:56]
I wanted to stay on the record so you heard that we do.
[6:08:59]
We are confirming the concurrence with the staff recommendation for the CD1 buffer as they
[6:09:05]
displayed at the very end.
[6:09:06]
I wanted that to be clear.
[6:09:08]
And I want to also confirm that we're prepared to sit down and talk.
[6:09:11]
That's why I said in junk to relief is the appropriate measure.
[6:09:14]
We're prepared to make sure that the injunctive relief is there exactly as the city attorney believes is sufficient to enforce the restrictive
[6:09:22]
covenants.
[6:09:23]
As I said at the very beginning, this building is going to be designed to comply with those restrictive covenants.
[6:09:28]
You can't risk, as you already heard the city attorney tell you, he hasn't had to execute a injunctive relief because it does shut down a business
[6:09:37]
which shut down the data center, which is providing services for hospitals, utilities, and
[6:09:42]
many, many others.
[6:09:43]
So I just wanted to really point that out.
[6:09:46]
You also have a chance during site development, permanent building, permit, process to look
[6:09:50]
at those limitations that are in the restrictive covenant and make sure we're compliant.
[6:09:58]
Thank you. Mr. Swipe, would you like to speak?
[6:10:02]
Okay, I'm just going down my line.
[6:10:04]
Mr. Mayberry,
[6:10:09]
was it a Zano?
[6:10:10]
He's on mine.
[6:10:13]
Was it a Zano?
[6:10:14]
If you please, I'd state your name and address me a three minutes.
[6:10:17]
Well, Zano, 11.25.
[6:10:20]
Blue, boulevard, some marcos, Texas.
[6:10:23]
I've said everything I needed to say once again,
[6:10:26]
I'm just saying that I'm in favor of the data center.
[6:10:29]
I think it's going to be a great project.
[6:10:31]
and a great tax base for the City of Somarko as well.
[6:10:36]
While with the restricted governance that they've prepared
[6:10:41]
and the City's restrictions is going to be a great project
[6:10:45]
where the City can be able to look at everything
[6:10:48]
from building perfect to watershed to environmental.
[6:10:52]
That's it, thank you.
[6:10:53]
Thanks, sir.
[6:10:55]
Mary, a little bit of divine.
[6:11:01]
She's coming up.
[6:11:02]
And do we have Justice Mika?
[6:11:04]
You're
[6:11:11]
a little feel divine, two, five, four, five,
[6:11:13]
you're a creek road, New Bromphal's Texas Hayes County.
[6:11:16]
Feel we've been sold down the river.
[6:11:18]
I feel there were some ethical blindness that was applied.
[6:11:21]
It is vague.
[6:11:22]
I think some things were intentionally left vague,
[6:11:25]
which is a distinctive risk for ethical blindness
[6:11:28]
and decision making within organizations.
[6:11:31]
It was vague as to why Mayberry could come back
[6:11:35]
within six months.
[6:11:36]
I think it's very much putting the cart before the horse
[6:11:39]
to allow this project without really looking at what the data center zoning actually needs to be.
[6:11:48]
And I think none of you really, none of you who voted yes actually really are invested in the health of those who live in the community and all of the pollution and noise pollution that's going to be spread out.
[6:11:59]
Who can we sue when we start to be impacted by this?
[6:12:02]
How can we go up the chain of command to find out why this came back within six months?
[6:12:08]
Truly disappointed in the direction that those aspects of the decision went and I think it's shameful.
[6:12:15]
So I'm sorry for the people who voted yes.
[6:12:18]
It's very discouraging and the background behind it is disgusting.
[6:12:22]
Thank you.
[6:12:23]
Thank you.
[6:12:28]
Justice Mika,
[6:12:32]
Charles Secting, Russell Carecelli,
[6:12:38]
Matt Gonzalez,
[6:12:42]
Frank Seamer,
[6:12:45]
Jerry Marguerita.
[6:12:54]
Yes, sir.
[6:12:55]
Good evening.
[6:12:55]
Commissioner's Matthew Gonzalez, 1791, 7 Massive Flower Band,
[6:12:59]
I stated before I urge you to support passing agenda item number five.
[6:13:05]
I yield back the rest of my time as a courtesy to the chair in this body.
[6:13:09]
As a courtesy notice, Mr. Frank Zimmer, Jerry Marjoto, Frank Zimmer, and James Presley all left for work obligations in the morning.
[6:13:19]
Thank you, sir.
[6:13:22]
The George Mendoza.
[6:13:25]
Ronan Conro.
[6:13:27]
Just two as well.
[6:13:31]
Eduardo Liva.
[6:13:33]
Just that thing.
[6:13:34]
I'll stay here.
[6:13:34]
It's your good.
[6:13:36]
No one shows up at the time.
[6:13:37]
Shannon Brown,
[6:13:41]
Abigail Lindsay,
[6:13:44]
MMO Good, Manuel Godoy, Jen Corboy, Bobby Levinsky,
[6:14:03]
Bobby Levinsky to work in Camerole, Samarko's Texas.
[6:14:05]
I've heard the six months waiting period addressed.
[6:14:07]
I've not heard the one year waiting period addressed.
[6:14:11]
Again, I'm going to read the code to you.
[6:14:14]
So the Samarko's development code also includes a express waiting period of one year for amendments to the zoning code to zoning.
[6:14:20]
with one of the following occurs.
[6:14:24]
City Council vote to deny the same request to change
[6:14:27]
for all our portion of the parcel or withdraw
[6:14:31]
of the same request to change by the applicant
[6:14:34]
after the city council meeting at which
[6:14:38]
the change to be considered has been called to order.
[6:14:43]
That meeting was called to order.
[6:14:46]
It is not proper for the planning commission to address
[6:14:49]
the zoning change tonight without a waiver of the city code as provided in the code.
[6:14:57]
That application was withdrawn and resimitted.
[6:15:00]
And that's why it's before you tonight. If you do not want to vote on the zoning change, there is grounds for a rejecting to it, a grids grounds for denial that it's not compliant with this code. It was a withdrawal of the zoning change and it's been resimitted within less than one year. It is not compliant with your code. Please do not vote for the zoning change. And also it is not single family versus data center.
[6:15:29]
There are so many more zoning categories that be more compatible that could provide a transition and there are people that live in that area
[6:15:38]
It is not just a power plant. There's people that live there and their livelihoods depend on you making a decision tonight
[6:15:45]
Please vote against this zoning change
[6:15:49]
Thank you for the Thanksgiving
[6:15:52]
Kara Rosario
[6:15:57]
Mike Camelander
[6:16:00]
Jeremy Hendrix
[6:16:03]
Carl
[6:16:07]
Then the count?
[6:16:11]
Fetton Court.
[6:16:12]
Tell, man, thank you.
[6:16:14]
Fetton Court.
[6:16:14]
The one last thing that I didn't have time,
[6:16:17]
first time around, was one of the other speakers
[6:16:20]
who talked about some of the issues
[6:16:21]
that the water utility had.
[6:16:23]
And what I wanted to, I had to point out,
[6:16:26]
was their five-year average of leakage in their system
[6:16:29]
is 25%.
[6:16:31]
So pretty much any of the water numbers we were seeing
[6:16:34]
should also just keep that in mind
[6:16:36]
that there's going to end up being at the staff's low end over the course of year to be
[6:16:43]
182,500 gallons of wastewater and on their high end of 30,000 per day it would be 273,750 gallons
[6:16:53]
wasted every year, just want to leave you from the word utility.
[6:16:56]
Thank you, Mr. Benton Court.
[6:17:00]
Tyler Earl, Peter Bane, Elizabeth Emerson,
[6:17:09]
Daniela Bellini,
[6:17:13]
Zachary Tindall, and Dawn Ewalt.
[6:17:24]
My name is Zachary Tindall, 614, Martin Luther King Drive. I want to talk to you about your role
[6:17:29]
in this community as members of the Planning and Zoning Commission. I'm hearing some of you
[6:17:32]
You should be ignoring some of the deeper implications of your decisions, and even that you should not be swayed by the concerns of the community.
[6:17:39]
I believe this is a misguided view.
[6:17:41]
It is my understanding that the principal requirement for appointment to P&Z is to have resided in St. Marcus for at least five years.
[6:17:47]
You are not required to have any expertise in city planning, geography, political science, economics, or any other field that might seem relevant to the decisions this body is faced with.
[6:17:55]
In fact, you all come from a variety of backgrounds
[6:17:58]
in each contribute your own unique perspective,
[6:18:01]
lived experience, and personal insight
[6:18:03]
to these deliberations.
