[0:49] How are you? Good. How are you?

[10:48] It is 9:00. We will call this meeting of the Lincoln

[10:52] County Commissioners to order. We will be abiding by the open meetings

[10:57] act which has been modified to a five-page document a copy of which is at

[11:03] the end of this table and also at the podium for anyone that would like to

[11:06] review those rules and regs. Additionally, the board of commissioners

[11:13] reserve the right to enter close session at any time as necessary to discuss an

[11:16] agenda item currently before us. Also, the board of commissioners reserves the

[11:21] right to take agenda items out of order for the convenience of the invol

[11:24] involved parties. For the public notice, uh we'll make

[11:29] note that we are meeting in the North Plat City Hall chambers.

[11:33] Uh my thanks to Mayor Kellher and Mr. Groa for accommodating us today. Much

[11:41] appreciated. >> First step would be to open with prayer.

[11:46] Michaela, would you lead us this morning, please?

[11:48] » Yes. Join me if you so please. [clears throat] Heavenly Father, thank

[11:54] you for our recent rains that refreshed our land.

[11:59] Give your grace over those who suffered storm damage. We are thankful for a

[12:04] community that shows up without hesitation when neighbors are in need.

[12:10] That spirit of service is the best of Lincoln County and we ask you to help us

[12:16] carry that spirit into this meeting. Lift up our first responders, our public

[12:22] servants, and those who work quietly behind the scenes for the good of our

[12:27] county. May they and their families wear your

[12:32] armor of protection. Lord, in a season of challenge, help us

[12:38] stand firm in our integrity, grounded in service and committed to what is right.

[12:44] Help us serve with compassion for those who are less fortunate and

[12:49] those whose struggles we don't know. We ask for your peace in this room,

[12:56] guidance in our decisions, and protections over our community. Amen.

[13:01] » Amen. One note uh overlooked was also at 9:15

[13:07] or thereabouts. We will recess as a board of commissioners and convene as a

[13:11] board of equalization once again abiding by open meetings act

[13:17] uh the five-page document. Item two is to approve the minutes

[13:22] regarding the board of commissioners meeting that we held August 24th of

[13:25] 2026.

[13:29] » Mr. Chairman, I'd make a motion we approve the [clears throat] minutes of

[13:31] the Lincoln County Board of Commissioners meeting August 24, 2026.

[13:37] » Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Are there

[13:40] any amendments, corrections?

[13:45] » Roll call, please. >> Hugley.

[13:47] » Hi. >> Woodruff,

[13:49] » I. >> Bruns,

[13:50] » abstain. Fuller time we >> hi.

[13:57] Before we open up item three, I'm going to accommodate

[14:02] our colleague. Commissioner Bruns requested to speak and I think that

[14:07] might be appropriate to hear from him at this time. Commissioner Bruns. Mr.

[14:12] Chairman, thank you for allowing me to be the first one to say a few things

[14:15] this morning in spite of my attorney wishing that I won it. But I believe

[14:20] that the community deserves to hear from me.

[14:24] Recently, I made a serious mistake, one that I regret with every ounce of who I

[14:29] am. I put myself in circumstances to have contact with law enforcement in

[14:35] which they ultimately arrested me. I absolutely take full responsibility for

[14:40] my actions. I know the community is disgusted with

[14:44] me, but no one is more disgusted and ashamed with my actions than me.

[14:51] I'm cooperating fully with the legal process, and out of respect for that

[14:55] process, I won't be discussing details of the case further today.

[15:00] What I do want to say is that I'm genuinely sorry. First to my family and

[15:04] especially my kids who didn't ask to have their father's mistake become a

[15:08] headline. and I'm immensely sorry to this community. You put your trust in me

[15:14] and I let you down. That's not a line that I'm saying because it's expected of

[15:19] me here today. I'm making it because I truly mean it.

[15:25] I also won't pretend that this happened in a vacuum. This has been one of the

[15:29] hardest years of my life. I've been dealing with the aftermath of

[15:33] a divorce, a change of job, a cancer scare, and for several weeks have been

[15:38] facing a recall effort that has been filled with vitriol and threats against

[15:41] me and my kids. I'm not telling you that to excuse what

[15:45] I did or its seriousness. It absolutely does not excuse it. I'm

[15:51] telling you because you deserve the full picture and because I think it's fair

[15:55] that you know the person behind the headline, not just the headline.

[15:59] I didn't handle the stresses of life the way I should have, the way my children

[16:04] deserve, or in a way that my office commands.

[16:10] I also want to address something directly. I've made a lot of mistakes in

[16:14] life and this incident is near the top of the list.

[16:17] However, the unprecedented, false, and politically convenient accusations that

[16:21] were made to this board in the community last week, accusations that I was

[16:25] abusive and threatening to staff at the jail are not part of that list.

[16:30] While I was at the jail, did I witness important safety checks of visual

[16:34] inspect, visually inspecting inmates and ensuring that they were alive and

[16:37] breathing being skipped? The kind of checks that matter enormously given how

[16:41] many deaths that facility has seen recently? Yes, I did. Did I ask

[16:47] appropriately about it? Yes. However, I did not raise my voice. I did

[16:53] not demean and I did not threaten anyone or their jobs. Our correction staff and

[16:59] law enforcement officers deserve the greatest respect and I simply ask the

[17:04] kind of questions I believe that every one of you would want a county

[17:07] commissioner ask if they see something like that.

[17:10] I'm not going to comment any further on that issue either as it will play out

[17:14] along with the audiovisisual evidence that exists in a separate legal process.

[17:19] What I can say is that I'm working to learn from my mistakes

[17:23] and that for however long or short of time I may have left in this role, I

[17:27] will keep doing work that this community deserves to the best of my ability.

[17:32] Again, I am truly sorry to my family and to all of you.

[17:38] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to speak.

[17:41] » Thank you. Are you completed? Okay.

[17:46] I will formally move to item three, which is public comment. [clears throat]

[17:51] Anyone that would like to come forth?

[17:55] » Morning, George. >> Morning.

[17:58] I've got a few comments I'd like to enter in the record and I appreciate

[18:02] your time. I'm be as concise as I can be, but I'd like to say a few things as

[18:06] we face the the big data center issue. All of my adult life, I've heard

[18:13] warnings at a time when robots could become more intelligent than people.

[18:17] From scientists, we've heard warnings from scientists, scholars, teachers,

[18:20] writers, filmmakers, and we all hope mankind will put a stop to it over the

[18:23] years, but no one has. And here we are now staring at that danger. Even the

[18:29] developers of artificial intelligence have warned us. Three years ago, Elon

[18:32] Musk called AI the greatest existential threat to mankind.

[18:37] Today, the trillionaire Elon Musk is pushing ahead because he aims to own

[18:41] them. Why should we cooperate?

[18:45] This summer, the president of another AI developer, Anthropic, broke a deal with

[18:50] the US Pentagon, to create autonomous soldiers who could do battle without

[18:54] human commanders. There was no law against creating it. This year, AI

[19:00] robots from Anthropic and another AI company, Open AAI, were tested to see

[19:04] how they would operate on websites that had established boundaries and

[19:08] established confines to see what link they would go to. The AI program has

[19:14] figured out a way to break through the boundaries, invading real websites

[19:17] without anyone knowing it until days or weeks later. And in the ensuing public

[19:22] discussion, it became known that AI companies cannot shut these programs

[19:25] down if they go too far. There's a move now in Congress to

[19:29] require companies or a federal agency to have a kill switch. It seems like an

[19:34] obvious safeguard, but Congress is mostly paralyzed with partisan fights

[19:38] and some members are reluctant to restrain AI because the industry is

[19:41] driving our economy, pushing the stock market to here to four unimagined

[19:46] levels. But nearly 88,000 US jobs were lost in

[19:51] the first five months of 2026 attributed to AI according to a report by CNBC.

[19:59] Anyone who makes a living now to computers have to be replaced within a

[20:02] year or 18 months. Many analysts say Musk recently said that he expects at

[20:07] least 100 million human robots, if not a billion, within five years.

[20:13] That seems a bit dreamy, but it seems possible given that robots can build

[20:18] robots. People have to be very skilled to have a

[20:22] job that AI just couldn't do. Professor Jeffrey Hinting Hinton, who is

[20:27] considered the godfather of AI, said recently, "The question is not will AI

[20:32] replace workers. The question now is who owns the robots, the data, and the

[20:37] intelligence. They will determine the future for the rest of us," Hinton said.

[20:42] Consider that AI is already a thief. When chat bots are trained, they are fed

[20:48] collected information assembled through the centuries, created by individuals

[20:51] and companies, most of it copyrighting or at least attributed to the author.

[20:55] Protected from exploitation from those who would use it for their own gain

[20:58] without acknowledging, let alone compensating the authors. This is

[21:02] illegal. But AI industry does it anyway. It is powered by billions of dollars

[21:08] from investors who aim to own the robots, the data, and the intelligence,

[21:11] such as Elon Musk. Few if any cooper cop copyright holders confided. The New York

[21:18] Times has had a lawsuit against Open AI for three years and is still unresolved.

[21:23] AI uses [clears throat] stolen information and more and more it does

[21:27] what is programmed to do. It thinks for us, it keeps us engaged. It monopolizes

[21:31] our time and in many cases it monopolizes our thoughts and our

[21:34] emotions. AI on our smartphones can listen to

[21:38] conversations, record our movements, our likes, our dislikes, or even our

[21:42] inclinations amounting to illegal searches and seizures.

[21:47] That information is recorded in data centers. In return, we are bombarded

[21:52] with advertisements and spam calls, many of which seek to fraudulently

[21:56] fraudulently con us out of our money, not to mention our peace of mind. This

[22:02] stuff happens now with some 4,000 data centers in various sizes operating in

[22:07] the United States and up to 1,000 hypers scale centers

[22:12] which are with an accompanying power plant can span up to two square miles

[22:16] are planned the next four years in the United States according to the CNC

[22:20] technology group a new Jersey company with 40 years of experience in

[22:24] technology. It is terrifying to think of what they will be able to do. AI is

[22:30] explosive and totally unregulated. Evidence of theft and fraud is rampant.

[22:35] AI creates fake videos, photos, and documentaries and broadcast them through

[22:39] the out the AIdriven social media world to captivated consumers.

[22:45] Until restrictions are written, AI can do whatever its owners design it to do.

[22:51] I've often heard it said in meetings such as this, there is no way to stop

[22:54] the growth of AI. Well, I suppose if we don't try, that's true.

[22:59] But it seems like a lame way to start addressing the situation.

[23:03] People are stopping it. From two May 2024 to March 2025, 64 billion in US

[23:10] data center projects have been blocked or delayed by a growing wave of local

[23:14] bipartisan opposition. According to the group data center watch, a few months

[23:19] ago, residents of Prince William County and Virginia stopped the planned 2100

[23:24] acre development. All over the country, people are

[23:28] confronting these developments. People want future development to be lawful.

[23:32] They want it to be respectful of individuals. And we want to determine

[23:36] our future while we still can. Development has gone far enough now

[23:43] until the industry can be restricted from going way too far in my opinion.

[23:48] And I trust that you will keep all this in mind as you make decisions about the

[23:52] development of data centers in our county.

[23:56] Thank you for your time and your attention and your concern.

[24:00] » Thank you, George. [clears throat]

[24:05] » For the record, Mr. Chairman, I don't know if he identified himself. I'd like

[24:09] that to be known as George. >> I'm sorry. George Lobby. George.

[24:12] » Yes. >> You did not identify yourself. I just

[24:15] did. I just But you can go ahead, please.

[24:17] » George Lobby and the publisher of the North Cloud Bulletin newspaper.

[24:20] » Thank you. Thank you, Joe. >> Good morning, Nancy.

[24:24] » Good morning. [clears throat] Nancy Nelson, settle in

[24:27] Nebraska. I just wanted to take this time. Um

[24:31] I'm just the spokesman for the con um our citizens group because it's Monday

[24:36] and it's at 10 o'clock. We are missing some

[24:40] that are going to be able to read our statements. So I just we have a packet

[24:44] that I want to hand out and all of our statements to you and I'd like to be

[24:48] able to do that at this time. Um, we appreciate the time that you guys have

[24:53] taken and that Judy has taken. Um, this can just be used as a tool.

[24:59] » Okay. >> Thank you.

[25:00] » You bet.

[25:14] » Anyone else at this time?

[25:34] Good morning, sir. I didn't mean to. >> Good morning. That's okay. David Fleece,

[25:38] Southerntherland, Nebraska. >> Morning, David.

[25:40] » Um, I'm glad you guys are all here this

[25:44] morning and this is open to the public. What little research I've done about

[25:49] data centers is that they, you know, about the com effects they have on the

[25:54] communities. Um, there's pros and cons. Um,

[26:01] but the one thing that I've seen from all articles I've read is that you

[26:08] cannot have a strong enough community agreement

[26:14] to govern these data centers. Some communities have strong community

[26:20] agreements, some do not. and everything I've read,

[26:28] you need to make it as strong as you can. That is up to you, five

[26:32] individuals. And we are asking you if you consider to

[26:37] let a data center come in Lincoln County that you guys do everything you can to

[26:43] make it as strong agreement as you can to benefit every person in Lincoln

[26:49] County. Now, you know, I haven't read through

[26:53] all of this, but I think with the people here and what you're

[26:59] going to hear today is that you can do better than this.

[27:03] Still go back to the drawing board, take as much time as you need. One of the

[27:09] suggestions that I've read is that you can get copies of community agreements

[27:14] from other cities that have strong agreements and model year agreement

[27:19] after that. Some of them local school districts get an annual payment of over

[27:24] a million dollars. These guys got unimaginable money.

[27:29] So, we're asking you if this goes through, you make sure that this is as

[27:35] strong of an agreement as you can possibly get for all of us. Thank you.

[27:40] » Thank you, David. >> Mr. Chairman, um, with regard to public

[27:46] comment, and I know that there's probably a lot of people that are here

[27:49] that are wanting to speak specifically to data centers and our regulations. Um,

[27:54] but if we want that to be part of the official record as evidence, we should

[27:58] probably have that during the public hearing so that it can be included in

[28:01] the body of evidence that we consider um and not during the public comment

[28:07] time. >> Just throwing that out there. I mean,

[28:09] I'm not not preventing anybody from coming up. they want to talk about those

[28:13] regulations now, by all means, but if they want their comments included as

[28:16] part of the record and the evidence that we consider, um, the public hearing is

[28:22] probably better for that. >> Understood.

[28:24] » Thank you for pointing that out, Chris. I agree [clears throat] that if there's

[28:28] any more directly addressing um the public hearing portion, it would be best

[28:35] for us to hear that during the public hearing.

[28:41] Okay, thank you. Uh, anyone else at this time?

[28:46] No one. We're going to move on then. Uh, we're going to move to item four

[28:52] then. Um, [clears throat] claims and treasures receipts is first

[28:57] up. >> Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we

[29:00] approve of claims and treasurers receipts with the ability to address

[29:06] anything at a later time if we have a question.

[29:10] » Second. We have a motion and a second. Are there questions on said claims or

[29:16] treasures receipts?

[29:21] » Roll call, please. Wers. >> Hi.

[29:24] » Hi >> Woodruff.

[29:25] » Hi >> Bruns.

[29:26] » Hi >> Williams.

[29:27] » Hi.

[29:35] » Next up we have an authorization for the chair to sign proposals of Kidwell for

[29:39] the courthouse department roads detention center and noxious speed

[29:43] department for security camera upgrades.

[29:48] We have four different contracts here and I think we've all been apprised that

[29:54] this is a compliance requirement um that impacts

[30:02] everything from grants to >> federal funding.

[30:06] » Federal funding. So they've been they were in your packet.

[30:10] Does anyone have questions on these individually?

[30:14] I can read in see for the information

[30:22] specific information. I believe the first one is

[30:27] looking for the contract page. This one is for the courthouse itself.

[30:34] The cost is going to be 132,845.

[30:41] Second up is the uh Department of Roads facility

[30:46] 62,295.

[30:54] Third is the jail portion that is impacted by these

[31:00] these cameras 18,185.

[31:05] And finally,

[31:09] the noxious weed department. And I assume also that's going to impact the

[31:13] emergency manager building. $42,785 >> and the dive team building.

[31:19] » And the dive team. Well, thank you for that,

[31:25] » Chair. >> Yes, sir.

[31:27] I would move that we authorize your signature and other appropriate

[31:30] signatures. Proposals with Kidwell for the

[31:33] courthouse department roads detention center and anoxious speed department for

[31:38] security camera. >> Second motion second. Do we have

[31:43] questions, comments?

