[0:00] Okay, we got the thumbs up that we're
[0:01] ready to go in city council meeting,
[0:04] Spanish Fork City, uh, August 18th,
[0:06] 2026. Thank you all for coming in person
[0:10] and online all over watching our
[0:12] meeting. We appreciate the
[0:13] participation. Um, we'll start like we
[0:16] always do in Spanish Fork with a prayer
[0:19] and motivational message given by
[0:21] Councilman Oiler and then the pledge led
[0:24] by Councilman Harden. Councilman Oiler.
[0:26] >> Thank you, Mayor. I'll pray. Our
[0:30] father in heaven, we gather tonight in
[0:32] this council meeting and give gratitude.
[0:34] for
[0:37] the community in which we live. We're so
[0:39] grateful, Father, for those around us
[0:41] that that serve and do good and help
[0:44] those that are in need. Father, we're
[0:46] especially grateful for our first
[0:48] responders and ask that would continue
[0:50] to bless and protect them. and we're
[0:54] grateful for what they do to to keep us
[0:56] safe and to help us in times of need.
[0:59] Father, we recognize
[1:01] the blessing it is to live in the United
[1:05] States and we are so thankful for the
[1:07] freedoms we enjoy and ask that thou
[1:09] would protect
[1:12] those men and women that serve to
[1:14] maintain and preserve those freedoms.
[1:17] We're so thankful for them and their
[1:18] families.
[1:21] Father, we recognize the importance of
[1:22] the decisions that we'll make tonight as
[1:24] we discuss the needs and concerns and
[1:28] issues facing Spanish Fork. And we ask
[1:32] that thou would guide our thoughts and
[1:35] give us the direction that we need to
[1:37] make the appropriate
[1:39] and correct decisions that will benefit
[1:43] those that live within Spanish Fork.
[1:45] We're so grateful that we live where we
[1:46] do and enjoy the beauties around us.
[1:50] Father, guide and direct us. And we pray
[1:52] for these things in the name of Jesus
[1:54] Christ. Amen.
[1:55] >> Amen.
[1:57] >> Would the audience please rise and say
[1:58] the pledge with me?
[2:02] » I aliance to the flag of the United
[2:06] States of America and to the republic
[2:08] for which it stands. One nation under
[2:11] God, indivisible, with liberty and
[2:14] justice for all.
[2:19] Thank you everyone. We appreciate that.
[2:20] We have a couple of public hearings on
[2:22] the agenda tonight. We'll just kind of
[2:24] let you know from the beginning here
[2:25] that we'll probably get to those.
[2:27] There's a few of them tonight, but we'll
[2:29] probably get to those around the 6:15
[2:32] 620 6:15 to 6:30 mark. So, just just uh
[2:36] if you can kind of think about that. Got
[2:38] a couple other issues to get through uh
[2:40] as well. Um the third item on our agenda
[2:43] right now is public comments. Again,
[2:45] this isn't the section for public
[2:47] hearing. If there's a public hearing
[2:49] item uh on the agenda, uh that'll be uh
[2:53] that'll be listed on the agenda if you
[2:55] have it. But this is a section uh that's
[2:57] always at our council meetings of public
[2:59] comment. So, those that would like to
[3:01] come up and address the mayor and
[3:02] counsel for something not on the agenda
[3:05] or uh any issue maybe in your street or whatever it may be, this is the time
[3:09] that you can come up and address the
[3:11] mayor and counsel. And uh we'll have a
[3:14] threeminut timer up there that Jordan,
[3:16] you're running this. Uh so both sides,
[3:19] you can kind of see that. That'll be the
[3:21] same thing during the the public hearing
[3:22] section as well. But uh this is a time
[3:24] now for public comment for anybody that
[3:26] would like to come up and address the
[3:28] mayor and council on a general issue.
[3:31] You're more than welcome to.
[3:36] com
[3:44] » when we discuss it. Yep. When we get to
[3:46] that item. Yep. Good question. Thank
[3:48] you. Yep. Anybody else for general
[3:51] public comment?
[3:55] Okay. Seeing none, we'll go to the next
[3:59] part of the agenda. Item number four,
[4:01] council comments. This is where the
[4:03] council reports uh from the uh the
[4:07] committees, the boards that we sit on
[4:08] and and what's happened since last
[4:10] council meeting. Um I don't have any
[4:13] stock shows that happened since between
[4:15] the last meeting and here. So I don't
[4:17] have any of those pictures and stuff. Uh
[4:19] but uh any uh council comments, we
[4:22] typically go from one side to the other.
[4:24] This time we're going to switch it up a
[4:25] little bit and start with Councilman
[4:26] Oiler in the middle and then we'll move
[4:28] this way and then we'll get back to
[4:30] Councilman Tuk and end at Councilman
[4:32] Carden. Is that okay?
[4:34] >> Yep, that works.
[4:34] >> Councilman Oiler.
[4:35] >> Yeah, thank you, Mayor. I recognize
[4:37] there are people here for other things,
[4:39] so I'll keep my council comments short.
[4:41] I did have my animal shelter board
[4:43] meeting this past week and just wanted
[4:45] to report back that the animal shelter
[4:47] has worked out an agreement with the
[4:50] Utah County Attorney attorney's Office
[4:53] Civil Division to represent the animal
[4:56] shelter on any future legal matters that we seem or deem necessary. So, just
[5:01] wanted to make everyone aware of that.
[5:03] That's all I've got. Mayor,
[5:05] >> good. Thank you, Councilman Oyer.
[5:06] Councilwoman Beck,
[5:08] >> I do not have anything tonight. Thank
[5:09] you. Okay, Councilman Marshall,
[5:11] >> just one. Um, school's starting up here
[5:13] pretty soon. The sun's getting in in a
[5:16] kind of a bad spot. Please be safe when
[5:18] you're driving your kids to school in
[5:20] the morning. Um, it's I'm always shocked
[5:24] at the speed we drive on our city
[5:26] streets. And while there's this many
[5:27] people here, I can preach a little bit.
[5:29] Um, so thanks for coming. Um, and slow
[5:32] down. That's it for me.
[5:33] >> Perfect. Thank you, Councilman Marshall.
[5:35] Councilman Tuk.
[5:37] >> Thank you, Mayor. Just one item of
[5:39] business from me this evening. I'd like
[5:40] to welcome up to the front our president
[5:42] and CEO of the Chamber of Commerce in
[5:44] Spanish Fork and Salem. That is Kathleen
[5:46] Levit for a couple announcements.
[5:58] » Um to save time, I'll just talk about
[6:00] the upcoming events of over the next
[6:03] couple of weeks for the business
[6:05] community. On Thursday of this week, the
[6:08] 20th, we'll be having our new networking
[6:11] lunchon at the Hampton Inn. Um, I'm
[6:14] actually very excited for this one. We
[6:16] have Gunther's Heating and Air
[6:18] Conditioning, teaching us about um how
[6:20] we can save some money on our power
[6:24] bill. And then we're trying Spitz, uh,
[6:26] the new Mediterranean restaurant in town
[6:29] for the catering. So, it's going to be a
[6:30] fantastic meeting of the minds. Uh then
[6:34] Women in Business is having an ice cream
[6:36] social on August 26th and that'll be at
[6:40] 1:30 PM. Hopefully the women in business
[6:43] can meet while kids are at school and
[6:45] not quite out yet. So we're still trying
[6:47] out some different times and dates for
[6:49] the best meeting spot for our women in
[6:51] business. Um then we have um
[6:57] let's see a ribbon cutting for Stone and
[7:01] Soul Wellness. They're a new business in
[7:04] Canyon Creek Parkway. It's a cold plunge
[7:07] sauna wellness studio. I just actually
[7:09] came from it right now. Beautiful owner,
[7:12] wonderful new space. So, we'll be
[7:14] cutting the ribbon at noon on September
[7:16] 3rd. And last thing, I just wanted to
[7:19] remind everyone, the farmers market is
[7:20] still going strong right here in City
[7:23] Hall parking lot every Saturday morning
[7:25] through the end of October. So, we
[7:27] really do have one of the best farmers
[7:30] markets around. So, please come out and
[7:32] support your local farmers. That's all
[7:33] I've got. Thank you.
[7:34] >> Thanks, Kathleen.
[7:35] >> Did you do the cold plunge?
[7:37] >> No, but I'm going to go back and do it.
[7:40] >> Thank you, Kathleen. And thank you for
[7:42] taking good care of our business
[7:43] community. I attended the farmers market
[7:44] for the first time this past Saturday.
[7:46] It's just right out here uh just west of
[7:48] this building, the parking lot, and it
[7:49] was outstanding. Better every year. Uh
[7:52] so many uh things to consider
[7:54] purchasing, and my wife and I purchased
[7:56] a lot. So, I invite everybody to come
[7:58] check it out for the weeks that are in
[8:01] front of us still. So, that's all I
[8:02] have. Mayor,
[8:03] >> perfect. Thank you, Councilman Tuk. I
[8:05] will say Spitz, I visited Spitz the last
[8:09] week. That was the first time. And they
[8:10] got the Post Malone uh you know,
[8:13] painting in there with the Fiesta Day's
[8:14] rodeo hat. And then they got Jade Romero
[8:18] softball, you know, Spanish Fort Dawn
[8:20] softball in there. I'm like, "Hey, how
[8:22] does the mayor get painted on your
[8:23] wall?" And they said, "That's not going
[8:25] to happen." And so, um, it's pretty
[8:27] cool. There's a lot of good stuff on the
[8:29] walls. So, yeah, good good place.
[8:31] Councilman Carden,
[8:33] >> thank you, Mayor. And at the farmers
[8:35] market, they do have peaches. So, if
[8:36] you're wondering, there are peaches this
[8:38] year. I know there was a worry about
[8:39] that for a while. Um, just a couple
[8:41] thing. The first thing is I was able to
[8:43] meet with the U City Council this last
[8:45] week. It's a group that I get to do and
[8:46] there's a couple alumni in the audience
[8:48] today. So, that's pretty awesome. Um, if
[8:50] you didn't know, our youth city council
[8:52] does an awesome job of vetting things
[8:54] that are happening in the city. Um, also
[8:57] volunteering at a lot of things that
[8:59] happen throughout the city. And one of
[9:00] those things that's getting ready to
[9:01] happen is our harvest moon. Harrah.
[9:03] That'll happen on September 11th. That's
[9:05] a Friday night. I know historically,
[9:07] except for last year, it was done on a
[9:08] Saturday. We're moving it to Friday
[9:10] because we had the food truck round up
[9:12] over in the park just across the street.
[9:14] That'll be from 5 to 8:00 PM. There's a
[9:16] couple of uh performances that'll be
[9:18] done, some art, some activities, food
[9:21] truck vendors, other vendors. So, please
[9:23] come check that out if you have time.
[9:25] The other thing that I wanted to talk
[9:26] about with the arts council is the
[9:28] corral is getting ready to start. So, if
[9:30] you have music talent or you just want
[9:32] to go hang out with people who may have
[9:34] that talent, um they are starting on
[9:37] August 25th at 7 to 9:00 p.m. in the
[9:40] Maple Mountain High School choir room
[9:42] and they will take singers of all um
[9:45] levels is what they said. So, that's all
[9:47] I have here. You can move your lips and
[9:49] get away with it is what they're saying.
[9:51] >> They will teach you. Perfect. Thank you,
[9:53] Councilman Carden. Uh I don't have
[9:55] anything besides just what Councilman
[9:56] Marshall said. um you know this morning
[9:59] getting kids uh to and from school just
[10:02] a busy busy time and and there's no good
[10:04] way there's no easy way uh to get to and
[10:07] from any school. The solution is not to
[10:10] make bigger roads to make people go
[10:11] faster. It's just it's just tough uh
[10:14] every school. So let's let's be safe.
[10:16] Thank you to Chief the the crossing
[10:18] guards that are keeping everybody safe
[10:21] and directing them. Let's let's be
[10:23] respectful there, too. And make sure to
[10:25] wave uh at them with all five fingers uh
[10:28] as they're as they're directing you and telling you where to go so we can we
[10:32] can get kids to and from school safe.
[10:34] So, back in session. Thank you, Nebo
[10:36] School District, for your partnership
[10:38] and all the teachers that are willing to take on all of our kids, especially
[10:42] the menden hall kids. Uh it's it's much
[10:45] appreciated. So, uh, item number five,
[10:47] now that council comments are over,
[10:49] staff reports, uh, manager parents,
[10:52] anything from the staff previous?
[10:55] >> Yeah, a couple of staff reports. We'll
[10:56] look to, uh, Bronco, our new parks and
[10:59] rec director, he's got, I think, two.
[11:00] And then Jared, our public works
[11:02] assistant
[11:04] director, has one.
[11:06] >> Whichever you like.
[11:07] >> Right there. Just make sure you turn
[11:08] your mic on.
[11:11] >> I just want to give you a couple
[11:12] updates. uh some projects going on in
[11:14] the parks and recreation department. Uh
[11:16] the first off is the Cany view park pond
[11:18] restoration project. And I gave Jack uh
[11:21] Jordan, you have the photos. Did Jack
[11:22] provide you with a couple photos? That's
[11:24] okay. So many of you have either smelt
[11:26] or seen or both. Canyon View Pond has
[11:28] been drained. We drained it uh the week
[11:29] after Fiesta Days and uh are looking we
[11:33] got about $400,000 worth of grants
[11:35] through the U.org or and the uh
[11:38] foundations and we're looking to go out
[11:41] to bid and uh start digging early
[11:45] October. Our goal is to take 8 to 10
[11:48] feet out and dredge it and uh sh up the
[11:52] southside with some landscape rocks so
[11:54] kids can stand on there and fish. It's
[11:56] been a challenge for them to fish and
[11:57] push some clay in there and level that
[11:58] bank out. We'll have some ADA
[12:02] access on the north side. So, you'll
[12:04] have about 20 feet of concrete and a
[12:05] driveway that goes up to the pond on the
[12:08] north side. And there will be good
[12:09] fishing uh all the way around. We'll
[12:12] extend the ADA dock on the east side. Uh
[12:14] we ran into a couple challenges. There's
[12:16] quite a few springs that are coming up
[12:17] through there. So, we got to work
[12:18] through that before we we we go any
[12:20] further with the project. We're pretty
[12:22] excited about it. Uh at the fairgrounds,
[12:24] many of you probably seen that it's
[12:26] looking a little barren. Uh the Willie
[12:28] Barn was torn down. Uh they're supposed
[12:30] to be putting in the new footings for
[12:32] the new indoor arena this week. The uh
[12:35] stall barns on the east side of the high
[12:37] shop rail have been torn down as well as
[12:39] the asphalt uh for that uh leisure grass
[12:44] area that we're going to put in for
[12:45] those that come down to visit. But we're
[12:47] our goal really is to try not to be
[12:50] super intrusive for those that have used
[12:51] our amenities that are driving through
[12:53] or some of the other shows that have
[12:54] come through while we're doing this
[12:55] project. But we're anticipating that
[12:57] being completed uh the beginning of
[12:59] April.
[13:02] » Any questions?
[13:04] >> I like it.
[13:06] >> Thank you.
[13:06] >> I think the video almost put the smell
[13:08] through through the TVs and phones. It was pretty bad. Is it It's getting
[13:13] better.
[13:14] >> Yeah.
[13:14] >> Bronco, can you remind me who which
[13:16] department was it that helped with the
[13:18] grant for the funding of the Canyon View
[13:19] Park?
[13:20] >> Uh it was a it was a lot of hands in on
[13:22] that. So Carson Hardy was a was the one
[13:25] who wrote the grants. Um Bart Moral was
[13:28] also played a played a huge role in that
[13:30] as well.
[13:30] >> And who who provided the grant? Who did
[13:32] we get that through?
[13:33] >> So the Uorg is the Utah Outdoor
[13:35] Recreation Grant. Okay.
[13:37] >> And that's provided by we're working
[13:38] directly with the Division of Wildlife
[13:40] Management on that. The other was the
[13:41] water restoration initiative. That's
[13:43] another state grant.
[13:45] >> Yeah, that's exciting. I know a lot of
[13:46] youth love to fish in the Canyon View
[13:48] pond. So that'll be great. Yeah, I've
[13:50] been wanting to do this since uh I
[13:52] started with the city. In fact, I have
[13:53] some things I've written down trying to
[13:55] work with them and it's finally coming
[13:56] together. So, I'm really excited about
[13:57] that project.
[13:59] >> How do you pull the pond be once
[14:00] finished roughly throughout? Will it be
[14:02] like 10 feet or
[14:04] >> Our goal is at the at the greatest depth
[14:06] is 10 feet. I don't know that that will
[14:08] be the case just because of some of
[14:09] those springs that are coming up through
[14:10] we got to work around, but that's our
[14:12] goal is 8 to 10 feet at the deepest. the
[14:14] whale and the festival of lights will
[14:15] finally be able to swim.
[14:18] >> Won't be stranded.
[14:19] >> But with that, if you're thinking of
[14:21] swimming in there, I don't think that's the idea, right? It's still just
[14:25] for fish to swim in.
[14:26] >> Yes. Yeah, there will be no swimming.
[14:29] Um, it is tempting to go in there right
[14:31] now, but please stay please stay away
[14:33] from the area. It's it's it's pretty
[14:35] mucky. It stinks anyway, so you
[14:37] shouldn't go down there.
[14:40] >> Just go up the road to the reservoir.
[14:42] That's a nice beach, place to fish, and
[14:45] a place to swim if if you need it.
[14:50] Or we got a great new rec center. Thank
[14:52] you, Bronco. Anything else?
[14:54] >> We got one from Corey and then I forgot.
[14:56] Uh Bon has a staff report as well.
[14:57] Sorry. One from Jared. Go ahead, Jared.
[15:01] >> Mic's off.