[6:18:05]
Some of you have ties to Sam Marcus
[6:18:06]
to the Go Back Generations.
[6:18:08]
While others are relative newcomers,
[6:18:10]
but all of you, like most of the people
[6:18:12]
who came out here tonight, call Sam Marcus Home,
[6:18:15]
that is what makes you qualified
[6:18:17]
to make the kinds of decisions you are faced with today.
[6:18:20]
You have not been given this responsibility
[6:18:22]
because you have a special ability
[6:18:23]
to make a detached, calculated decision.
[6:18:26]
There are better ways to do that.
[6:18:27]
A computer program could be trained to do that.
[6:18:30]
And would that even be undesirable?
[6:18:32]
Would it be a good thing for these decisions to be made
[6:18:34]
by a completely impartial, perfectly logical party,
[6:18:37]
which is not swayed by its own feelings
[6:18:39]
or by the concerns of its neighbors?
[6:18:40]
I think not.
[6:18:41]
I think that would miss the point.
[6:18:43]
The point is that no one is more capable, more qualified,
[6:18:47]
or more determined to protect the needs
[6:18:49]
of this community than the members of this community.
[6:18:51]
you are members of this community and you are on this commission precisely because you are affected by the decisions made here today.
[6:18:59]
I think it has been made clear that the State of Center poses a threat to our well-being and in the long run probably this community is continued existence.
[6:19:07]
Your neighbors have come here to use all of our power and influence to defend this community.
[6:19:11]
I ask you to do the same, defend your community, do not be convinced that the most important considerations around this project are beyond the preview of this commission.
[6:19:19]
do not be convinced that it is someone else's job,
[6:19:22]
do not be convinced that it is inappropriate
[6:19:23]
to be influenced by your own sense of right and wrong,
[6:19:26]
do not be convinced that the consequences of your decision
[6:19:29]
are not your problem.
[6:19:31]
You have been chosen from among the community
[6:19:33]
because you have an interest in what happens
[6:19:34]
to this community.
[6:19:36]
This is your home.
[6:19:37]
You have a moral right to defend it
[6:19:39]
and you have a power to defend it.
[6:19:41]
So I beg you to vote to defend it.
[6:19:42]
Vote with your heart, vote with your conscience,
[6:19:45]
and vote with your community.
[6:19:46]
Thank you.
[6:19:47]
Thank you, sir.
[6:19:52]
And then we will open the public hearing that anybody at the chamber could wish us to speak.
[6:19:57]
Please like.
[6:19:57]
There's much noise as I can.
[6:20:02]
Oh my gosh. I want to start with the officer that you had were moving people earlier, took it upon himself in the middle of a quiet and undistrupted meeting to ask me to leave, because I was taking photos of the developer's notes, text messages, and he just inserted himself and said, you're making a nuisance. I'm going to tell you to stop this, and then refuse to give me any statue or code that said that that was in violation of the rules of the quorum for this room.
[6:20:29]
that goes to show that that type of those threats of force, which is that that's what
[6:20:36]
that is, the threat of being removed is a threat of force, is that the benefit of
[6:20:40]
developers, not our community, that's not the benefit of staff that this is something
[6:20:47]
that's been in front of you for so long, and our legal department and no other staff
[6:20:53]
member and you don't even bother to ask another staff member about the impacts of SBA and
[6:20:59]
then there are links to the notches gasses that kill people, the
[6:21:06]
amount of citizen comment
[6:21:07]
that has gone into this is probably more than the amount of comment that you received for the
[6:21:12]
complaint itself. I and others working alongside some of you at various points in this community
[6:21:18]
have tried so hard to get people to show up and do this and give
[6:21:25]
it a comment and show up to these things because your voice is heard, your voice is important
[6:21:28]
and it's not. And I don't know how to tell people any more than it is. I don't usually listen
[6:21:35]
to something like this but I'm listening. I'm absolutely living as a mentor of Jim Garber, as a product
[6:21:43]
of Texas State University, as an ally to some of you in many regards, as an enemy to some
[6:21:48]
of you in many regards. I don't know what to do at this point to continue to cheerlead
[6:21:53]
and try to get people to show up and waste their freaking time. Don't nod your head of
[6:21:58]
me, Mr. Case. I've never seen a chair of this commission be the one to first make the motion
[6:22:03]
way out of step, way out of out of decorum. What this is going to do, given the amount of expertise
[6:22:11]
on our side of this issue, this is going to result in our citizens suing our own freaking city.
[6:22:18]
That's our only choice.
[6:22:20]
It's a nitpick, the process that Sam fumbled,
[6:22:24]
that you all did not do questions on.
[6:22:26]
We're going to have to do open records or questions
[6:22:28]
for the communications that Commissioner Burlison said,
[6:22:31]
people are writing in and sharing this.
[6:22:32]
Who are they?
[6:22:33]
You go into lunch with them.
[6:22:34]
You serve them a chamber of commerce with them.
[6:22:36]
Do they work for the greater sandbox partnership?
[6:22:38]
Who are these people?
[6:22:40]
Puppin' front of us.
[6:22:41]
Do they even have a vested interest?
[6:22:43]
Does any of the impacts of this development
[6:22:44]
get an impact than more their lives?
[6:22:46]
No.
[6:22:48]
So frickin' tired of this, I said so much time trying to, you know, reinvent my image
[6:22:54]
so that you all take me seriously, and it didn't, it was absolutely pointless.
[6:23:00]
I'm going to tell everybody to just give up.
[6:23:04]
You had as well, too.
[6:23:05]
Let's all stop.
[6:23:07]
I know many of you are going to run for City Council and I will be there, make sure you leave.
[6:23:18]
Hi, son, it's your effort.
[6:23:19]
I'm also pissed.
[6:23:21]
I wore suits tonight.
[6:23:22]
I hate doing that.
[6:23:23]
That's not much, that's not much of a, you know,
[6:23:29]
I mean, I mean, forget it, like, the problem with everything that's going on and I'm sorry it's going to be insulting to you, but all of us in DCAC have been doing this for the last year, going out of our way to study these things when I don't have the time, I'm a grad student, I defend next month, I don't have time to be here, I'm ruining myself to be here.
[6:23:49]
But I am here because myself, like all these other people, are ahead of the curve, because we are looking at what's going on in the rest of the country.
[6:23:59]
The communities that are being destroyed, the new cancers that are being developed, the rising miscarriage rates.
[6:24:07]
And we're going, oh, we don't want that in our town.
[6:24:10]
I talked to somebody from New York.
[6:24:12]
Like last week, who was like, oh my God, y'all don't have a data center yet?
[6:24:16]
What are y'all doing right?
[6:24:18]
How can we help y'all this stuff?
[6:24:21]
Like people are looking at our city as a nexus of this massive government,
[6:24:27]
or this massive nationwide fight.
[6:24:30]
And the only people who see somehow weirdly ignorant of it is y'all.
[6:24:35]
So we are ahead of y'all on the curve in the sense that we know this disaster is coming.
[6:24:42]
We know that all of us, no matter how much money you have, will be standing in line to get water from whatever source we can.
[6:24:50]
Because they've not secured the water rights.
[6:24:52]
Because five years ago, Phoenix got within 50 days of ground zero.
[6:25:00]
No water, and the sale of guns skyrocketed. And if that happens in Phoenix, they're all coming here. If that happens in El Paso, they're all coming here.
[6:25:08]
That happens in San Antonio, they're all coming here. Y'all guys are city planning, and there's nobody.
[6:25:15]
I've not seen a single government official who actually seems to have thought for half a second about what it looks like when any major city in this country loses water.
[6:25:25]
Like, do you all know what we did over toilet paper?
[6:25:29]
Like, your neighbor, your best friend, will kill you for water for their family with no hesitation.
[6:25:37]
And that's where we are going.
[6:25:38]
And that's where they are driving us.
[6:25:40]
And you are just sitting here and seating it to them and setting a precedence for a town that does not have a data center yet.
[6:25:47]
And the precedence that you are setting now is that we can change our comprehensive plans willingly if they ask us to.
[6:25:54]
that we can change our zoning's willy-nilly, if they ask us to, why?
[6:25:58]
Because they just want to destroy our town.
[6:26:03]
I'm sorry to tell you all this, but right now, the world's being paid over, paved over and killed with lead certified buildings.
[6:26:13]
All of these things that they're saying are going to hold them accountable are the same things that they are using as an excuse to literally destroy the world.
[6:26:21]
Thank you.
[6:26:23]
Thank you, sir.