[31:48] Hearing none. >> Roll call, please.

[31:51] » Woodruff. >> Hi.

[31:52] » Fuller. >> Hi.

[31:53] » Bruns. >> Hi.

[31:54] » Hi. >> Wings. All right.

[32:54] Okay, thank you.

[33:06] It is now 9:22. At this time, we will recess as the

[33:10] board of commissioners and convene as the Lincoln County Board of

[33:13] Equalization. Once again, abiding by the open being

[33:17] exact uh copy of the five-page directive here at the end of the table and at the

[33:22] podium for your review. First item under the board of

[33:27] equalization would be to approve our meeting minutes held August 24th of

[33:32] 2026. >> Chair, I would move that we approve

[33:34] those minutes regarding the Lincoln County Board of Equalization meeting

[33:38] held on August 24, 2026. >> Second. We have a motion and a second.

[33:44] Roll call, please. >> Woodruff,

[33:46] » I. >> Wer.

[33:48] » I. >> Bruns.

[33:49] » Abstain. >> Williams.

[33:50] » I. Second is the public comment period for

[33:54] board of equalization topics. If anybody if anyone is here that would like to

[33:58] speak to board of equalization issues, this is your opportunity.

[34:05] See no one coming forth for board of equalization business.

[34:09] We'll move on to certificates correction refunds spend by the county assessor.

[34:15] Julie indicates she has none for us this morning. So this will be a very brief

[34:19] session for the board of equalization. So at 9:23 we shall adjourn as a Lincoln

[34:27] County Board of Equalization and reconvene as a Lincoln County Board of

[34:30] Commissioners. Our next item will be at 9:30.

[36:47] That was caught on the back of this.

[39:07] » [snorts]

[40:39] [clears throat]

[40:42] » It >> is now 9:30. Item six [clears throat]

[40:47] is discuss and consider action on an application by Royal Ramos

[40:52] for Ramos administrative subdivision located in a TA1

[40:57] transitional agricultural district on property described as part of lot 3

[41:03] section 20 township 12 north range 26 west of the 6pm Lincoln County Nebraska.

[41:08] Good morning Judy. Morning. Judy Clark, um, county planning and zoning

[41:14] administrator. It's probably going to be the easiest one you have for me today.

[41:18] So, um, what you see in front of you is a copy of the review comments. Um,

[41:22] attached to that. It's a couple of location maps of where this, um,

[41:27] subdivision is located and a, uh, preliminary and final plat. Um, the

[41:34] subdivision is creating a 3.28 acre lot. The applicant is proposing to build a

[41:40] new residential dwelling on the lot. Planning staff has no objection to the

[41:44] subdivision. The subdivision is in conformance with the Lincoln County

[41:47] comprehensive plan zoning regulations and the subdivision regulations. Full

[41:52] disclosure, this sub this lot exists. Um, couple years

[41:59] ago, an attorney just made a meats and bounds description and it was filed at

[42:05] the courthouse. without me knowing about it. So, that

[42:10] does happen periodically. Um, it was caught that it was an illegal

[42:15] subdivision when the gentleman that is wanting to buy build a house on it um

[42:20] came in and asked for a permit to do so. So, um I told him that lot was not a

[42:26] legal lot even though he purchased it in a transaction.

[42:30] Um and I had him go through the subdivision process.

[42:35] So, just so you know, >> this is is this off Highway 30?

[42:38] » Yes. >> Okay. And it is rural. I mean,

[42:42] » transitional egg and with the 3.28, they did meet the regulations for the

[42:47] requirement for the over three acres um when they did that, but that does happen

[42:52] every once in a while. >> Question. Is it just east of Hershey?

[42:58] » Brady. >> Oh, Brady. Because it's a little map I

[43:01] could not see. Sorry, I did not label it well, but it is Brady.

[43:05] » So, the question I would have is uh no problem with uh right away on the drive

[43:12] coming off of with the state off of Highway 30.

[43:15] » Um I'm not sure if they have talked to the state about that. I did send them

[43:19] there. I told them also um to talk with Jason just in case there were some

[43:25] issues there, but it should be a state rightaway permit.

[43:29] And I believe there's already an access there. It just needs to be widened a

[43:33] little bit. >> When was the purchase of the lot?

[43:37] » Um I believe it was back in 2021

[43:44] when they did that. I know you're you're looking kind of

[43:49] puzzled. It does happen. Sometimes attorneys have the ability to write

[43:54] legal descriptions. Um Tyler can tell you that sometimes attorneys or

[43:59] reitterers won't check and make sure they're meeting the regulations. And so

[44:04] it does get filed at the courthouse. And then sometimes I'll catch it, sometimes

[44:09] the registers of deeds office will catch it, sometimes the assessor's office will

[44:13] catch it. I'm not sure why this one did not get caught at the time, but it

[44:18] didn't. And so we caught it now and we're cleaning up a mess.

[44:22] » Yeah. and and it's not necessarily pertaining to what we're considering

[44:27] here today, but I'm probably going to have some questions on that workflow

[44:31] » and finding out ensuring that all uh parties, all departments are are

[44:37] speaking to each other and that you know things are getting assessed

[44:41] appropriately, people are paying the appropriate taxes.

[44:45] Um so that'll be a discussion for after the meeting. Thanks Judy.

[44:50] » I agree. Thanks, Judy, for bringing this to our attention and catching it. Uh,

[44:54] and that was going to be where I went, Commissioner Bruns, was um putting

[45:00] safeguards in place to prevent it from happening. Like you said, it doesn't

[45:03] happen very often, but it does happen. So,

[45:05] » yeah, it it's a little tough to have the registered deeds, the assessor, and

[45:09] myself know each other's jobs. I mean, we we focus on our one job, and so it's

[45:13] nobody's fault. It just happen. And it does happen every once in a while, but

[45:17] we usually catch them at some point. Thank you. Mayor Chair, I would move

[45:24] that we approve the Ramos administrative subdivision as described.

[45:31] » Second. >> Have a motion and a second. Any

[45:34] questions, comments? >> Roll call, please.

[45:39] » Woodruff. >> Hi.

[45:41] » Wer. Hi. >> Bruns. Hi.

[45:43] » Hi. >> Williams.

[45:44] » Hi. Thank you, Judy.

[46:08] Those of you don't that don't have an agenda, our next item is at 9:40.

[46:27] What is this supposed to be?

[46:36] » I think this was attached to the last invoice. I don't even know.

[46:41] » Uh, one of the first invoices. I recognize the item.

[46:47] Probably was the front of that. I certainly saw that.

[46:51] » This must be

[47:00] » No, actually, no, that's not it. >> Oh, and I really

[47:03] » I'll have to dig it out. Show it to >> I really don't know what you're talking

[47:06] about. >> Yeah. had your name on it. So I was

[47:08] like, >> "Okay, she asked a question of this."

[47:12] Oh, here it is. That way

[47:39] Maybe Becky knows where it came from. >> It was email.

[47:43] » It was to me. >> Email.

[47:45] » Mhm.

[47:53] [clears throat]

[48:02] Yeah, I've never heard of this company before or had any contact.

[48:08] » I wonder if it's because on some websites I'm still the chair.

[48:15] » Well, that's entirely possible. >> Merry Christmas.

[48:20] » Thank you.

[48:24] » [clears throat]

[48:39] » might also

[48:42] contact. >> Yeah.

[48:47] » Yeah. And you that does generate a lot of that stuff.

[48:53] Can I have this? >> Absolutely.

[48:54] » You should have one in your packet. >> It's all right. I I don't need it.

[48:58] » Is it that one underneath here? The paper

[49:03] » is the one from >> Should have been on top of your stuff

[49:06] for your

[49:10] » There's no guarantee it could be in here.

[49:12] » She can have that one.

[49:16] It's kind of like it was coming out of left field because I didn't I didn't

[49:21] engage the company in it. >> Yeah, me either that I remember.

[49:24] » And I thought well somebody can make heads or tails of this.

[49:29] » I'll take a look at it.

[50:10] Isn't that cool? I've got a picture of Joe on the back.

[50:14] » Never seen him wear a hat before.

[50:21] They've got your picture on the backboard, Joe.

[50:25] » I didn't know you had a hat.

[50:33] » I haven't seen >> it.

[50:42] I'm old [clears throat] school. I hope we always remember.

[50:44] » It is now 9:40. Item seven is to discuss and consider setting Sep

[50:50] September 21st, 2026 at 11:00 a.m. for public hearing to

[50:56] receive comments on the proposed 2026 2027 fiscal year Lincoln County,

[51:01] Nebraska budget. Becky, >> this was the date that uh the auditor or

[51:07] not the auditor, the accountant and I had planned for the public hearing for

[51:10] the board. We have several weeks yet to work on the budget and we should be

[51:14] ready by then. Okay, >> Mr. Chairman, are you ready?

[51:18] » I am. >> I will make a motion that we set

[51:24] September 21st at 2026 at 11:00 a.m. for the public [clears throat] hearing to

[51:29] receive comments on the proposed 2026 2027 fiscal year Lincoln County,

[51:35] Nebraska budget. >> Second. Motion and second. Any

[51:40] questions? Roll call, please. Wer.

[51:44] » Hi. >> Hi.

[51:46] » Runs. >> Hi.

[51:47] » Woodruff. >> Hi.

[51:48] » We hi.

[51:55] » And once again, for those that don't have an agenda in their hand, uh, our

[51:59] next item is 10 a.m. >> while we sign claims.

[52:36] Somebody

[52:46] [snorts]

[52:55] » I got mine in his office

[53:00] first hand.

[53:23] reading for you, sir. Actually, you're a little short on

[53:30] should see me at trial.

[53:34] Papers and ideas.

[54:04] » [clears throat]

[54:43] » Well, I have

[56:21] Exactly.

[56:44] a legitimate charge here.

[56:48] Um

[56:52] these are nice think

[57:02] » I mean assuming that is definitely under the new budget that would be for

[57:08] July and August. So >> yeah I mean that' be at least for

[57:12] August.

[57:15] We might have to do a

[57:24] Three of us already.

[57:32] » That was part of the motion.

[57:38] » I think it's new budget year. >> It's the new budget.

[57:43] » Supposed to have been modified.

[57:48] That's supposed to be

[58:09] » Oh, you have the caveat. So, we can pull it,

[58:12] » right?

[58:17] I don't think so. We don't mention any others.

[58:27] » That's a question for Tyler.

[58:49] I don't think I understand everything I should about that.

[58:57] » I thought we talked about that last >> It was supposedly removed from the

[59:02] budget.

[59:07] during our budget meeting, >> but I don't

[59:11] » Well, they they they said at our budget review that they would

[59:16] » they amended their

[59:28] » over here.

[59:35] So something that we had >> well that that specifically was

[59:41] requested that that be removed because it's part of the perview of

[59:48] » there is no statement

[59:53] » can't

[1:00:03] got attached to something

[1:00:30] else.

[1:00:34] Steve look

[1:00:42] » I can comment hopefully clarify

[1:00:58] » I think it's just form.

[1:01:05] » Sounds like a pretty simple. >> We know where those came from.

[1:01:21] » I'm sure we paid.

[1:01:25] » I'm gonna blame it on Joe. >> I [clears throat] I did it. It was

[1:01:31] probably under my desk.

[1:01:37] » Probably

[1:01:56] minutes.

[1:02:07] Yeah,

[1:02:12] please.

[1:02:22] Let's

[1:02:36] hear.

[1:02:52] Okay.

[1:03:20] » Hello.

[1:04:04] Are you kidding me?

[1:04:15] I'm getting nervous about all my titles.

[1:04:31] challenging for me because there are so many different entities and that's what

[1:04:36] we do. Each each different departments on a different color paper and it really

[1:04:43] helps me keep everything. [clears throat]

[1:05:22] Well, this might have been the week he was on vacation.

[1:05:25] » Okay. All right. >> I bet you it was.

[1:05:27] » Okay. Yeah, when I think he was in Alaska and

[1:05:31] they don't need her. >> All right. All right.

[1:05:35] I read the whole letter. >> People like you don't do vacation, so

[1:05:39] it's hard. >> Okay, I'm with you. Thank you.

[1:05:47] » I do remember because I got a couple of phone calls.

[1:05:51] » Okay.

[1:06:10] I was going to have Booker

[1:06:16] just like how minuscule electricity

[1:06:34] That was part of that renovation. I mean, I said, you know,

[1:06:44] » I think in >> 18

[1:07:01] Well, I don't either. I don't want to be dropped.

[1:07:14] » Yeah, these are all AC cross.

[1:07:40] No, it's fine.

[1:07:45] » Well, that's I know. [snorts] I know.

[1:07:51] » [clears throat]

[1:08:09] » Christ,

[1:08:18] right? >> [clears throat]

[1:08:33] » on the public hearing.

[1:08:53] Thank you.

[1:08:56] » Okay. Five.

[1:09:29] » [clears throat]

[1:09:35] [laughter]

[1:09:39] » But not

[1:09:44] » [clears throat]

[1:10:28] » So the first one must be this guy right here.

[1:10:42] Yeah, I'm sure I got mine out of order. >> It is now 10:00 a.m. It is time for our

[1:10:47] public hearings, three of which we need to conduct this morning.

[1:10:53] [clears throat] Uh Tyler, would you like to lead off

[1:10:56] with some uh guidance for the uh speakers?

[1:11:00] » I would. All right, folks. It's very important we stay on topic for what is

[1:11:04] actually on the agenda today. The only thing on the agenda today are some

[1:11:09] changes to our regulations. There's no project, no rumored project, there's no

[1:11:13] applied for project. There's no project south of Southerntherland we're going to

[1:11:16] talk about today. Here's why. If I were a data center developer and I didn't

[1:11:21] like our regulations, the first thing I would do is go to court and try to get

[1:11:24] them set aside. The best way to do that is going to be through proving a

[1:11:28] violation of the Open Meetings Act. If we get too far off agenda, we violate

[1:11:33] the open meetings act. I don't want the public to be the reason our regulations

[1:11:38] get set aside and we're back down to the one pager. Does everybody understand

[1:11:42] that? Perfect. If you get off topic and start

[1:11:46] talking about a particular project, I will warn you nicely. If I have to do it

[1:11:51] again, I'm probably going to consider asking the chair to have you removed

[1:11:54] from the room so that we do not violate the open meetings act. It's my only

[1:11:58] goal, folks. There will be a time place for any particular project. I assume

[1:12:03] some enterprising young capitalist will be renting torches and pitchforks across

[1:12:07] the street at the time. By all means, come on down then. Today is about

[1:12:11] regulations only. Thank you. All right. First one, first up is uh

[1:12:18] public hearing to discuss and consider action on an amendment to the Lincoln

[1:12:22] County zoning regulations article 5 conditional uses regarding state

[1:12:27] legislative updates to conditional use permit procedures.

[1:12:31] So at 10:01 I shall open this public hearing regarding this topic and invite

[1:12:37] Judy Clark to give us the uh details. [clears throat]

[1:12:42] Good morning. >> Good morning. Judy Clark, Lincoln County

[1:12:46] Planning and Zoning Administrator. So, the first item that we are looking at is

[1:12:51] the conditional use amendments to the conditional use. So, you all received a

[1:12:56] copy of my review comments. Attached to that is the current conditional use

[1:13:01] regulations and then behind that is the draft

[1:13:05] regulations. you will first see a resolution passed by the planning

[1:13:10] commission and then you will see the draft of the conditional uses. So that

[1:13:15] is what was passed at the planning commission level. Now going back to the

[1:13:19] front page of the review comments in 2026 the Nebraska state legislature

[1:13:23] passed LB663 setting standards and processes that local governments are

[1:13:28] required to follow regarding the conditional use permitting. These

[1:13:32] standards require planning commissions and boards of commissioners to hear and

[1:13:36] act on applications under strict timelines. Sometimes referred to as we

[1:13:41] have referred to it before the shot clock limiting the county's ability to

[1:13:45] postpone decisions or in some cases to require certain conditions to adhere to

[1:13:50] legislative mandates and to still be able to have some local control.

[1:13:54] Planning staff is recommending the proposed amendments. Now in that draft

[1:13:58] regulation and I am going to take 100% the blame for this what was presented to

[1:14:03] the planning commission was missing um what I feel is a very important

[1:14:09] portion of the conditional uses um which you will see on that last set of drafts

[1:14:14] with the yellow highlights I am asking

[1:14:19] » suggested edits >> what was that

[1:14:20] » the suggested edits I think >> the suggested edits that's what that

[1:14:24] cover page says suggested edits Um, I am recommending that you add 2, three, 4,

[1:14:30] 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 to the current standards. Those are

[1:14:37] currently in, if you flip back to the original, those are currently in our

[1:14:41] conditional uses. I did not mean to wipe those out. That

[1:14:46] was very unintentional. Not sure how that happened, but my job,

[1:14:51] I'll take the blame for it. So you're by adding that you're not changing anything

[1:14:56] that doesn't already exist. I would just like that added to the draft.