[15:04] >> Oh, sorry. There it is. You've been down
[15:06] to 900 North, 1,00 north, 200 East. You
[15:10] can see that there's some lane closures
[15:11] and a pipe along the ground. We're
[15:13] rerouting the sewer because we're
[15:15] relining the 24-in line
[15:18] uh that runs to the sewer plant that
[15:20] goes down 200 east underneath the
[15:22] freeway. That line's been deteriorating.
[15:24] So, it's been on the list to be redone.
[15:26] And we're lining the pipe and when we're
[15:29] done, the pipe will be good for another
[15:31] 50 years.
[15:33] Uh the good news is the project's almost
[15:35] complete and the traffic control will be
[15:37] done by the end of next week.
[15:40] I don't know if there's any questions,
[15:41] but that's what that project is.
[15:44] >> I think that's been a headache for a lot
[15:46] of people as they travel on 10th or
[15:48] second trying to get over to the that
[15:49] area, but um really extending the life
[15:52] of that sewer line, which would be an
[15:54] impossible project to dig up uh right
[15:57] because of uh where it goes and what
[15:59] it's underneath. be impossible to do it
[16:02] underneath I-15, but uh we found that
[16:05] lining the projects increases the
[16:07] lifespan of the project, but we don't
[16:08] tear up the roads. Um it's less
[16:12] intrusive on the traffic. We just do
[16:14] lane closures instead of full closures.
[16:16] >> It's an interesting concept, right? You
[16:18] still have some some intrusion and it's
[16:19] still an annoyance for people, but the
[16:22] amount of annoyance is significantly
[16:23] less and the cost is is much less. So,
[16:25] we're we're really grateful and proud of
[16:27] that project. And then Von touch on the amicus brief.
[16:32] >> Yeah, amicus brief. There's an impact
[16:34] fee case that uh was happening in Utah.
[16:36] It's Stanley versus Salt Lake City. Um
[16:39] they alleged that the impact fees that
[16:41] they were required to pay weren't
[16:43] authorized under the the impact fee
[16:47] facilities plan at the time that they
[16:49] were charged or that they were spent on
[16:51] projects later. Um the district court
[16:54] found for the city and said that the
[16:57] impact fees could be spent on projects
[17:00] that are in later versions of the impact
[17:02] fee facilities plan not that frozen in
[17:04] time list uh when they paid their their
[17:07] fees. So they appealed the the to the
[17:10] appellet courts and the league of cities
[17:13] and towns has urged an amicus brief to
[17:15] be filed and so several cities are are
[17:18] joining that. Provo city drafted it in
[17:20] support of Salt Lake City. Um, basically
[17:23] the the argument is that cities should
[17:25] be able to spend their impact fees on
[17:27] projects as long as they're in the same
[17:29] infrastructure category. For example,
[17:31] sewer impact fees on sewer projects
[17:34] under today's current impact fee
[17:36] facilities plan, not the one six years
[17:38] ago whenever the fees were paid. So that
[17:41] and that's that's needful because that
[17:44] recognizes that growth might not always
[17:46] happen while we expect it to or projects
[17:48] may become more costly and some may be
[17:51] less needful and some may appear on the project list. Technology changes
[17:56] a lot of reasons why the list of
[17:58] projects on the impact fee facilities
[17:59] plan will change over the years. So
[18:02] we're supporting Provo and Salt Lake
[18:03] City in in that argument
[18:06] if you're unless you feel otherwise.
[18:10] questions for Vaughn in joining that.
[18:13] >> I think the only question I have is is
[18:15] it amicus or amikas?
[18:17] >> I've heard amikas, but that's
[18:18] >> I've heard.
[18:19] >> I was the one who lost
[18:20] >> tomato tomato
[18:21] >> like anyone knows what you're talking
[18:23] about.
[18:23] >> It's actually in some meetings I've been
[18:25] in that's been the the whole topic of
[18:28] discussion is about is it amicus or amus
[18:30] not the issue which is kind of goofy but
[18:33] >> it's a big deal and and appreciate Bon
[18:35] reviewing that today. Okay. I think you
[18:37] only got it today in terms of the the
[18:38] legal argument, but it's a good
[18:40] framework and uh it the fact pattern I
[18:43] think fits a lot of how we do what we
[18:45] do. So, it's it's directly relative to how we operate.
[18:50] >> And that's it. Mayor,
[18:51] >> you'll hear us say this. It's said um
[18:54] closer to the state's legislative
[18:57] session all the time, but uh I think
[18:58] that's a good example of one-size
[19:00] misfits all with with cities. right
[19:02] here. We are signing a an amikas brief
[19:05] with Salt Lake City and and and Provo
[19:08] and in ways that are like, hey, you
[19:10] know, cities operate differently and and
[19:13] uh and have some similarities, but but
[19:15] also are unique in different ways, too.
[19:17] So, I think that's a that's a good good
[19:20] point there.
[19:22] >> And not in staff reports, but maybe just
[19:24] to to recognize and this is I think the
[19:27] first time since we've been in this
[19:28] space that we're actually using the
[19:29] overflow room. Uh, and so unbeknownst to
[19:32] you, you might not be seeing it, but
[19:34] there's probably now some 30 or 40
[19:37] people that are that are seated in the heritage room. They're watching this
[19:40] there. Um, and I want to make sure that
[19:43] they they recognize that we know they're
[19:45] in there. And and as we go through the
[19:47] couple of public hearings, there may be
[19:48] some people that we need to get from
[19:50] over there into here, which is why we
[19:51] have those in part why we have those
[19:53] seats reserved there on the front row.
[19:56] So yeah, you guys that are out in the
[19:57] hallway, if you want to have a seat,
[19:58] there is I think 120 115 seats in that
[20:02] space over there that they can sit in as
[20:04] well.
[20:04] >> Stadium seating. Pull it out. Yeah, the
[20:07] seats are out.
[20:08] >> All right. So yeah, uh if you didn't
[20:09] hear that, there's a heritage room right
[20:11] next to here that that is streaming this
[20:14] as well. So if you can't find a spot in
[20:15] here or a spot in the hallway, please join us in there. And uh as we
[20:19] get closer to the public hearing that
[20:21] you might be here for uh we'll we'll
[20:23] make sure you you you get your spot in
[20:25] the queue and come in. Uh okay, thank
[20:28] you for that. Uh Seth, anything else?
[20:30] Staff reports. That's what we wanted to
[20:32] cover there. Okay. Uh item six is the
[20:35] consent items. We've got uh one, two,
[20:38] three, four, It looks like consent items. Uh
[20:44] council minutes of last meeting. Utah
[20:46] County Tourism Tax Advisory Board Grant,
[20:49] FAA Federal Contract Tower Reimburseable
[20:52] Agreement, and HOA West LLC Vista View Fiber Service Agreement. Any
[20:58] questions on those consent items from
[21:00] the council?
[21:02] >> If not, I'd entertain a motion to
[21:03] approve the consent items.
[21:05] >> So, move.
[21:07] >> Motion made by Councilwoman Beck.
[21:09] >> Second.
[21:09] by Councilman Marshall. All in
[21:11] favor say yes.
[21:12] >> Yes.
[21:13] >> Consent items have been approved. That
[21:15] takes us to the public hearings uh of
[21:17] tonight. We've got a few of them. Um we
[21:20] uh uh I think maybe it's a good a good
[21:24] practice that some some of you are
[21:26] probably here for a public hearing that
[21:28] has to do with land use on the east side
[21:30] of town. I believe that was in in front
[21:32] of our uh planning commission just a
[21:35] couple of weeks ago. And so maybe that's
[21:37] a good a good practice run uh for our
[21:39] public hearings tonight. Many of you
[21:41] probably here for the the other public
[21:43] hearing that deals modifying Title 15.
[21:47] There's a couple of those tonight, but
[21:48] you're probably here for for the one
[21:50] that has to do with with power
[21:52] generation and and data centers. Uh the
[21:56] first one that we'll get to 7.2
[21:58] uh is an ordinance to amend Dave, if
[22:01] you're okay with getting to that one. Is
[22:03] that all right?
[22:04] >> Okay. Ordinance to amend the zoning map
[22:07] to change the zoning of a property to RR
[22:10] and R112 to C2 located approximately 400
[22:13] North Spanish Fork Parkway. I guess I
[22:15] should have checked. Maybe the
[22:16] applicant's not here for that. Is the
[22:20] We're covered. Okay, applicant's here.
[22:21] Perfect. Okay. Um, so Dave, if you'll
[22:25] excuse me, kind of this is a spot that I
[22:27] want to just maybe review our our public
[22:30] hearing uh um agenda or excuse me, our our
[22:35] rules of of our public hearings in
[22:38] Spanish Fork. And if if these need
[22:40] repeat, we can we can do this again um
[22:44] uh at the next public hearing. But let
[22:47] me just run through these really quick.
[22:50] Uh so so we all know the the rules that
[22:53] we're playing by in in our city council
[22:55] meeting. Um the first one speaker uh
[22:58] limited to three minutes each and we'll
[23:00] see a timer up there. So that'll be up
[23:02] there and and possibly one behind us. So
[23:04] you you'll be able to see it at that
[23:06] time. If when you reach three minutes on
[23:09] your on your uh comment, please please
[23:12] try to wrap it up. Uh you know, finish
[23:14] that sentence. If there's anything else
[23:16] that you'd like to say, please submit it
[23:18] to us in in writing. Uh we'll we'll
[23:21] receive that and take it under
[23:22] consideration. Um if you hear your
[23:24] comment maybe said, uh please uh please,
[23:28] you know, uh just count that as as we've
[23:30] heard the comment. Uh and so there's no
[23:32] need to repeat what what somebody else
[23:35] has said. Um we are taking notes up here
[23:38] and so during a public uh hearing
[23:40] section, you won't see us engage. If you
[23:43] ask us a question, we'll be writing that
[23:45] down. If you ask the applicant a
[23:46] question, you we'll be writing that
[23:48] down. And if you ask the city staff,
[23:50] we'll be writing that down as well. But
[23:52] so we don't eat up your your three
[23:54] minutes, we we won't um we won't answer
[23:56] those while we're talking. Um really
[23:59] proud of this part in Spanish fork, but
[24:01] shouting, yelling, clapping, not
[24:03] allowed. Either in disagreement or
[24:05] agreement with what somebody's saying.
[24:07] We want to hear from everybody and we
[24:09] don't want anybody feeling intimidated
[24:11] about getting up here and speaking one
[24:13] way or the other. So, please don't don't
[24:15] cheer or boo or or clap or anything. We want to hear from everybody while we
[24:19] have a a public hearing going on and we
[24:22] want everybody to be comfortable that
[24:23] way in speaking to us. Um, this is a
[24:26] limited public forum. So, you're you're
[24:28] you are free to address the council. Try
[24:31] to try to not address each other. Uh
[24:33] that could maybe be something that you do outside or on your own time. Um
[24:39] and then please uh when you get up uh to
[24:41] the mic in our public hearing, state
[24:42] your name and where you're from. We've
[24:45] got uh because we've got so many uh here
[24:48] for a public hearing tonight, we'll have
[24:49] a different system that we'll ask you to
[24:51] have a QR code and and and maybe that's
[24:54] so everybody's not standing up in line
[24:57] waiting to speak to us, but you can sit
[24:59] comfortably and then we'll call you when
[25:00] it's your time to come up. But we'll try
[25:02] to fill these seats. These front seats
[25:04] here are reserved for for maybe the next
[25:06] three or four that are going to be the the people to speak and we'll let
[25:09] you know your name so you can get up
[25:11] there and and uh sit down comfortably
[25:14] until it's time to come up. Um and like
[25:16] I said, if you can name and the city
[25:18] you're from, uh then uh that would be
[25:20] great so we get that on the on the
[25:22] record for you tonight. Okay, public
[25:24] hearing. Uh Dave, before we go to a
[25:28] public hearing, please uh if you could
[25:29] brief us on 7.2. too. Mr. Mayor, quick
[25:32] handoff to Mr. Snyder. Perfect. Mr.
[25:36] Snyder. Thank you. There he is.
[25:42] » Uh I'm a little more comfortable right
[25:44] here. Thank you.
[25:46] >> Uh this was reviewed by the planning
[25:48] commission recently um at their August
[25:51] meeting, August 5th. Um the request is a
[25:53] zoning map amendment. Um, this is on the
[25:56] east side of town at the corner of 400
[25:59] North and Spanish Fork Parkway. Let's go
[26:01] to the next slide.
[26:03] Uh, you can see the area that's
[26:05] highlighted. Um, it's just the north
[26:08] portion of the property that abut
[26:10] Spanish Fork Parkway. The, uh, south of
[26:13] it is already zoned R12 and will remain
[26:16] uh, that way. And the applicant is
[26:18] looking to change the zoning um, on the
[26:21] north half to commercial. On the right
[26:24] you see the general plan. It does
[26:26] embrace uh some type of commercial use
[26:28] uh at the intersection and along 400
[26:31] North. Let's go to the next slide.
[26:34] So once again, this is the request.
[26:35] They're taking uh portions of property
[26:37] from the RR, which is rural residential,
[26:41] and then a a portion 75 ft of the R112
[26:45] um to general commercial C2. Let's go to
[26:48] the next slide.
[26:49] Um this here is conceptual only. It was
[26:53] provided by the applicant um for
[26:56] reference. And so you can see the south
[26:58] half which is the right side of the
[27:00] screen that would still be developed in
[27:02] larger single family uh residential lots
[27:05] similar to what's uh surrounding it. And
[27:08] then the north portion um the applicants
[27:11] hoping to expand the commercial in the
[27:13] area um which is just to the north where
[27:16] the Harmons is is proposed to be
[27:18] located. Um let's go to the next slide.
[27:22] This was the recommendation from the
[27:24] planning commission. They unanimous
[27:27] unanimously, excuse me, uh recommended
[27:29] approval with a 60 vote. Um based on
[27:32] these findings that you see here, in
[27:34] their opinion, it was consistent with
[27:36] the general plan designation of
[27:37] commercial. Um it'll provide for
[27:40] commercial uses at an important and
[27:41] highly visible intersection. Um and that
[27:44] the proposal will enhance commercial
[27:46] uses and service in in the area. Uh and
[27:48] then lastly that the proposal will
[27:51] promote conveniently located commercial
[27:53] uses and services. Um we did hold a
[27:55] public uh hearing at the planning
[27:58] commission. We did have a number of the
[28:00] adjoining property owners um get up and
[28:02] share their comments. Um those are
[28:04] listed there in your staff report. Some
[28:06] of the things we did did hear um is the
[28:10] need for commercial services. U some
[28:12] felt this would be a beneficial use
[28:14] under the power lines that bisect the
[28:16] property. Um, others were in favor of
[28:18] commercial and not town homes a number
[28:21] of years ago. Um, there was a proposal
[28:24] for town homes on the property which was not wellreceived. Uh, we did
[28:28] hear some concerns from the neighbors
[28:30] about potential for headlights in the
[28:32] drive-thru, noise from the drive-thru,
[28:35] uh, traffic needed intersection
[28:37] improvements and road improvements um,
[28:39] along Spanish Fork Parkway. Um, any
[28:43] questions for staff at this time?
[28:47] Questions for Mr. Snyder.
[28:48] >> Brandon, I have one quick question. On
[28:50] that east side of where they're going to
[28:52] go commercial on the zoning map, would
[28:54] they need to put up a masonry fence
[28:56] since that's not zoned yet or would they
[28:59] have to wait to see what happens there?
[29:00] What would that look like?
[29:02] >> Sorry, on the east side.
[29:04] >> So, east is north on this
[29:06] >> whating
[29:08] the field. East is never north.
[29:11] >> It might be up.
[29:12] >> Hey, engineer speak. Be quiet.
[29:14] >> Oh, that's true.
[29:15] I see the masonry wall come into play is
[29:18] to the south where it abuts the three
[29:20] residential lots.
[29:21] >> So if the property on map north
[29:26] >> Thank you.
[29:27] >> would um if it went residential, let's
[29:30] say it went R12, which is in the general
[29:32] plan kind of in the area right now,
[29:34] would the commercial be required to
[29:35] build a fence at that point or what
[29:37] would that look like? um at this point.
[29:40] So, this is just conceptual. Those
[29:41] details we'd work out with the site plan
[29:43] and the subdivision plat, but in their
[29:45] current proposal, um there's a trail
[29:48] that's uh along Spanish Parkway as well
[29:50] as 400 North and then a trail that
[29:53] follows the power line corridor. And so,
[29:56] their current proposal in this concept
[29:58] is that trail would be on the east
[30:01] property line.
[30:03] >> Um but we can definitely make note of of
[30:05] that. Uh generally commercial at budding
[30:08] residential you do have a a landscape
[30:10] buffer with a masonry wall.
[30:13] >> So your question is about timing.
[30:14] >> Yeah because it's not zoned yet, right?
[30:16] It's RR right now. I don't know when and
[30:19] if that will change. I just don't know
[30:21] who would pay for that if it went
[30:24] residential. That's my question. I guess
[30:25] I probably asked it poorly.
[30:27] >> Council, I mean I I'll maybe add to what
[30:30] Brandon shared. Our ordinance would not
[30:32] require today a wall to be constructed
[30:34] there. And it would be next to
[30:37] impossible in the future to go back to a
[30:40] property owner that had developed
[30:42] sometime prior to
[30:45] a neighboring property developing and
[30:47] ask them to do something like build that
[30:48] wall.
[30:49] >> So if we wanted it, we would have to
[30:51] hold the new zone, whoever zoned it at
[30:54] that point to build that fence if that's
[30:56] what we wanted,
[30:57] >> which is somewhat common. Yeah. To do
[30:58] that. I'll also mention that the
[31:02] configuration of the general plan is
[31:03] such that at least part of that property
[31:05] to the east conceivably could develop
[31:07] non-residentially.