[6:26:33]
Chris, before I'll go, six, six, nine,
[6:26:35]
benders during this seven-book community.
[6:26:40]
You guys just pretty much proved.
[6:26:44]
Like, I'm not going to give you guys any grace.
[6:26:47]
I don't think he's that you're not being attention,
[6:26:49]
and you're not listening.
[6:26:50]
You don't care.
[6:26:54]
You've proven that this is pretty much a class issue.
[6:26:57]
We have a rich white guy from out of town
[6:26:59]
coming in and acting like he's going to save our budget problem just by
[6:27:06]
gracing us with his presence. And the only people that come up that
[6:27:11]
trying to get on these type of commissions and run from city council are
[6:27:13]
usually people who are pretty well off. So of course the well off are going to
[6:27:17]
protect the well off. This is no surprise to me. I'm not actually disappointed
[6:27:23]
Because I expected this,
[6:27:27]
but now you've given me something like, I'm not going to be like
[6:27:33]
Max where I'm going to tell people to give up.
[6:27:36]
I'm going to tell them we need to do something different.
[6:27:39]
We need to give up on it like Tarleton.
[6:27:40]
We need to give up on worrying about city council.
[6:27:43]
And we need to hit the streets and start flipping tables.
[6:27:46]
People can take that as a threat of violence and disruption if all they want.
[6:27:49]
Maybe I'll come to that.
[6:27:50]
Maybe I won't.
[6:27:51]
I don't know, but it's time,
[6:27:55]
like, I want to block maybe
[6:27:57]
from building, by just having us all just go camp out on this property,
[6:28:00]
really care his shit up, make it as difficult for him as possible.
[6:28:06]
That seems to be the only way we're going to stop this,
[6:28:07]
because you guys just made it easier for City Council.
[6:28:09]
No matter what you vote on this owning part,
[6:28:12]
we already know that probably six of them are going to vote for this.
[6:28:16]
Even one that I would think would be against it as much as she seems to care about the community,
[6:28:20]
the fact that she's voted for the men mill last time, so as she doesn't care about the community.
[6:28:26]
The only one that does is Amanda Rodriguez, and the two that voted no one at this time.
[6:28:30]
Thank you.
[6:28:34]
So, I know you guys don't care. You guys don't care about what the community said.
[6:28:37]
You don't care about what the immediate doofus office street, who just on a whim decided to
[6:28:42]
run for city council. You don't care what I think. So I know I'm not hurting your feelings.
[6:28:46]
But in case I have her to feelings, cry me fuck and remember, we're gonna need it.
[6:28:52]
Thank you, sir.
[6:29:00]
Yeah, so I mean, this was clearly a sham.
[6:29:14]
David, when you read the news and you see things are not going
[6:29:23]
to get more peaceful, I think, in this country, right?
[6:29:25]
Like, it's not going in a good direction.
[6:29:28]
And a lot of what's happening is young people
[6:29:31]
are witnessing government that even on this most micro-local level
[6:29:39]
is not like really critically engaging with their job or like really like listening to people
[6:29:47]
and that's having effects and like when you read the news and you see the chaos that's happening
[6:29:52]
and then five years when you see what's happening and you like sort of shake your head and you're like
[6:29:58]
Well.
[6:30:00]
We're all going crazy. You just remember that like you have
[6:30:07]
a lot of power each of you to kind of write that future. It's like being written. And
[6:30:17]
yeah, this is what it, this is what is happening here, I guess.
[6:30:23]
Thank
[6:30:27]
you,
[6:30:34]
sir.
[6:30:34]
Gina Plumming 1013, Dartmouth.
[6:30:38]
Any event?
[6:30:40]
What?
[6:30:41]
Let's talk to them.
[6:30:43]
I'm sorry.
[6:30:44]
I know what happened between when Jim Garber died and tonight.
[6:30:52]
You know, what new information did you have that changed your mind?
[6:30:57]
I do appreciate that there is a difference between the preferred scenario and amendment and a zoning change.
[6:31:07]
So I haven't given up on your yet.
[6:31:09]
That maybe you're just looking at the preferred scenario and making a distinction between that and the zoning amendment.
[6:31:19]
I wanted to make you aware too, something I brought up at the town hall.
[6:31:23]
But we had last week, this isn't about data centers, but I think we're a lot of us are not treated seriously like maybe we're over a dramatic or whatever,
[6:31:42]
but the state, these are the actual titles of some continuing medical education credits I got last year.
[6:31:50]
These are the titles from the American Medical Association's Education website and the two that stuck out, there were a number of them related to climate change and the two that stuck out were why should extinction medicine be a medical specialty.
[6:32:10]
The other one was, why healthcare still matters in the face of the end of humanity?
[6:32:19]
The American Medical Association is trying to deal with the end of humanity.
[6:32:30]
I really feel, I can't imagine what it would feel like.
[6:32:33]
I mean, I'm all done not going to be here that much longer, but to be younger, or if you
[6:32:39]
have children, I have a child, but he's already an adult, but if you have children or grandchildren,
[6:32:45]
We need to take this seriously.
[6:32:53]
Also, I just want to reiterate that the restrictive
[6:32:56]
Governments are irrelevant.
[6:33:00]
So the lead certification, these things are irrelevant.
[6:33:04]
They would be very hard to enforce.
[6:33:09]
And in the presentation, I noticed that they
[6:33:12]
they did concede that water use was connected to energy but then when they
[6:33:19]
compared residential to
[6:33:25]
light industrial they were just talking about
[6:33:28]
onsite usage and that was that was very misleading and I would also like to
[6:33:35]
reiterate that you can finish that this is a false either or a situation between
[6:33:44]
residential and plant industrial or residential and data center.
[6:33:50]
Even if you don't think it's appropriate for residential,
[6:33:55]
that doesn't mean you should approve light industrial.
[6:34:00]
We can bring it back again for another consideration.
[6:34:06]
Thank you.
[6:34:07]
Thank you, ma'am.
[6:34:14]
Anyone else in the chambers which is speak?
[6:34:17]
Do you have any bound line who wishes to speak?
[6:34:19]
Mayor, did you wish to speak?
[6:34:25]
I sure.
[6:34:29]
I have no feelings right now actually.
[6:34:31]
I can't even really say that I'm disappointed.
[6:34:36]
But one of the things I said at the town hall last week,
[6:34:39]
we were going to have a town hall.
[6:34:40]
We were really hoping to hold the town hall so that we could all share space
[6:34:44]
in a different and more democratic format.
[6:34:48]
And that conflicted with the city's strategic visioning.
[6:34:50]
So anyway, we hung out in a pentacostal church for a bit and I think one of the first things I said what directed at council the mayor
[6:35:00]
Mostly, and some city staff, there's due y'all want to live in a democracy.
[6:35:11]
Some of us, yeah, we believe
[6:35:15]
that we can co-create the world that we want, and it seems like y'all want to be in the way of that.
[6:35:22]
And we're not going to stop fighting data centers here.
[6:35:29]
We're deeply devoted to this place.
[6:35:33]
And I'm sorry that y'all, I wish that we'd
[6:35:38]
been able to have a more open dialogue.
[6:35:40]
We will be holding a town hall soon.
[6:35:44]
But a lot of us are probably going to get increasingly
[6:35:50]
unwilling to engage in this kind of format
[6:35:52]
because we're clearly not being listened to and are very well-informed on this topic and I wish
[6:36:00]
we had a different way to communicate. I tried emailing you all actually. I understand you all used
[6:36:04]
to have a city email and when I did emailing all it bounced back. I like went to spam. So it's been
[6:36:12]
really hard to even communicate. Like there's no easy direct line of communication. I wasn't sure if
[6:36:17]
like, I don't know, so it's very frustrating, and some people are just so frustrated that they're just on their unwilling to engage in this way, and I think more and more of us are going to feel less and less willing to engage in this way, and more and more willing to do other things to create the world that we want and that we need to survive.
[6:36:41]
Yeah, that's mostly, I'm sorry, that we weren't able to relay more information,
[6:36:51]
yeah, it's
[6:36:52]
upsetting, but all across the country and the world, people are fighting data centers, and
[6:37:00]
they are winning, and we can't do.
[6:37:03]
Um, and I don't understand, yeah, like Gina said, what has changed since last spring,
[6:37:11]
like y'all aren't supposed to be thinking about budget, like what's the reason to vote for this.
[6:37:17]
Um,
[6:37:20]
yeah, it was really poignant to rewatch that meeting and hear the things that y'all were saying
[6:37:24]
and actually feel like we were listening to and hear what Jim said and thank you.