[1:15:02] Okay. So for the record, we have a amendment to the Lincoln County zoning

[1:15:06] regulations uh duly noted with these this amendment

[1:15:11] or reinsertion >> would be the way to say that.

[1:15:15] » So that's part of the public record. Um, we did have some folks um were kind

[1:15:21] enough to sign in early for the various uh hearings if they're interested in

[1:15:26] speaking. Uh, we're going to try to give everyone three minutes. Uh, we're not

[1:15:30] it's not written in stone. If you have a a statement that takes a little longer,

[1:15:34] I understand that. Just try to be as brief as you can and get all your points

[1:15:39] made. Um, so with the luxury of having a couple signin sheets here for this first

[1:15:46] public hearing, um, I have one person who requested to speak, Brandon Keller.

[1:15:54] Mayor,

[1:16:01] » morning everyone. [clears throat] >> Tyler, I don't think I'm going to stray

[1:16:04] here, but if I do, just warn me. Okay, >> I'll just throw you right out of your

[1:16:07] own. >> Okay.

[1:16:10] Uh my name is Brandon Keller and I'm the mayor of North Plat. I I do think that

[1:16:16] particularly sitting in your seats or sitting in my seat from time to time,

[1:16:20] it's I'm going to allow me to state the obvious because that's what I'm good at

[1:16:23] and rules are extremely important. And the following of the rules and the order

[1:16:28] of the rules has a great deal of logic to it, but it's not always obvious when

[1:16:32] you're reading them. So, I just want to applaud you for moving forward with

[1:16:36] considering a set of rules because it is highly important to the future of the

[1:16:40] community and the future of the county and the future of the area. With that

[1:16:43] said, I'm just going to read a few things from Nebraska legislature

[1:16:48] uh the statute 23-114.01, which basically guides um

[1:16:54] county boards and the county planning commission. Just highlighting some

[1:16:58] pieces of it. This particular one is paragraph 5, section B.

[1:17:05] It's about halfway through the paragraph. And it says, "Granting a

[1:17:09] conditional use permit or a special exception by the commission or county

[1:17:12] board shall be based solely on county zoning regulations."

[1:17:17] Again, following the rules. Highly important. Highly important to

[1:17:20] understand that there are rules in place, which is why it's important that

[1:17:24] we have rules. Little bit further at the end of that paragraph, it says, "The

[1:17:28] granting of a conditional use permit or special exception by a commission or

[1:17:32] county board shall not relieve the applicant of any requirement to obtain

[1:17:36] other necessary permits from any federal, state, or local agency.

[1:17:41] Basically, that means is the county or the city cannot preempt federal

[1:17:46] regulations or state regulations. It's obvious to all of us, but not always

[1:17:49] obvious to everyone who's considering these things."

[1:17:53] Moving on to section six. The power to grant conditional uses or

[1:17:58] special exceptions as set forth in subsection five of this section shall be

[1:18:01] the exclusive authority of the commission except that the county board

[1:18:05] of commissioners supervisors may choose to retain for itself the power to grant

[1:18:09] conditional uses or special exceptions for those classifications of uses

[1:18:13] specified in county zoning regulations. long way of saying back to the county

[1:18:19] zoning relations. In your case, in this county, you guys have the approval or

[1:18:23] the non-approval [clears throat] authority. The county board of

[1:18:26] commissioners or supervisors may exercise such power if it is formally

[1:18:30] adopted standards and procedures for granting such conditional uses or

[1:18:33] special exceptions in the manner that is equitable and which will promote the

[1:18:39] public interest. Moving on to section seven. And section

[1:18:44] seven in general describes a process once a a county excuse me a conditional

[1:18:51] use permit or a special application is is presented and in the case that that

[1:18:56] that special permit would be presented to or excuse me application would be

[1:19:00] presented to the planning commission. Planning commission has 30 days to

[1:19:04] consider it. If they find the application is not complete they have 10

[1:19:08] days to send it back. the uh once they receive the information

[1:19:13] back they have another 30 days. After that they have 90 days to act in some

[1:19:19] manner. Then [clears throat] it goes on to

[1:19:23] excuse me [cough] allergy season

[1:19:28] goes on to the county board. County board has essentially the same time

[1:19:32] frames repeated 30 10 30 and then 90 days. This is why rules are so

[1:19:38] important. You remember nothing else that I said today. Remember this one

[1:19:41] piece. If after those long periods of n 30, 10,

[1:19:45] 30, and 90 days, if the board has not granted or denied a conditional use

[1:19:50] permit or specialty exception by the end of such 90-day period, this is referring

[1:19:54] to the to the board's 90-day period, the conditional use permit or special

[1:19:59] exception shall be shall be deemed granted.

[1:20:03] Now, I know that all of you know that, but I'm not sure that all the public

[1:20:06] knows that. And that's why rules are so important.

[1:20:11] I applaud you for considering these rules. Please make them the very best

[1:20:14] that you can. City of North Plat will be considering uh similar sets in the very

[1:20:19] near future. Thank you. >> Thank you, mayor. Uh I I also failed to

[1:20:24] note that just just because you didn't get on the signin sheet, if you're a

[1:20:28] late comer to the meeting, uh you're certainly welcome to speak here at the

[1:20:33] public hearing portion. So uh before we move on and close the public comment

[1:20:38] period regarding this uh article 5 uh portion is anyone else in the room

[1:20:46] that would like to speak to this please come forth.

[1:20:53] No one. All right. Um so at um

[1:21:00] 10:10 we shall close the public hearing or mean not the public hearing or bigger

[1:21:05] pardon the the public speaking portion of the hearing and move on to discussion

[1:21:12] colleagues

[1:21:16] you have questions for Judy on this

[1:21:22] fairly straightforward we have to deal with LB 6663 as the mayor says.

[1:21:27] » And I think it's important to note that this is not the first time we've heard

[1:21:31] this or you know this is we've we've heard this at many of our meetings and

[1:21:36] » uh so not not our first view at this. So if we appear not to have a lot of

[1:21:40] questions uh plus having our homework ahead of time this weekend and stuff and

[1:21:45] reviewing it. So I wanted at least the audience to realize that.

[1:21:49] » Yeah. Very good. >> Mr. chairman, if if there aren't any, if

[1:21:52] you're ready for a motion, I would be glad to make

[1:21:54] » certainly am. >> I would just like real quick to say uh

[1:21:57] thank you to Judy and the uh planning commission for uh making it more robust

[1:22:02] as far as the pre-application process. I think that's going to be uh extremely

[1:22:06] beneficial for the entire county, particularly with contentious projects.

[1:22:12] So, >> okay.

[1:22:15] » As as Joe just spoke to, um Judy asked more questions than my fair share. Uh

[1:22:22] being on the committee along with Commissioner Bruns, I think we've had a

[1:22:26] lot of exposure. Uh I echo what everybody has said. You and the team

[1:22:32] that you've assembled uh all the people from the community that have uh

[1:22:38] contributed in one way or another um has really helped make these better. and uh

[1:22:46] I appreciate all your efforts and your recommendations.

[1:22:53] » Joe, would you like to make that motion? >> Mr. Chairman, I'd move that we adopt

[1:22:56] resolution 2026-27 to approve the amendments to the Lincoln

[1:23:02] County Zoning Regulations, Article 5, Conditional Uses, with the addition of

[1:23:08] sections 5.13 standards for review. Uh sections 2 through 15. Second.

[1:23:16] » We have a motion and a second. Are there questions?

[1:23:22] Judy, you have any questions? >> Thank you.

[1:23:25] » Roll call, please. >> Hugley.

[1:23:29] » Hi. >> Woodruff.

[1:23:30] » Hi. >> Williams.

[1:23:31] » Hi. >> Bruns.

[1:23:32] » Hi. >> Wer.

[1:23:33] » Hi. [snorts]

[1:23:39] » All right. At 10:12, we'll move on to the second public hearing. Sign that

[1:23:44] resolution.

[1:23:48] » Go ahead.

[1:23:51] » Yep. >> Sign it first.

[1:23:57] » You're doing that. I'll read this in. Second public hearing is to discuss and

[1:24:02] consider action on an amendment to the Lincoln County zoning regulations

[1:24:06] section 4.07 07 land use categories matrix to add

[1:24:11] ancillary data center as permitted uses in an A1, TA1, C1,

[1:24:18] I1, and AGV and LCR zoning districts.

[1:24:29] Again, Judy Clark, Lincoln County Planning and Zoning Administrator. Okay.

[1:24:33] So, this item um you saw a very similar item a couple of weeks ago. Um it's the

[1:24:38] land use matrix or the zoning matrix that shows where um items are permitted.

[1:24:45] Um we changed at that meeting at the time when it came to data centers, we

[1:24:49] changed all data centers to conditional use in certain areas. Um with this one,

[1:24:56] we got to looking at the ancillary data centers. Now, ancillary, um, I don't

[1:25:02] like that word. I'd rather have it say accessory, but, um, essentially that's

[1:25:06] what it is is an it's an accessory to the permitted use or to the conditional

[1:25:11] use. So, these would be data centers that probably already currently exist.

[1:25:16] Um, banks have data centers, hospitals have data centers. There's a whole bunch

[1:25:22] of different types of industrial uses or industrial, you know, or commercial uses

[1:25:28] that already have data centers, but they're very small. And so, um, that's

[1:25:33] where we came up with the definition of ancillary. But when we got to looking at

[1:25:37] the, um, matrix, if you lumped it all in with data centers, then they would only

[1:25:42] be conditional uses in certain districts. planning commission felt that

[1:25:47] um these types of data centers should be able to be allowed with the commercial

[1:25:53] or industrial venture that is that it is supporting.

[1:25:57] So it wouldn't be a standalone. You would already either have um a

[1:26:02] commercial building that's running a commercial function out of there um or

[1:26:07] they would apply together. So a lot of our industrial uses are conditional uses

[1:26:12] anyway. they would have to apply for those but that that ancillary data

[1:26:16] center would be permitted along with that commercial use

[1:26:22] » um or otherwise said ancillary >> ancillary there you go

[1:26:27] » however you say it that's why I like accessory works better

[1:26:30] » I agree I agree >> Judy do we currently have an operational

[1:26:34] definition for ancillary [clears throat] data centers in our regulations

[1:26:38] » um no we do not in the current ones in the proposed ones we do But no, not in

[1:26:43] the current regulations. >> Now, I know that we're not considering

[1:26:47] that change yet, but can you just what is the operational definition that has

[1:26:52] been proposed?

[1:26:59] » I will read that to you for the second. Yeah.

[1:27:05] Um, ancillary or micro centers, smaller localized server rooms occupying less

[1:27:13] than 10% of a building's gross floor area or 2,500 square ft, whichever is

[1:27:18] less, permitted as an incillary or however Mr. Wing said it. Um, use to

[1:27:25] primary commercial or office functions that directly support on-site commercial

[1:27:30] or business operations. Ancillary uses or structures secondary and incidental

[1:27:36] to data center use including but not limited to administrative logistical

[1:27:40] fiber optic storage security buildings or structures. They typically consume

[1:27:45] under one megawatt of power. So with that operational definition that we have

[1:27:50] yet to consider, do you think that there's a risk that any kind of an

[1:27:54] organization can game the game so to speak,

[1:27:58] build a huge building and I mean because we have the the square footage limit in

[1:28:02] there now um that we'll be considering and voting on.

[1:28:06] » That was quite a discussion at the planning commission level. Um originally

[1:28:11] it was 25% of this square footage. Um I I don't like numbers. I I love numbers

[1:28:17] actually because I'm a math major, but I don't like numbers in zoning code

[1:28:22] because yes, could I have somebody come in and say, "Oh, well, my building is

[1:28:26] 2,499 square feet." Is is that going to

[1:28:31] happen? I hope not. Could it? Possibly. Um, but that's why we went down to the

[1:28:37] 10% or 2500, whichever is less. And we just

[1:28:42] took that based off of average size of a home.

[1:28:47] you know, 2500 square feet maybe is a pretty large home. 1,200 square feet.

[1:28:52] You could do 1,200 and and a portion of it could be something else. But that's

[1:28:56] kind of where we settled. >> So, for the record, Judy, you're reading

[1:29:00] some of the excerpts from the amendment to the zoning rags as part of our public

[1:29:04] record for the hearing. >> Yes. Okay.

[1:29:10] » Anything else to add with that?

[1:29:17] We'll we'll reserve the right to pester you again, Judy.

[1:29:22] » Okay. So, the public comment period is before us regarding this

[1:29:28] this particular hearing um on section 4.07 land use categories

[1:29:35] matrix. Do we have we don't have anybody that pre-signed, but are there anyone is

[1:29:41] there anyone present that would like to speak to this?

[1:29:46] Certainly want you to have the opportunity.

[1:29:50] Okay, hear none. We'll close the public

[1:29:54] hearing portion and go on to discussion. colleagues,

[1:30:00] questions for Judy or >> I would like to comment that I

[1:30:05] appreciated the planning and zoning meeting being livereamed

[1:30:10] so that we could all listen to that uh discussion. It was a a

[1:30:16] good long meeting, good comment. Uh, I appreciate the input from 25% down to 10

[1:30:25] and or 2500 square f feet, whichever is less. So, just wanted to make that

[1:30:30] comment. Thanks again for your work and to the planning commission to the people

[1:30:34] that spoke. >> Chair, if I may.

[1:30:36] » Yes, sir. >> I would also like to commend our

[1:30:39] planning commission members for the uh work that they have done and the

[1:30:45] products that they have brought to us that uh for us to consider. totally

[1:30:51] agree with that. They've done a lot of hard work, heavy lifting.

[1:30:57] Thank you all.

[1:31:03] I'd entertain a motion. We're ready to move on.

[1:31:11] Mr. Chairman, I'd make a motion that we approve or we adopt resolution 2026-28

[1:31:17] to approve amendments to the Lincoln County Zoning Regulation Section 4.07

[1:31:23] land use categories matrix heading incillary data centers as a permitted

[1:31:29] use in a C-1 A-1

[1:31:34] TA-1 AGV and LCR zoning districts.

[1:31:41] Second. >> We have a motion and a second.

[1:31:47] At 10:20, the public hearing portion is over. The motion is on the floor. A

[1:31:51] second is also in place. Are there any questions

[1:31:55] » for Judy comments?

[1:32:00] Roll call, please. >> Hugley.

[1:32:02] » Hi. >> Bruns.

[1:32:03] » Hi. >> Woodruff.

[1:32:04] » Hi. >> Wer.

[1:32:05] » Hi. >> Williams.

[1:32:06] » Hi. Moving on,

[1:32:10] » here's the resolution.

[1:32:14] » We are now going to discuss and consider action in a public hearing setting on an

[1:32:19] amendment to the Lincoln County Zoning Regulations Section 8.22

[1:32:23] data centers regarding data center regulations

[1:32:27] 10:21. We shall open this portion and we will also begin with Judy Clark.

[1:32:34] Judy >> Judy Clark, Lincoln County Planning and

[1:32:37] Zoning Administrator. Okay. Um, I'm going to try to make this as non-lengthy

[1:32:42] as possible, but I'm going to start out and I know you all know this, but again,

[1:32:48] just for public consumption, I want to kind of go back and do a very, very

[1:32:53] short planning 101. So, um, this book that I have in my

[1:32:58] hand, you guys have all seen it. It's got both

[1:33:02] the comprehensive plan and the zoning regulations that are currently um on

[1:33:08] hand. The comprehensive plan consists of let's see the verbiage oh I don't know

[1:33:14] 200 and some odd pages 235 some odd pages with maps. So the purpose of a

[1:33:20] comprehensive plan you have to have a comprehensive plan in place in order to

[1:33:26] do planning and zoning and to establish regulations. that was done years and

[1:33:30] years ago. 1974, as a matter of fact, was the first um established planning

[1:33:36] commission in Lincoln County. Just in case some of you don't know that, at

[1:33:39] least that's the first documents I can find is 1974.