[31:08] >> Correct.
[31:09] >> Okay. Thank you,
[31:11] >> Brad. And I have a question for you
[31:13] about this. So just west of this
[31:15] proposed development on the 2550 East
[31:18] road right there that goes and you know
[31:20] if you were continue it be in front of
[31:21] the high school Maple Mountain High
[31:22] School right now on the corner there. So
[31:24] if we're looking at the map on the
[31:25] bottom right uh it curves you know you
[31:28] have to it's kind of dangerous in my
[31:30] opinion but will this development uh
[31:32] will finish a sidewalk and make it
[31:34] straight? Will it take out that curve
[31:36] that intersection? Do you know what I'm
[31:38] talking about?
[31:39] I don't have a pointer, but you're
[31:41] talking the far right side of the
[31:43] screen. Yep.
[31:43] >> Uh that was a question that was raised
[31:45] in the public hearing and I'll let Jared
[31:48] uh speak as as uh he sees fit to
[31:51] clarify, but um improvements happen as
[31:54] development occurs. And so if the uh
[31:57] developer were to phase it and start at
[31:59] the north end um with the commercial,
[32:01] then those improvements would go in um
[32:04] and then as the subdivision goes in,
[32:07] those improvements would then be
[32:08] completed. That was a concern that was
[32:11] shared with one of the neighbors as far
[32:12] as uh it'd be nice to try and get all
[32:14] the improvements on the east side of
[32:16] Spanish Fork Parkway in at once. Um but
[32:19] ultimately that happens as development
[32:21] occurs unless there's some other
[32:23] direction by the council.
[32:24] >> Okay, good. Yeah, I would be in favor of
[32:26] that too. So
[32:26] >> I would also be in favor of like
[32:28] finishing that whole road. I think it
[32:29] would be really dangerous to leave it
[32:31] open.
[32:32] >> Stacy, are you talking about the west
[32:33] side as well?
[32:35] >> Are you just talking about the
[32:36] development? Yeah. Let me make sure I'm
[32:38] understanding where you're are you
[32:39] talking on Spanish Parkway or are you
[32:41] talking on
[32:42] >> Yeah. Spanish Parkway will be that will
[32:44] be approved improved
[32:47] >> the whole piece that's outlined right
[32:49] there. Even the residential.
[32:51] >> Yeah. Yeah. It just may come with it may
[32:54] be phased, but I think you can talk with
[32:56] the applicant about not phasing it.
[32:58] >> Okay.
[33:00] Make sure I'm clear. Stacy, you're
[33:02] talking about both the east and the west
[33:05] side of Spanish park. No,
[33:07] >> no.
[33:09] Just the east side. So,
[33:14] >> the west side currently has
[33:15] >> You guys, we really do know our
[33:16] directions.
[33:17] >> The west side currently has homes. The
[33:18] east side is where we're looking at
[33:20] this.
[33:21] >> So, the west side of the proposed site,
[33:24] but the east side of the street.
[33:26] >> Okay. Thank you.
[33:27] >> Yes.
[33:28] >> Perfect. Well, this is oriented
[33:29] correctly.
[33:30] >> West of the development. That's good
[33:32] pointer.
[33:34] >> Who's driving?
[33:35] >> Jordan is. Good job, Jordan. Takes an
[33:37] accountant to get us straight. So,
[33:40] you're talking about where this pointer
[33:42] is, that side of the road will be you
[33:44] won't fully improve from the the full
[33:46] length of this proposal.
[33:48] >> Yeah. Otherwise, that's going to jut out
[33:50] and then
[33:51] >> it's going to look almost exactly like
[33:53] it does today.
[33:54] >> Yeah.
[33:55] >> It's just in a different jutting
[33:56] location.
[33:57] >> Yeah. Just right on the corner there,
[33:59] too. Just take off that edge.
[34:01] >> Is the applicant here?
[34:02] >> Yeah.
[34:02] >> Wait, before I come, they come up. I
[34:04] have a question.
[34:05] Um, can we go back to the slides,
[34:09] Brandon?
[34:11] So, the proposal is C2 all of this. How
[34:15] do you build residential in that C2
[34:17] zone?
[34:22] » So, the proposal is not for the entire
[34:24] property, it's for the north half.
[34:26] >> So, that that
[34:28] >> that rectangle there is the bottom of
[34:30] the commercial development. And from the
[34:33] rectangle to the south,
[34:36] no changes, but that is part of the
[34:38] overall development.
[34:40] >> There are changes. Right now, it's
[34:42] >> it's
[34:42] >> Sorry, go ahead.
[34:43] >> Oh, go ahead. Sorry. I was just going to
[34:45] say it's taking 75 ft of the north part.
[34:48] I don't if there's a pointer, but um
[34:51] >> I need some pointers. But the the
[34:53] concept will still allow for the
[34:56] remaining southern portion to develop in
[34:58] the R112 which I think it's nine lots
[35:01] shown and that was previously
[35:03] >> when you scroll forward two spots Jordan
[35:06] please
[35:06] >> to the concept
[35:07] >> clip right what just one that is that
[35:09] entire block
[35:11] >> and the commercial property is just the
[35:13] rectangle piece that we're changing
[35:15] zoning wise
[35:16] >> yes all right okay
[35:19] >> now can you go back to the general plan
[35:22] One more.
[35:22] >> A couple more right here.
[35:24] >> So, one of the findings from the
[35:27] planning commission was that it is
[35:28] consistent with the general plan. It
[35:30] doesn't seem consistent with the general
[35:31] plan.
[35:33] >> The planning commission when it was
[35:34] discussed with them, the general plan is
[35:37] a visionary document and so the lines
[35:39] for the general plan are not as static
[35:41] as the zoning district lines are. It's sort of semantics I think on my
[35:46] part, but we hang our hat on that so
[35:48] often that we say it's consistent with
[35:50] the general plan. Part of this is
[35:51] consistent with the general plan. Part
[35:53] of it is not consistent with the general
[35:54] plan.
[35:54] >> That's fair to say. And so when we look
[35:56] at the goals and policies and it
[35:58] encourages
[35:59] um commercial to be on the corner or
[36:02] commercial along hightra corridors. Uh
[36:05] in that regard it is.
[36:06] >> Okay. So they're extending that
[36:07] commercial general plan designation a
[36:09] little bit further to accommodate what
[36:11] they want to do there. Okay. That makes
[36:12] a ton of sense. Thanks.
[36:13] >> And I'll let the applicant speak to it,
[36:14] but I believe some of the reasons for
[36:16] that is just to offset the cost of some
[36:19] of the improvements that are being
[36:20] discussed such as along Spanish Fork
[36:22] Parkway.
[36:24] >> Mr. Mayor,
[36:25] >> yes.
[36:25] >> Maybe just one other thought on road
[36:27] improvements. Spanish city has been
[36:28] holding a certain amount of money to
[36:30] improve the west side of Spanish Fork
[36:32] Parkway along the subdivision frontage,
[36:35] the subdivision that Edge constructed.
[36:37] Boy, I think it was probably close to 10
[36:38] years ago now. Um so I understand that
[36:42] back at that time uh edge provided funds
[36:46] in lie of making those improvements
[36:47] partially so that they could be made in
[36:50] conjunction with development that would
[36:52] happen on the east side and therefore uh
[36:54] improve that portion of the road as
[36:56] well. So at least along that portion of
[37:00] 2550 east again on the west side that
[37:03] absuts that subdivision. We'd expect to
[37:05] see that improved uh at some point in
[37:08] time in concert with the development of
[37:10] this property if that proceeds.
[37:12] >> Dave, how many years ago was that?
[37:14] >> Uh I feel like I can check seems like
[37:18] 10.
[37:19] >> So 10 years costs have gone up. Is that
[37:22] enough to cover how much of
[37:24] >> Very likely not enough to cover all of
[37:26] it?
[37:26] >> We used it in a streets fund, but
[37:30] uh at that point we didn't know exactly
[37:32] how this road did line out. So we didn't
[37:33] want to put the improvements in just to
[37:35] term out. So likely the costs have gone
[37:37] up, but we use them funds elsewhere. So
[37:39] we'll just the city would fund this.
[37:41] Okay.
[37:45] » Any other questions for staff before we
[37:48] invite the applicant up here?
[37:50] Okay.
[37:52] >> Anything you want to add to it? Sorry,
[37:55] we need your name, too.
[37:57] >> Yeah. Uh, my name is Forest Gascoll. I
[37:59] represent the developer here. Um, I'll
[38:02] try to I'll try to touch on the things
[38:04] we talked about, um, as best I can
[38:07] remember them. So, um, our plan right
[38:10] now is to develop the entirety of the
[38:12] property, both the commercial and the
[38:13] residential at the same time. I want to
[38:15] clarify that because I believe in the
[38:17] planning commission meeting what I said
[38:19] might have not sounded like that. So
[38:22] that is our plan. We do want to pl and
[38:25] improve the residential portion at the
[38:27] same time as the commercial. Um so we
[38:29] would do we would improve the entirety
[38:31] of the length of Spanish fork parkway at
[38:33] that time. Um and then yeah, just to
[38:36] brush on the kind of um the slightly
[38:41] misalignment to the zoning and general
[38:43] plan, um the parcel to the east, and I
[38:46] apologize. I'll make sure next time I
[38:48] come in, I turn my map so that north is
[38:50] out.
[38:51] >> We'll get it.
[38:51] >> Um that is owned by Rock Mountain Power.
[38:54] We've had a lot of talks with them
[38:56] obviously with the power line corridor
[38:57] right there. They have told us they have
[38:59] no intention of selling that right now.
[39:01] So while that may be the um the you know
[39:05] the ideal uh general plan designation,
[39:09] we're not able to develop that as
[39:10] commercial uh at least in the
[39:13] foreseeable future. And then we designed
[39:15] our plan kind of around that power
[39:17] corridor power corridor. Um because that
[39:21] takes up a lot of that northern end, we
[39:23] had to kind of push some buildings to
[39:25] the south. And then we're showing four
[39:26] lots. Uh, and that acreage is about what
[39:29] we think it'll take to sort of um to uh
[39:34] be able to afford to improve put in the
[39:36] slip lane that I don't know if it showed
[39:38] up in this packet, but we were talking
[39:40] about in planning commission. There's a
[39:42] turn lane that they want us to put in.
[39:43] We've got to kind of fit it around some
[39:45] existing power lines. So, that's that's
[39:48] kind of how we came up with that um that
[39:52] acreage and that that size. And then
[39:54] yeah, on the residential side, we're
[39:56] just happy to uh do develop it as it is
[40:01] currently zoned and we think that that
[40:03] size lot and that type of street is
[40:06] something that, you know, will be uh
[40:08] that there's a market for in the city.
[40:10] So, we don't plan on asking for anything
[40:12] there. We're just going to develop it as
[40:14] per the current zoning.
[40:16] Um and yeah, that's if you have any
[40:18] questions, I'm happy to answer.
[40:20] >> Forest, you're not phasing this at all.
[40:21] plan on then developing the commercial
[40:23] and the residential at the same time?
[40:26] >> Yeah, we we think the commercial uh
[40:28] there's already, you know, a market for
[40:30] it and we can get moving on that right
[40:31] away. The residential, we're going to
[40:33] plat and with the platting and um and uh
[40:37] separating the lots, we'll do the
[40:39] improvements at that point. Um, we're
[40:41] not I wouldn't say our company I
[40:43] wouldn't consider us home builders, but
[40:45] we um we are developers, so we can do at
[40:47] least the the platting and uh and
[40:50] improving at the beginning.
[40:52] >> You plan on selling the lots or are you
[40:54] going to hire or work with a developer
[40:57] to do all of the building? And
[41:00] >> um
[41:02] at this point I'd say the plan is to
[41:05] probably work with somebody but um we we
[41:07] have done some home building in the past
[41:09] small scale which I'd say this fits. So
[41:12] we're kind of keeping our our options
[41:14] open there.
[41:18] » Any other questions for Forest before we
[41:21] go into public hearing?
[41:23] >> Thank you Forest. Appreciate it. Might
[41:25] have you back up.
[41:26] >> Okay. ought to entertain a motion to go
[41:27] into public hearing for item 7.2, the
[41:30] zoning map change at 400 North Spanish
[41:34] Parkway.
[41:34] >> So second
[41:36] >> motion made by Councilman Oiler, second
[41:38] by Councilman Carden. All in favor say
[41:40] yes.
[41:41] >> We're in public hearing uh for 7.2.
[41:44] Anybody from the public that would like
[41:46] to speak to this agenda item, please do
[41:49] manage.
[41:49] >> And then there are four people that are
[41:51] in that other room. And so yeah, you're good. You're good. But there are
[41:55] four people. Mhm. And so if you want to
[41:57] work them in, you've got their names on
[41:58] that sheet. So if you want to work them
[42:00] in however you can.
[42:01] >> Are you Eric?
[42:02] >> No, I don't find.
[42:04] >> Okay. Okay. I'll work I'll work them
[42:06] after you. John.
[42:07] >> Hey, sounds good. And Janine is here as
[42:10] well.
[42:10] >> Oh, hi. Perfect.
[42:12] >> Uh John Sumpion. I live across the
[42:14] street. Um,
[42:16] I was, um,
[42:19] pleased to see beneficial commercial
[42:22] use, um, especially because it allows
[42:26] improvement across the whole, um, east
[42:29] side of the road and it connects the
[42:32] trail from on Spanish Fork Parkway by
[42:34] where Harmons is going to be to the
[42:37] trail that is in front of the high
[42:38] school.
[42:40] Um, I didn't know whether it was going
[42:44] to be a phased thing or whatever. So, I
[42:47] expressed disapproval during the
[42:49] planning commission hearing that it was
[42:51] going to be developed and improved, at
[42:53] least improved along Spanish Fork
[42:56] Parkway at the same time. I'm in favor
[42:58] of the proposal.
[43:02] >> Thank you.
[43:02] John. Appreciate it, John.
[43:05] Miss Bazgard, as you come up, I'll I'll
[43:07] read out uh James, Bri, and Angie. If
[43:11] you're in the next room, please please
[43:13] make your way in to speak to this item.
[43:16] Thank you.
[43:18] >> Uh we submitted a letter and I was just
[43:21] wondering how many have had had a chance
[43:23] to read that.
[43:24] >> Yep.
[43:24] >> Okay. And if you had any questions. Um,
[43:28] and I just will briefly say that we
[43:31] loved moving up there when it was all
[43:33] barley and cornfields, but we also
[43:36] recognize that property owners have the
[43:38] right to um develop and their property
[43:42] that will be in their best interest. We
[43:44] know because the power line goes through
[43:47] there that a developer has a lot of
[43:49] convenience
[43:51] and we need to be able to afford to put
[43:54] the improvements in for that piece of
[43:57] road that's uh totally inadequate for
[44:01] the traffic that's on there. Uh we
[44:07] um are really glad that you brought up
[44:10] that the city will take care of the
[44:12] piece of that they have have not decided
[44:17] to develop until across the street was
[44:20] developed uh because that will really
[44:22] improve that too. We're grateful for
[44:24] that and we're grateful that you're
[44:26] going to do it all at once. That will be
[44:28] very helpful. Um
[44:31] the southern portion of the property uh
[44:33] being R zoned R12 is compatible with the
[44:37] surrounding homes and uh that looks
[44:40] really good to us. The northern portion
[44:42] is limited for development options
[44:45] because the power easement and we know
[44:47] that they're doing their best to make
[44:49] that um to be an attractive and
[44:52] beautiful place. We know that the the
[44:55] traffic's already there from the high
[44:57] school and connecting Spanish Fork
[44:59] Parkway down to the highway that goes to
[45:02] Springville. So, the traffic's already
[45:05] there. And so, we really don't think the
[45:07] commercial development will bring more
[45:09] traffic. It'll just be the people that
[45:11] are already using that. We do hope that
[45:13] the developer will be mindful of the
[45:16] three homes directly across the street
[45:18] and that they will be careful about um
[45:22] you know
[45:23] lights from your car flashing in our uh
[45:26] living room window and u their exits and
[45:30] entrances. If they're right by mine,
[45:32] it's going to be pretty hard for me to
[45:34] ever get out coming this way, this way,
[45:36] and this straight at me. So, I hope
[45:38] they'll all be be very careful of that.
[45:40] And um
[45:42] I really
[45:45] have looked at several different
[45:46] proposals and this one actually looks
[45:48] like the best option that we've seen and
[45:52] even though it's going to be really hard
[45:54] for us um we recognize that this will
[45:58] probably be the best option for that
[46:00] piece of property. So
[46:02] um we don't oppose.
[46:05] >> Thank you. Thank you. Can you get your name for Terara so she makes or
[46:09] excuse me for uh
[46:11] >> Shelly so she gets it in the minutes?
[46:13] >> Janine J A N E Bazgard B- A D S G A A R
[46:20] D.
[46:21] >> Thank you, Miss Bazgarden. And keep an
[46:23] eye out for Councilman Carden and
[46:24] Councilman Tuk that are in that
[46:26] neighborhood up there
[46:27] >> down the street from
[46:28] >> Make sure they don't drive too fast down
[46:30] that road ever. All right. Thank you.
[46:33] Appreciate it. Okay. Uh, next, uh, I had
[46:36] on the list here, Eric. Eric.
[46:40] >> Yes.
[46:42] >> Hi there. Thanks for the time. Um,
[46:45] looking at the plan, um, some of the
[46:48] concerns that I had. Um, I'm a resident,
[46:51] just so you know. I'm off 130 North
[46:53] right there on the corner. And, uh, the
[46:56] traffic I know has been mentioned. I
[46:58] have I have cameras on my back porch and
[47:00] there's many many accidents there
[47:02] especially with the high school and the
[47:03] young drivers. Uh, the one thing I did
[47:06] want to talk about is about a year and a
[47:08] half ago, they did some reasonzoning for
[47:11] the elementary schools. And one of the
[47:13] things that they did with that is they
[47:14] said that um over in that neighborhood
[47:17] directly south of where um the fields
[47:20] are, they reszoned them over to um
[47:23] Sierra Bonita and they are not offering
[47:26] a bus or any type of system like that.