[6:37:34]
Do you want us to chambers which speak in the background line?
[6:37:43]
No.
[6:37:43]
Wait, I think about that.
[6:37:45]
I speak.
[6:37:46]
Yes, ma'am, please.
[6:37:47]
My name is Danielle Kid.
[6:37:48]
I live at 1318 Hazelton Street in Symarcus.
[6:37:52]
I'm fairly new to this debate that we're having here, but after seeing this tonight,
[6:37:58]
I just want to ask, what was the point of creating a comprehensive plan?
[6:38:05]
If you're not going to listen to it.
[6:38:06]
If you're not going to listen to the people that participated in creating it,
[6:38:15]
we can discuss that
[6:38:17]
Yeah, I'd like to know
[6:38:21]
We can't answer you right now. We can discuss it later in the agenda. Okay. Well, I hope that you do
[6:38:27]
You had how many people come in here and tell you that we didn't want this in our community
[6:38:37]
The only people that were in favor don't live in this town.
[6:38:55]
What we closed this anyone's in the chamber, which is be
[6:39:05]
I'm going to recommend a partial approval of the ZEC-2513 for all the requested tracks with the exemption of a 50-foot buffer along the north-western property line of the Highlander S.M.1 LLC Tracts,
[6:39:23]
adjacent to the private dryway grant Harris Road, the 50-foot buffer would instead be recommended for
[6:39:29]
a carried edition of one CD-1.
[6:39:35]
That's a staff language.
[6:39:36]
That's a staff language, so approval based on staff recommendation?
[6:39:40]
Yeah.
[6:39:41]
Staffers in, okay.
[6:39:43]
Motion approved by Commissioner Spell?
[6:39:46]
All seconded.
[6:39:47]
Seconded by Commissioner Burlison.
[6:39:50]
Discussion.
[6:39:54]
Yes sir, Commissioner Agnes.
[6:39:55]
I know that the restrictive evidence aren't really for us.
[6:40:00]
To negotiate for the applicant the best for council to do, or maybe staff. But I do have a number of comments on them that I think are some significant, I'd like to go ahead and make, because I understand that these will, hopefully at least be heard or read by some of our council members.
[6:40:24]
So, and I don't know that the applicant has to worry about responding to any of these because I mean I don't matter in this process, but I do have a number of comments.
[6:40:37]
First, there's a 20-year term on the restrictive confidence.
[6:40:43]
And the items that are the subject of these confidence aren't 20 year items.
[6:40:49]
I mean, things like water usage, runoff.
[6:40:53]
These are more perpetual type items.
[6:40:57]
I would strongly suggest if I were council.
[6:41:00]
I get rid of the 20 year term.
[6:41:02]
It just doesn't make any sense.
[6:41:04]
I mean, 20 years do we not care how much water they use.
[6:41:07]
Do we not care how much runoff they have.
[6:41:09]
I mean, obviously we still would.
[6:41:11]
I mean, actually, if somebody mentioned this earlier, and I've seen this, I think at one point there is a projection that came out of some staff somewhere that our
[6:41:23]
our demand for water will exceed our supply in 2047.
[6:41:28]
That's just a little over 20 years from now.
[6:41:31]
And so it makes no sense for these to expire in 20 years.
[6:41:35]
Because obviously at that point, we're still going to care a lot about water usage.
[6:41:39]
So that's one comment I would make is get rid of the 20-year term.
[6:41:44]
Secondly, I know it's been talked about a lot of current clothing,
[6:41:49]
but I don't see anything in here.
[6:41:50]
If you get any idea how these things are going to be monitored, what kind of reporting we should get.
[6:41:56]
And again, particularly on the water use, it just seems like there's things that could be done to where the city is, you know,
[6:42:03]
you just said just a water bill once a month or something.
[6:42:06]
But there's nothing in here about monitoring and reporting, and I think there should be.
[6:42:12]
There's a lot of items in here that start off,
[6:42:15]
If a data center is constructed on the property, it's probably five or six of them.
[6:42:22]
And that seems kind of like an unnecessary hedge or something to me.
[6:42:26]
I mean, there doesn't seem to be any doubt that they intended to put a data center on the property.
[6:42:32]
And I would actually suggest that be eliminated every case.
[6:42:35]
I don't even know what the point of it is, honestly.
[6:42:37]
I mean, in a worse case, I guess if they don't do a data center and do something else,
[6:42:41]
than these provisions would all become an operative,
[6:42:44]
and I guess I could use as much water as they wanted,
[6:42:46]
and so forth.
[6:42:47]
And that's probably a far-fetched scenario,
[6:42:49]
but you never know.
[6:42:51]
So I would strongly suggest that that'd be taken out
[6:42:53]
everywhere it applies and if the data centers
[6:42:58]
on the property, uh, one question on water usage I had
[6:43:02]
by actually, too.
[6:43:05]
And I'm all confused by this, in the staff presentation,
[6:43:08]
and I think some of what the applicant has told us.
[6:43:10]
There are two separate numbers for water usage.
[6:43:15]
One is 75,000, what is it, million gallons a day, and the other is like 25 to 25,000 gallons per day.
[6:43:26]
And as I understand, the first one is allocation, the second one is usage.
[6:43:30]
But I don't know why the provision in here on water usage isn't based on usage.
[6:43:36]
Why not put 35,000 into here instead of 75,000?
[6:43:39]
75,000 is an allocation, not 35,000 is your projected usage.
[6:43:46]
Do you want to respond?
[6:43:48]
I don't know if you want to or not.
[6:43:50]
Again, no.
[6:43:53]
Up to you.
[6:43:54]
I'll just go on with all of them.
[6:43:55]
If you want to, if you want to, you can respond to any of them.
[6:44:00]
Also, on water usage, and this is a little tricky.
[6:44:05]
But as several people have mentioned up there this evening,
[6:44:08]
The water that gets used to produce the power for the data center will dwarf the amount
[6:44:16]
of water that's actually used, it's going to be used directly by the data center.
[6:44:20]
I mean, by like 30 times or more from the numbers I've seen.
[6:44:25]
And in a sense, what's being contemplated right now is probably the best case scenario for
[6:44:31]
since you're planning to use the PEC for a electric, because the water they use is
[6:44:40]
I understand it would not come from our watershed, but from some other part of the state,
[6:44:45]
and also I understand that some of their power comes from solar and wind, which also
[6:44:51]
doesn't require a great deal of water like natural gas or coal.
[6:44:57]
But the one thing, several people I know here in...
[6:45:00]
Accounts who are very involved in conservation and water and so forth are very concerned that, at some point, the data center would decide they want to get their power directly from pay's energy.
[6:45:14]
And the problem that would create is that pay's energy gets their water from the same source as the city of St. Marcus does.
[6:45:21]
And that's something that I know they would like not to see, and it makes sense that they would not like to see.
[6:45:29]
And I would like to see something in here that obligated the data center to continue using PDC.
[6:45:40]
I mean, continue using PDC for power.
[6:45:46]
I say without the consent of the city to change.
[6:45:49]
I mean, I can understand there might be some reason down the line to change, but I would
[6:45:54]
like to see something that at least gives the city the ability to sign off on that.
[6:45:59]
Because it could make a great deal of difference to water usage from our sources if that change
[6:46:05]
ever got made.
[6:46:07]
Another thing that's maybe kind of picky, I can maybe see the problem on the lead certification.
[6:46:14]
What is being sort of represented here is that they will apply for lead certification, but not that they will actually get certified as leads.
[6:46:26]
And I can kind of understand that because obviously the actual certification depends on the approval of some other other body, but still, and I don't know what better, what could be done better than this, but if they were to apply for lead certification and not get it.
[6:46:43]
then that doesn't seem to be useful to the city or to anybody.
[6:46:48]
And I don't know what could be done there,
[6:46:50]
but maybe there's something better.
[6:46:54]
We could choose.
[6:46:56]
Oh, the one on noise.
[6:46:58]
What that's number.
[6:47:02]
Yeah.
[6:47:03]
Item J.
[6:47:05]
And this is a little bit picky, but I could see
[6:47:07]
under certain cases it could make a difference.
[6:47:10]
It says right now that they will
[6:47:13]
The maximum noise level should be 75 decibels as measured from either the closest right of
[6:47:20]
way to the property or from the property line of the complainant, et cetera.