[1:33:42] So um over time we have adopted new comprehensive plan sometimes updates

[1:33:50] um sometimes we'll update it as uh we do a subdivision we might have to update

[1:33:54] the land use map in the comp plan because that is your establishment that

[1:34:00] is your baseline to create a zoning code. So a couple things I want to point

[1:34:04] out to you. Um on page 45 of the comprehensive plan,

[1:34:11] there is a goals and policies regarding economic development. One of those is

[1:34:18] 5.1. The county recognizes the importance of dynamic economic

[1:34:22] development programs to support entrepreneurship, business retention and

[1:34:27] expansion and industrial recruitment. Another one of these is a public policy

[1:34:34] um that is a economic development goal. Agricultural enterprise from research

[1:34:39] and development to production to processing and market marketing remains

[1:34:43] a vital and growing part of the city and county economy.

[1:34:48] Um, another goal that's in the economic development goal, a diverse economic

[1:34:53] base with strong primary sector employment provides a foundation for

[1:34:57] long-term growth and community development. I just thought that were

[1:35:01] those were really important to point out. Um the other thing in

[1:35:07] the um comprehensive plan is we have a whole section devoted to environmental

[1:35:13] regulations, environmental statistics, environmental goals. Whole entire

[1:35:18] section that talks about the protection of groundwater and air quality. Um

[1:35:23] protection of soils, the sand hills region, um migratory bird population.

[1:35:29] um committed Lincoln County is committed to environmental stewardship,

[1:35:34] conservation, and natural resources. Another thing in that document that I

[1:35:39] thought was really important to point out, so along with your comprehensive

[1:35:43] plan, which is your base, your starting point, then you establish zoning

[1:35:48] regulations. Now, I know we're here to talk today about one particular section

[1:35:52] of that zoning code, but again, there's another document and this document is

[1:35:58] somewhere around 194 pages and that is zoning.

[1:36:05] So, when we're looking at this section, this 8.22,

[1:36:09] we have to also understand that that's just a special portion of that. there

[1:36:14] are other things that would pertain to a data center if we ever got one um that

[1:36:22] it would have to follow. We do have a section in the zoning code on

[1:36:31] um the different soil districts um page 118 119 121 different soil districts. So

[1:36:38] if a potential project would end up in a different soil district they not only

[1:36:41] would have to meet the standards of data um which is 8.22.

[1:36:48] They would also have to meet those regulations that are in that section. Um

[1:36:52] article five which is the conditional uses that you just um made a resolution

[1:36:57] to pass. Any potential project would also have to follow those regulations

[1:37:03] which start on page 126. It'll be different now since we did the addition.

[1:37:07] There's also a section um 8.10 10 which is performance standards for industrial

[1:37:12] uses. Um data centers are considered industrial uses. So there are additional

[1:37:17] performance standards that they would have to take into consideration. And

[1:37:21] then the final one and I probably missed a couple in there because I was just

[1:37:25] doing this here maybe half an hour ago. Um but anyway the um other portion that

[1:37:31] they have to meet too is article 11 which is your enforcement and

[1:37:34] administration of the conditional use of the land use all of those things. So all

[1:37:40] of those things go into one application. So just because you're

[1:37:45] writing a regulation for one particular section, whether it's wind, solar,

[1:37:51] um data centers, whatever it is, um it also has a lot of other things that has

[1:37:59] to be in conformance with also. So we just want to keep that in mind when

[1:38:03] we're drafting these regulations. Okay. So now to the task at hand I

[1:38:11] provided you you should all have a copy of the review comments on the front

[1:38:15] page. Then you have a copy of the current regulations which is the one

[1:38:19] pager and then you have a copy of the draft

[1:38:23] regulations from the planning commission.

[1:38:27] And then you have a copy of the yellow highlights. I'm not going to take 100%

[1:38:34] credit for that. I did review it with the um county attorney and we

[1:38:40] collaborated on some of it and uh we came up with the so I'm throwing him

[1:38:45] under the bus also along with me with the drafted portion for some additions

[1:38:49] that um those came from the rest of what you have in there which

[1:38:57] is the draft regulations that the community be provided to the planning

[1:39:02] commission at that meeting. They're documents like 42 pages long.

[1:39:07] Okay. So, I'm not going [clears throat] to go

[1:39:11] through all of what I have on the review comments. Um, but I am going to say that

[1:39:16] planning commission has been researching this for quite a while prior to planning

[1:39:19] commission researching this. Um, Michaela and I sat on a land use

[1:39:24] committee board that talked about data center regulations. I've been to

[1:39:27] numerous conferences, webinars, and for the last couple years, I'm been talking

[1:39:33] about data centers across the state forever. Um, but [clears throat] we

[1:39:39] started really looking in depth at updating ours because and I want to make

[1:39:44] everybody understand we do have the one pager that exists right now that along

[1:39:48] with our comprehensive plan, our conditional use regulations.

[1:39:53] We can go ahead and use that and regulate it. I

[1:39:58] would feel better with better regulations, which is what we are

[1:40:02] proposing. I mean, could we still do it the old way? Absolutely. Can we do it

[1:40:07] better this way? Absolutely. So, um I don't want anybody to think

[1:40:13] we're standing right now with nothing because we do have things in place.

[1:40:18] After a number of subcommittee meetings, extensive research, the subcommittee

[1:40:22] brought the first set of regulations to the full planning commission on July

[1:40:25] 14th. Um at that planning commission we discussed the regulations um entirely

[1:40:32] item by item um with community members in attendance. After that minor changes

[1:40:37] were made. August 11th planning commission held a public hearing

[1:40:41] recommended to approve the data center regulations with some changes and that

[1:40:46] again is handed out to you. At the public hearing, the planning commission

[1:40:50] heard testimony and was presented with an approximately 40 42page rewrite of

[1:40:55] the regulations. Um, planning staff and the Lincoln

[1:40:58] County Deputy Attorney, we have reviewed that document, found a few portions of

[1:41:03] the document that we could possibly add to the um, regulations.

[1:41:09] And [sighs] anyway, um

[1:41:13] the one thing that I do want to say about the 42page document,

[1:41:19] there is quite a bit of of useful information in there. Um,

[1:41:27] the thing with this 42page document that you guys all have a copy of, I think it

[1:41:33] would be better served as a policy review document or a data center

[1:41:42] review document for staff to have, for you guys to have as like a aside from

[1:41:48] the zoning regulations, have this document at the side. So when you do get

[1:41:53] a data center, you can go through this and say, "Oh, in the environmental

[1:41:57] review, maybe we need to look at this or maybe we have that in there, but they

[1:42:01] could have added this." I think it could be turned into a very usable document,

[1:42:07] but not something that needs to be in the regulations. And why I say that is

[1:42:11] because if you look at this, it is so detailed. So detailed. And when it comes

[1:42:17] to regulations, a lot of times less is more.

[1:42:20] Because when you have so many details, you're either going to leave something

[1:42:25] out or you're going to have a project that's going to hit every single one of

[1:42:30] those regulations. And then where is your ability to make a choice?

[1:42:37] Where is your ability to make a choice? Um, one of the things I want to point

[1:42:42] out in their um, proposed regulations is they have a section here where they

[1:42:48] talked about all the people that should be involved in the community benefits

[1:42:52] agreement, all the stakeholders that should be

[1:42:55] involved there. It's great. Good list. But they have Twin Plat NRD. What about

[1:43:02] Middle Republic?

[1:43:08] There's things like that in this document. But again, there are a few

[1:43:11] things in there that we did find in those yellow highlights um that we can

[1:43:17] probably reasonably insert insert. So Judy, uh, since it's pertinent to the

[1:43:22] procedure and a lot of folks are going to want to speak to this individually,

[1:43:28] um, is it should it be part of the record that we recognize that this

[1:43:33] document's going to be submitted and kept and shared with planning comm or

[1:43:39] planning commission? >> Um, planning commission has a copy of

[1:43:42] it. >> I know that. I know they do.

[1:43:44] Yeah. Um, I think what we could do with it, I don't think we want to keep it in

[1:43:50] that form. I think we would want to make it like a public policy review. It'd

[1:43:55] have to be massaged a little bit, but I think we could use it as something as a

[1:43:59] really good resource to use when you are reviewing an application if it does come

[1:44:02] forward. >> Since you're on that topic, I believe I

[1:44:05] have a a document here that Mr. Mora submitted that kind of an abbreviated

[1:44:10] portion or version of that is it >> um I don't know I think that was kind of

[1:44:16] » specifically line paragraph by paragraph to know

[1:44:20] » yeah they have some questions in there it's it's not necessarily

[1:44:23] » speak to that but >> um so one final question while you're

[1:44:28] presenting the so in uh in addition I need to uh point out that part of the uh

[1:44:34] uh process we do have a copy of the amendment as proposed by planning and

[1:44:38] zoning. So that'll be sub submitted into the record. Correct.

[1:44:42] » Anything else? >> You do have a copy of that and you also

[1:44:45] have a copy of the one with some suggested edits that um came from the

[1:44:51] community submitted packet that the attorney and I took a look at and tried

[1:44:56] to pull a few things out of there that um would mesh with the regulations. And

[1:45:03] I'm I'm getting a little bit ahead of the process here, but it comes to mind

[1:45:08] that as we move forward here and we give consideration to these inputs and

[1:45:13] they're good, as you say, there's a lot of good input.

[1:45:16] um out of difference for the planning commission. I guess my goal today would

[1:45:21] be to strengthen in other words adopt these more robust

[1:45:26] proposals that planning brought us but at the same time send this back with

[1:45:31] these uh proposals that have been shared with the community uh citizen committee

[1:45:39] to further adjust the document if if

[1:45:44] needed. My recommendation would be to take the one that's the yellow

[1:45:48] highlighted um which is the second draft because it

[1:45:52] doesn't change the intent of what planning commission had intended and it

[1:45:57] does also encompass some of the additional things that the community

[1:46:03] requested. Um and Tyler, please correct me if I'm

[1:46:06] wrong, but but my I guess it's my recommendation. I guess I can have my

[1:46:11] own opinion, right? [laughter] But anyway, um what I what my recommendation

[1:46:17] would be is to adopt that one with the yellow highlights

[1:46:21] and that way you have a stronger base. And if you want the planning commission

[1:46:28] to continue to work on it, that is entirely up to you. We can go with what

[1:46:33] you say or you can send it back and tell planning commission you want more

[1:46:37] research, more input to see what they think.

[1:46:40] » Sure. >> Yes, sir. ask you your question.

[1:46:43] » Absolutely. >> Uh that is excuse me that's the draft

[1:46:46] regulations suggested edits. >> Yes.

[1:46:48] » Dated August 27 20 26. >> Yes.

[1:46:52] » Thank you.

[1:46:57] » Other question? Well, Judy, I think we're on the same page. I I would like

[1:47:01] to see us in some form get a more robust document in place, but not close the

[1:47:06] door. I would like to out of respect for the planning and zoning committee and

[1:47:10] what they all the work they put into this to any final tweak or or adjustment

[1:47:16] that they didn't have time to digest at your last hearing. So, keeping that in

[1:47:21] mind, I guess that's why I'm leaning towards uh moving forward with something

[1:47:26] today, but

[1:47:29] uh subsequently moving it back to those folks so that you guys can go back over

[1:47:34] it and pour over it and make sure that we didn't miss anything.

[1:47:37] » That's the the joy the the luxury that we have with these types of documents is

[1:47:42] they are living breathing documents can always be strengthened. So, okay, Judy,

[1:47:48] you don't have anything else right now? >> I think I covered it all.

[1:47:52] » Okay. Well, you raise your hand. Uh, folks, I think we have roughly 18 people

[1:48:00] that would like to speak on this particular one. So, the public hearing

[1:48:03] portion is certainly here at uh 10:37.

[1:48:09] Um, and again, if someone came in late and didn't get on the sheet, that does

[1:48:14] not preclude you from speaking. Please understand that it was just a courtesy.

[1:48:18] We appreciate people letting us know. Uh, so thank you for that. But if if

[1:48:23] there's somebody in the audience that did not get on the sheet, we'll

[1:48:26] certainly give you uh the opportunity. Uh, so I'll give you uh who's up and

[1:48:31] who's next so we can kind of keep things rolling. Uh, we're going to shoot for

[1:48:34] roughly a threeminut uh timeline if we could. Uh, first would be Thomas Davis,

[1:48:41] the first sneige. Uh, Rachel Nelson will be right behind that. And then David

[1:48:47] Fleece. >> Good morning.

[1:48:50] » Good morning. My name is Thomas Davis. I live here in North Plat, Nebraska. I'd

[1:48:53] like to talk about 8.22.02. I urge the board to strengthen the

[1:48:58] definitions of section 8.22.02 O2 from cooling system through behind meter

[1:49:04] generation so that the final regulations cannot be avoided through technical

[1:49:09] definitions or project segmentation. Most of these definitions are

[1:49:13] substantially the same in the community and county drafts. That is a good

[1:49:17] starting point but there are important opportunities to prove them for

[1:49:22] ancillary data center. The committee draft allows a facility to occupy less

[1:49:26] than 25% of a building while the county draft uses the narrower standard of less

[1:49:31] than 10% or 2500 square ft whichever is less. I recommend retaining the narrower

[1:49:37] threshold while adding language making it clear that ancillary status cannot be

[1:49:41] used to avoid data center requirements when the use is functionally a data

[1:49:46] center. The definitions of campus, collocation, edge, hypers scale,

[1:49:53] on-site, elliptical demand, infant structure, and sensitive receptors

[1:49:58] generally are similar. These should be retained, but the county should ensure

[1:50:02] that thresholds and terms used elsewhere in this ordinance are applied

[1:50:05] consistently. Most importantly, behind meter

[1:50:08] generation must be remain broadly defined. Both drafts properly include

[1:50:13] diesel, natural gas, fuel cells, batteries, renewable systems, nuclear

[1:50:18] systems, and combinations of these. The stronger community approach is then to

[1:50:23] require meaningful review of those systems, including utility protection

[1:50:27] and environmental analysis. Please have the council refine these definitions

[1:50:32] that they are clear, technology neutral, difficult to circumvent, and coordinated

[1:50:36] with the operative standards elsewhere in 8.22.

[1:50:40] Both documents are drafts. Please make the final definition stronger at either

[1:50:44] draft when necessary. Thank you. >> Thank you, Thomas.

[1:50:49] Again, Rachel Nelson is up next and then David Fleece.

[1:50:53] Good morning. >> Good morning, guys. My name is Rachel

[1:50:56] Nelson. I live here in North Plat. I'm here today to talk about 8.2203.

[1:51:02] I think it's fairly obvious we have a large majority of the country that does

[1:51:05] not county probably country as well that does not want a data data center in our

[1:51:11] area. That being said, I urge the board to strengthen section 8.22.03

[1:51:17] by incorporating the community regulations measurable protections for

[1:51:20] the site design, natural resources, water, and wastewater, but with

[1:51:24] technical and legal refinement where necessary. The county draft contains

[1:51:29] important protections. It requires compatibility with surrounding

[1:51:33] properties, attention to sensitive receptors, adequate access, water,

[1:51:38] wastewater capacity, and annual sampling. But in several places, the

[1:51:43] community draft turns general goals into actual standards. For example, the

[1:51:47] county simply says to minimize impacts on natural resources. The community

[1:51:53] vision requires measurable environmental standards and connects them to ongoing

[1:51:57] monitoring. It also changes campus design provisions from what it merely

[1:52:01] encouraged into requirements. Most importantly, the community version

[1:52:05] substantially strengthens water oversight. Instead of annual sampling

[1:52:09] alone, it requires monitoring of water intake, discharge volumes, temperatures,

[1:52:14] and quality, regular reporting, and independent third-party verification.

[1:52:19] Please retain that framework, but have council and qualified water

[1:52:24] professionals refine the details. Not every water

[1:52:28] quality parameter necessarily requires continuous measurement and numerical

[1:52:33] discharge limit should be supported by applicable law. Engineering standards,

[1:52:38] permits and site conditions. The final ordinance should clearly establish what

[1:52:43] gets measured, how often, who verifies it, who receives results, and what

[1:52:48] happens when the standards exceeded or not met.

[1:52:52] Both documents are drafts. Please combine the county's framework with the

[1:52:55] community versions. measurable standards and independent verification. The goal

[1:53:00] should not simply be requiring to an applicant to promise that natural

[1:53:04] resources will be protected. The county should have objective information

[1:53:08] allowing it to determine whether those protections are actually being met.

[1:53:14] Regulations might stop this project as you have mentioned, but the fact is if

[1:53:18] the regulations are not good enough to stop anything, that's a reason. I beg

[1:53:22] you guys to please look at this. Thank you so much for your time. Again,

[1:53:28] a reminder, there is no this project.

[1:53:34] » All it takes is one word to get stuff set aside.