[47:30] So those kids are walking across that
[47:32] street and at the time we requested, you
[47:34] know, some provisions be done. For
[47:36] example, you know, flashing lights, you
[47:38] know, crossing guards and they did do
[47:40] the the flashing lights were already
[47:42] there, but they did put a crossing
[47:43] guard, but I think there's going to be
[47:44] some additional measures that this goes
[47:46] through with the increased traffic and
[47:48] things like that. Um, I have some
[47:50] concerns about that and would like to
[47:52] see some additional measures looked at
[47:54] for that. um just for a safety concerns
[47:57] with this new development that's going
[47:59] in. Um as well as the you know like like
[48:05] they said that they're going to be doing
[48:06] all the the rework because there is that
[48:08] S-curve right there at the south that's
[48:10] very bad. It's it's hard to see
[48:12] especially with the um green box that's
[48:15] there on that corner. So those
[48:17] improvements again would I would like to
[48:19] echo that that needs to be done all at
[48:21] the same time so that it helps with that
[48:23] traffic flow. And uh that's everything
[48:26] that I have that I wanted to bring
[48:27] forward. Thank you.
[48:28] >> Thanks. Thanks.
[48:29] >> Appreciate that.
[48:35] » I had uh James Burky next. If James is
[48:39] here,
[48:43] while he's on his way, if Angie Parkin
[48:46] is here,
[48:48] >> I misunderstood. I'm actually here for
[48:50] the next the next.
[48:51] >> Perfect. Okay, thank you. Uh Jesse,
[48:55] Jessenne
[48:57] Rail,
[49:00] » got it. No, perfect. Anybody else uh for
[49:04] public hearing uh item 7.2 up on Yes.
[49:07] Sorry. Yeah.
[49:08] >> Hi. You said my name earlier and I was
[49:10] just being polite. Um, hi. My name is
[49:13] Bri. I actually live around the corner
[49:14] from Eric. Um, he has the really cool
[49:16] Halloween decorations on the corner that
[49:18] everybody comes and sees.
[49:20] >> Um, I am the mother of two young
[49:21] children who one of them is autistic and
[49:24] goes to Sierra Bonita. She loves being
[49:26] outside. She loves being around the the
[49:29] park. And while we monitor her closely,
[49:32] I do every day I'm concerned about
[49:35] pedestrian safety. I love that we have a
[49:38] ton of small kids in that neighborhood.
[49:40] I love the park. I love the community
[49:42] feel. So, that is a big thing of if this
[49:45] goes through, I would love to see the
[49:47] developer really um promote that and
[49:50] hopefully it will decrease some uh some
[49:52] of the vehicular traffic because if
[49:55] we're encouraging those high schoolers
[49:56] to hopefully go to Swig if there's one
[49:58] that goes there. Um they're already
[50:00] walking down the street to the holiday,
[50:02] which I being a nervous mom anyways, I
[50:06] will follow the high schoolers slowly
[50:07] just so there's not quick cars going
[50:10] past them because that makes me really
[50:11] nervous. Um, so the pedestrian and child
[50:14] safety is a huge issue for me with this
[50:16] going in. Uh, we do have a very active
[50:18] neighborhood. As soon as it's good
[50:20] weather, everyone's outside. And in
[50:22] addition to that, with the Harmons going
[50:24] in and with this going possibly going
[50:26] in, we have a lot of people who cut
[50:28] through our neighborhood to try to avoid
[50:30] Spanish Parkway at 40 plus miles an
[50:33] hour. And that is terrifying because I
[50:35] live kitty corner from the park. Um, so
[50:38] that I mean I'm constantly barking at my
[50:40] kids, which I'm sure my neighbors love.
[50:42] Um, so that I know that, you know, speed
[50:46] bumps are not economical, but um, we're
[50:51] right next to the high school. We're
[50:52] right next to all this proposed
[50:55] commercial. Like, we really need to
[50:57] avoid any potential tragedies that would
[51:00] come with quick drivers. Um, and again,
[51:03] echoing the Spanish Parkway is an
[51:05] absolute mess. We moved into this
[51:06] neighborhood four years ago. Um we I
[51:10] mean there's accidents all the time and
[51:12] I am again neurotic and emailed all of
[51:16] the Maple Mountain High School leaders
[51:19] and said please for all that you can
[51:21] please encourage the high schoolers to
[51:23] go slow. Um also that four-way stop
[51:26] that's just south of the high school.
[51:27] People who don't live in the area don't
[51:29] realize it's a four-way stop. Constantly
[51:31] blitzing through that. Um, so all the
[51:34] Spanish for parkways, particularly that
[51:36] stretch from the light down to the high
[51:39] school is a really scary place to be.
[51:43] Um, and then again, Sierra Bonita being
[51:45] a walking school, the high schoolers,
[51:46] they will walk to um, yeah, walk to the
[51:50] park. They'll, I'm sure, eventually walk
[51:51] here. But that would be my main like I
[51:54] want to support
[51:56] good business coming into the area. I've
[51:59] already convinced three family members
[52:00] to move to Spanish Fork in the years
[52:02] that we've been here. We love it. Uh
[52:04] would really love to see some measures
[52:06] put forth to make sure that our kids are
[52:08] safe. Um and our neighbors. So, thank
[52:11] you.
[52:12] >> Thank you, Bri.
[52:14] >> Can we Can we ask questions or we're not
[52:17] going to ask questions?
[52:17] >> You're going to hold your question.
[52:19] >> What is to her?
[52:20] >> Well, she'll she's sticking around. She
[52:22] >> Okay, Bri, can you stick around?
[52:25] >> All right.
[52:26] >> Right there. Yeah, right there. Thank
[52:28] you.
[52:29] Anyone else uh for this public hearing
[52:32] item up on Spanish Fork Parkway?
[52:38] » You could sit down brief.
[52:39] >> Yeah, we can. Yeah, please.
[52:40] >> We don't want
[52:41] >> uh Jake Lassley, Spanish Fork. I'm
[52:43] looking at the proposed I know it's just
[52:45] a mockup drawing, but they had three
[52:47] additional um places where you would
[52:50] enter or exit off of Spanish for Parkway
[52:53] for that. That's a huge concern for me.
[52:55] I could see maybe one, but three
[52:57] additional ones right there at that
[52:58] corner is a concern. That's all. Thanks.
[53:01] >> Thanks, Jake.
[53:06] » Anyone else for this public hearing?
[53:08] Spanish Fork Parkway.
[53:13] » Anybody in the other room, Seth?
[53:16] >> Not that I'm aware of. I think we've got
[53:17] them all.
[53:17] >> I think we got them all signed up from
[53:19] the other room. Perfect. Okay. If
[53:21] there's no no other public hearing uh
[53:24] participants for this item, I would
[53:26] entertain a motion to go out of public
[53:27] hearing for 7.2.
[53:29] >> So moved.
[53:30] >> Motion made by Councilman Carden.
[53:32] >> Second.
[53:32] by Councilman Tuk. All in favor
[53:34] say yes.
[53:35] >> Yes.
[53:35] >> Okay. Discussion back up here.
[53:37] Councilman Marcy. You had a question for
[53:39] >> for Bri.
[53:39] >> Bri.
[53:40] >> Yes.
[53:41] >> Um you mentioned you would like to see
[53:43] some pedestrian safety improvements. I'm
[53:46] curious in this little section. What are you envisioning
[53:50] would be the the improvements you'd like
[53:52] to see? Just so that I make sure that
[53:54] I'm saying the right things.
[53:56] >> Yeah. Um I mean wide walkways, trees. Uh
[54:00] I like that there's a burm. Is it called
[54:02] a burm? That between the um the pathway,
[54:06] it's right across the street from the
[54:07] high school where there's like that
[54:08] walkway. People are on that all the
[54:11] time. So having some distance. Um my
[54:14] daughter, she's Yeah, she's on the
[54:16] spectrum. She does alope. We've worked
[54:18] with her a ton on it, but having that
[54:19] extra space um really provides a lot of
[54:23] comfort between us and the street. And
[54:25] just on my street alone, we have five
[54:27] autistic kids and half of them are
[54:29] non-verbal. So,
[54:31] >> I would say some space between the
[54:33] sidewalk and the street, incentivizing
[54:36] people to walk to these commercial
[54:37] places. So, like whatever that may look
[54:40] like, and trying to disincentivize any
[54:43] um traffic going through the
[54:44] neighborhood, but
[54:45] >> Okay. So you're concerned about the
[54:47] entire stretch of Spanish Parkway in
[54:49] this area.
[54:49] >> Yeah.
[54:50] >> And while we are developing this one
[54:52] section almost first, get it right.
[54:55] Provide some buffer between the traffic
[54:57] and and people on the sidewalks. Okay.
[55:00] >> Yeah. I mean, yeah, tons of little kids
[55:02] are on their bikes all the time and the
[55:03] high schoolers.
[55:04] >> A crossing walk up by the intersection.
[55:06] >> Nothing mid block, I'm assuming.
[55:09] >> Yeah. like much like what Eric said,
[55:11] like some dedicated crosswalk that's
[55:12] like right and clear of like because
[55:15] kids will either cross at that line or
[55:18] at that four-way stop to go to Sierra
[55:19] Bonita and that's our entire
[55:22] neighborhood.
[55:22] >> Bri, which one has the four-way? Is it
[55:24] 130 130 north?
[55:26] >> No.
[55:26] >> Or is it the southern one?
[55:27] >> I'm so bad. Street number
[55:29] >> south of the seminary.
[55:30] >> Okay. South of the seminary. I mean,
[55:33] where the temple's eventually going to
[55:34] go, which obviously between the Harbins
[55:36] and the temple and like we're all very
[55:39] excited. We're the main thing we're
[55:41] nervous about is we don't want um our
[55:44] kids to be in danger. So, and also too,
[55:47] like we have I love the high schoolers
[55:49] in our neighborhood and the ones I do
[55:50] know, I tell them to go slow, but um
[55:53] yeah, there's there's really no
[55:57] protections other than right in front of
[55:59] the
[55:59] >> So, this is currently a four-way stop.
[56:02] >> That's currently a four-way stop and you
[56:04] can't see one of the stop signs. Like,
[56:06] it's covered by a tree right now. And
[56:08] so, there's constantly people driving
[56:10] through that four-way stop. And that's
[56:11] also the stretch of road that the high
[56:13] schoolers walk to go to the Holiday gas
[56:16] station. So that entire street is
[56:19] >> I just live south of you. They're down
[56:21] past that field. So I do have a question
[56:24] following up with Shane's. So I don't
[56:26] drive the Arrive homes maybe that that
[56:28] are east of you,
[56:29] >> but you know how they have their little
[56:31] jet outs there. Does that slow down
[56:33] traffic at all?
[56:34] >> No.
[56:36] >> Okay.
[56:36] >> Streets are way too wide.
[56:38] >> Oh, you're right. Yeah, the streets are
[56:39] wide, which is great for
[56:41] >> Yeah.
[56:41] >> for neighborhood, you know, community,
[56:43] but
[56:44] >> Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Bri.
[56:46] >> Oh, no, that's
[56:47] >> Jared. I've got a couple of questions
[56:48] for you. What's the long-term plan for
[56:50] this intersection?
[56:51] >> Thank you. Thank you.
[56:54] >> This intersection
[56:56] is going to be constructed as a
[56:57] roundabout. So, the plans are in design
[56:59] right now and should be built with the
[57:02] temple and the subdivision.
[57:03] >> Will this be a roundabout that has
[57:05] pedestrian islands?
[57:06] >> Yes.
[57:07] >> Okay. Can we go north, Jordan?
[57:13] Keep going.
[57:16] Right there. So, that
[57:17] intersection there, what will that one
[57:19] be?
[57:20] >> That currently in our master plan is an
[57:22] uncontrolled intersection with just stop
[57:23] signs from east to west.
[57:27] >> Okay. Because there, especially if
[57:30] depending on what we do, let me back up.
[57:33] So the Edge Homes improvements that
[57:37] we're talking about, is that just behind
[57:39] the edge homes or is that the entire
[57:41] length of the rest of Spanish Parkway to
[57:43] Forest South?
[57:46] >> That's just the frontage of the Edge
[57:48] Homes subdivision.
[57:50] >> Okay. So I think there's two fundamental
[57:51] questions we have to ask. So the first
[57:54] is if we think that we need to figure
[57:56] out how to improve those because there's
[57:58] not going to be development coming for
[57:59] those last is it three houses? Three
[58:01] houses. Yeah. So there's not going to be
[58:03] development there outside of those edge
[58:05] homes that we've already talked about
[58:06] paying for, right?
[58:08] >> So the question would be is does this
[58:11] intersection need to be approved to
[58:12] encourage crossing here to walk up the
[58:16] street
[58:17] >> or do we need to pay for the rest of the
[58:20] street to be improved, those three
[58:22] included houses, because we can approve
[58:24] up to the edge homes, but then there's
[58:26] those three last houses, that last
[58:27] little jog, and that creates an unsafe
[58:29] environment,
[58:30] >> right? or we need to help improve this.
[58:32] And if it's only scheduled to be a stop
[58:34] sign, that's not going to do it.
[58:35] >> So, I like that you've got the trail on
[58:38] that side with the develop development.
[58:41] Is that planned for the northern
[58:43] >> northern portion as well? That trail
[58:44] will go all the way to to 400.
[58:47] >> Correct.
[58:48] >> Okay. So, not to get away from what
[58:51] Jesse asked, there's a cross-section
[58:53] that we have adopted for Smashburg
[58:55] Parkway. Can you find that? Pull that up
[58:57] just so that everyone sees. But the full
[58:59] vision of what we would implement there,
[59:01] how we get to it is on the east side of
[59:05] the road, this development takes care of
[59:07] it.
[59:08] >> On the west side of the road, there's a
[59:09] section that we we will fund
[59:12] and there's a section of three homes
[59:14] that need we need to figure that out.
[59:15] Right,
[59:15] >> Jared? Isn't
[59:18] don't go. Isn't this cross-section
[59:22] what's in front of the high school the
[59:24] cross-section?
[59:25] >> Yes, it's what's along the whole park.
[59:27] >> Yeah. So,
[59:27] >> but the cross is
[59:28] >> So, if you just look at the southern
[59:31] portion of this image, that's the
[59:32] cross-section that we'll have three
[59:34] lanes, uh, middle turn lane, right? Some
[59:37] del capabilities on either side of the
[59:39] shoulder,
[59:41] >> shoulder buffer,
[59:42] >> shoulders, park strips. Yeah. And then a
[59:45] trail on the one side, a sidewalk on the
[59:47] other. That's the cross-section that
[59:48] will be continued to the north.
[59:51] >> And Bri, that's what you had in mind is
[59:52] that same crosssection. Okay,
[59:55] >> perfect. Let me ask a question to our
[59:57] police chief, Chief Johnson. If that's
[1:00:00] all right.
[1:00:02] >> Are they called What are they called?
[1:00:03] Hawk, if I got the right term, blinking
[1:00:05] lights.
[1:00:06] >> Yeah,
[1:00:07] >> hawk lights. What What goes into a study
[1:00:10] to determine if a hawk light should be
[1:00:12] installed or not?
[1:00:12] >> I'll refer to Jared, our engineer.
[1:00:17] >> We would do a pedestrian study. It would
[1:00:19] be a study that we'd count the
[1:00:21] pedestrians and look into whether it was
[1:00:22] warranted or not. Um the safe school
[1:00:26] routes does not have this designated as
[1:00:28] a safe crossing for the school routes.
[1:00:30] >> Who who determines the safe school
[1:00:33] routes?
[1:00:34] >> We have a traffic safety committee that
[1:00:35] works in conjunction with uh our staff
[1:00:38] and the Nebo school district and the
[1:00:40] school district is a very active
[1:00:41] participant in that safe school route.
[1:00:44] So they will be very much involved in
[1:00:46] creating the walk routes for students in
[1:00:48] this area.
[1:00:49] >> Is there is there a crossing guard at
[1:00:51] this intersection? No,
[1:00:53] >> this is at a high school. So, we don't
[1:00:55] have crossing guards at high schools,
[1:00:57] >> but we
[1:00:58] >> we could put one here for if there was
[1:00:59] an elementary crossing.
[1:01:01] >> We we we evaluate them every year with
[1:01:03] the schools and we certainly do that.
[1:01:05] The addition of the homes with this
[1:01:06] subdivision aren't really going to add,
[1:01:09] you know, a measurable change to to
[1:01:12] that. But, but I think just I think the
[1:01:15] question's been raised. You know,
[1:01:16] they're they're uncomfortable with the
[1:01:18] route that the school has set up. And so
[1:01:20] we can work with the school district and
[1:01:22] >> Matt I don't I don't know if you sit on
[1:01:24] that committee but Matt's people do and
[1:01:25] Jared I don't know if you sit on it but
[1:01:27] your people do. So you can bring that
[1:01:28] up.
[1:01:29] >> We'll put this in the traffic safety
[1:01:30] committee and take a look. Um a hawk
[1:01:32] signal probably would not be warranted.
[1:01:34] Those are the ones that go over the
[1:01:35] street.
[1:01:36] >> The RFBs are more the flashing beacons.
[1:01:39] >> That's what I was thinking. So what are
[1:01:40] those called?
[1:01:41] >> RFB.
[1:01:42] systems are above it and stalk.
[1:01:45] >> So RFP or B
[1:01:47] >> RFB B is in boy. There is one of those
[1:01:49] just south of this.