[6:47:27]
And what bothers me about that is it particularly given the, you know, rather limited
[6:47:32]
road system out there in the sort of gigantic block perimeter that this plant will sit in
[6:47:40]
middle of, it seems very possible to make a complainant the property line of a complainant
[6:47:47]
could be closer to the source of the noise than the closest public right of way. In fact,
[6:47:54]
that seems very likely. And it would seem better to just word this as measured from both
[6:48:02]
the closest right of way to the property and from the property line of the complainant,
[6:48:07]
Just to kind of avoid the situation I'm concerned about,
[6:48:13]
let's see, it's just words, but I think you could make a difference under a certain situation.
[6:48:19]
Also, and I think maybe the way this has gone tonight, it's not the problem that could possibly have been.
[6:48:25]
But condition precedent, where this whole thing becomes, I guess, no, and void if they don't get the zoning they want by March 18th, 2026.
[6:48:36]
That's a pretty tight deadline.
[6:48:39]
I mean, if I see the schedule right, the second vote by city council, I think would be March
[6:48:46]
the third.
[6:48:48]
I don't know if that's probably deliberately made tight, but I would think it would be something
[6:48:54]
a little bit more, or some longer deadline, and that would be more realistic, because I think
[6:49:02]
certainly possible I could get delayed before past March 18th but still ultimately get approved.
[6:49:09]
So, I guess I would just suggest a later date probably just allow a little more slack in the process,
[6:49:15]
because that allows almost nothing.
[6:49:23]
Let's see,
[6:49:27]
yeah, that's, that's I think really all that I have, I have some questions about
[6:49:32]
what kind of remedy, but I think that's been discussed here by the lawyers in the room.
[6:49:38]
So that's really all I've got, and I guess I mainly just
[6:49:41]
trying to put this on the record hoping that somebody
[6:49:45]
counsel will notice it and listen to it.
[6:49:47]
And so for this, the applicant has anything they want to say
[6:49:50]
that's fine, but it's not necessary at all.
[6:49:54]
And that's really all I've got on that.
[6:49:56]
Yeah, we'd like to respond.
[6:50:04]
I'll just say that I think those are great comments and we'll take them all under consideration.
[6:50:10]
Okay, thank you, I appreciate it.
[6:50:14]
Commissioner Spell.
[6:50:19]
Sometimes we get the luxury of having a proposal in front of us that is fantastic and one
[6:50:25]
there for when we love it and we're all happy for it and sometimes we get to be like this.
[6:50:31]
Which at the best case can you say it's better than alternative?
[6:50:33]
alternative by the way is the cloud birth facility which is going in down the row
[6:50:39]
outside the city of Lemons, which is, I believe, three and a half times larger than
[6:50:43]
this proposal from Mr. Mayor Mary. And someone mentioned this is a watershed moment.
[6:50:50]
The watershed moment is coming on. It came in November when they broke rat clock
[6:50:54]
burst and nobody from the city has any ability to stop that. And nobody from
[6:50:58]
the county has anybody to regulate the property more than what the city can do.
[6:51:03]
Our city's land development code is one of the strongest in our area.
[6:51:08]
It is a gold standard in Texas.
[6:51:10]
It is always open for improvement and we have process for improving it.
[6:51:15]
But it is fundamentally better than what any county can legally do in the area that I'm aware of.
[6:51:21]
And it is better than our surrounding cities in terms of environmental protections for our water and protections for our river.
[6:51:27]
So if the, so fundamentally from my perspective, a project like this in the C limits, in the,
[6:51:35]
in under the land development fund following it, regardless of whether there's a sugar
[6:51:39]
and covenants, which is another factor, is going to be more environmentally better all things
[6:51:46]
be equal than the exact same project being built a quarter of amounts on a city limits.
[6:51:51]
And so the issue, the two mixed that is, is this vote, or is the council direction when it comes to the council?
[6:51:59]
Is it going to fundamentally increase the number of data centers built in our community,
[6:52:04]
or built in the greater semergus area, and in the central Texas area?
[6:52:09]
And I don't believe it will.
[6:52:11]
From ERCOT's perspective, it's finally sort of the regulatory body that handles what you can tie into greater not.
[6:52:19]
And so this project will have to tie in the degree.
[6:52:21]
That's how you get the sort of jurisdictional for the, for the Senate bill.
[6:52:26]
And I do in a minute want to read from something from a news article that was provided to us,
[6:52:30]
from the statesman about what they're actually going to do because I know that came up
[6:52:34]
from a venture out of Turkey back in December.
[6:52:41]
I am looking, from our perspective, I just don't see them caring,
[6:52:47]
whether you project like this is built in the City of Limiter,
[6:52:49]
built two miles down the road in the E.T.J. Their grade is not that precise. And so when you
[6:52:56]
approve something like this, you scratch off another project in the E.T.J., because they're
[6:53:02]
going to look at this from respective of what can the grade handle. And yes, our client is going
[6:53:06]
to be a lot more perspective, sort of permissive than I'm sure some of the people in the audience
[6:53:09]
wouldn't prefer them to be. That's a issue for the state government to handle and the state
[6:53:14]
legislator to handle. And there are elections for those in November, but we can't decide that
[6:53:19]
night. Well, we have to look at is what's the best alternative for
[6:53:23]
San Marcos? How do we mitigate the worst effects even if we're stop voting for
[6:53:30]
something that we may not personally approve of our personally like? We have
[6:53:35]
responsibility to the city and for the citizens to do our best with the hands
[6:53:39]
worked out and sometimes we are dealt about hand.
[6:53:45]
Please, please. Right man, I'll
[6:53:51]
of a comment than a question, but we do listen to y'all, or let's not do back and forth,
[6:53:59]
let's not do back and forth.
[6:54:01]
Oh, yeah, I'm not going, and I don't intend to, but what I want to say is just because the
[6:54:05]
vote didn't go the way you think it should have or it did or didn't, it really bothers me.
[6:54:12]
I think Mr. Baker said that he's given up. This is not the body that makes the final
[6:54:18]
decision.
[6:54:22]
I'm not going to, I'm not going to discuss, but what I want to know is that the process
[6:54:28]
is not over here, and it really bothers me when one citizen is just to give up, and I would
[6:54:35]
encourage, if you don't like the way this goes tonight, regardless, go to City Council,
[6:54:43]
there are the ones that are elected, there are the ones that make that decision, there
[6:54:46]
ones that need to hear what we heard tonight. And I'm sorry if you feel like we didn't
[6:54:53]
listen because I don't for one, do listen to you, just didn't work. I have to go
[6:54:59]
what's in for wasn't.
[6:55:00]
In front of me. And they let's come back to the agenda item that we're discussing here. Commission weeks.
[6:55:09]
I do want to respond to the jukumissions that have already spoken, and then I do have some points I want to make.
[6:55:14]
It's only a gold standard if we adhere to it. I understand what you're saying, commissioner roof, and I appreciate that.
[6:55:21]
I do appreciate, you know, the work that our staff has done to give us a comprehensive plan and to give us an LVC at a preferred scenario amendment.
[6:55:32]
My disappointment is that I feel like we're not abiding by those documents and the same thing about the waiting period, I think that probably the wrong call was made for all the right reasons, you know, nobody tries to make a bad call, but I feel like it shouldn't have even been before us, about the comfort, about the change in the PSA and I feel like this shouldn't even be before us because there has not been a one-year waiting period.
[6:56:01]
So I feel like our gold standard documents aren't being followed, so that does distrust me.
[6:56:10]
I also appreciate what you have said, Commissioner Oda Curkey, but we are part of the process.
[6:56:18]
We are a very important part of the process and I have listened to you.
[6:56:24]
That's why my comments have been what they have been tonight.
[6:56:27]
I don't know where Commissioner Burlison may have gotten some documents that I didn't receive,
[6:56:34]
but I have taken notes on every person that has come here.
[6:56:39]
I read every letter that was sent to us.
[6:56:42]
We had only four that were for it and 12 that were against it in the letters.
[6:56:49]
And we had over 100 people, almost 100 people, and then if you count people that came again
[6:56:55]
When the agenda item was up for discussion and spoke again against it, we had well over a hundred of our citizens saying don't do this.
[6:57:05]
We don't want this.
[6:57:07]
I Google the addresses of the people, the four people that said they wanted it, they don't live anywhere near this property.
[6:57:15]
Yet the people who are going to be impacted by these decisions are here tonight saying don't do this to us.
[6:57:23]
Please don't do this to us, and I brought up the example of the wood's apartment.
[6:57:30]
We all know how those people who voted that in are now seen in San Marcos,
[6:57:35]
how they are talked about.
[6:57:38]
They voted it in for whatever reasons they did.
[6:57:41]
It was disastrous for the people of San Marcos.