[1:53:39] [clears throat] >> David Fleece. Good morning, sir. Again,

[1:53:42] good morning. >> I'm David Fleece, Southerntherland,

[1:53:44] Nebraska. I respectfully urge the board to substantially strengthen section 8228

[1:53:50] governing behind meter electrical generation. The county draft says

[1:53:55] dedicated generation may be required to offset a data center's electrical

[1:54:00] demand, but it does not establish when that requirement applies. More

[1:54:05] importantly, its utility verification is not required until prior to completion

[1:54:11] of construction. That information belongs in front of you

[1:54:17] before approval, not prior to construction completion.

[1:54:22] The community draft provides the stronger framework

[1:54:28] before the planning commission approval. It requires independent professional

[1:54:32] review of transmission and substation capacity, reliability, infrastructure

[1:54:37] requirements, and potential impacts associated with the systems serving the

[1:54:42] facility. Please retain that approach, but refine it with council and the

[1:54:48] serving utility. The county should require Applicants to

[1:54:53] disclose projected electrical demand, generation capacity, energy storage,

[1:54:58] substations, transmission connections, fuel infrastructure, required utility

[1:55:04] upgrades, cost responsibility, and applicable utility conditions.

[1:55:11] And please prevent project segmentation. Generation, storage, substations, fuel

[1:55:18] systems, and other enabling infrastructure serving the data center

[1:55:22] should not escape disclosure simply because they are separately owned,

[1:55:28] located on adjacent parcel, separately permitted or constructed later.

[1:55:35] At the same time, the ordinance should respect decisions legally belonging to

[1:55:40] utilities and other regulators. Lincoln County does not need to operate the

[1:55:45] electrical g grid to make sound land use decisions. It needs reliable information

[1:55:52] about the whole project it is being asked to approve. If that so happens,

[1:55:57] please use the community draft as the foundation and have council create clear

[1:56:03] objective pre-approval requirements within the county's lawful authority.

[1:56:10] Also, I would like to state that I agree with Chairman Williams's

[1:56:15] opinion that that the changes are adopted to further strengthen this and

[1:56:22] then send it back for review to see if we can strengthen it even farther. I do

[1:56:28] appreciate that and I want to thank you guys for your time and your efforts.

[1:56:33] » Thank you, David. I appreciate that. Okay. So, Nancy Nelson is was next here

[1:56:38] in the list and then Susan Cipher after that.

[1:56:44] » You didn't give me an on deck. >> On deck on quue.

[1:56:50] » Sorry. [laughter] >> You want to go to the bottom of the

[1:56:53] list? [cough and clears throat]

[1:56:57] » Nancy Nelson, settle in Nebraska. I'm going to speak on 8.22.10

[1:57:02] 10 noise standards. I urge the board to adopt strong measurable noise standards

[1:57:08] in section 8.22.10.

[1:57:14] The com the county draft requires data centers to implement noise mitigation

[1:57:18] measures to minimize impacts on nearby residential areas. That is an important

[1:57:23] goal, but minimize is not a measurable compliance standard. How does an

[1:57:28] applicant prove compliance? How does a neighbor demonstrate violations and what

[1:57:34] objective standards does the zoning administration enforce? The community

[1:57:39] draft provides a stronger framework because it establishes numerical noise

[1:57:43] limits, measurement locations, nighttime protections, testing procedures, and

[1:57:49] specific consideration of total and low frequency noise. Please retain those

[1:57:55] concepts, but do not adopt technical numbers simply because they appear more

[1:58:01] protective. Before a final adoption, have a

[1:58:04] qualified independent acoustic professional evaluate the proposed decel

[1:58:09] limits, frequency standard, measurement locations, testing duration, background

[1:58:15] noise, weather conditions, instrumentation,

[1:58:19] and treatment of emergency generators. Then make the ordinance ask six

[1:58:25] questions clearly. What gets measured? Where, when, by whom? What constitutes a

[1:58:32] violation? And what happens when the facility exceeds the limits? The final

[1:58:38] regulations to protect sensitive receptors address both ordinary and low

[1:58:44] frequency and tone or tonal noise require pre-operational analysis

[1:58:50] postoperational verification and establish continuing compliance. Any

[1:58:56] exception except exception for genuine emergencies or required generation

[1:59:03] testing should also be narrowly defined as it does not become a loophole for

[1:59:09] routine operation. Please use the community draft as a

[1:59:13] foundation. Replace the counties counties subjective standards with

[1:59:18] objective limits and have qualified experts establish a technical record

[1:59:24] supporting those limits. Noise protection should be measured before

[1:59:28] approval enforceful after operation begins. And I would also like to thank

[1:59:34] you Mr. Williams. This is a leaving living living and breathing document.

[1:59:37] We've heard that since June. So, I would like something approved today more than

[1:59:43] the one and then it goes back. Um, and thank you, Judy. I liked the explanation

[1:59:48] this um at the beginning of all the other things that

[1:59:53] the environmental and I'm going to go review those and I thank you very much

[1:59:57] for that ex explanation and for all the hard work. Just remember you have

[2:00:02] concerned citizens out here that have been working just as hard. Thank you.

[2:00:07] » Thank you, Na Nancy. Uh Susan Cipher is up next and then Nancy Fleece.

[2:00:17] » Hello Susan Cipher, Southern Nebraska. >> Morning.

[2:00:21] » Behind me generation is not simply an electrical issue. It is also a land use,

[2:00:26] environmental and emergency response issue. This is why I urge the board to

[2:00:31] incorporate the stronger protections from the community version of section

[2:00:36] 822.08. 8. Unlike the county draft, the commit

[2:00:40] committee version requires analysis of fuel storage and spill containment,

[2:00:46] battery chemistry and hazards, air emissions, noise, vibration, cooling

[2:00:52] water discharge, decommissioning, and environmental regulations.

[2:00:58] It also requires coordination with emergency management, fire departments,

[2:01:02] and emergency medical services, including hazard disclosure, specialized

[2:01:08] training, emergency access, shutdown procedures, and communication protocols.

[2:01:15] Those concepts should remain, but please have counsel and qualified professionals

[2:01:21] refine the language. Instead of requiring a generation have absolutely

[2:01:26] no negative impact, establish measurable performance standards and compliance

[2:01:32] requirements, require evidence of a um applicable f federal, state, and

[2:01:38] environmental permits and approvals without unnecessary duplicating another

[2:01:44] agency's regulatory authority. Energy storage requirements should identify

[2:01:51] technology, chemistry, capacity, hazardous materials, failure modes,

[2:01:57] monitoring, maintenance, emergency response, and decommissioning.

[2:02:02] The community draft also correctly connects backup power systems in section

[2:02:08] 822.08 rather than treating backup generators

[2:02:12] as unrelated equipment. That principle is critical. Whether electricity comes

[2:02:18] from the grid, natural gas turbines, gas turbines, diesel generation, batteries,

[2:02:25] fuel cells, and other technology, the county should understand the

[2:02:30] infrastructure and impacts before improving the land use. Please adopt the

[2:02:35] community framework refined in the council and technical experts and make

[2:02:41] 822.08 comprehensive.

[2:02:44] measurable, enforcable, technologically neutral. Thank you.

[2:02:50] » Thank you very much.

[2:02:55] Uh, let's see if I didn't lose my place. Nancy Nancy Fleece. Good morning. And

[2:03:02] then we have Michelle Bogs. >> Good morning. Nancy Fleece. I live south

[2:03:06] of Southerntherland where this is proposing to be built.

[2:03:10] » No, ma'am. [clears throat] >> No.

[2:03:11] » No. I was very clear about that. We are not here to talk about a project. Oh,

[2:03:15] sorry. Regulations. >> Can I talk about feelings?

[2:03:19] » Are they good ones? >> No, not necessarily.

[2:03:23] » They're very sad feelings. What I do ask is going to concern the minimum site rec

[2:03:28] requirements. I urge the board to substantially strengthen section 82207

[2:03:34] while making sure its acreage and setback requirements can be supported by

[2:03:38] evidence. The difference between these drafts is very significant.

[2:03:43] The county requires only 10 acres with ordinarily I1 industrial setbacks of 30

[2:03:49] feet in front, 25 ft in the rear, and just 10 feet on the side. The community

[2:03:55] draft requires 120 acres and 500 foot setbacks, requires future expansions to

[2:04:01] maintain those setbacks, and allows the county to require greater separation

[2:04:06] based on proximity to residences, agriculture, schools, and other

[2:04:10] sensitive receptors. The community approach provides substantially greater

[2:04:15] protection. But I am not asking you to adopt numbers simply because they are

[2:04:19] larger. I am asking you to establish meaningful setbacks reported by the

[2:04:25] impacts the county is trying to prevent. Noise, lighting, lighting, visual

[2:04:30] impacts, mechanical equipment, generation facilities, emergency risk,

[2:04:35] and conflicts with neighboring land uses. Please ask your planning staff,

[2:04:40] technical experts, and county attorney what evidence supports 10 feet, 500 ft,

[2:04:45] or some other distance. Consider whether ex sensitive receptors and

[2:04:50] non-participating residences require greater separation than ordinary

[2:04:55] industrial property lines and whether some setbacks should be measured from

[2:04:59] buildings, generators, cooling equipment, substations or other impact

[2:05:04] producing equipment rather than simply from partial boundaries. Also retain the

[2:05:10] community requirement that future expansion areas remain subject to the

[2:05:14] applicable setbacks. A large acreage requirement alone does not protect the

[2:05:19] neighbor where the facility and its equipment are located on that acreage

[2:05:24] does matter. Please use a community draft as the stronger starting point but

[2:05:29] establish setback and acreage standards that are protective, evidence-based,

[2:05:35] measurable and defensible challenge if challenged. I thank you and I ask you to

[2:05:40] not only just come from your commissioner hearts when you make these

[2:05:43] decisions, but from your personal hearts. This is my neighbor. This is

[2:05:48] where I raised my kids. Thank you. >> Thank you, Nancy.

[2:05:55] Next up, we have Michelle Bogs. Michelle and then we'll have uh Charles Fleece

[2:06:02] on the in the queue. >> Good morning. I am Michelle Bogs from

[2:06:06] outside North Plat. I'm here to speak on 8.22.04

[2:06:12] development standards. I urge the board to strengthen section 8.22.04

[2:06:18] 04 by combining the county draft's important water protection standard with

[2:06:24] a more detailed and measurable requirements in the community draft.

[2:06:30] First, buffers should be requirements, not possibilities. The county says

[2:06:35] buffers may be required and exterior surfaces should minim minimize visual

[2:06:41] impacts. The community draft instead says buffers shall be required and

[2:06:47] specifies that buildings, cooling equipment, and mechanical systems must

[2:06:53] be screened. Please retain the stronger mandatory language and specify where

[2:07:00] buffers are required, what they must accomplish, and how they must be

[2:07:04] maintained. Water protection is even more important. The county draft

[2:07:10] properly says no data center should be approved unless adequate water exists

[2:07:16] and withdrawals and discharges will not adversely affect groundwater or surface

[2:07:21] water. Keep that standard. But the community draft provides the evidence

[2:07:27] needed to apply it. Quantified water losses, replenishment requirement and

[2:07:32] sources, drought planning, public water certification,

[2:07:37] well sustainability analysis, baseline hydrarology, ongoing monitoring and

[2:07:43] maintenance discharge protections. Those provisions should form the foundation of

[2:07:49] the final ordinance, but they need technical and legal refinement. The

[2:07:54] cooling language hierarchy should be clarified. Engineers should determine

[2:07:59] appropriate monitoring and testing requirements, and council should

[2:08:03] distinguish what Lincoln County can enforce through zoning from discharge,

[2:08:08] groundwater, or water quality decisions belonging to the NRD or state and

[2:08:13] federal agencies. Finally, independent technical review

[2:08:18] should be mandatory, not merely something the county may request with

[2:08:23] qualified experts selected by the county and paid for by the applicant.

[2:08:28] Please take the strongest provisions from both drafts and create standards

[2:08:32] that are mandatory, measurable, technically supported, and within

[2:08:37] Lincoln County's lawful authority. Thank you for all the hard work, and thank you

[2:08:41] for hearing us and considering Thank you, Michelle.

[2:08:48] Um, Charles, please. And then we'll have Martin Mora.

[2:08:54] » Martin will be up after Charles. [clears throat]

[2:09:01] » Morning, Charles. Fleece. >> Morning.

[2:09:03] » On uh section 8.22.6 16 decommissioning on this whether we go along and we give

[2:09:12] them a higher bond to hold them accountable to the size of the project

[2:09:17] the finance behind it. Um that's kind of where I'm at there. It's going to get

[2:09:24] put back as close to natural as it can. Need to hold their feet to the fire.

[2:09:29] Like you're saying, Commissioner Williams,

[2:09:31] the regulations are to hold their feet to the fire and hold them accountable.

[2:09:37] Whether from the beginning of this process,

[2:09:42] the regulations could be a deterrent or a welcome.

[2:09:50] I think we're in agreement. It it could be a deterrent. Um,

[2:09:57] lifechanging money could come to Lincoln County, to Solen, to Wallace, to

[2:10:01] Hershey. And is that worth it? What do we get out of this?

[2:10:07] Um, are they held if 100,000 gallons of glycol get spilled? Do they clean it up?

[2:10:18] What happens at that point? I guess there's still a document that can be

[2:10:24] worked on, can be changed, can be addressed. Um, conditional use permit,

[2:10:30] things can be added in there. There's a lot of layers. I thought in the

[2:10:34] beginning of this process, we were protected and it was going to be okay.

[2:10:39] Now, it's like a game of Plinko where it's the they're they're just picking

[2:10:44] their way through the process and they're going to get to the bottom. They

[2:10:47] will get there. But what are what are we going to do,

[2:10:52] guys? As I said in the first time I ever stood

[2:10:56] up in front of you guys, are we willing to sell our soul for this? Are we

[2:10:59] willing to fight? I like to give deputy attorney enough

[2:11:04] tools to fight. Kind of mentioned that before. You can't just walk into ruin

[2:11:10] and just start shooting. He needs to have ammunition. He needs to have

[2:11:14] something good to stand on so he can fight for the rest of us also. And I do

[2:11:18] appreciate that. I do I do respect what you guys are trying to

[2:11:24] do. Hopefully what you guys do get done in this process.

[2:11:28] Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. Appreciate that. Martin

[2:11:33] and then we'll have Jan Knight after that. Martin Mora, come on forward, sir.

[2:11:39] Good morning. Good morning all. >> Good morning.

[2:11:45] So, commissioners, my comments today are directed to the continuing compliance

[2:11:50] provisions in the August 27th draft of section 822. Um, during an earlier

[2:11:55] meeting with planning and zoning, it was noted that there is currently no

[2:11:59] position specifically assigned to this kind of continuing oversight. Um my

[2:12:04] concern was once the application is approved and the conditional use permit

[2:12:08] is issued what and the facility is operating who is responsible for making

[2:12:12] sure those tools work together over the lifetime of the facility information and

[2:12:16] reports will need to be tracked over time complaints evaluated inspections

[2:12:21] coordinated and potential violations considered and addressed. Eventually, I

[2:12:25] believe that function could be fulfilled by a small technically capable data

[2:12:30] center compliance office or officer. I'm not suggesting we create a new

[2:12:34] regulatory body today. I'm presenting a concept that may help us move forward

[2:12:38] while preserving a clear path for continued county level monitoring,

[2:12:42] verification, and enforcement within the authority available under Nebraska law

[2:12:47] and statutes. That function could also coordinate with rather than duplicate

[2:12:52] the work already being done by existing local and regional public entities and

[2:12:56] other agencies or utilities with responsibility in that respect.

[2:13:01] Citizens should have somewhere they can take a legitimate concern uh where it

[2:13:05] can be documented, measured and resolved. Planning and zoning and county

[2:13:10] council should not become the first stop every time that a resident reports a

[2:13:15] problem or and it should also not result in a bottleneck if there are potential

[2:13:20] compliance issues that arise. If we're going to establish meaningful standards,

[2:13:25] I think we should also preserve the county's ability to administer, monitor,

[2:13:29] and enforce those standards as we move forward. Having reviewed relevant

[2:13:34] Nebraska statutes and existing county powers, I'll provide a few references to

[2:13:39] planning and zoning and council for consideration uh after we kind of see

[2:13:43] how today's meeting shakes out. Um the benefit I would hope for is continuity.

[2:13:48] Citizens have one place to go after the fact in order to present any challenges.

[2:13:53] Um, and the county is able to maintain a durable record that would survive future

[2:13:59] changes in staff, elected officials, and ownership.

[2:14:03] » Martin, before you walk away from the podium, I I was remiss in not requesting

[2:14:06] you speak your name. I spoke your name. >> Oh, apologies. Martin Moore, North.