[1:01:50] >> There is one on
[1:01:52] >> the RFBs are usually put on all the
[1:01:54] roundabouts or they are put on all the
[1:01:56] roundabouts.
[1:01:56] >> Okay.
[1:01:59] >> But we'll certainly put this on our list
[1:02:01] and take a look at it.
[1:02:02] >> I think it needs to be broader than
[1:02:03] that. We probably need to have a
[1:02:04] conversation about how to complete
[1:02:06] Spanish Parkway
[1:02:10] » all the way to both sides.
[1:02:11] >> Certainly not tonight. This this
[1:02:13] development is going to do its part if
[1:02:14] it's approved.
[1:02:15] >> We do have some work to do for the rest
[1:02:17] of the corridor though. I'm a big fan.
[1:02:18] >> Great questions. But yeah,
[1:02:19] >> and I think the other part when we're
[1:02:21] talking about Spanish Parkway in this
[1:02:22] stretch, Jake said it well is that Smash
[1:02:26] Fork Parkway. I don't know the words
[1:02:28] that were used. I think hot mess, mess,
[1:02:29] I think those were interchangeable, but
[1:02:31] there's a lot of traffic on this,
[1:02:33] especially at 7:30 to about what time
[1:02:38] school started? 7:45. Yeah. And then
[1:02:40] from 3:00 on, Seth has a lot of pictures
[1:02:42] of me sending him of the roundabout on
[1:02:44] the south side from um Highway 6. But
[1:02:47] there there's a lot of traffic on
[1:02:48] Spanish Parkway. And so one of the
[1:02:50] things that I think that we I don't know
[1:02:52] if we need to put as a condition or as
[1:02:54] something to note is how many entrances
[1:02:56] we're adding to Spanish Parkway from the
[1:02:58] commercial area because it is going to
[1:03:01] be hard especially as we're closer to a
[1:03:03] light. I know there's standards that are
[1:03:04] going to be around that. So maybe maybe
[1:03:06] we can talk to that. How far away from
[1:03:08] the signal would they even be able to
[1:03:09] put an entrance to Spanish Parkway?
[1:03:11] >> Three, sorry, 350 ft would be the fir
[1:03:15] first access
[1:03:16] >> and then it' be spaced beyond that. So I
[1:03:19] would only see one access from the
[1:03:20] commercial district
[1:03:22] >> onto the parkway, one access from the
[1:03:23] subdivision and none of the houses would
[1:03:25] access.
[1:03:27] >> Got the parkway.
[1:03:27] >> So they'd have to come through this
[1:03:29] street here.
[1:03:30] >> They'd either have to come this street
[1:03:31] through the south or there would be the
[1:03:32] one street that's in between the
[1:03:34] commercial.
[1:03:34] >> Okay. So Jared, even you even though you
[1:03:37] say you could see one access for the
[1:03:39] residential, that doesn't mean there
[1:03:41] needs to be an access on Spanish Parkway
[1:03:44] for the residential. They could access
[1:03:46] it from the south, right?
[1:03:48] >> Correct.
[1:03:49] Or go through the commercial. But the
[1:03:52] way the concept is drawn, there's a road
[1:03:53] that's right between the two of them.
[1:03:55] >> The commercial, would they be able to go
[1:03:57] through the How does that work with the
[1:03:59] masonry? Well, I guess you you could
[1:04:02] still put a road through the commercial
[1:04:05] and the residential and then just
[1:04:08] >> the concept plan would have to be
[1:04:09] changed. Yes. For that to happen.
[1:04:11] >> Yeah.
[1:04:12] >> And that's approved by planning
[1:04:13] commission. Yeah.
[1:04:14] >> Uh in this case, it would be a
[1:04:17] subdivision that the planning commission
[1:04:19] would approve. Yes.
[1:04:22] >> I have one question or possible request
[1:04:24] from Chief Johnson. Would it be an
[1:04:25] appropriate time here in the next month
[1:04:26] or two to do a traffic study over there
[1:04:29] by the park? Bri said that there was a
[1:04:30] lot of speeding and maybe it'll be a
[1:04:33] good reminder for high school.
[1:04:34] >> Yeah, we can get our traffic trailer up
[1:04:35] there
[1:04:36] >> and see if there's anything we need to
[1:04:39] do in addition to that.
[1:04:41] >> There's one on Third West that slows me
[1:04:42] down every time.
[1:04:44] >> That one's getting moved to a different
[1:04:45] location, but still maintain your speed
[1:04:48] there, please.
[1:04:50] Now, heads up, Bri, that means there's
[1:04:52] going to be some tickets issued in your
[1:04:54] neighborhood, and it's probably going to
[1:04:55] be your neighbors that get the tickets.
[1:04:57] That's just how it usually goes. But,
[1:05:00] >> okay, your neighbors,
[1:05:01] >> that's what they always say.
[1:05:03] >> Perfect. Jared, if the developers uh
[1:05:06] amendable to this, as they're putting in
[1:05:08] the improvements on the east side of the
[1:05:10] road, um if we can take advantage of the
[1:05:13] mobilization and of the project that's
[1:05:15] happening to at least develop to the
[1:05:17] curb um on the west side and and pay the proportionate cost again that if
[1:05:23] they're amendable to that, we let's look
[1:05:25] at at doing that perhaps all at once.
[1:05:29] It'll be a little bit more of a
[1:05:30] headache, but it will be a little bit
[1:05:31] less of a headache in the in the long
[1:05:33] term.
[1:05:34] >> Yeah, if you'll work with the developer
[1:05:36] on that.
[1:05:36] >> That's a great idea. You got a you got a
[1:05:38] road crew out there improving the road.
[1:05:40] Why not improve both sides of it when we
[1:05:42] >> go to sleep?
[1:05:42] >> Got it uh got it planned to do it and
[1:05:45] not disrupt people too too much. I think
[1:05:47] that's a great recommendation.
[1:05:49] >> Mayor, I got one more question
[1:05:52] >> towards I guess city staff and the
[1:05:54] applicant. One of the concerns that was
[1:05:56] brought up and if if I lived where the
[1:05:59] Bazgarss lived, this would be a concern
[1:06:00] of mine as well. How do we make sure
[1:06:03] other than the developer saying, "I'm
[1:06:06] not going to do it," that lights don't
[1:06:08] end up in windows while people are
[1:06:10] waiting in drive-throughs.
[1:06:16] We don't have anything in our zoning
[1:06:17] code necessary that would require some
[1:06:19] of the things you typically would see to
[1:06:21] screen headlights. BMS a lot of times
[1:06:24] with some type of vegetation on top of
[1:06:25] them uh is used along the perimeter of a
[1:06:29] project where you have cues for
[1:06:32] drive-throughs and that type of thing
[1:06:33] where it could be a problem. Um so we
[1:06:37] could amend the zoning code to include
[1:06:40] requirements for that type of a thing.
[1:06:43] You could maybe um have this applicant
[1:06:46] enter into some type of an agreement to
[1:06:48] do that sort of a thing. You could take
[1:06:50] them at their word that they're going to
[1:06:51] do it voluntarily. Um
[1:06:54] >> would Sorry, Dave. Would the planning
[1:06:56] commission see their plan as far as
[1:06:59] drive-thru layouts and everything before
[1:07:01] it gets approved?
[1:07:04] >> Not if the zoning is changed.
[1:07:06] >> Then they're just ready to go. Once once
[1:07:09] the zoning's changed, they're
[1:07:10] commercial. they can start building. And
[1:07:14] >> if you want, you could make a motion,
[1:07:16] you could make a one of the conditions
[1:07:17] subject to
[1:07:18] >> so
[1:07:19] >> um
[1:07:21] especially if the if the applicant is
[1:07:22] willing to enter into that, then it's a
[1:07:25] part of the the the approval and I think
[1:07:28] is legally binding. Um and that I think
[1:07:32] what Dave is suggesting is that that
[1:07:34] they take care of that through the
[1:07:36] landscaping and that gets installed. It
[1:07:38] might take a year or two for that to
[1:07:39] grow to the right height, but in the
[1:07:41] long term it would be taken care of. Is
[1:07:42] that what you're suggesting?
[1:07:44] >> That's a pretty common way to
[1:07:46] >> to address that.
[1:07:47] >> Okay. You any concern? Yeah, I'd love to
[1:07:50] hear your thoughts.
[1:07:51] >> Um, yeah. So, I'm actually surprised
[1:07:54] that's not in the code already. That's
[1:07:56] uh sort of typical for us. We we try to
[1:07:59] screen all of our drive-throughs through
[1:08:01] a combination of um uh bushes, hedges,
[1:08:05] and and BMS. It sounds like um that the
[1:08:09] Spanish Fork Parkway cross-section
[1:08:12] there's a bit of landscaping between the
[1:08:15] trail and the road. So, and they were
[1:08:16] talking about there being a burm in
[1:08:18] another part. So, maybe that's a
[1:08:19] possibility to get it along a lot of
[1:08:21] that frontage.
[1:08:22] >> Um also, if you'll notice, we try to lay
[1:08:25] out our access points kind of in between
[1:08:26] the houses to make sure that we're not
[1:08:29] shining headlights into anybody's
[1:08:30] windows. But, yeah, that's that's pretty
[1:08:32] standard. And um even if it's not in the
[1:08:35] code that it's going to show up on our
[1:08:37] landscape plans. Um it sounds like site
[1:08:40] plan approval doesn't go through uh
[1:08:42] planning commission
[1:08:43] >> DRC.
[1:08:44] >> Okay. Um that's typically when you know
[1:08:46] we're held to it, but it'll go through
[1:08:49] staff and they'll see what we're
[1:08:50] planning on doing there.
[1:08:53] >> Okay. Thank you.
[1:08:54] >> Thank you. I think it's smart to if you
[1:08:56] want it put it.
[1:08:57] >> Yeah. put us and mention it
[1:08:59] >> out of condition of some screening for
[1:09:00] lighting in the drive drive-throughs.
[1:09:02] >> Would we put something about that
[1:09:04] intersection down on the B that side the right side of the
[1:09:09] plan if we wanted it there? Seth
[1:09:14] » I'm asking you a question if that's
[1:09:15] where it
[1:09:19] » you can put whatever you want in the
[1:09:20] conditions. If they're not legal then
[1:09:22] they become problem problematic. So what
[1:09:23] what's the condition you think
[1:09:25] >> I just want I want us to evaluate that intersection better especially with
[1:09:28] the school district and also with the
[1:09:31] more traffic coming there.
[1:09:34] What does that mean?
[1:09:34] >> What does that mean? Evaluate it. What
[1:09:36] does that mean?
[1:09:37] >> Study study the the intersection. Do a
[1:09:40] traffic study.
[1:09:40] >> You want the applicant to do that.
[1:09:42] >> Correct.
[1:09:44] >> We don't have a a
[1:09:47] >> Yeah, I think
[1:09:47] >> we don't have a we have a standard
[1:09:49] cross-section for both roads
[1:09:50] >> that make an intersection. What in
[1:09:53] addition to that would you want
[1:09:54] >> a signaled crosswalk something?
[1:09:57] >> I think that would be on us. I don't
[1:09:58] think there are nine subdivision it
[1:10:01] would be
[1:10:02] >> no way that the Yeah, they're driving.
[1:10:04] >> So like we can do that then you just
[1:10:06] >> Okay,
[1:10:07] >> tell me what you are. We can evaluate
[1:10:08] subdivision or that cross-section. Yeah,
[1:10:10] >> that's
[1:10:11] >> that intersection.
[1:10:12] >> We're currently updating our master plan
[1:10:13] and I can pinpoint it to take a look at
[1:10:16] it.
[1:10:16] >> Thank you. Okay,
[1:10:18] >> perfect.
[1:10:19] Thank you for those
[1:10:21] recommendations. Good questions. Uh,
[1:10:23] thank you public for the questions there
[1:10:25] as well. If there's no other further
[1:10:27] questions for staff of the applicant,
[1:10:29] I'd entertain a motion for 7.2.
[1:10:32] >> I'll make a motion. I move the I move to
[1:10:35] approve the proposed Hollowac Acres
[1:10:37] commercial zone change based on the
[1:10:39] following findings. One, that the
[1:10:41] proposal is consistent with the city's
[1:10:43] general plan land use designation of
[1:10:45] commercial. Two, that the proposal will
[1:10:47] provide for commercial uses at an
[1:10:50] important and highly visible
[1:10:51] intersection. Three, that the proposal
[1:10:54] will enhance commercial uses and
[1:10:56] services in the area. And four, that the
[1:10:59] proposal will promote conveniently
[1:11:01] located commercial uses and services
[1:11:04] with an added condition that screening
[1:11:07] for headlights in the drive-thrus be
[1:11:11] evaluated during the site plan with the
[1:11:14] DRC.
[1:11:16] Second
[1:11:18] >> motion made by Councilman Oiler, second
[1:11:20] by Councilwoman Beck. Any questions on
[1:11:22] the motion?
[1:11:23] >> Yes, I have one. Okay.
[1:11:24] >> Can I
[1:11:25] >> add a a motion of my own? Can I What is
[1:11:29] my motion?
[1:11:30] >> It's called a friendly amendment if you
[1:11:31] like.
[1:11:32] >> Friendly amendment.
[1:11:33] >> Depends.
[1:11:34] >> It's super friendly. Let me just tell
[1:11:36] you and then we'll talk about it. Can we
[1:11:38] do that?
[1:11:38] >> Yeah, sure.
[1:11:39] >> Um I don't believe the number one is
[1:11:40] correct. I don't think that it is
[1:11:42] consistent with the general plan. it
[1:11:43] doesn't it's not gerine to the approval
[1:11:45] of this and I would suggest striking it
[1:11:47] and then the the last I would say let's
[1:11:50] put a uh a finding that although we've
[1:11:52] talked about it and the applicant has
[1:11:54] said they'll do it that they complete
[1:11:55] the entire length of the property on or
[1:11:57] the entire length of yeah the property
[1:11:59] on on Parkway in one phase.
[1:12:02] >> Okay.
[1:12:04] >> Are you amendable to that friendly
[1:12:06] amendment?
[1:12:06] >> I am. Von, do you want me to include
[1:12:08] those in my motion or is that clear what
[1:12:10] he's asked? Yeah, I would definitely
[1:12:11] make it on the record. So striking the
[1:12:14] finding one and adding a additional
[1:12:16] condition that the full length of the
[1:12:19] parkway be
[1:12:20] >> correct. So I would add to my motion the
[1:12:24] friendly suggestion to strike finding
[1:12:27] number one and to add an additional
[1:12:30] condition that the full improvements
[1:12:32] along Spanish Fork Parkway be done or
[1:12:36] completed in one phase. and I will
[1:12:38] continue with my friendly second.
[1:12:40] >> Perfect. Thank you for the
[1:12:42] >> We have an amended motion and the second
[1:12:44] to that amendment. Any questions on
[1:12:46] that?
[1:12:47] >> Okay, this is a roll call vote.
[1:12:48] Councilman Tuk, yes. Councilman Carden,
[1:12:50] yes. Councilman Oiler, yes.
[1:12:51] >> Councilwoman Beck,
[1:12:52] >> yes.
[1:12:52] >> And Councilman Marshall,
[1:12:53] >> yes.
[1:12:54] >> Perfect.
[1:12:55] >> Thanks, C.
[1:12:55] >> 7.2,
[1:12:56] >> thank you all.
[1:12:57] >> Is approved. Again, I appreciate
[1:12:59] everybody's involvement in u the
[1:13:01] applicant as well.
[1:13:03] Okay. Uh 7.3. We'll get to the the next
[1:13:06] public hearing that u uh that I think
[1:13:09] everybody's here for. Uh 7.3. I think
[1:13:12] the applicants here. Um this is an
[1:13:14] ordinance to amend title 15 to define
[1:13:16] and create requirements for data centers
[1:13:18] and facilities, generate their own
[1:13:20] electricity. The this proposal has been
[1:13:23] put forth by Valition, a company that
[1:13:24] would like to construct a data center in
[1:13:26] Spanish Fork. Valition's proposal has
[1:13:28] been updated to incorporate
[1:13:30] >> recommendations made by the planning
[1:13:31] commission. While the planning
[1:13:32] commission recommended the proposal be
[1:13:34] modified, the commission also failed to
[1:13:36] make a positive recommendation on the
[1:13:37] proposal. A motion to recommend approval
[1:13:39] failed to pass with a three to three tie
[1:13:42] vote. Uh Dave, I think I'll I'll pass it
[1:13:46] off uh to you uh or your staff to start
[1:13:49] off before the applicant Ron's right
[1:13:51] there. Before the applicant comes up, um
[1:13:54] I guess the uh the reminder here is we
[1:13:57] do have uh now the sign up that's been
[1:14:00] sent out. Let's do let's do it after the
[1:14:02] presentation.