[6:57:44]
I don't want that to be my legacy.
[6:57:47]
I do not want that on my sheet, on my side of the ledger.
[6:57:51]
I'm listening to you. I'm taking into account what is legal for us to do. I'm abiding by the rules.
[6:57:58]
I feel like we do need to seriously consider the massive people that have come to us tonight with the research that they have done.
[6:58:09]
And we need to listen that and consider that.
[6:58:12]
Could we go, did you want to discuss your objective to the agenda, I don't, or-
[6:58:19]
Sure, or if you want to know that we have a place?
[6:58:21]
Sure, the zoning?
[6:58:22]
Well, that was part of it, that was part of it, that was part of it.
[6:58:30]
Okay, so listen, this is why I'm not for the zoning change.
[6:58:36]
For one, I do think that there are health concerns that we're not sure of yet.
[6:58:40]
If anybody's done any research about data centers, you just Google, health concerns with data centers, the list is long, right?
[6:58:49]
So I feel like until we are more certain about what the implications, the repercussions will be with animals, with the air quality.
[6:59:02]
I think that we don't have any business approving the zoning change, because like Commissioner Agna has made clear,
[6:59:09]
it is clear that a data center is going to go there. If this goes through and if Council approves, both the PSA open and the zoning change,
[6:59:17]
then the data center will go there. So, in effect, Commissioner Agna was correct.
[6:59:23]
We are voting on whether or not we want to allow a data center, right? So health concerns are big for me.
[6:59:29]
Another, as you know, as I've said, I think that we're improper to go ahead and vote on this because the one your wait period has not occurred.
[6:59:37]
I also see this as spot zoning and let me just read a little bit about spot zoning.
[6:59:43]
So spot zoning.
[6:59:47]
Let's see.
[6:59:48]
Let's see. Let me get back to the spot zoning page.
[6:59:53]
Maybe I should just, yeah.
[6:59:55]
So Spock's owning a curse when a city council, I know that we're not city council.
[7:00:00]
But remember, we recommend a city council. So spot zoning occurs when a city council, where you could say a planning and zoning commission, this regards its comprehensive zoning ordinance.
[7:00:14]
And I feel like that's what we would be doing. I just feel like we would be going against what citizen input has helped staff create in our land of development code.
[7:00:28]
I think that's going to be a great question.
[7:00:31]
Okay, first of all, let me comment, the paperwork that I'm talking about, when I said
[7:00:36]
that we received letters, they're the letters that have sent to us that people send in
[7:00:42]
and we all have them.
[7:00:44]
So it's not that people contacted us directly.
[7:00:48]
I don't know how people couldn't contact us because any information that we got, we got
[7:00:55]
from staff.
[7:00:56]
We didn't get it from the outside or anything like that. So I just want to make that clear
[7:01:06]
We are listening
[7:01:09]
My vote on a lot of this had to do with cloud burst with no regulations. That type of thing
[7:01:18]
I said you're very first meeting was another meeting just like this
[7:01:25]
And it was another big project, what is an out, um, near-marked-and-dale, or terminal, smart terminal.
[7:01:33]
If you go out there and you look at smart terminal now, it's a cluster, it's horrible.
[7:01:40]
Because they have no regulations.
[7:01:43]
So, I only voted my conscious in what I thought would be better in the long run for the citizens
[7:01:50]
to be able to have some type of regulation period. That's why. Now,
[7:01:59]
I'll save my question
[7:02:01]
for staff after you'll.
[7:02:03]
Chris Wagner.
[7:02:04]
Yeah, I just, I mean, my reasons are a little simpler than Commissioner Minks, but I want
[7:02:09]
to just, I'm going to vote to deny the zone and change. I just want to explain why.
[7:02:16]
One, which is probably not my main reason, but I did vote to deny the preferred scenario
[7:02:21]
And somehow, although it's a little tricky to think about, it seems kind of inconsistent to vote for the zoning change if I didn't vote for the preferred scenario amendment because in my mind, they're pretty much part of the same thing.
[7:02:33]
But the bigger issue on the zoning change is that I could really only vote, even if there had been no preferred scenario amendment involved in this whole process.
[7:02:43]
I could only vote for the zoning change if I was satisfied with what I saw in the restrictive
[7:02:52]
covenants.
[7:02:53]
And obviously I have a lot of issues with the restrictive covenants, some of which are important
[7:02:58]
to me and one of which applies to a couple of which apply to water usage, which is a critical
[7:03:05]
issue to so many people on this, which we barely discussed, if at all, frankly,
[7:03:11]
but without
[7:03:12]
I'm not restrictive competence that I'm comfortable with, I can't vote for the zoning change and it's not possible under the circumstances for me to have restrictive confidence I can be comfortable with because that has to get done by city council messing the future so in that case I'm just not comfortable voting for the zoning change right now and I don't intend to so that's where I'm coming from.
[7:03:36]
President.
[7:03:37]
Good question.
[7:03:39]
For staff.
[7:03:41]
Why is it not compatible with the complaint that staff would commit partial?
[7:03:51]
So for this existing proposal.
[7:03:56]
So I think there's two conditions.
[7:03:58]
So this recommendation is contingent upon the approval of the preferred scenario amendment.
[7:04:03]
It was I guess two lines in that slide.
[7:04:06]
If it's not, if the preferred scenario amendment is not approved, then that recommendation would not hold any weight.
[7:04:17]
Does that make sense?
[7:04:18]
Are you saying that as it goes to recommended up, or are you saying that?
[7:04:23]
Can someone pull up the recommendations later?
[7:04:27]
And I think the whole point is that's why you have a preferred scenario amendment,
[7:04:34]
So that the zoning request could be compatible to the plan, but it's your correct.
[7:04:40]
It's not currently compatible unless an amendment to the preferred scenario map occurs.
[7:04:46]
So that's, I don't know if that's kind of what you're in that.
[7:04:49]
And that's the CD-1 buffer specifically, I think, is really in order to mitigate the impact or to a point, mitigate.
[7:05:00]
Some of the impacts of the proposed zoning, where you have, you know, kind of small, a couple of small residential lots that are already there in the ATJ, that was the purpose.
[7:05:15]
I was going to ask staff that we could pull that nap up.
[7:05:19]
So my understanding.
[7:05:19]
So CD1 in general is about as close to empty ground as we tend to have for the city and
[7:05:29]
so the idea is that these properties here and I do want to confirm the applicant is immunable
[7:05:35]
to this.
[7:05:36]
You know, this is something the applicant will accept that this buffer would have to go
[7:05:41]
place as tied to the, as tied to the zoning.
[7:05:47]
The, they have told me yes, they're nodding. I don't know if you want to read it to
[7:05:49]
the record. I think I'll take a nod and it's good enough, but that's, but that's, that's
[7:05:55]
why that's a condition there is to try and create a buffer between these properties
[7:06:01]
because these are pretty existing. And these are not the city limits that correct?
[7:06:04]
No, they are all outside the city limits.
[7:06:06]
Okay. Thank you.
[7:06:11]
Let me just go again to when we make a zoning change, how should zoning be done, right?
[7:06:21]
So zoning must be compliant with the approved comprehensive plan.
[7:06:26]
And it's not, but the asking is not unless the PSA is done, but I would say number one, it doesn't mean it's not compliant with an approved comprehensive plan.
[7:06:34]
Secondly, must be applied uniformly, meaning not part of some special side deal.
[7:06:42]
You know that I believe that this qualifies the spot zoning, so this isn't being applied
[7:06:47]
uniformly, all right?
[7:06:49]
And then the third part is, must meet and follow the requirements of the city code, including
[7:06:55]
procedural requirements, which, again, you know, that I think it has not been.
[7:07:00]
So just giving you reasons why I think this clearly should be voted against.
[7:07:06]
I need to take that page away from you.
[7:07:09]
Commissioner Costilla.
[7:07:11]
If you think one, and I understand that we have no input on the restrictive covenant.
[7:07:20]
So I just kind of want this one on the record for council.
[7:07:25]
Something that really stuck out for me was a citizen.
[7:07:28]
And I apologize if I forgot your name, but if you're still here,
[7:07:34]
the monitoring, the animal and human health, I don't know how feasible that is,
[7:07:41]
but I think that is something that, for me, would be a no-brainer to be put in the restrictive covenant,
[7:07:49]
so my colleagues at Council, I really hope that you take a look at that.
[7:07:54]
I share the same concern regarding who is monitoring this as Commissioner Agnew stated.
[7:08:03]
So again, I hope my colleagues up above will get definitive answers of that.