[2:14:11] » Thank you. Thank you very [clears throat] much.

[2:14:14] Uh, Jan Knight and then Diane Hibner.

[2:14:19] » Morning, Jan. >> Morning. Go ahead and speak your name to

[2:14:23] the microphone. >> Jan N of North Flat, Nebraska. I am

[2:14:28] speaking on environment environmental monitoring 8220.

[2:14:34] I urge the board to add the environmental monitoring definition and

[2:14:38] framework from the community regulations with appropriate legal refinement. There

[2:14:44] is an important difference between the two drafts. The community regulations

[2:14:48] establish environmental monitoring as an ongoing independent program covering

[2:14:54] development, construction, operation, and decommissioning.

[2:14:59] They require defined baseline conditions and measurable standards for water use,

[2:15:04] waste, discharges, lighting, and noise. This is a major improvement over just

[2:15:09] simply stating that a project must pro protect the environment.

[2:15:15] The community draft also requires independent monitoring paid for by the

[2:15:20] project also to relevant records and facility information, regular reporting,

[2:15:26] public availability of monitoring results and binding requirements that

[2:15:31] survive ownership changes and continue through post decommissioning

[2:15:36] remediation. But I'm not asking the board to adopt

[2:15:40] every sentence exactly as written. For example, the position the provision

[2:15:45] allowing affected communities to select the monitoring authority should be

[2:15:50] refined so that the stakeholders have meaningful input without creating an

[2:15:55] unintended veto. The ordinance should also establish objective procedures for

[2:16:01] setting performance thresholds and should have council review provisions

[2:16:06] concerning automatic compensation and permit revocation.

[2:16:11] The important thing is not though whose draft gets adopted. Both documents are

[2:16:16] drafts. The county currently has no comparable standalone environmental

[2:16:21] monitoring definition. Please use the community draft as the

[2:16:26] foundation. Strengthen it where necessary and have council make the

[2:16:30] final language objective measurable, administratable, and legally defensible.

[2:16:36] A data center should not simply promise to comply. Lincoln County should have

[2:16:42] the ability to measure compliance, know when standards are exceeded, require

[2:16:48] corrective action, and preserve those protections for the life of the

[2:16:52] facility. Thank you. Thank you for all your help and all your hard work.

[2:16:57] » Thank you, Diane Hibner. And then we'll have

[2:17:02] Shaylee Scranton. Diane, good morning Diane. Morning.

[2:17:08] I'm Diane Hibner. I urge the board to make section 82215

[2:17:14] one of the strongest provisions in the final regulations. The data center

[2:17:19] should not be reviewed as simply a building on a parcel. The county needs

[2:17:24] to understand the whole project and its combined its combined impacts before

[2:17:29] approval. The community draft provides the stronger framework by requiring

[2:17:35] environmental and community impact analysis and updated review when the

[2:17:39] project when projects expand. That concept should be retained and

[2:17:44] strengthened. The final ordinance should require disclosure of the project's full

[2:17:50] reasonable anticipated package such as the buildings, the electrical demand,

[2:17:56] substations and transmission needs behind the meter generation, backup

[2:18:01] power, batteries, fuel infrastructure, water supply, cooling, wastewater,

[2:18:07] roads, and the known future phases or other infrastructure material materially

[2:18:13] necessary to serve the project. That does not mean Lincoln County regulates

[2:18:18] everything disclosed. Utilities, NRDs, and the state or federal agencies may

[2:18:24] control particular infrastructure or permits that the county cannot evaluate

[2:18:29] land use impacts that it doesn't know about.

[2:18:33] require qualified professionals to analyze the appropriate subjects and

[2:18:38] allow the county to select and direct independent reviewers at the applicant's

[2:18:43] reasonable expense. The analysis should evaluate combined and cumulative

[2:18:49] impacts, not merely each component separately, and require updates when

[2:18:54] material project assumptions change, such as electrical demand, water use,

[2:18:59] generation, um, infrastructure, the site design, or

[2:19:04] expansion before the county approves the changed project. Finally, make the

[2:19:09] analysis part of the county's actual decisionmaking record. It should provide

[2:19:14] evidence for the planning commission and board to make required factual findings

[2:19:19] and not simply become another report sitting in an application file. Please

[2:19:24] use the community draft as the foundation, but refine it with council

[2:19:29] and technical experts. Lincoln County should review the project that will

[2:19:34] actually exist, including the known dependencies, not merely the portion

[2:19:39] appearing on the conditional use permit applications. Thank you.

[2:19:44] » Thanks, Diane. >> Um, another question I just wondered,

[2:19:46] um, I noticed that Gary Pson is here in the audience. I was just wondering,

[2:19:52] » Gary, would you mind sticking around afterwards just to ask answer a few

[2:19:56] questions if >> Thank you.

[2:19:59] » Thank you, Diane.

[2:20:03] Consider I like your comments about the whole project. That's kind of indicative

[2:20:08] of David Fle's comments about fragment segmentation. So that makes sense. SK

[2:20:14] Shaylee is next and then Beth DeFreeze. Good morning Shaylee. Speak to the

[2:20:19] microphone to your name. >> Good morning. I am Shaylee Scranton. I

[2:20:23] live around Theford, but I do think that this is a topic that's very important to

[2:20:27] speak up about. And I'd like to urge urge the board to strengthen section

[2:20:32] 8.22.06 by combining the county draft with the

[2:20:36] more detailed emergency response protections in the community draft. The

[2:20:41] county draft requires emergency plans, fire suppression, noise mitigation,

[2:20:46] security, emergency service improvements, annual inspections, and

[2:20:50] county inspection access. Those are important requirements, but the

[2:20:54] community draft answers an important question. What must emergency planning

[2:20:58] actually address? It requires disclosure of cooling and fire suppression

[2:21:03] chemicals, battery systems, high voltage equipment, substations, pressurized

[2:21:08] systems, and decommissioning hazards. It also requires specialized responder

[2:21:13] training and necessary equipment funded by the applicant. That is the stronger

[2:21:17] approach. If a facility creates specialized emergency response needs,

[2:21:21] Lincoln County should identify those needs before approval, not after an

[2:21:25] incident. and taxpayers should not bear reasonable project specific costs

[2:21:29] created by the facility. But the community language should also be

[2:21:33] refined. Emergency management, fire departments, and other qualified

[2:21:37] professionals should identify necessary project specific training and equipment.

[2:21:42] Council should review inspection provisions to distinguish emergency

[2:21:45] access from routine regulatory inspections. Private security

[2:21:49] requirements should defer to applicable law and appropriate law enforcement

[2:21:53] coordination. Noise requirements should also cross-reference the measurable

[2:21:57] standards elsewhere in 8.22 rather than relying only on the phrase minimize

[2:22:02] impacts. The county's later section 8.22.17

[2:22:07] already contains additional requirements for emergency plans, radio coverage,

[2:22:12] emergency contacts, responder training, and specialized equipment. Please

[2:22:16] consolidate the strongest provisions so responsibilities are clear and not

[2:22:20] scattered throughout the ordinance. The final standard should answer four

[2:22:23] questions. What hazards must be disclosed? Who reviews them? What

[2:22:28] preparedness is required? And who pays for project specific response needs?

[2:22:33] Please make those answers clear before any facility begins operation. Thank

[2:22:37] you. >> Thank you, Shirley.

[2:22:41] Beth to freeze. And then we'll have uh Heather. I apologize. I'm sure the last

[2:22:46] name. >> It's okay. It's fine.

[2:22:49] » Okay. Good morning. Next. >> I'm Beth Different Lake Subdivision.

[2:22:56] » I urge the board to strengthen section 82205.

[2:23:01] The community and county drafts are essentially the same. They both require

[2:23:06] one parking space per employee based on the largest shift. ADA compliant

[2:23:11] parking, two loading spaces per building, and then states that access

[2:23:16] should be designed to ensure efficient traffic flow and prevent congestion.

[2:23:22] Our wish is to change should be designed to shall be designed. It's efficient and

[2:23:31] safe access is important enough to put in this ordinance. It should be in an

[2:23:37] enforcable requirement rather than a suggestion.

[2:23:41] Second, the site design should address the traffic a particular project will

[2:23:45] actually generate. The county shall require adequate on-site parking,

[2:23:50] loading areas, security gate, queuing, emergency access, and safe ingress and

[2:23:55] egress so that vehicles do not have to maneuver on the public roads. The

[2:24:01] ordinance shall account for both construction and operational traffic.

[2:24:07] Finally, requiring two loading spaces per building may not fit every facility.

[2:24:13] A better standard would require applicant to demonstrate loading and

[2:24:18] service areas are adequate for each building subject to a reasonable county

[2:24:23] minimum. This these changes do not require you to

[2:24:28] predict every future traffic problem, but it does require the applicant to

[2:24:33] disclose expected traffic and how to safely accommodate it.

[2:24:38] I would like clarification on one point. Um, if I've asked this twice, I've got a

[2:24:47] yes answer. I've gotten a no answer. If a company complies with all regulations

[2:24:52] as adopted, does the county still have the option to say no to a proposed

[2:24:59] company? And if it can, can you put that in the

[2:25:04] regulations? We are here to protect the people and

[2:25:09] our resources, not protect business. Thank you.

[2:25:13] » Thank you, Beth. U I'm confident we can still say no.

[2:25:18] want to speak to that real quickly since it's it's on topic and we won't

[2:25:24] forget it. It's an maybe technically >> I want to speak at the end again too if

[2:25:29] you'll allow me. >> Um so one of the things that I forgot to

[2:25:33] say when I was doing my little planning 101 speech conditional uses go with the

[2:25:37] land. So when people are asking about what holds the next owner to the same

[2:25:44] standard, the conditional use is granted. It goes with the property. No

[2:25:47] matter who the owner is, no matter what happens until such time as that 12

[2:25:52] months comes and they don't use it anymore, then they have to go to

[2:25:56] something else or they change what they're doing. Otherwise, it goes with

[2:26:01] the land. So that continued compliance with whatever's in that conditional use

[2:26:04] stays with that property. Um, now your question on can you deny

[2:26:10] it? Yes, if you have something that is

[2:26:14] factbased behind the denial. You cannot have a conditional use permit fill this

[2:26:21] room with 120 people and everybody says, "I don't want it. I don't want it. I

[2:26:25] don't want it." And then you guys say, "Okay, I don't want it." Why? You have

[2:26:30] to have a why. You have to have a fact. Is there environmental concern? Is there

[2:26:38] wind, noise? Is there something? You have to have a fact.

[2:26:45] Um, Tyler, did I explain that well enough?

[2:26:48] » Close enough for now. Yeah. [laughter] >> But you do have to have some fact behind

[2:26:54] it. You cannot deny an application simply because you do not want it.

[2:26:58] » Well, I I appreciate the question. I just wanted to address it in timely

[2:27:02] fashions before we forgot it. Um, Heather, and I apologize. I don't

[2:27:08] didn't What's the last name? Heather. >> Heather Gunnan. North Plat. Um,

[2:27:14] » next. >> Sorry. Um, I have looked through I don't

[2:27:18] have the community whatever that they're talking about. I

[2:27:22] just have the cities that was provided to me here today. Good.

[2:27:26] » I just have a concern about heat dome. I don't see this mentioning a heat dome at

[2:27:32] all. uh several places where they have them.

[2:27:37] The the local within a few miles of the site depending on how the size, how much

[2:27:43] power it's running, um the wind that the moisture and air, there's so much

[2:27:48] environmental impact that could happen. And being as how climate change is

[2:27:53] running everyone's prediction models into the dirt, I would

[2:27:59] recommend a much larger required

[2:28:04] size of the entity, the the square footage of the property just because if

[2:28:09] there's farmers next door, they're going to need they're I mean six degrees

[2:28:14] increase over what it's like sometimes 110. So if it gets to 116 degrees around

[2:28:19] the property, anybody trying to grow anything, anybody who lives there is

[2:28:22] going to need more air conditioning, going to need require more water for

[2:28:26] their animals, for their pets, for themselves. Um,

[2:28:32] so I would

[2:28:35] I would like someone to put something in there whereas under the requirements for

[2:28:42] any whoever's trying to put this in to increase the

[2:28:49] availability of the electric and water to the some 25 mile

[2:28:58] circum circumference of the property. because we don't know where the heat

[2:29:01] dome is going to go. We don't know how big it's going to be. I know that that's

[2:29:05] I would like it to be specifically in the environmental

[2:29:09] impact requirements for them to do a study on

[2:29:13] it and I would like to have it updated at least by annually within

[2:29:19] annually within the first five years of operation

[2:29:23] just so because the prediction models are Excuse my language.

[2:29:28] um the prediction models. I mean, we're having once in a lifetime weather for

[2:29:34] the rest of our lives, at least monthly somewhere. So, uh I know that that's

[2:29:40] going to make it they're going to have to buy a ton more land, but

[2:29:45] it's it's only going to get hotter and having

[2:29:50] a huge heat dome is only going to make that so much hotter. And you can't grow

[2:29:56] things when it gets to I mean that's where most of the county's money comes

[2:30:00] from is just green things and it will all be brown.

[2:30:08] » That's all I have to say. Thank you. >> Thank you, Heather. Faith Coburn is up

[2:30:11] next and then Pam Elliott.

[2:30:18] » Well, thank you. Okay. uh Pam Pam Elliott

[2:30:26] and then we'll have Teresa Roert if she chooses to speak.

[2:30:32] Good morning. My name is Pam Elliot and I live in North Plat, Nebraska. I urge

[2:30:36] the board to adopt substantially stronger requirements for backup power

[2:30:40] systems section 8.221.13.

[2:30:44] Backup generation should not be treated as incidental equipment. A large data

[2:30:49] center may have multiple generators, fuel systems, batteries, exhaust

[2:30:54] sources, and associated equipment. The county should evaluate their combined

[2:30:58] impact, not simply each piece individually.

[2:31:02] The county draft contains useful protections, including environmental

[2:31:06] compliance restrictions on routine testing hours, noise mitigation, and

[2:31:10] fuel storage requirements. But the community draft provides the

[2:31:15] stronger framework by making backup power subject to the comprehensive

[2:31:18] behind meter generation requirements in section 8.22.08

[2:31:23] that brings fuel storage, air emissions, noise, vibration, environmental impacts,

[2:31:29] emergency planning, and decommissioning into the review.

[2:31:34] Please retain that approach and strengthen it further. Before approval,

[2:31:38] require disclosure of the number and type of generators, fuel source,

[2:31:43] individual and total generating capacity, locations, fuel storage,

[2:31:48] exhaust systems, anticipated testing and operating hours and projected emissions.

[2:31:55] Also distinguish genuine emergency operator operation from routine testing

[2:32:00] and other non-emergency operation. Calling equipment backup should not

[2:32:05] create a loophole allowing regular generation to escape escape standards

[2:32:10] intended for normal operations. Require evidence of all applicable state and

[2:32:15] federal air quality permits and have qualified experts evaluate aggregate

[2:32:20] noise emissions, heat related impacts and risks to nearby sensitive receptors.

[2:32:27] The county should not attempt to replace state or federal environmental

[2:32:30] regulators, but it should in understand the land use impacts of the complete

[2:32:35] backup power system before approving any project.

[2:32:41] Please combine the strongest provisions of both drafts to make 8.22.13

[2:32:46] measurable, technology neutral, independent re independently reviewable,

[2:32:51] and enforceable through the facility's life. Backup power should be reviewed

[2:32:57] prior to any project being approved, not after.

[2:33:03] Thank you. >> Thank you, Pam.

[2:33:06] Terresa Roers. And then we have Muriel Clark. And again, if anyone else didn't

[2:33:11] make the list and wants to speak. >> Okay. Good morning. I'm Teresa Roer from

[2:33:16] Southerntherland. >> Good morning.

[2:33:17] » Hi. Um, I think you've heard throughout this whole speech, all these speeches,

[2:33:21] that we're trying to help you understand that it's important to have a plan

[2:33:26] before approval, to make them measurable after construction, and to continue with

[2:33:32] their compliance afterward. And I think all of these things that we're talking

[2:33:36] about include all that. I want to speak specifically about 82211 and 82212,

[2:33:42] which is lighting and screening. Um, the lighting provisions provided by the

[2:33:46] county give us a pretty good guideline, but it does not uh does not establish an

[2:33:52] objective limit on how much light can actually leave the property. The

[2:33:57] community draft establishes a property line spillover limit. It requires fully

[2:34:02] shielded fixtures with no upward light emission and establishes nighttime

[2:34:07] dimming and requires continuing maintenance. Um, we have also with the

[2:34:13] screening the same concerns. The community draft goes further by

[2:34:17] requiring the applicant to demonstrate that screening actually provides visual

[2:34:23] protection. It meets the section 82210 noise standards, which is what they're

[2:34:28] supposed to be there for, and remains durable over time. It also permits

[2:34:33] alternative designs when professionals can provide equivalent performance.