[1:14:03] >> So I would encourage maybe the public
[1:14:05] that's here um this is the part to
[1:14:08] listen to these maybe the maybe the
[1:14:10] presentation either by some of the staff
[1:14:13] or uh by the applicant um might have
[1:14:16] some answers to questions you you you
[1:14:19] have uh there uh there's also been three
[1:14:22] open houses that there were a lot of
[1:14:25] questions asked and answered as well. So
[1:14:27] listen uh to to this part of it. Maybe
[1:14:31] it'll help answer some questions you you
[1:14:33] possibly came with. But uh if not, we'd
[1:14:35] love to hear from you in the public
[1:14:36] hearing section of it as well. Mr. Von
[1:14:39] H. Pale
[1:14:41] >> Herbert. Um, I'll introduce the text of
[1:14:45] the the amendment that those that's been
[1:14:47] applied for and then I'll go through the
[1:14:50] major, you know, the legal parts of that
[1:14:52] and then it'll be appropriate, I think,
[1:14:54] to turn the time to the applicant to
[1:14:56] explain their application and then your
[1:14:58] public hearing as you mentioned. Um, so
[1:15:01] the application is is to amend the text
[1:15:03] of our zoning ordinance, our land use
[1:15:05] ordinance in three main parts. Um, and
[1:15:09] scroll down, you'll see it in your
[1:15:10] agenda packet there that most of the
[1:15:12] text is in blue, and that's because
[1:15:14] that's what was requested by the
[1:15:15] applicant. The red lines are from either
[1:15:19] staff recommendations or the planning
[1:15:21] commission uh motion that they made. So,
[1:15:24] first part is definitions. They they
[1:15:27] define data center, which we don't have
[1:15:29] a definition today for an energy storage
[1:15:32] system, which is affiliated with the
[1:15:34] data center. uh controlled emission
[1:15:37] generation which is a emission gener
[1:15:41] emission excuse me power generation up
[1:15:43] to a certain level of of emissions and
[1:15:46] then there's ultra low uh emission
[1:15:48] generation as well and then the general
[1:15:50] definition of on-site power generation.
[1:15:53] So after we get the definitions, if you
[1:15:55] scroll a little bit further, we come to
[1:15:58] the the uses that are allowed in the I1
[1:16:01] zone. And so it lists their data center.
[1:16:04] You can see the addition of the staff
[1:16:06] and the that to require it to be an
[1:16:09] on-site power generation facility as
[1:16:12] well. So it's not just data centers
[1:16:14] generally, but only a data center that
[1:16:17] has that on-site power generation
[1:16:18] component. Um, and then the definition
[1:16:22] or the use of on-site power generation
[1:16:24] facilities. So, those two would be
[1:16:26] >> So, Von can ask it. Can we ask questions
[1:16:28] as it's going or you want me to wait?
[1:16:30] >> Wait just a second.
[1:16:31] >> Okay.
[1:16:31] >> Write it down.
[1:16:32] >> Yeah, sure.
[1:16:33] >> Oh, forget. Okay, I'll write it down.
[1:16:36] >> Um, let's see. Where are we?
[1:16:40] Okay. And then the next section is the
[1:16:41] supplementary rec regulations. Those are
[1:16:44] the standards and regulations that apply
[1:16:46] to on-site power generation facilities.
[1:16:49] Scroll just a bit more. Well, the first
[1:16:52] um purpose the applicability it's etc.
[1:16:56] In applicability there's that limitation
[1:16:59] that the planning commission imposed
[1:17:00] that have a maximum of 500 megawws which
[1:17:03] is of generation capacity which they
[1:17:06] call it name plate generation which I
[1:17:08] guess is the top rated productivity of the generation of those facilities
[1:17:14] under ideal conditions. They need a
[1:17:17] buffer above and beyond what they
[1:17:18] actually will be using um for redundancy
[1:17:21] and and to be able to service their
[1:17:23] equipment and so on. Um there's energy
[1:17:27] storage uh regulations that's there I
[1:17:30] think primarily to maintain an islanded
[1:17:32] operation which ensures the grid
[1:17:35] isolation. Um again the electric
[1:17:38] isolation from the grid so that it
[1:17:40] doesn't touch our grid our city grid or
[1:17:43] any electric grid another provider
[1:17:46] another Rocky Mount Power or somebody
[1:17:48] else. Um there's regulations for noise
[1:17:51] limitations. Those are consistent with
[1:17:53] the city's noise ordinance for
[1:17:55] residential zones. Even though this is a
[1:17:57] industrial zone, there's a residential
[1:17:59] zone right next door to it. And so the standards for on-site power
[1:18:04] generation will be the the residential
[1:18:06] zones. They're they're lower at
[1:18:09] nighttime, which makes sense. Um there's
[1:18:12] an air quality section. If you scroll
[1:18:15] further, uh it would require them to
[1:18:17] obtain the Utah Division of Air Quality
[1:18:19] approvals. Um again the there's the
[1:18:22] controlled emission um generation which
[1:18:25] is limited to.3 pounds of nitrous oxides
[1:18:30] per megawatt hour produced. And then
[1:18:34] there's an ultra low um
[1:18:37] generation as well and that's 007 pounds
[1:18:41] of nitrous oxides per megawatt hour
[1:18:44] produced.
[1:18:45] Then there's setbacks and screening and
[1:18:47] height section there. Those are
[1:18:49] consistent with the I1 zone. Also
[1:18:52] requiring walls and landscaping for
[1:18:54] screening.
[1:18:56] Um the water use is is detailed there
[1:18:58] and required to be a closed loop air
[1:19:01] cooled or dry cooling specifically
[1:19:03] prohibiting evaporative or once through
[1:19:06] cooling. Um, moving further, there is
[1:19:10] other regulations for wastewater
[1:19:12] discharge and decommissioning of of the
[1:19:16] facility once once they're done with
[1:19:18] their project. Um, so that is what's
[1:19:22] proposed. You can see the the red lines
[1:19:24] there. There's one more number 13.
[1:19:27] There'll be a citywide limitation. This
[1:19:28] is a planning commission recommendation
[1:19:31] um that there be no more than two of
[1:19:33] these uh self-generation
[1:19:36] uh data centers anywhere in the city at
[1:19:38] one time. Um
[1:19:41] the staff reviewed it and made some
[1:19:44] changes even before sending it to the
[1:19:46] DRC or the planning commission. Um
[1:19:48] rather than allowing data centers of any
[1:19:50] type, we recommend modifying the text to
[1:19:53] allow only data centers that have the
[1:19:55] on-site power generation. The reason is
[1:19:58] that
[1:20:00] um to allow any other sort of data
[1:20:02] center, a grid connected data center,
[1:20:05] that would require a future legislative
[1:20:07] change. And so it would come back to
[1:20:09] city council to determine if it wants to
[1:20:12] make that determination uh to allow grid
[1:20:15] connected data centers. Um the planning
[1:20:18] commission held their public hearing
[1:20:20] that they added those two limitations
[1:20:22] that we discussed the maximum of two and
[1:20:24] then the maximum generation capacity. Um
[1:20:29] after that the approve the motion to
[1:20:32] approve the the data the text amendment
[1:20:36] that failed to pass that was three to
[1:20:37] three and so it advanced on to you but
[1:20:39] without any recommendation either way.
[1:20:42] Um, and though it's not part of the
[1:20:46] application or a requirement of our
[1:20:49] zoning or anything like that, the
[1:20:51] applicants also submitted a draft
[1:20:53] development agreement which I reviewed.
[1:20:55] It includes
[1:20:57] many of the same things and more, but
[1:20:59] the water cap, the islanded uh provision
[1:21:03] that there's no connection to any grid,
[1:21:05] no no allowance for exporting power that
[1:21:08] they maybe they generate more than they
[1:21:10] need. That's not allowed. no diesel
[1:21:12] generator backup, the noise limits again
[1:21:15] with acoustical analysis and and
[1:21:17] compliance reports. There'll be annual
[1:21:20] public reporting. Um, and that report
[1:21:22] will be a public record. Uh, the
[1:21:26] allowing the city to audit their their
[1:21:28] claims. You know, we can go visit the
[1:21:29] site and see and inspect for ourselves.
[1:21:32] Um also an annual economic report that
[1:21:34] would list out jobs and wages and taxes
[1:21:37] that are produced and the capital
[1:21:39] expenditures that they have made. And
[1:21:42] then with the decommissioning there
[1:21:45] there's a provision that they would
[1:21:46] provide a financial assurance for that they would a bond of of sorts that
[1:21:51] they would ensure that enough is there
[1:21:55] to decommission the facility when that
[1:21:56] time comes. Um, and what I was
[1:21:59] specifically looking for in addition to
[1:22:01] the stuff that's already in the
[1:22:02] ordinance were the remedies. It' be
[1:22:03] like, "So what? So what if a breach
[1:22:06] happens? What if the noise level exceeds
[1:22:07] or or they use more water than than the
[1:22:10] cap allows?" First is a notice and cure
[1:22:12] provision, which is typical for
[1:22:14] contracts. We give them notice you've
[1:22:16] exceeded it and you need to cure it.
[1:22:19] That's that's step one. Then there's a
[1:22:21] stipulated damages for breach as well.
[1:22:24] um you know we could specify what the
[1:22:26] damage would be if if you have a water
[1:22:29] violation or a noise violation and so
[1:22:31] on. But more importantly for me I was
[1:22:34] happy to see that they included specific
[1:22:36] performance and injunction which are
[1:22:38] equitable remedies. The court can order
[1:22:40] them specific performance means order
[1:22:42] you to do X Y or Z. You must do this to
[1:22:45] come into compliance with your contract.
[1:22:47] Um injunction is kind of the opposite.
[1:22:49] we stop you from doing the court in
[1:22:51] order you to stop doing something that
[1:22:53] violates your contract. So those are
[1:22:56] great remedies in my opinion. We both
[1:22:58] have damages or or um money penalties,
[1:23:02] but we also have equitable remedies that
[1:23:04] the court can order. Um that agreement
[1:23:07] still needs to be finalized and will
[1:23:09] come to you at a later date. But uh
[1:23:12] again, that's additional and separate
[1:23:14] from the the land use application that
[1:23:16] you hear tonight. I just wanted to
[1:23:17] report that that came through as well.
[1:23:20] And finally, that the agreement runs
[1:23:22] with the land. It if they sell tomorrow
[1:23:24] or some some you know future owners,
[1:23:26] future um of the property would be
[1:23:30] required to buy by the same terms
[1:23:32] because it runs with the land at both
[1:23:34] burdens and benefits the land.
[1:23:37] Any questions?
[1:23:40] >> I should have just shut up because you
[1:23:41] did answer one of them.
[1:23:42] >> See, see, lesson learned. Um, but walk
[1:23:46] me through conditional subject to
[1:23:49] conditions.
[1:23:51] What does that mean? Who gets who's
[1:23:53] approving what? So, today we're talking
[1:23:54] about setting the rules, the limitations
[1:23:58] if if something like was this was to go
[1:24:00] in here. The the guardrails that would
[1:24:02] need would apply.
[1:24:05] >> Are we as a city council out at that
[1:24:07] point? If we approve this, we're not approving a site plan. We're
[1:24:10] not approving a data center
[1:24:12] >> anywhere. We're saying here are the
[1:24:14] rules to allow a data center.
[1:24:16] >> Exactly. Um yes, the the council would
[1:24:20] be out of that point. It would then a
[1:24:22] site plan application would come in
[1:24:23] which is an administrative action. The
[1:24:25] staff and the DRC specifically would
[1:24:28] review the site plan for conformity with
[1:24:30] these objective standards that would be
[1:24:32] set in the ordinance that is adopted.
[1:24:34] What whatever final version that takes.
[1:24:36] um it would be out of your hands even if
[1:24:39] it were a conditional use permit because
[1:24:40] then it would go to the planning
[1:24:42] commission. Again, that's still in a
[1:24:45] administrative act. It's not a
[1:24:46] legislative act. They need to apply the
[1:24:48] same standards. Um but there's a little
[1:24:51] less risk of I'll say it this way. I
[1:24:53] don't mean to imply our commission would
[1:24:56] do this, but impose any arbitrary type
[1:24:58] standards. um because there's not a you
[1:25:02] know public meeting where they have to
[1:25:05] you know look at other concerns beyond
[1:25:07] what are in the ordinance and that's
[1:25:08] >> no more public meetings hearings.
[1:25:10] >> There would be public meetings but not
[1:25:12] public hearings.
[1:25:12] >> Okay. So it would go before the planning
[1:25:14] commission. The planning commission
[1:25:15] would say here's what they're proposing.
[1:25:17] It meets all of the all of the
[1:25:20] guidelines all the guard rails that the council put in place. You're
[1:25:24] approved.
[1:25:25] >> Yeah. You're talking about conditional
[1:25:27] use
[1:25:27] >> if it were.
[1:25:29] >> Oh, excuse me. I misunderstood.
[1:25:30] >> This current
[1:25:31] >> uses subject to conditions would be
[1:25:34] applied by the staff through the
[1:25:35] development review committee. Okay. At a
[1:25:37] public meeting.
[1:25:38] >> Oh, okay.
[1:25:39] >> Public hearing.
[1:25:39] >> Not a public.
[1:25:40] hearing, but a plug
[1:25:41] meeting. Okay.
[1:25:42] >> Okay. So,
[1:25:44] >> question. The importance of getting
[1:25:46] guard rails right is is a pretty big
[1:25:49] deal.
[1:25:49] >> Yeah, I'd say so.
[1:25:51] >> Okay.
[1:25:52] Gotcha.
[1:25:55] Can I just confirm one thing? You said
[1:25:57] stipulated damages and that's not just a
[1:25:59] fee. It would also include where the
[1:26:03] court could come in and enforce
[1:26:04] something.
[1:26:05] >> Stipulated damages are the fee. So
[1:26:08] whatever we agree upon is is a right
[1:26:11] type of penalty to pay in dollars for
[1:26:14] violating the agreement.
[1:26:15] >> But there's additional remedies and they
[1:26:17] are cumulative. It's not one in place of
[1:26:19] the other. The court could order
[1:26:21] liquidated damages and injunction and
[1:26:23] specific performance. They could order
[1:26:25] that.
[1:26:26] >> But Von, you were saying that that's not
[1:26:27] currently spelled out yet. It is
[1:26:29] correct.
[1:26:29] >> Well, it was still to be finalized, but
[1:26:32] the nuts the key features of the
[1:26:34] contract I was pleased to see were
[1:26:35] there.
[1:26:37] >> We may have some minor back and forth on
[1:26:39] those finalizing terms, but I was happy
[1:26:42] to see the remedies there.
[1:26:45] >> So, all of that though is in a
[1:26:48] development agreement. Yes.
[1:26:51] >> None of those rules. Some of those rules
[1:26:54] are in here.
[1:26:54] >> Yeah.
[1:26:56] >> But not all of them. Does the I can't
[1:26:57] remember. Does it say you will have a
[1:26:58] development agreement with exactly what
[1:27:00] you just said in it
[1:27:01] >> or we are
[1:27:03] >> do we get an opportunity to discuss what
[1:27:05] is in a development agreement then?
[1:27:06] >> Sure. You certainly will.
[1:27:07] >> So there is a decision by a body outside
[1:27:10] of the permit.
[1:27:12] >> If the development agreement comes
[1:27:13] forward, like I said at the beginning,
[1:27:15] it's it's not a requirement of this text
[1:27:17] of this zoning. It's not a requirement
[1:27:20] um because you're setting what the
[1:27:23] administrative standards would be for.
[1:27:25] >> Right.
[1:27:26] >> But they've offered that.
[1:27:27] >> Sure. And and I think that I I
[1:27:30] understand what this applicant is doing.
[1:27:31] I'm thinking about more general if
[1:27:34] someone else to come in.
[1:27:35] >> Right. So So the point being
[1:27:37] >> you've mentioned already with the
[1:27:38] development agreement from what you've
[1:27:40] seen that there are things in there that
[1:27:41] are in addition to what we're asking as
[1:27:44] conditions. Does it make sense to take
[1:27:47] those things that are additional and
[1:27:50] actually make them conditions?
[1:27:52] >> Yeah, thanks Kevin.
[1:27:53] >> Or at the very least or at the very
[1:27:55] least one of the conditions be that they
[1:27:57] enter into a development agreement
[1:28:00] >> or Yeah. that way
[1:28:01] >> you add that as a second as another
[1:28:04] >> use subject to conditions that you
[1:28:06] consider that the applicant shall enter
[1:28:08] into a development agreement to further
[1:28:11] specify things.
[1:28:12] >> Yeah. Okay. Because what what I'm
[1:28:14] hearing you say is there are a lot of
[1:28:15] there are several things within that
[1:28:16] development agreement that go a long way
[1:28:19] to satisfying a lot of the questions
[1:28:21] that we have been getting.
[1:28:22] >> Yeah.
[1:28:22] >> Which are not necessarily addressed
[1:28:24] fully in our code.
[1:28:26] >> Yeah. Great point.
[1:28:27] >> Correct.
[1:28:28] >> Okay.
[1:28:29] >> Von, let me ask a question real quick.
[1:28:31] And Jordan, while you've got control, if
[1:28:32] you could scroll just below the
[1:28:34] definitions.
[1:28:37] Just want to get it other way.
[1:28:41] >> There you go. Oh,
[1:28:42] >> that's the end.
[1:28:43] >> Okay, I guess go up then.
[1:28:47] >> The uses.
[1:28:48] >> Oh, yeah. The definitions are at the
[1:28:49] top. So, yes. Thank you. Um down
[1:28:54] right right there. So, the first red
[1:28:56] line, the change uses subject to
[1:28:59] conditions. And then you've you've
[1:29:02] scratched out or lined out conditional
[1:29:04] use permit, but then you've still got
[1:29:06] the C153
[1:29:08] 8 060.
[1:29:10] >> Oh, good.
[1:29:12] Um, right. Is that
[1:29:14] >> which points which points you to
[1:29:17] conditional use permits.
[1:29:18] >> That's my mistake.
[1:29:20] >> Just wanted to make sure
[1:29:22] >> the intent is correct to classify it as
[1:29:24] a use subject to conditions.
[1:29:25] >> Yeah.
[1:29:29] » Thank you.
[1:29:30] >> Any other questions for Vaughn?
[1:29:34] >> Anything else, Von?
[1:29:35] >> Okay. Thank you. Appreciate it. Mr.
[1:29:39] David G.
[1:29:49] I'm going to go ahead and say I plan to
[1:29:51] be brief here. We'll see how that goes.