[7:08:13]
And then my last point is just more of a comment and really no questions.
[7:08:18]
I've asked quite a few questions at last meeting and I'm having last meeting but I don't want
[7:08:26]
to keep meeting a dead horse, maybe that's not the right analogy to use right now.
[7:08:32]
But commissioner,
[7:08:35]
spell, kind of set it best for me and I apologize if I'm not articulating
[7:08:40]
this as thoroughly, I know it's all late for everybody.
[7:08:44]
But this, for me, personally, regardless of what decision this is not an easy decision,
[7:08:51]
it is not.
[7:08:52]
I don't envy our position, I don't envy Council at the end of the day, like I said,
[7:08:58]
this is just not an easy decision.
[7:09:01]
For me, what I've taken into account is a lot of the citizens comment regarding, of course,
[7:09:10]
utility usage and the impacts of what this could and could not have on health.
[7:09:15]
Well, for me, I don't want to, if we're going back and forth on, if we're considering
[7:09:22]
400 homes, 500 homes, or another data center that would have no regulations.
[7:09:28]
I mean, I'm trying to think of the devil that I would pick from, but I couldn't go to bed
[7:09:35]
night thinking that I put a family next to a power plant, I think that's, I don't think
[7:09:44]
that's feasible for me and we're all entitled to our own opinions here.
[7:09:49]
Secondly, if, you know, there's all these words of what can happen, what if this
[7:09:54]
status center does go to the county, we have no regulations on that and that's something
[7:10:01]
A lot throughout this. And that's something I've taken into consideration. Our city has a most stringent
[7:10:09]
codes in place. And to say that, to have the opportunity or to risk that for it to go to the county, and
[7:10:19]
there's been comments made by our elected officials that said, hey, we have no say, that's,
[7:10:29]
that
[7:10:29]
But for me, I mean there's meant that this has not been an easy decision and still
[7:10:34]
isn't, but I just wanted to say my two cents regarding that.
[7:10:41]
Any further discussion?
[7:10:46]
I think tonight, I don't think any of us knew how we were going to vote until the vote happened.
[7:11:23]
But for me, when Abigail Lindsey got up and she spoke about how bad
[7:11:23]
Please, I apologize, we just apologize.
[7:11:29]
OK, you all ready to vote?
[7:11:32]
Can you say, I just want to comment on what Mr. Burlson said.
[7:11:39]
And unlike some other things we've dealt with, in this case,
[7:11:43]
the applicant didn't have the option to develop that
[7:11:46]
of the county out of the city.
[7:11:48]
He had already, you know, his property's already been announced.
[7:11:51]
So it's not like some other things.
[7:11:53]
So, I don't think that was really an option to worry about, but for where would that work?
[7:11:59]
Okay.
[7:12:02]
You're ready to vote?
[7:12:04]
We'll call vote, please.
[7:12:06]
Sure.
[7:12:06]
Griffin, Spill.
[7:12:10]
Hi.
[7:12:11]
All right.
[7:12:12]
Have you been notified?
[7:12:15]
Were you making any?
[7:12:18]
Shall we roll this in?
[7:12:19]
I.
[7:12:20]
The David Case.
[7:12:21]
Hi.
[7:12:22]
Would you be close to you?
[7:12:23]
Hi.
[7:12:24]
All right, done.
[7:12:25]
Hi.
[7:12:26]
Amy Meeks?
[7:12:27]
No.
[7:12:27]
The motion to recommend approval passes, six to two.
[7:12:36]
There's now brings us to questions and answer session with the press and public.
[7:12:43]
Oh, my goodness.
[7:12:48]
I'll see you next time, okay, we haven't had this in a while.
[7:12:51]
The commission staff may respond to questions related to items on such agenda.
[7:12:55]
You do not have to respond, you can't deflect.
[7:12:58]
Is there anyone that chamber who wishes to ask a question?
[7:13:03]
And my name again, yes, Secretary Tindul is 614 Martin Luther King Drive, Sam Marcus Texas.
[7:13:10]
I'm sorry, I'm missing something. Why do you all think that this, that approving this is going to stop more stop air
[7:13:16]
cop from approving more? Everything that I have heard, everything that I've read, doesn't imply that this isn't going to be one
[7:13:23]
less than the count.
[7:13:26]
So, this is question and answer, are you all going to answer? How does this work?
[7:13:30]
I'm not going to answer.
[7:13:32]
Okay.
[7:13:33]
Mr. Spell.
[7:13:35]
Please.
[7:13:36]
I'm not an expert on this.
[7:13:38]
I can give you my thought press also.
[7:13:40]
I'm not an expert on this.
[7:13:41]
I give my thought process if you're asking.
[7:13:44]
Which I think you are.
[7:13:46]
Urgot has internal measures to do.
[7:13:48]
I have not seen about great capacity.
[7:13:51]
How many, how many watts can we take out of the grid before the grid runs out of power?
[7:13:57]
based on the current capacity of electric plants that are currently in production and expected to go online in the future.
[7:14:03]
For facilities that are built, and my best guess, and I do not know, and I am not an expert.
[7:14:13]
But they probably have internal measurements of, well, we expect this area is going to have room for amounts of watts in the future.
[7:14:20]
And my belief is that if there's something that gets built in the city limits, then that number goes down, and if it's good, I said it went to it also goes down.
[7:14:31]
Surely that there's, this is a sliding scale of what the grid is going to be able to accommodate, as the people on Mayberry's team said that as the developers, as the data centers come in, then the grid is supposed to grow to accommodate it.
[7:14:48]
That's what the applicants themselves said.
[7:14:51]
So this is a sliding scale.
[7:14:53]
This doesn't make sense that having one more data center here
[7:14:58]
is going to mean less, one less data center.
[7:15:00]
I apologize. I don't think you're going to get the answer that you want. I don't think you're going to get the answer.
[7:15:07]
This was the main reason a few of you all voted for this. You must have an answer.
[7:15:17]
It's not a back and forth debate.
[7:15:19]
I got it.
[7:15:21]
Not from
[7:15:24]
what?
[7:15:26]
All right.
[7:15:27]
Can I get a motion to adjourn?
[7:15:29]
Can I get a motion to adjourn?
[7:15:32]
Am I allowed to get a motion to adjourn?
[7:15:33]
Can we do that, Sam?
[7:15:35]
If there's still people wanting to ask questions?
[7:15:37]
It's up to the commission, but I do want to clarify.
[7:15:39]
it's not because of the open music when it's not a debate and I was
[7:15:44]
thinking to keep in mind the record on the hearing was the vote and now
[7:15:48]
you're being asked to provide after the fact motivations it's actually if you
[7:15:53]
want to answer but you can also there's no requirement to answer here you can
[7:15:57]
provide follow-up information and things like that that may be not a
[7:16:01]
mandate to you it's not a mandate that there be a debate yeah I think if I
[7:16:05]
We'll put together some comments out to the facts.
[7:16:08]
It's almost to a, I think it's better for me
[7:16:12]
than, well, I shouldn't do what they want.
[7:16:20]
The fact that you brought up Abigail as reasoning,
[7:16:24]
sorry, Saunders, the same marks.
[7:16:27]
Michelle, the fact that you brought up Abigail
[7:16:28]
as you're reasoning for voting in favor of this.
[7:16:32]
We're bringing her up, meaning you literally brought her up.
[7:16:36]
I brought her up to, to, to, to, to be her comment.
[7:16:42]
Regardless, regardless, regardless, if she had been here to hear that, she would have just broken down.
[7:16:47]
I know her very well. She's good friend of mine. That would have sent her into a panic attack.
[7:16:52]
She would be like screaming and crying about that that you used her as justification.
[7:16:57]
That's not justification. Her comments, what she said was already something that totally bothered me,
[7:17:04]
to think that we could have something of this magnitude to be out there without any regulation would so
[7:17:12]
effort.
[7:17:13]
Yeah, but now we get both.
[7:17:14]
Thank you.
[7:17:18]
I'm curious.
[7:17:21]
Why when Mr. Mayberry came up here and answered Ms. Meeks's question, Mr. Meeks, and asked,
[7:17:29]
hey, would you, Mr. Mayberry go back to building housing if this failed?
[7:17:33]
He said yes and yet with it fails. He said I'm going to keep forcing this issue
[7:17:38]
So I won't curious why you all chose to believe somebody that would lie openly to your face and
[7:17:45]
secondly
[7:17:48]
When why again as I said earlier now that you have a chance to respond and Mr. Spell I appreciate you going out on a limb and engaging with that
[7:17:55]
I know we responded pretty drastically
[7:17:57]
I will take four-sponsibility. We're full of a lot of emotions
[7:18:02]
But, yes, you get it, you've been on the other side of these frustrating situations.