[2:34:39] Um through all of this, it is not only what happens the day they build the

[2:34:44] building. Please don't just regulate what happens then. It has to be for the

[2:34:50] maintaining for the life of the facility. And that's what we're asking.

[2:34:54] Make it a plan before approval, measurable performance after

[2:34:58] construction, and then continuing compliance throughout the life of the

[2:35:02] project. Thank you. >> Thank you, Teresa.

[2:35:06] Uh the last we have on our list is Mur Muriel Clark. And again, if anybody else

[2:35:13] didn't get on the list and wants to come forth after Muriel's presentation, we'll

[2:35:17] uh we'll invite you up. Good morning. >> Good morning, Muriel Clark from

[2:35:21] Southerntherland. After engaging in this process for the past four months and

[2:35:26] listening to countless testimonies concerning data centers, including

[2:35:29] everybody who testified here today, the board of commissioners and the planning

[2:35:33] commission are to be are to be commended for the preliminary work that you've

[2:35:38] done so far. The point has been made in today's testimony is that both

[2:35:44] regulations, the one from the planning commission and the one that the citizens

[2:35:48] prepared are drafts. The county draft contains meaningful improvements, the

[2:35:53] community draft goes considerably farther in many areas. We understand

[2:35:58] that in our zeal to protect our communities, our resources, and our

[2:36:02] environment that the community draft contains provisions that go too far and

[2:36:07] that are not defensible. The testimony today and the community concerns that

[2:36:12] have been raised these past four months make it clear. The regulations adopted

[2:36:16] by the county must contain the strongest provisions possible. We've seen

[2:36:21] disastrous effects of underregulated data center construction in other

[2:36:26] Nebraska communities and across America. Lincoln County cannot repeat those

[2:36:31] mistakes. As you consider the amendments today,

[2:36:36] and I urge you to go section by section to make sure that they provide the

[2:36:41] strongest protections possible, use one baseline, the protection of Lincoln

[2:36:46] County communities, not accommodation of data center projects.

[2:36:52] The community proposals and the testimony that you hear today reflect

[2:36:57] what our citizens value. strong communities, strong environmental

[2:37:01] protection, quality infrastructure, unhampered emergency services, and

[2:37:06] quality of life for residents near potential sites. We feel, and I think

[2:37:11] you've heard from the testimony here today, that the draft from the planning

[2:37:15] commission doesn't go far enough. And we do understand that some of the proposals

[2:37:20] from the community draft go too far. Again, there are both drafts and we

[2:37:26] understand that. So, here's what we ask. That you adopt a strong version of A22

[2:37:32] today. Go through the proposed regulations section by section and

[2:37:37] review each one of them through the lens of protecting our communities. Then

[2:37:42] treat the version that comes out of today's action as a working document.

[2:37:46] Send what you adopt back to the planning commission for more revision. You can do

[2:37:51] both things at once. Adopt strong standards today and commit to

[2:37:56] strengthening them as more information becomes available. As Mayor Keller said

[2:38:01] earlier, rules are important and what you do here today will establish those

[2:38:06] baseline rules that we can build upon to make sure that any project protects the

[2:38:12] communities around them. Thank you. >> Thank you very much, Miel.

[2:38:18] Now we've come to the end of this list and we have someone that is jumping for

[2:38:22] joy to come. >> Good morning.

[2:38:25] » Good morning. Elizabeth Tagmire, resident of North Plat.

[2:38:28] » I'm going to sign you in. >> You're not on this list. So sign that

[2:38:32] one if you would. >> These folks already signed in. So I have

[2:38:35] this for the for the clerk. >> Thank you.

[2:38:39] » Just counting [clears throat] on my minutes. No, [laughter]

[2:38:44] » I'm walking over my minutes, not your minutes.

[2:38:48] » You begin when you're ready.

[2:38:54] » Okay. Well, commissioners, first of all, thank you. This has been a very

[2:38:57] enlightening process. Have been um joining you most weeks listening um in

[2:39:02] on things. One thing I well I wasn't prepared to speak so you're not getting

[2:39:07] a written uh statement here but as I was looking at the draft version that that

[2:39:14] was prepared by the planning commission for the commissioners um I came across a

[2:39:20] word may and as someone who deals pretty

[2:39:24] regularly herself with state statute and policy um I have an opinion about the

[2:39:29] word may and that also of Shell because Those those are they're big things. May

[2:39:36] means you may or may not do it and shell means you will do it. Um so just want to

[2:39:42] point out that tomorrow night the North City Council, which I know you're not

[2:39:47] controlling that body, but they are going to discuss rate increases to

[2:39:51] electricity and water. Likewise, uh the North Public School

[2:39:56] Board has just now um indicated that they will be going to the pink postcard

[2:40:01] uh meeting here later in September. And so I'm pointing these things out to

[2:40:06] indicate that um residents of this county are facing rising costs all the

[2:40:12] time. And the language that concerns me and the reason it concerns me is the

[2:40:18] generation of electricity. Um I have noticed our our light and water bill

[2:40:23] continues to go up every summer higher than it was the previous summer. And um

[2:40:31] and one thing that concerns me is section um 8.2208 behind meter

[2:40:37] electrical generation requirements. It says that each behind me meter data

[2:40:43] center may be required to provide dedicated electrical generation and

[2:40:48] energy storage or a combination thereof sufficient to offset 100% of the

[2:40:54] facility's projected electrical demand. There's that word may. They may or they

[2:41:00] may not. And I really think that that needs to turn into a shell because we

[2:41:05] have seen in other communities that supply and demand affect the cost of

[2:41:11] electricity and it hurts residential consumers of electricity. And so when

[2:41:17] there's a higher demand that these data centers are going to put on the grid and

[2:41:22] according to Mayor Kellahar um he came and spoke at the Lincoln County

[2:41:26] Republican meeting in July and said that you know yeah they start out behind the

[2:41:30] grid and then you know within six to seven years they're going to want access

[2:41:34] to the grid. And so when they gain access to our electrical power grid,

[2:41:40] it's going to affect our rates because when there's a higher demand on

[2:41:46] electricity, then the prices go up. So I would ask that you would change one word

[2:41:52] from May to Shell to protect the residents of not just North Plat but

[2:41:57] Lincoln County from higher rate increases that may come um if a data

[2:42:02] center would be built in their area. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate that,

[2:42:07] Elizabeth. U

[2:42:10] once again, anyone else folks that didn't [clears throat] get a chance,

[2:42:15] didn't make our list, that doesn't matter. This was just a convenience to

[2:42:19] expedite time and thank you all for helping us with that. Oh, we have one,

[2:42:24] Judy. Good morning.

[2:42:28] » I'm Judy Peterson. I live uh just south of North Plat. I do serve on the

[2:42:32] planning commission, but I am not here as a representative for the whole

[2:42:36] commission. One thing I will say is each time that we have a meeting and each

[2:42:40] time there's a project brought in in front of us, um there is extensive

[2:42:45] amount of reporting that has to be done before anything is approved. Um but we

[2:42:50] also have to take into consideration how anything that we put into a conditional

[2:42:54] use permit for that type of industry, how that affects another industry. um

[2:43:00] such as fuel storage storage or fuel spillage or anything like that when you

[2:43:05] think about us being in an egg area. And so I just wanted to say I really

[2:43:10] appreciate all the work that they went to and it's been extremely valuable. Um

[2:43:16] but I also want to have them think about how we have to think about how any

[2:43:22] regulation we put onto one business may affect another one. and so how that

[2:43:29] all can work together and so we can try to raise all votes instead of um or you

[2:43:36] know uh control um the county but we do have to think about all of those other

[2:43:41] kinds of um businesses that might be impacted by a regulation that we put in

[2:43:47] place. So thank you very much. >> Thank you for that.

[2:44:00] David Fle, Southern, Nebraska. >> David, you double you're double dipping

[2:44:04] on me, but >> I know I apologize for that.

[2:44:08] [clears throat] >> Go ahead.

[2:44:09] » Doing my reading reading reports from universities and institutes.

[2:44:15] One of the things that jumped out at me and I don't know the difference. I don't

[2:44:19] and maybe maybe Judy she wants to talk can explain them. it's in your

[2:44:23] wheelhouse. Conditional use permits as opposed to a dedicated land use permit.

[2:44:30] Because one of the things I read this morning, just this morning earlier, one

[2:44:34] of them recommended that you possibly make it a dedicated land use permit that

[2:44:40] will stop. I don't know why it said that, but it it said it might discourage

[2:44:46] building on farmland helter skelter and it might,

[2:44:51] you know, kind of limit it and focus it more. So maybe you can address that

[2:44:57] because I don't know the difference and maybe you guys do, but

[2:45:01] » maybe make this a dedicated land permit instead of conditional language.

[2:45:05] » Okay. Thank you for that point. Uh before we get Judy back up again, uh the

[2:45:12] public comment period, I want to kind of get it finalized here. Did we miss

[2:45:17] anybody, folks? No,

[2:45:21] I don't see any hands. Okay. At 11:35, we're going to close the

[2:45:28] public hearing portion of this uh procedure [clears throat]

[2:45:33] and we're going to go to deliberation and and Q&A for Judy and Tyler or

[2:45:39] anybody else that we need to talk to or quiz. Uh Judy, since that David brought

[2:45:45] that up, do you want to begin by addressing that particular question?

[2:45:50] » Okay. I I did not see the article that he read or whatever he read, but the

[2:45:54] difference between a permitted or a dedicated land use versus a conditional

[2:45:59] use is you guys never see the application. If you want to go a

[2:46:03] dedicated land use, I'm going to tell you right now, I'll probably have to

[2:46:06] quit my job because I don't want the responsibility of getting a data center

[2:46:10] in my lap and saying yes or no. I don't want that. That's that's why you guys

[2:46:14] get paid paid big bucks. But that is the difference. Um, what you would do with a

[2:46:20] permitted use is you're going to have areas of the county

[2:46:27] that you would maybe zone industrial. So, you'd have to go in, look at the

[2:46:32] county, and say, "Okay, all these areas would be perfect for data centers." And

[2:46:38] you would say, "Okay, you can be here as long as you're zoned industrial." If

[2:46:42] they're zoned industrial, that comes to me. I sign off on the

[2:46:46] little baby and they build their structure.

[2:46:48] » We have no recourse. >> You have no recourse other than me

[2:46:52] saying yes or no. And again, I do not want that responsibility. I'm going to

[2:46:56] tell you right now, I will probably walk out

[2:47:00] » because I do not want that. As [clears throat] part of this long

[2:47:02] process, we did have some areas >> that were zoned permitted, but you came

[2:47:09] and recommended that we change them because

[2:47:13] » you realized that and brought it to us. >> Correct.

[2:47:16] » So, that was what we did several weeks ago when I originally brought the

[2:47:20] amendment to the land use matrix to you and we changed those from permitted to

[2:47:25] conditional. Now what the conditional does and you guys know this and the

[2:47:29] public may not know this but what the conditional does is they bring the

[2:47:33] application to me with all the required documents plus I can request any

[2:47:40] additional document that I feel is needed for planning commission and the

[2:47:44] board of commissioners to make a reasonable decision. So, not only

[2:47:49] everything that's in this regulation when you pass it, everything that's in

[2:47:54] the U comp plan, everything in any of the other zoning regulations, they bring

[2:48:00] me an application, I can say, "Okay, you need to bring me this also because I

[2:48:04] don't think you have enough information to allow the planning commission and the

[2:48:08] board of commissioners to make a good decision." So, and that is one of the

[2:48:13] things with Okay, I've always said I hate LB663. Okay, I'm going to kind of

[2:48:18] maybe give it a little bit of a win. Um, that pre-application meeting is very,

[2:48:22] very important. I do that now just as a personal thing with a lot of the

[2:48:27] conditional uses, I will sit down, look at it, but it's usually kind of a Judy

[2:48:32] meeting. Sometimes I might call Jason or one of the others in, but where there's

[2:48:36] a requirement for that pre-application meeting, now I can say, "Look,

[2:48:40] everybody, this person, this person, this person, and this person's coming to

[2:48:44] this pre-application meeting, and we're going to sit down and review this before

[2:48:49] it ever comes in front of you." So, we have a really good idea of what that

[2:48:53] conditional use is. And that can be with anything. Data centers can find animal

[2:48:57] feeding operations, twin towers, solar, anything that's a conditional use. And

[2:49:02] so that's kind of a good thing because now I have resources to help make a

[2:49:08] educated choice on what's coming in front of you.

[2:49:12] » On top of that, we can place additional conditions on top of what is in the

[2:49:17] regulation. >> Yes, with a land use permitted land use

[2:49:21] permitted only, they come in, if they meet the guidelines, I sign off, it's

[2:49:26] gone. conditional. They come in, maybe they meet the guidelines, it comes to

[2:49:31] you guys or goes to planning commission first. They say, "Okay, yeah, you meet

[2:49:35] the guidelines, but we want this also, which may be some additional screening,

[2:49:39] maybe some additional setbacks." Um, I mean, hard to say. Maybe a document of

[2:49:45] some sort and then or they may have a a period on there. We've done conditional

[2:49:50] use permits where you've said the conditional use permit expires in 10

[2:49:53] years. Um, you can do that. And the thing that

[2:49:58] you have to go with again, and I know the individuals in the audience think

[2:50:02] our regulations are vague. Well, work with state statute because state statute

[2:50:07] says planning commission and the board of commissioners can put on any

[2:50:12] reasonable condition. Go find in state statute the definition

[2:50:17] of reasonable. There isn't one. Does not exist. So, what is reasonable? That's

[2:50:22] for you guys to make a choice when you do the additional uses.

[2:50:25] Tyler, get anything to add? >> No, you're doing great. Judy, [laughter]

[2:50:29] Judy, >> back to to David's question. We did

[2:50:33] close a loophole on industrial zoned property for not being able to just come

[2:50:39] in and get it. >> Correct. No matter if

[2:50:42] » So, we did close that loophole. >> We did close that

[2:50:44] » just recently. >> Yeah. Right now, today, if we got an

[2:50:47] application, it's conditional use. >> Yeah.

[2:50:50] » So, that would have to come in front of you.

[2:50:53] » Uh Mr. Fleece, great question though. I'm really glad that you brought that

[2:50:58] up. Another important thing to to consider with that is if it's permitted,

[2:51:04] it does just go to Judy and she has all of the decision making. When we changed

[2:51:11] it, it it goes to Judy, the planning commission. They have a public hearing

[2:51:16] where you guys can all show up and participate. And then when it comes to

[2:51:21] us, another public hearing. [snorts] Those are two really important steps

[2:51:25] that I feel protect our community probably better than anything else.

[2:51:34] » Can I keep going? >> Sure.

[2:51:36] » I'm going to make you guys miss lunch, just so you know. Okay. So, um I don't

[2:51:41] want anybody to think that I do not like the regulations that the um community

[2:51:46] put forward that 42 day page document. I think it's great. I think they have a

[2:51:51] lot of information in there. I do not feel that it needs to be or should be

[2:51:59] part of the actual zoning regulation because what that does, and I've said

[2:52:04] this a hundred times, the more strict you make a regulation, the less

[2:52:09] opportunity you have to make a choice. So, some of the things that are in there

[2:52:16] are very, very, very helpful. Um some of the things that they hit on was um water

[2:52:21] oversight. Who does that? NRD, NDWE, um EPA for any type of contamination. If

[2:52:31] we put that in our regulations, then number one, we're overstepping and I

[2:52:35] don't know if we have a right to do that to begin with. Tyler would have to

[2:52:37] answer that. And number two, do we have environmentalists on staff or the

[2:52:44] ability for us to hire one that can go do that or look at it or know what

[2:52:47] they're talking about? I do planning. I don't do water usage,

[2:52:51] but we require all those studies in the regulations that we're proposing. We we

[2:52:57] require an environmental study, uh energy study, use usage study, a water

[2:53:03] study. um we require engineering study, we require an environmental impact

[2:53:09] analysis, all of that stuff is going to be in there. So that 43page document,

[2:53:14] that's going to be a huge useful tool for me when for you when you get that

[2:53:19] packet and it says, "Oh, did we hit all these environmental things? Oh yeah,

[2:53:23] that'll be awesome." Or, "Wait a minute, we forgot something or they forgot

[2:53:27] something." Because we will be reviewing all of those. One of the other things

[2:53:31] that they talked about is public availability.