[1:29:53] Um, this is a unique situation. It's a
[1:29:55] really unique land use that um, this
[1:29:57] proposed text amendment would
[1:29:58] accommodate. And I think in light of
[1:30:00] that, uh, I owe everybody a little bit
[1:30:02] of an explanation at least as to how
[1:30:04] staff came to the conclusion of
[1:30:05] supporting the amendment that's before
[1:30:07] you. Um, I've been with Spanish Fork for
[1:30:10] about 20 years now, and this is the
[1:30:12] first time where a specific proposal's
[1:30:15] come forward with a type of land use
[1:30:18] where we formed a committee to evaluate
[1:30:22] it, and that's something that happened
[1:30:24] in February. That committee's met a
[1:30:26] number of different times. We've
[1:30:27] reported back to the council a number of
[1:30:29] times over the course of the past seven
[1:30:31] or eight months.
[1:30:33] Uh we've done homework to evaluate what
[1:30:37] this proposal potentially could mean for
[1:30:40] Spanish Fork City and for a local
[1:30:42] portion of the community, uh for
[1:30:44] neighbors and so forth. Um and I've
[1:30:48] appreciated the effort that everybody
[1:30:50] that's been involved in that has put
[1:30:51] into it. Again, it's unique. We
[1:30:54] understand that um the uh concept
[1:30:59] um as we've reviewed it has not been
[1:31:03] limited to the particular proposal that
[1:31:05] Valition has put forth. Um there are
[1:31:08] number of different groups that have uh
[1:31:10] made application with the city in
[1:31:11] various ways to pursue ultimately uh the
[1:31:15] prospect of building a data center in
[1:31:17] Spanish Fork. Um and for various reasons
[1:31:21] uh those different proposals at least to
[1:31:23] date have fallen by the wayside. Um some
[1:31:26] of them absolutely have been vetted out
[1:31:28] uh because of different um criteria that
[1:31:31] either the city can't meet or they
[1:31:33] can't. Um nonetheless here we are with
[1:31:35] valition tonight being really the
[1:31:38] proposal that's led to this this
[1:31:39] particular text amendment. Uh some of
[1:31:42] the things that uh the committee and
[1:31:44] staff have focused on. We're very very
[1:31:46] concerned about the prospect that for
[1:31:48] example Spanish Fork City rateayers
[1:31:50] would uh be impacted adversely by having
[1:31:54] a large power user tie into the power
[1:31:58] system in such a way that is Spanish
[1:31:59] Fork City's power system in such a way
[1:32:01] that um as has been the case in other
[1:32:03] parts of the country eventually
[1:32:06] uh residents power rates have gone up.
[1:32:09] Um, I'll let Jeff Chavez with Felician
[1:32:12] better describe how that doesn't come
[1:32:14] into play with their particular
[1:32:15] proposal. We're very concerned about the
[1:32:18] fundamentals, the things that we hear
[1:32:19] about day in and day out in our office
[1:32:22] when development occurs, when new land
[1:32:24] uses come to town and neighbors are
[1:32:26] impacted. It's the fundamentals
[1:32:28] typically traffic is at the top of the
[1:32:30] list in terms of concerns that people
[1:32:32] have. Uh, noise. Um it hasn't been often
[1:32:36] that we've been concerned about things
[1:32:38] like not excuse me odors or noxious uh
[1:32:42] emissions of different types. Uh but
[1:32:45] that is certainly something that's been
[1:32:46] part of the vetting that we've done with
[1:32:48] this particular proposal given the
[1:32:49] technology that um would be employed in
[1:32:53] accordance with the uh prescribed
[1:32:56] conditions that would have to be met for
[1:32:58] this to be allowed in Spanish Fork. And
[1:33:01] I could go on and I want to show some
[1:33:03] images and I don't in any way, shape or
[1:33:05] form mean to be flippant or to just take
[1:33:09] lightly the questions that are before
[1:33:11] the council tonight and some of the
[1:33:12] concerns that the residents of the area
[1:33:14] or the community at large have with the
[1:33:17] proposal. But there have been some
[1:33:19] moments
[1:33:21] as we've looked into what Valition would
[1:33:23] like to do that really have have um been
[1:33:26] poignant. So uh Mr. Mr. Hails, if you
[1:33:29] could go to the next slide. So, uh
[1:33:32] again, Mr. Chavez will talk more about
[1:33:35] uh the uh self generation of power as
[1:33:39] he's proposing to do it. A number of us
[1:33:41] in April of this year visited various
[1:33:46] sites um where the particular type of
[1:33:50] fuel cells are manufactured, where
[1:33:52] they're in use. images here on the right
[1:33:54] side of the screen. Uh those are of the
[1:33:57] fuel cells in operation. You can you can
[1:34:00] maybe kind of make out that um they're
[1:34:02] next to an Enterprise Renaar
[1:34:05] in between that business and the
[1:34:08] business that uses the power that's
[1:34:10] generated here. Um as we stood next to
[1:34:13] this field of generators, we couldn't
[1:34:15] smell anything. We couldn't really hear
[1:34:18] anything. and uh the co-orker or sorry
[1:34:22] the workers
[1:34:24] on their break from this company that uh
[1:34:27] again is using this power um you know
[1:34:31] they they took their breaks right next
[1:34:34] to these fuel cells in operation. Um we
[1:34:38] didn't add the picture of one of them
[1:34:39] that was taking a nap actually but uh
[1:34:42] that really is what we observed here on
[1:34:45] this site in terms of uh the impact from
[1:34:50] that particular part of what valition
[1:34:52] will talk about in action. Uh more
[1:34:54] recently we visited a site in Salt Lake
[1:34:56] County. You can go to the next photos
[1:34:59] that we have there. Um wasn't anything
[1:35:01] quite as dramatic as what I just showed
[1:35:03] happening there. There's a group of us
[1:35:05] in front of a data center um that
[1:35:09] operates in many ways very similarly to
[1:35:11] what would be allowed in Spanish fork if
[1:35:13] the text amendments approved. Um
[1:35:17] the image on the left again that's right
[1:35:21] in front of the data center. If you did
[1:35:25] not quite a 180 degree turn from where
[1:35:29] we were there and looked to the north,
[1:35:32] uh you'd see a residential neighborhood
[1:35:34] right next door. Um that uh as as it
[1:35:39] appeared to me was not suffering any
[1:35:41] adverse impacts from having been located
[1:35:45] uh for several years now in very close
[1:35:46] proximity to um this data center. Again,
[1:35:52] that is not representative of all of the
[1:35:54] work that we've done to try to make sure
[1:35:56] that um from a land's perspective, what
[1:35:59] Valition is talking about would not
[1:36:02] adversely impact the community. Um but
[1:36:06] uh again, we've done a lot more work
[1:36:08] than we ever have on anything else. the
[1:36:10] language of the text amendment with the
[1:36:12] conditions that are spelled out there. I
[1:36:14] think you'll likely see that it um it's
[1:36:17] atypical of what we have in our zoning
[1:36:20] code in terms of the uh level of
[1:36:23] specificity, the detail, the criteria
[1:36:26] and that sort of a thing. And those are
[1:36:28] things that we as staff feel very
[1:36:29] strongly about. um we believe the bar
[1:36:32] needs to be very very high for uh uses
[1:36:35] like this for a data center and for any operation that's going to generate
[1:36:40] its own power like what's being
[1:36:42] discussed here. So uh just a little bit
[1:36:44] more explanation about how we got here.
[1:36:46] Um that's partly my introduction as well
[1:36:48] for valition. I'd be happy to answer any
[1:36:50] questions that you have for me or
[1:36:54] >> say questions for Dave before you go to
[1:36:56] the applicant.
[1:36:57] >> Just just one Dave just c just so we all
[1:37:00] can hear this. So, this one that you
[1:37:01] toured in West Jordan, just what was the
[1:37:03] size of that data center and then the
[1:37:05] one that you showed pictures of
[1:37:06] previously? What do we know what the
[1:37:07] size of that one was?
[1:37:08] >> I Mr. Chavez, I'll maybe leave that for
[1:37:12] you. I I would Yeah, probably get it
[1:37:14] wrong. Sounds good.
[1:37:17] Anything else for Dave?
[1:37:20] >> Thank you, David.
[1:37:20] >> Thank you. Appreciate it.
[1:37:28] » Thank you, Mr. Mayor. and council. It's
[1:37:30] good to be with you again. Landon, just
[1:37:32] real quick,
[1:37:34] >> um the uh the field of fuel cells where
[1:37:39] folks were taking naps represented about
[1:37:42] 40 megawatts of power. Uh Nova full
[1:37:47] campus runs about 300 megawatts of
[1:37:50] power, which is where we
[1:37:53] uh where we visited just the other day.
[1:37:55] Um
[1:37:57] it's good to be with you. Um,
[1:38:00] I maybe owe Dave an apology because when
[1:38:03] I walked into his office some 10 months
[1:38:05] ago, I I didn't know that, you know,
[1:38:09] we'd be here um dealing with such a
[1:38:14] hotly contested topic, but I should have
[1:38:16] known because the whole reason why we
[1:38:19] engaged
[1:38:21] uh as a company was to address the hotly
[1:38:26] contested concerns about data centers.
[1:38:30] Um, I think it's important for us to to
[1:38:33] stress that that is our history. That's
[1:38:37] where we came from. We focused on
[1:38:40] different ways to build power because we
[1:38:42] were concerned about what was going on
[1:38:43] with the grid. We were concerned about
[1:38:46] rates going up all around the country.
[1:38:49] And so our initial work was in building
[1:38:52] finding ways to build on-site power
[1:38:54] solutions that would give
[1:38:57] businesses and consumers a lower price,
[1:38:59] a fixed rate so it wouldn't go up.
[1:39:03] Uh we were really horrified by the
[1:39:05] amount of water that data centers have
[1:39:08] really gotten away with scot-free for
[1:39:12] decades
[1:39:14] um in really poorly designed facilities
[1:39:17] that nobody was paying attention to for
[1:39:21] a really long time.
[1:39:23] So that's really the genesis of this
[1:39:26] company. And part of our conversation in
[1:39:29] the city has been um
[1:39:32] it's I've really enjoyed it. Um the
[1:39:36] there's a few folks here that
[1:39:39] I feel like I kind of know now because
[1:39:41] we spent uh 10 hours staring at each
[1:39:44] other and you know talking about these
[1:39:46] good questions and it's been really
[1:39:49] informative and I think for me one of
[1:39:52] the most encouraging aspects has
[1:39:57] been um when when I look at like council
[1:40:02] meetings happening around happening
[1:40:03] around the country When I look at the
[1:40:05] absolute train wreck of a circumstance
[1:40:08] that the the those folks in box elder
[1:40:12] were forced to to deal with with this
[1:40:14] atrocious proposal and terrible process.
[1:40:18] Uh those dialogues um they seem to
[1:40:21] descend into a lot of anger um a lot of
[1:40:24] contention a lot of fighting and I have
[1:40:27] just been pleased that that has not been
[1:40:29] the case in our dialogue. Now, we have
[1:40:32] gotten a lot of interesting comments
[1:40:33] online and, you know, not everything has
[1:40:36] been, you know, roses, that's for sure.
[1:40:39] But
[1:40:40] it's been telling to me that in every
[1:40:44] meeting
[1:40:45] from the commission meeting to an update
[1:40:48] previously at this council in our open
[1:40:51] house meetings without fail
[1:40:55] more than one person stands up and says
[1:40:58] something to the effect of
[1:41:01] I was totally against this.
[1:41:04] But
[1:41:06] if we can verify if these things are
[1:41:10] accurate,
[1:41:12] you know, I'm kind of open because I
[1:41:15] think we all agree that um if there is a
[1:41:20] major problem in some part of our,
[1:41:24] you know, our country, our cities,
[1:41:28] we welcome solutions. And I've been
[1:41:31] impressed and pleased that while there's
[1:41:33] a lot of opposition and a lot of
[1:41:35] opposition still and we won't win
[1:41:38] everybody over on this topic, I've been
[1:41:42] pleased that folks have been willing to
[1:41:44] just listen a little bit. Uh, one of our
[1:41:48] major um oh, you know, I don't want to
[1:41:53] say adversary, but there was one who
[1:41:54] stood up who's really really opposed.
[1:41:57] doesn't trust the process.
[1:42:01] But four different times when he
[1:42:03] continued to stand with his opposition,
[1:42:07] each time he began to preface it with,
[1:42:11] "If this is true,
[1:42:14] you guys may have solved this problem.
[1:42:18] So you better do this, this, and this."
[1:42:20] And came up again. Now, if this is true,
[1:42:25] this is pretty unique.
[1:42:27] maybe maybe this could be beneficial.
[1:42:29] So, I've appreciated people's
[1:42:32] willingness to hear and listen. Um, and
[1:42:36] I think our intent here is to continue
[1:42:40] collaborating as the slide indicates.
[1:42:43] This conversation is not over. Um, I
[1:42:46] also would suggest um
[1:42:50] I think it's important to have a little
[1:42:52] bit of a little bit of trust that it is
[1:42:55] true.
[1:42:57] It's true that city councils can do real
[1:43:00] due diligence. It's true that city
[1:43:03] councils um can be honorable and not
[1:43:08] look for backroom deals and not make a
[1:43:11] decision before the city has a chance to
[1:43:14] weigh in. I know without question that
[1:43:19] this city has not made a decision. I am
[1:43:23] crystal clear and I want the the
[1:43:25] citizens to know that this decision is
[1:43:28] not rubber stamped by any stretch. I
[1:43:32] think it's important for people to
[1:43:33] understand this that there are some good
[1:43:36] councils and cities out here still who
[1:43:38] do things the right way and this is one
[1:43:40] of them. Um I think it's important for
[1:43:44] people to have a little bit of trust
[1:43:46] that perhaps some companies can move
[1:43:50] forward with good intentions also. We we
[1:43:53] are one of those and that's why we have
[1:43:55] had no interest in rushing or pushing or
[1:44:00] hiding
[1:44:01] uh but in fact to take the time that we
[1:44:04] need to open
[1:44:07] every conversation, every question and
[1:44:11] to address those the best we can and we
[1:44:13] can't answer every question. And this
[1:44:14] proposal is not 100% perfect. Um, but
[1:44:18] we're just laying it all out for the
[1:44:20] council and the city to consider. We're
[1:44:23] hopeful that this lands in a place that
[1:44:24] we can proceed, but it may not.
[1:44:34] I shared this u the other day. I think
[1:44:36] it's worth revisiting just to explain
[1:44:40] the foundation
[1:44:42] um around how data centers are not all
[1:44:44] the same and ultimately a data center um
[1:44:48] is a collection an outcome around
[1:44:51] decisions that developers make.
[1:44:55] So a developer can choose to invest more
[1:44:59] capital into emerging technologies
[1:45:04] that do a better job. We talk about uh
[1:45:08] residents around the country who deal
[1:45:11] with a hum, a drone, maddening. Um and
[1:45:16] it doesn't have to be that way. In the
[1:45:18] past, the equipment was so antiquated
[1:45:21] that that was kind of the outcome.
[1:45:23] diesel generators, large fans,
[1:45:26] um, unkempt promises. You know, there's
[1:45:29] a story of a city in New Jersey where
[1:45:31] they put on diesel generators and they
[1:45:33] said, "No, this will just be for
[1:45:34] backup." As soon as they got through the
[1:45:38] process, they turned those generators on
[1:45:40] and never turned them off. And so, this
[1:45:43] was before this was when people could
[1:45:45] get away with things. So we have made a
[1:45:49] choice to utilize the fuel,
[1:45:53] the power and the process
[1:45:57] that is most beneficial to creating as
[1:46:00] close to a sustainable operation
[1:46:04] as possible.
[1:46:14] We have outlined several times now um
[1:46:17] how our approach
[1:46:20] is designed to eliminate as much risk
[1:46:25] for the city and for its residents.
[1:46:30] um while still providing a substantial
[1:46:34] net positive impact for the city and its
[1:46:39] residents. And so these there's these
[1:46:42] six kind of pillars really
[1:46:45] that we've gone into great detail and
[1:46:47] explaining um that first of all we bring
[1:46:50] our own power. We will never connect to
[1:46:52] the grid. That's a big it's a big
[1:46:54] problem uh in designing data centers
[1:46:57] that grid just can't handle it. And
[1:46:59] typically when a city says that they
[1:47:01] will accommodate
[1:47:04] um a data center with grid power, then
[1:47:07] the developer asks the city to pay for
[1:47:08] that to fit the bill. Um and so
[1:47:13] everything about pulling from the grid
[1:47:15] right now is sort of a really a
[1:47:17] non-starter especially whoops
[1:47:22] especially for us. So we do not connect
[1:47:24] to the grid. We use natural gas that is
[1:47:28] powered powering a fuel cell that does
[1:47:32] not burn the natural gas. There's a
[1:47:35] chemical reaction that occurs that
[1:47:37] creates electricity and the byproduct is
[1:47:40] heat and and clean water. So that is why
[1:47:44] the fuel cell when we get into the topic
[1:47:48] of air
[1:47:50] um allows us to produce power with near
[1:47:53] zero emissions. not zero but very clean.
[1:47:57] We call it ultra clean as it relates to
[1:47:59] any particulate or smog that would come
[1:48:03] out of a traditional
[1:48:05] um fuelpowered system.
[1:48:09] Water is a major topic and um
[1:48:14] innovators have looked at the problem of
[1:48:19] wasteful water systems and created uh
[1:48:23] the closed loop system that allows us to
[1:48:26] fill um our data center cooling system
[1:48:30] one time about 500,000 gallons or two
[1:48:34] households equivalent
[1:48:37] and that's
[1:48:39] During the year, we need to use water to
[1:48:42] create humidity in the system. And that
[1:48:45] is about 250,000 gallons of water a year
[1:48:48] or one household.
[1:48:51] So when we look at actually the water
[1:48:52] that's currently being used or allowed
[1:48:55] on site as is,
[1:48:58] we make no additional impact.