[7:18:07]
So, but none of you won't ask that question.
[7:18:10]
Commissioner Burlison, if that was your fear, where was that question for staff?
[7:18:15]
For the thing about the SP6, why did you not ask staff?
[7:18:19]
You asked him a turning.
[7:18:21]
He doesn't know anything about SP6 until something has to be litigated about it.
[7:18:25]
So, all of you that voted, yes, I would appreciate,
[7:18:30]
and we all would like to better understand why, again,
[7:18:33]
youth thought it to basically sole part of your decision
[7:18:37]
on this, well, we might get one or both
[7:18:40]
when you could have asked to clarify Tyler.
[7:18:42]
Your fourth was here, like I have it spewed the numbers
[7:18:45]
about all the impacts that these things
[7:18:46]
have on our electric grid, you didn't ask.
[7:18:49]
And I get that there was a lot of conversation
[7:18:51]
Mr. Ridey Go Notaker, you said very similar thing,
[7:18:55]
about like, well, you know, it's going to go up to Council, but we don't want to advocate
[7:18:58]
all of our responsibilities and asking these questions and how important all these questions
[7:19:02]
are to letting them get it right upstairs.
[7:19:06]
Why not ask them now? It was in your purview.
[7:19:10]
I would out of respect for this process and to help any of us want to continue to advocate for
[7:19:17]
people to show up here. We need answers. Without that,
[7:19:24]
I guess you all will continue to elect your
[7:19:26]
friends. I don't know. So any answers from anybody? Yes, this is not. I appreciate it.
[7:19:33]
Going back when I said earlier, there is in the packet, a newspaper article in the
[7:19:37]
American States that I was going to call it at one point. I ended up not doing so, but it is an
[7:19:42]
area here. It is an interview from the ERCOTC, ERCOTC, no data scenarios. I think it's a little
[7:19:48]
of the SSH was headline, but it does talk a bit about shutting innocenters off completely if there
[7:19:57]
is a power situation like we had with the...
[7:20:00]
That's a standard that argument can basically telling you everything is equal to 8.UN and we have a legal bill, because that's a standard that already exists in Texas for petrokin plants.
[7:20:07]
They can stay government, can basically tell them, we need the power, you turn off your generators, you turn off your facility to the, to a bare minimum or even completely off.
[7:20:16]
Right, and that is something that is, you know, that is not, that's essentially isn't our packet.
[7:20:19]
Right. That being different from weather or not to data center, skin be built. That's the question.
[7:20:25]
And that identified your reasons to vote for it. And at the same time, you're very, very important to understand how we're doing in a way in which you're looking for and that's very important.
[7:20:29]
was not asked of whether two could still be built.
[7:20:33]
And whether we're going to just be doubly in trouble or not.
[7:20:36]
So I realize I'm over my time.
[7:20:37]
Thank you.
[7:20:39]
Mary, a little field divine.
[7:20:41]
So I've previously commented about the short time frames,
[7:20:46]
whether it's been six months for renewal of an application
[7:20:51]
or a year, and a hopeful understanding of that.
[7:20:54]
But I heard both quoted tonight and its city council meeting
[7:20:58]
where these roles were denied.
[7:21:01]
So from ethics perspective, creating a short timeline
[7:21:05]
and creating an imaginary enemy or triangulation
[7:21:09]
like hypothetical, other site, other out of bounds,
[7:21:15]
out of regulation, data center coming in,
[7:21:18]
and the short timeline and the hypothetical enemy,
[7:21:24]
that all increases the risk of ethical blindness,
[7:21:27]
because the decision making is rushed, and it's also in part based on an imaginary threat.
[7:21:33]
So I want to know why is that a culture, why is that part of the culture of this committee?
[7:21:40]
That's okay.
[7:21:43]
Because I'll tell you I served as an ethics mentor on Coursera for the course on ethical decision making
[7:21:51]
in organizations through the University of Los Angeles.
[7:22:05]
apologize.
[7:22:06]
I don't have an answer.
[7:22:08]
That's a good one.
[7:22:08]
That's a good one.
[7:22:11]
That's a good one.
[7:22:12]
That's a good one.
[7:22:12]
Well, I feel obligated to say I do try to work ethically, and I do try to consider all the important
[7:22:22]
points when I'm coming to my own decision, my own conclusion.
[7:22:27]
I can only speak for me.
[7:22:29]
So, um, you know, I'm open to feedback if you guys think that I miss something.
[7:22:35]
I think you did great.
[7:22:36]
Well, thank you.
[7:22:37]
I tried.
[7:22:39]
I think you did great.
[7:22:39]
I've done like the overall culture of the board and I appreciate your insights very deeply
[7:22:44]
greatly.
[7:22:45]
Thank you.
[7:22:48]
The comments from the board from the committee.
[7:22:53]
So it's just the way things are around here.
[7:22:57]
That's a, that's a toxic safety culture.
[7:22:59]
I'm not a lawyer.
[7:23:00]
Sam McGurier is.
[7:23:05]
What do you want us to question you to come to the company?
[7:23:09]
Do you ask the questions?
[7:23:12]
Gene, I'm flipping.
[7:23:14]
My question is for our Commissioner of Urlison.
[7:23:19]
I'm trying to understand, can you tell me what were the developers doing on cloud-verse property
[7:23:27]
that you saw the city of San Marcos would have the ability to regulate?
[7:23:34]
What
[7:23:38]
I was saying is that when Abigail Lindsay stood up there and she talked about how it was just a mess out there
[7:23:48]
The noise is that was something that I think is in there that the city could regulate
[7:23:55]
She's talking about them being woken up in the middle of the night and different alarms things like that
[7:24:01]
Those that type of thing is alarming to me and so that was something that just, it stood out when she started talking about it, I thought, okay, we could do a lot better than that.
[7:24:17]
Well, she was talking about, this is the construction phase, this isn't like the decibel limits on a data center, there's no data center there yet.
[7:24:25]
So, so what regulations do you think the City of Santa Marcos is going to put into place so that there won't be noise during construction?
[7:24:41]
She just started talking about noise and I just responded to that. That was a trigger because that's something that everyone's been talking about.
[7:24:52]
It's just no regulation because this is the difference, I think we're really triggered it.
[7:25:00]
Is nobody knows what they're doing, how they're doing it? Do you know how much water they're using? Has anyone had the opportunity to have this type of a forum to come, ask questions, whether you believe them or not?
[7:25:16]
But at least you had the ability to come, to ask questions, to give input, for us to try to make things a better, you know,
[7:25:27]
put things in a restricted covenant or give a recommendation to do that because we don't have control over that.
[7:25:35]
Those are the things that I'm talking about.
[7:25:38]
Is that at least there would be a conversation.
[7:25:43]
If there's a problem that people that live their notice and they come complaining to the city,
[7:25:51]
but we have practices in place that could handle that or could mitigate that, then that would be a much better situation.
[7:25:59]
That's all I'm saying.
[7:26:00]
What regulations could we put in place that would limit the energy usage?
[7:26:08]
I'm not sure.
[7:26:10]
I mean, it's the things that they're saying that they're only going to use so much energy.
[7:26:15]
And if it's in the restricted covenant that they could not use more than that, then that would be something to restrict it.
[7:26:23]
Just like water.
[7:26:25]
And again, we can answer, it's going to be provided out for the meeting.
[7:26:28]
And really, the rules aren't to have a continuing debate.
[7:26:32]
It primarily because the open meeting sacked secondly because the action was already taken by the commission,
[7:26:42]
but
[7:26:42]
anyways, I think you already spoke, did you already ask previously sir?
[7:26:47]
Or am I mistaken?
[7:26:49]
No, I'm not.
[7:26:50]
No, I'm not.
[7:27:01]
No, I'm not.
[7:27:02]
We're not doing the role call.
[7:27:03]
All of that.
[7:27:04]
Are we ready if I enter?
[7:27:05]
All right.
[7:27:05]
Thank you.
[7:27:06]
William Agmin?
[7:27:08]
All right.
[7:27:08]
Shall we listen?
[7:27:10]
David Cace?
[7:27:11]
All right.
[7:27:11]
Lippico Cia?
[7:27:13]
All right, done.
[7:27:14]
Amy?
[7:27:14]
Hi.
[7:27:15]
Griffin Spell?
[7:27:16]
We were adjourned at 203 AM.