[2:53:34] Um, I've worked for city and county government for 28 years. I've had

[2:53:38] attorneys tell me all the time, "Whatever hits my desk is public

[2:53:42] record." So, when they submit an environmental

[2:53:45] study, you can see it. When they submit a whatever study it is, you can see it.

[2:53:51] You can request a copy. Now, there may be a fee associated with that. I don't

[2:53:54] know. But, uh, they want to come in and look at it in my office, it's there. So

[2:54:00] I write little notes you can you can read those if you want to too because it

[2:54:04] is public knowledge public record. Um the other thing they talked about is um

[2:54:10] energy requirement. So one of the things when it talks about the energy

[2:54:13] requirement on the back of the meter behind the meter and someone had said

[2:54:18] something about well how do we how do we know you know if our costs [snorts] are

[2:54:22] going to go up? I pay for electric too. I don't want my cost to go up at all.

[2:54:26] And that's why you have that energy study to begin with. And before any

[2:54:31] project like this starts, they have to go through either NPPD or Dawson or

[2:54:37] whichever power company it is, maybe it's Makook Public Power, wherever it

[2:54:40] is, because we're covered by a number of them, and they have to have one of those

[2:54:43] studies done that's going to tell us where that consumption is. If it comes

[2:54:47] to you and it looks like they're not going to have the ability to do it and

[2:54:50] our rates are going to go up, that's where you guys get to make that

[2:54:53] decision. Um, so to put that in the regulation, it's going to be in the

[2:54:58] study. And you don't know because each project is going to be different.

[2:55:04] You might have one that's going to use very little, I mean, probably unlikely,

[2:55:09] but very little energy, and you're going to have one that's going to use mega

[2:55:12] mega energy. And so to put it in a regulation,

[2:55:17] it's going to come back in that study when you know what a project is because

[2:55:22] we have no idea. We have no idea. And these regulations are built for any type

[2:55:28] of a data center project. We have no idea what that's going to be. Wish we

[2:55:32] all had a crystal ball so we could figure that out because I would like to

[2:55:35] know too. Um they talk about battery storage, fuel storage. So if you

[2:55:42] look at our regular um our regulations right now, we do have battery storage

[2:55:47] regulations. However, I will say we probably ought to

[2:55:50] look at those again, but they are in there. Page 175. Um, we do have above

[2:55:55] ground storage tanks which is for hazardous materials. That's on page 160.

[2:55:59] So, we have those regulations in place and again we have the performance

[2:56:03] standards of industrial conditional uses. Um, the facts that you added back

[2:56:08] in um those are on there also that help protect you. Um,

[2:56:15] acreage. This is a big one that was that we

[2:56:18] talked about a lot at planning commission in our committee, our

[2:56:21] subcommittee. We started out saying we wanted them to have 500 acres and then

[2:56:26] we got down to, well, maybe they should only have 120 acres. Well, then one of

[2:56:31] the things that's in our comprehensive plan,

[2:56:35] environmental protection section, how do you be an a county and protect a

[2:56:43] community when you're requiring that they take 500 acres out of egg

[2:56:47] production? If they can meet all these regulations

[2:56:52] on the least amount of land, if they can meet the noise standards, if they can

[2:56:56] meet, you know, your water usage, all these noise standards on the smallest

[2:57:00] amount of land, that's taking taking the smallest amount of egg production out.

[2:57:07] So that's how we ended up at the conclusion where we were at. Um,

[2:57:12] setbacks that was also a huge huge huge discussion.

[2:57:17] You can't base setbacks again simply because you don't like a project.

[2:57:23] Setbacks have to be based for some factual reason. What do we know 100% for

[2:57:28] sure that's going to require a 500 foot setback?

[2:57:32] Noise. Do we know that? I don't think we know know that know that until we get

[2:57:37] the noise study. And that's why when this was written

[2:57:41] too, it was written with a lot of maze instead of shells

[2:57:46] because what if you have something small come in,

[2:57:50] they can mitigate their noise with a fence and when you have a large one,

[2:57:55] they're going to need BMS and trees and, you know, whatever. It's so hard to

[2:58:00] predict until you get that environmental impact analysis back.

[2:58:07] Okay, I'm done.

[2:58:11] I don't know what else to say, but anyway, no, I think I think what the

[2:58:15] community did with that 42page thing, I think it is great. I think we can use

[2:58:20] that as a policy manual, as a review. I don't know what you would call it, a

[2:58:25] standard operating procedure when reviewing these. I think it would be a

[2:58:29] very, very useful tool. But as far as being in the actual regulations, we took

[2:58:35] out what we thought we could. And again, if you guys want to adopt what you've

[2:58:39] got in front of you and go back and have planning commission look at it, that's

[2:58:43] my opinion. They could come up with something entirely different.

[2:58:47] » I I like that a lot. I like I'd like to send it back out of deference and

[2:58:50] respect to them. They spent a lot of time on this and uh we adopt a more

[2:58:56] robust guideline today, but we don't kick the door shut. We send

[2:59:02] it back down to our colleagues planning and zoning. That's my take on

[2:59:09] » Do you have any questions? Any more questions?

[2:59:13] » Tyler, you were supposed to jump in with me. What do you do?

[2:59:16] » Didn't let me get worried. >> Judy, you did a really good job in

[2:59:19] addressing because I had notes and you pretty much checked them all out.

[2:59:24] » Great explanation. I will address one one key thing because I did go back

[2:59:28] after the planning commission meeting and I did look um the draft the planning

[2:59:32] commission draft had 14 instances where it said the word may had 72 instances

[2:59:37] where it used the word shall I think 5 to1's pretty good when we're

[2:59:41] trying to maintain

[2:59:46] » uh before we uh close the hearing and move on to resolution consideration uh

[2:59:53] does anybody else have anything colleagues.

[3:00:00] No one. Okay. It's 11:49. We're going to close the public hearing portion. Now,

[3:00:05] we're going to discuss and consider adoption of resolution number 2026

[3:00:09] 29-29, an amendment to the Lincoln County

[3:00:12] Zoning Regulations Section 8.22 data centers regarding data center

[3:00:17] regulations.

[3:00:24] I'm just clarifying this does include the portion that is in red for the

[3:00:29] community benefits agreement definition changes.

[3:00:32] » Is that correct? >> I hope it does. Yeah. Does that need to

[3:00:35] be changed? >> It's in red on the draft that we got to

[3:00:39] make it. [clears throat] >> It's not a side note.

[3:00:45] » Oh, I'm sorry. Sorry, Nancy. I >> um

[3:00:52] Well, me too. My wife says I don't listen to her. Uh the question was

[3:00:58] and my my gohead I wanted clarification that

[3:01:02] the community benefits agreement definition the draft that we have that

[3:01:07] uh was updated during the >> planning commission public hearing.

[3:01:13] um that that those changes are in red and I just wanted to make sure that what

[3:01:16] we are considering that that is actually part of what we are considering those

[3:01:20] those necessary changes. So that's all I was seeking clarification on Nancy.

[3:01:26] » So to that to that point clerk do you have the conf confident you had the

[3:01:32] right document to be considered? I have the resolution

[3:01:38] » just like the other two resolutions you passed. The the resolution is an

[3:01:43] enacting document. The actual draft is going to get more or less staple to the

[3:01:46] back of it as an exhibit. So you'd be passing the if you're doing what I think

[3:01:51] you're doing passing the draft uh version 8.22 that is has the suggested

[3:01:58] that it's from Judy and myself in it. That's what we get stapled to the back

[3:02:02] of the resolution.

[3:02:06] with the additional changes noted. >> Yes.

[3:02:09] » Yes. >> Chair, I have a question to ask probably

[3:02:12] of our council. This is uh in regards to water.

[3:02:18] » Okay. If

[3:02:21] a project comes into county and if they

[3:02:27] decommission wells to supplying the water,

[3:02:33] does that egg ground get taxed as dry land or irrigated ground? Is that

[3:02:41] something that's in the regulations or is that in the community benefits

[3:02:45] agreement? I believe that's going to be in the tax laws. Uh that's a better

[3:02:49] question for Julie who happens to be in the audience, but I won't put her on the

[3:02:53] spot. Uh because I don't know it's incredibly germanine to what we're doing

[3:02:57] today. I think that's probably outsider. >> I wanted to see if that was something

[3:03:01] that was needed to be in the regs or not.

[3:03:04] » I don't think I would go in regulations. >> I think it's already covered.

[3:03:08] » That answers my question. Okay.

[3:03:19] Um, we had some written documentation, Mr.

[3:03:24] Chairman. I'd like to have that entered into uh the record as evidence

[3:03:29] uh to include. I know that uh Mr. >> I think we Yeah, you can identify. I

[3:03:34] think we did submit that to the clerk, did we not?

[3:03:37] » Yes, I gave it to you. >> Yes, she had it.

[3:03:40] » Yeah, but we got something this morning from uh Mr. George lobby and I know he

[3:03:43] made comments during public comment period not during the public hearing but

[3:03:47] I want to make sure that his comments were entered in as part of the

[3:03:51] » three. Okay.

[3:03:55] » All right. So the proposal would be to adopt the resolution

[3:04:00] as uh crafted between Judy Clark and Vulmer.

[3:04:08] Correct Judy with the

[3:04:12] highlighted portions included.

[3:04:16] » Correct. >> Okay.

[3:04:19] What's your wishes, colleagues? [clears throat]

[3:04:24] Mr. Chairman, I'd make a motion that we adopt resolution 2026-29

[3:04:30] to approve the amendment to the Lincoln County Zoning Regulations Section 822

[3:04:36] uh data centers. Uh this would include the additional

[3:04:40] changes that we have we had mentioned earlier highlighted. They're in red on

[3:04:44] our documents and included as part of the exhibit that the clerk has for our

[3:04:50] vote on the resolution. That's my motion.

[3:04:55] » I will second >> a motion and a second. Um,

[3:05:02] I guess not necessarily directly from

[3:05:06] » impacting the uh the uh motion, but I would I guess I would request that we

[3:05:13] identify that we have any intention to send this back to planning and zoning.

[3:05:17] » That would be my friendly amendment that we include.

[3:05:20] » I'll accept that. I didn't know if we wanted to do that as part of the motion,

[3:05:22] but I certainly would accept that as part of the amendment. Okay. Thank you.

[3:05:28] uh so that we can continue to work on and refine it which we should which we

[3:05:33] should everyone in agreement the amendment

[3:05:39] » chair we would have uh regulations in place

[3:05:45] » yes >> in that process

[3:05:46] » yes immediately correct Tyler >> yes [clears throat]

[3:05:52] » so we're we're we're immediately strengthening our regs and still leaving

[3:05:59] the opportunity for planning and zoning and Judy Clark to review.

[3:06:04] All right, and thank you all today for your uh attention to this and appreciate

[3:06:10] your input. Sincerely, roll call, please.

[3:06:15] » Iruff. Hi,

[3:06:18] » Bruns. Hi, >> Williams. Hi.

[3:06:24] » Okay. Um resolution.

[3:06:28] We have to sign a resolution here.

[3:06:35] Do we need a close session? No. Good.

[3:06:49] Okay.

[3:07:02] G.

[3:07:14] » Okay.

[3:07:19] » Okay. >> Thank you. She

[3:07:30] » next we have hear concerns from elected officials, department heads or

[3:07:33] representatives. >> The road man's here. Any storm reports?

[3:07:42] Jason, >> do you have anything for us on anything?

[3:07:50] Did we get all the claims? >> No, we're still

[3:07:53] » still signing them.

[3:08:09] [clears throat]

[3:08:11] » Kayla, did you probably not there yet, but for the

[3:08:16] transportation study. Thank you for covering that.

[3:08:20] » No problem. It was a good

[3:08:34] » Yeah, I just wanted

[3:08:43] » it performed manual reset.

[3:08:49] » That's reason.

[3:08:54] I would prefer not >> to

[3:09:01] understand

[3:09:11] the button and see what does come.

[3:09:15] » And so part of part of this is parts and repairs.

[3:09:20] It's not just manual reset troubleshoot.

[3:09:35] » I think that's very

[3:09:45] subm

[3:09:49] seems that really high.

[3:10:13] Well, >> I think uh

[3:10:19] » I think it's >> performed manual reset and I think it's

[3:10:23] way more than that. >> Yeah, but you know it should be a little

[3:10:27] bit more than that. I mean, you know, when that kind of a bill

[3:10:31] » understood >> and it's it's not on Booker, it's on our

[3:10:37] » whether I don't care if it's AJ, I don't care snails,

[3:10:41] but

[3:10:52] Sounds like my alarm, but it's not.

[3:11:01] [clears throat]

[3:11:08] » Uh, let's go on to committee reports. Anybody have a committee report?

[3:11:14] » I do have a committee report. Uh

[3:11:21] Lincoln County Crossroads had our monthly meeting on Wednesday morning

[3:11:27] via Zoom with the JEO group and the um committee local

[3:11:34] committee people. [clears throat]

[3:11:37] » It was a great meeting. Um we discussed primarily the upcoming um meeting at the

[3:11:44] college that we're going to have on >> and I don't have all my notes with me

[3:11:50] here [clears throat] and allergies are wreaking havoc with my voice. Uh but it

[3:11:56] is September 17th 5:00 pm out at Midplains Community

[3:12:02] College South Campus. Uh, [clears throat]

[3:12:07] in our meeting, we agreed to do a hybrid. Instead of having it be a

[3:12:13] full-blown town hall or a full-blown open house, we're going to combine those

[3:12:19] two meetings. Uh, so there will be an agenda that is very time-specific put

[3:12:25] out. Uh, so people don't think it's a come and go and get there after certain

[3:12:32] things have been presented. So, be uh looking for the press release. I believe

[3:12:37] that's coming out to all the press today. We will do a better job and

[3:12:43] advertising it farther in advance this time was one of the conversations I had

[3:12:48] with JEO and so um we I feel like we've really come to a good spot. They will

[3:12:55] have a lot of information that the committee hasn't even seen yet by the

[3:12:59] time we get to the to the open house slash town hall.

[3:13:05] » Very good.

[3:13:15] » I'm glad to see that you do the hybrid things

[3:13:19] instead of, you know, [clears throat] >> we have we had a lot of discussion about

[3:13:25] that. I think the hybrid meeting is going to be more informational

[3:13:30] » and it'll help everybody be able to hear uh questions and answers at the same

[3:13:36] time. >> That's important.

[3:13:37] » That's very important to me. >> Is that the way you're going to come

[3:13:39] across as well? >> 30 different meanings when you leave the

[3:13:43] thing. >> Yeah.

[3:14:07] Becky, you have anything while we're signing these final claims.

[3:14:15] » Don't come don't show up Monday and don't come over here,

[3:14:18] » right?

[3:14:23] [clears throat and snorts]

[3:14:28] is any relation? >> Not that I'm aware of.

[3:14:33] » You don't want to sign that one. That's >> I don't The reason I did is because

[3:14:37] there two of them with the same amount on them.

[3:14:41] » That's traditional. >> I know. But um

[3:14:45] » yeah, it does kind of throw up a red flag, but it's it's how we usually do

[3:14:49] it. >> Watching.

[3:14:51] » Yeah. There's two lodging lodging.

[3:14:58] » I see they took in some more money. >> This was an inner fund transfer and it

[3:15:04] wasn't the lodging fund and the improvement fund like we usually have.

[3:15:08] This is this is an inner it's an improvement transfer of the lodging fund

[3:15:13] but for operating expenses but it's still 29.99.

[3:15:19] So it was a little bit confusing. We took care of the budget.

[3:15:23] » Okay. >> All right.

[3:15:30] » Let's see. What do I want to keep? We'll keep the one with my comments.

[3:15:44] [clears throat] >> Is that it?

[3:15:47] » That is it. Right. >> Have them all.

[3:15:49] » No more.

[3:15:54] Okay, I want to once again thank our colleagues here at the city of

[3:15:59] Northplation for us today. Uh thank you to all the IT

[3:16:04] folks that made this a seamless process moving across the street. Thank you so

[3:16:09] much for that. Mayor Keller, uh Mr. Gross.

[3:16:16] Thank you to those gentlemen for being very gracious to let us use this these

[3:16:20] chambers. So having nothing else that I know we

[3:16:24] have to be come before the board today. Becky says no. It's 12:05. We shall

[3:16:30] adjourn.

[3:16:36] There's my budget. There was something else.

[3:16:53] That's a lot.

[3:16:59] » Thank you.

[3:17:09] I'm going to have to put wheels on my So I could if I wanted to talk a

[3:17:16] I just

Lincoln County Commissioners Meeting, August 31, 2026

Transcript