[1:49:02] We will never request an increase in
[1:49:05] water at any time and we factually will
[1:49:11] utilize far less than many comparable
[1:49:13] businesses uh that we drive past and
[1:49:16] utilize uh on a regular basis in every
[1:49:19] city in Utah.
[1:49:22] We have focused on making sure that our
[1:49:24] noise impact is minimal. And this is a
[1:49:29] surprise because most data centers are
[1:49:32] utilizing older antiquated equipment
[1:49:35] that are just loud.
[1:49:39] Our engineers have also worked on a
[1:49:41] variety of ways to shield and engineer
[1:49:45] on the property so that we uh suppress
[1:49:48] as much noise as possible. For example,
[1:49:51] we're the first ones that we know of who
[1:49:54] have now engineered a way for our
[1:49:55] cooling system, which is the loudest of
[1:49:57] the components on the property to be
[1:50:00] indoor.
[1:50:02] Nobody has done that before, but we're
[1:50:05] putting our cooling equipment indoor
[1:50:07] dramatically suppresses the amount of
[1:50:10] sound on property.
[1:50:13] Our equipment is low heat. We capture
[1:50:17] and reuse as much heat as as we possibly
[1:50:21] can and we can demonstrate that the
[1:50:24] expected amount of increased heat on
[1:50:27] property is modest and the near impact
[1:50:33] talking less than a quarter mile half a
[1:50:35] mile off site is um an iniccernable
[1:50:39] amount of additional heat less than less
[1:50:43] than a degree in a very short period of
[1:50:45] time. What's interesting also when we
[1:50:47] talk about this property, and we'll get
[1:50:49] into this, um, it happens to be in a
[1:50:51] location that actually complements our
[1:50:54] desire to decrease sound and decrease
[1:50:56] heat because of its positioning at the
[1:50:58] mouth of the canyon and a constant flow
[1:51:02] of wind.
[1:51:04] And finally, we've gone into detail
[1:51:06] about uh the substantial community
[1:51:08] benefits um that we think um if a
[1:51:14] community has an opportunity to uh have
[1:51:17] a substantial financial impact for
[1:51:20] programs for infrastructure
[1:51:22] combined with a company like ours who
[1:51:24] will contribute a portion of our actual
[1:51:27] income to going above and beyond in
[1:51:30] local programs.
[1:51:32] We think this ends up netting out to an
[1:51:36] overall positive for everybody involved.
[1:51:41] But I want to share with you a little
[1:51:43] bit about what the process has
[1:51:46] um helped us accomplish.
[1:51:50] We have fielded
[1:51:53] hundreds and hundreds of extremely
[1:51:57] thoughtful questions.
[1:51:59] um everything around every one of the
[1:52:02] kind of pillars that I've that I have
[1:52:04] talked about. Um so much so we we have
[1:52:08] this is kind of what we're we're
[1:52:09] referring to now as this Q&A bible of
[1:52:14] direct answers to over 350 questions. Um
[1:52:20] we already knew the truth about our
[1:52:22] equipment and about our outputs. Um but
[1:52:26] this helped us go even deeper. And so,
[1:52:29] um, I'm going to take a minute and
[1:52:32] actually go through some of the
[1:52:34] questions that have come up that maybe
[1:52:36] some have brought here today. Um, just
[1:52:40] to address some of the the deeper
[1:52:42] questions that some folks here have been
[1:52:44] through a port a version of this
[1:52:46] presentation. This is different. Some in
[1:52:49] this room were not able to come to to
[1:52:51] the open house. So, I think that some of
[1:52:53] these answers will uh shed light on a
[1:52:56] few questions that um you know, maybe
[1:53:00] attendees are wondering about. Um so,
[1:53:02] I'm going to go through some of these
[1:53:03] quickly and then uh we're going to talk
[1:53:06] about um the use of the property. We're
[1:53:09] going to talk about uh the text
[1:53:12] amendment um the development agreement
[1:53:15] um and then have a conversation together
[1:53:17] and hear from the community on
[1:53:19] additional questions and also um how we
[1:53:22] may consider proceeding together.
[1:53:25] Um
[1:53:27] in water
[1:53:28] we've been asked um does the cooling
[1:53:31] water evaporate into the sky? It
[1:53:34] doesn't. We're not wasting. It's a
[1:53:35] sealed loop. How much water do we
[1:53:38] actually use? 500,000 gallons to fill
[1:53:41] 250,000 gallons a year.
[1:53:46] Lawns are going brown. Why does a data
[1:53:48] center get water that we don't?
[1:53:53] Our property has no need for extra
[1:53:56] water. It's a building that already uses
[1:53:58] about 15 million gallons of water a year
[1:54:01] just on its exterior. That's something
[1:54:04] that we will actually decrease. So,
[1:54:06] we're not asking or receiving any uh any
[1:54:10] more water that's than is already
[1:54:12] allotted.
[1:54:14] Hey, will these people quietly take more
[1:54:16] water later?
[1:54:18] We we we cannot we will not we cannot.
[1:54:23] We have designed a system that's
[1:54:24] extremely expensive that runs on the
[1:54:27] amount of water that it runs on. Uh we
[1:54:30] would be fools to think that we could go
[1:54:32] through this process knowing somehow in
[1:54:34] the background that we really need more
[1:54:37] water and that somehow we would pull
[1:54:40] that off and and get that. We would be
[1:54:42] fools to invest in something that would
[1:54:45] require us to do some kind of bait and
[1:54:46] switch. So there is no chance for us to
[1:54:50] quietly take more water later on. Are
[1:54:53] there chemicals in the loop? F PFAS
[1:54:56] these forever chemicals. There's nothing
[1:54:59] that we add to our water, no chemicals
[1:55:01] except for glycol that is a normal
[1:55:05] additive that we find in HVAC and in our
[1:55:07] homes and systems everywhere. Um, so
[1:55:10] there's no there's no additional
[1:55:13] chemical that goes into this into this
[1:55:15] system. There are trace elements of PFAS
[1:55:18] uh that you can't avoid because they're
[1:55:20] part of almost every structure that's
[1:55:22] built anywhere at the time.
[1:55:26] Where does the water go if it fails?
[1:55:28] People have been concerned that we're
[1:55:30] going to be putting water into uh into
[1:55:33] the drainage system. Uh we won't and we
[1:55:36] can't. And if there was ever a time that
[1:55:38] we need to treat our system, we're able
[1:55:40] to block off portions of that system,
[1:55:43] pump the water into a tank, treat it in
[1:55:46] a tank, and reapply it into our system
[1:55:49] without ever having been disposed of or
[1:55:53] offloaded uh in any nefarious way at
[1:55:56] all. Um, can it contaminate our drinking
[1:56:00] water? No, because we never get anywhere
[1:56:03] near uh the city water system at any
[1:56:08] time. Power and gas. Will this raise my
[1:56:11] electric bill? No, we don't touch the
[1:56:13] grid. There's no way for us to impact
[1:56:15] it. Will it strain the grid or cause
[1:56:17] black hats? No, because we don't touch
[1:56:20] it. We're not connected to it. Is the
[1:56:22] city or state paying them anything?
[1:56:24] Absolutely not. There are no waiverss.
[1:56:27] There's no concessions. There's no
[1:56:29] subsidies. We make no requests of the
[1:56:33] city for any kind of subsidy uh upfront
[1:56:37] or down the road of any kind at any
[1:56:40] time.
[1:56:42] How much gas will we consume every year?
[1:56:44] It's a lot. 14.9 million mm BTUs, which
[1:56:49] is basically expanding the natural gas
[1:56:52] pipe to about 12 in. But we pull that
[1:56:55] gas from a wholesale a wholesale supply
[1:56:59] that in no way touches the residential
[1:57:03] supply already set aside for Embridge.
[1:57:06] We in no way compete what with what the
[1:57:09] residents already have allotted to them.
[1:57:12] Has anyone uh run a data center that's
[1:57:14] this big on fuel cells alone? Not this
[1:57:17] size with no grid.
[1:57:21] What's important to understand there is
[1:57:23] that while that's the true answer today,
[1:57:26] we um are leading the pack along with
[1:57:30] Oracle and others who are doing large
[1:57:32] deployments,
[1:57:33] Bloom has sold over $60 billion worth of
[1:57:37] fuel cell in the last 24 months that are
[1:57:40] all now part of various engineering
[1:57:43] projects around the country. Um, and so,
[1:57:48] uh, we're ahead of the curve, but their
[1:57:51] technology has been validated for over
[1:57:53] 15 years in hundreds of thousands of
[1:57:55] fuel cells. We know and our capital
[1:57:58] decision makers know that this system
[1:58:01] will run um without without any hiccup
[1:58:05] because it's been doing so for 15 to 20
[1:58:07] years in a variety of locations. Um, you
[1:58:09] know, hey, why should we be first? Why
[1:58:12] should we be first? come back uh when
[1:58:15] it's something else. Um
[1:58:18] you know the the trade-off is that fuel
[1:58:21] cells today are going to admit um a
[1:58:25] third less of of carbon. Um there is a a series of events that have
[1:58:33] occurred that have brought us to this
[1:58:36] place. It happens to be that there is a great location here. And there's a
[1:58:41] part of it is just it it happens to have
[1:58:44] come together in this in this place. And
[1:58:47] you know, I think that if we're able to
[1:58:49] demonstrate that the that all of the
[1:58:52] parts are going to bring a net positive,
[1:58:55] uh we think it's going to be a great
[1:58:56] thing if this is uh the first place that
[1:58:59] you are able to lead out to see this
[1:59:01] type of technology running in place.
[1:59:04] Will there be smoke stacks? know what's
[1:59:07] permitted to come out of it. We're
[1:59:09] required to follow all of the state's uh
[1:59:11] permitted uses. We have initially been
[1:59:15] approved for this process to move
[1:59:18] forward. It's in the public uh comment
[1:59:21] period. Um but we expect that all of
[1:59:23] this will move forward without any uh we
[1:59:27] will have met all the requirements. Um
[1:59:30] how does that compare to something I can
[1:59:31] picture? You know, I think um it's about
[1:59:34] the same as a regional hospital, for
[1:59:37] example. Uh to give you some some
[1:59:39] comparison, the canyon wind blows right
[1:59:42] over our homes. Down we wind wind means
[1:59:44] us. Um the permutes permits total use um
[1:59:49] are everything that there is. It it
[1:59:51] could move it moves through the canyon
[1:59:55] uh without having any accumulative
[1:59:57] negative effect on anybody in in
[2:00:00] proximity.
[2:00:02] So we have continued to go through these
[2:00:05] hundreds of questions and um all of
[2:00:08] these questions around emissions have
[2:00:12] continued to prove out that everything
[2:00:14] we're doing falls below any expected
[2:00:17] requirement noise. Um, all of our
[2:00:22] studies have proven and indicated that
[2:00:26] our decibel ranges are lower than what
[2:00:31] is currently emanating from the property
[2:00:34] today. Um and so when we are seeing a 60
[2:00:39] to 65 decibel at our boundary and 50 or
[2:00:44] less close at uh at at homes, this is
[2:00:49] something that is a
[2:00:52] imperceptible
[2:00:54] accumulation
[2:00:56] um that blends with the existing sound,
[2:00:59] the existing decibel range that this
[2:01:01] entire area um is living with right Now,
[2:01:06] so we have continued to go through um
[2:01:09] all of the answers to hundreds of
[2:01:12] questions. Heat, where does the heat go?
[2:01:15] We've been able to understand that the
[2:01:18] heat that may accumulate up to 9 degrees
[2:01:21] on our property disseminates within a
[2:01:24] half a mile, quarter mile of less than a
[2:01:27] degree imperceptible
[2:01:28] amount of change. Um carbon emissions,
[2:01:33] we've gone done a deep deep dive and
[2:01:35] carbon emissions are something that um
[2:01:38] our system still produces
[2:01:42] um a substantial amount of carbon.
[2:01:44] That's something that is just part of
[2:01:47] the way that this fuel cell works. But
[2:01:50] compared to many other industrial and
[2:01:54] commercial facilities,
[2:01:56] um, we still
[2:01:58] fall into a category of
[2:02:02] it, it's debatable when you say
[2:02:04] reasonable compared to how people view
[2:02:06] carbon, but compared to what the entire
[2:02:09] city is emitting on a regular basis, um,
[2:02:12] you know, the carbon emissions are um,
[2:02:16] within range of something that you would
[2:02:19] have put together in an industrial in
[2:02:22] industrial development. It's not the
[2:02:25] carbon emission piece is um not
[2:02:28] something that we try and defend it. we
[2:02:30] put the the amount out. And what our
[2:02:34] focus really on is on the way that um
[2:02:41] the way that the emissions that create
[2:02:43] our smog, what we are required under a
[2:02:47] permit to meet um we fall below all of
[2:02:52] those standard requirements.
[2:02:55] So there's an additional question
[2:02:56] additional questions that came in around
[2:02:58] trusting the process. Um are we going to
[2:03:01] be able to increase the amount of
[2:03:04] revenue that we contribute
[2:03:06] um health and safety? Will it hurt my
[2:03:08] property value? What about lights at
[2:03:11] night? As we went through all of these
[2:03:14] questions, um, it brought us to a
[2:03:16] conclusion that I want to discuss in a
[2:03:18] minute about making sure that we find a
[2:03:21] way to allow the community to have a
[2:03:25] view of all of these hundreds of answers
[2:03:28] to questions. Before we get to that, we
[2:03:31] look at the building and how we look to
[2:03:34] utilize this this facility. There's
[2:03:38] really three things to look at that
[2:03:39] comes to kind of a decision around the
[2:03:42] current use of this building, how the
[2:03:45] building would be used from a a
[2:03:48] potential buyer compared to how we would
[2:03:51] utilize this building.
[2:03:54] Currently, you have a warehouse. Um,
[2:03:57] it's not it's not fully occupied. um
[2:04:01] it's not producing
[2:04:03] um a whole lot of emission, but you do
[2:04:05] have uh regular truck activity. Um
[2:04:11] they're utilizing um a property value of
[2:04:14] about 51 million and they're paying a a
[2:04:18] modest amount of annual property tax. uh
[2:04:21] noise is between 50 and 70 dB as is and
[2:04:26] there's a substantial amount of
[2:04:28] emissions in CO2.
[2:04:30] A potential buyer could potentially
[2:04:34] utilize
[2:04:36] over 80 uh loading bays and distribution
[2:04:40] points that would dramatically increase
[2:04:44] uh the monthly truck activity up to more
[2:04:46] than 10,000 trips.
[2:04:49] um
[2:04:50] they may be generating uh you know over
[2:04:53] a million dollars a year in annual
[2:04:55] property tax but there's a lot of
[2:04:57] emission that comes out of the use of
[2:05:00] that of that building in our use. We are
[2:05:05] dramatically less in emissions. We have
[2:05:10] at a certain point maybe up to 400
[2:05:12] employees operating out of this
[2:05:14] facility. our noise and traffic are all
[2:05:19] extremely modest and at the end of the
[2:05:22] day we end up generating a substantial
[2:05:26] economic impact for the city. And so
[2:05:30] aside from the text amendment that this
[2:05:32] is about and looking at uh voting on and
[2:05:35] approving at some point, um this is
[2:05:38] something that's substantial as it
[2:05:39] relates to just the current use of the
[2:05:42] building and comparing that against uh
[2:05:45] the risk of something that comes in that
[2:05:47] has uh a lot of sound and a lot of
[2:05:50] emission compared to this use.
[2:05:54] We mentioned that we took a trip up to
[2:05:56] the Nova facility in West Jordan. So,
[2:05:58] um, this is a good example of, you know,
[2:06:00] a bit of a comparable. That building is
[2:06:03] on 100 acres. They're utilizing grid.
[2:06:06] They're utilizing turbines. They're
[2:06:08] utilizing some uh bloom fuel cell. Um,
[2:06:12] by contrast,
[2:06:15] we're utilizing far less water. We're
[2:06:18] producing far less emissions. Um and
[2:06:21] this is a site that has been approved
[2:06:25] under the term of you know being a good
[2:06:27] neighbor and and we think that um this
[2:06:30] facility has proven to be actually a
[2:06:33] good neighbor and our design is
[2:06:36] dramatically more efficient. But kind of
[2:06:38] to the point about, you know, the the
[2:06:41] meeting that we we had there just the
[2:06:43] other day to visit, when we look at the
[2:06:46] sound, this is just right outside of
[2:06:48] this building.
[2:06:50] Less than 50 dB. Um there's over 300
[2:06:54] megawatts of power running throughout
[2:06:57] this throughout this whole facility.
[2:07:00] um right in direct view of cooling and
[2:07:04] fuel cell, we're still running under 60
[2:07:07] dB.
[2:07:09] And the picture that we've shown before,
[2:07:11] you know, you have homes in right within
[2:07:14] proximity that were there before this
[2:07:18] data center was even built.
[2:07:21] We actually got curious about those
[2:07:24] residents
[2:07:27] and Utah is weirdly the world of the
[2:07:30] land of going doortodoor. So we thought
[2:07:32] let's go doortodoor
[2:07:34] and um we went door to door and spoke
[2:07:39] with over 20 over 15 of the residents
[2:07:42] and we took them through a just a quick
[2:07:45] survey about do you know what's in the
[2:07:48] building? um have you noticed noise?
[2:07:51] Have you noticed any exhaust, vibration?
[2:07:55] And asked them to those who were willing
[2:07:57] to go on record and um give their
[2:08:00] feedback. These folks uh that we were
[2:08:03] able to talk to, each one said that
[2:08:06] they're they don't notice noise, they
[2:08:09] don't notice heat, they don't notice
[2:08:12] vibration, they forget that it's there.
[2:08:15] And in fact, a little bit down the road,
[2:08:19] there is a type of distribution center
[2:08:22] and they actively um complained about
[2:08:24] the fact that they hear beeping noises
[2:08:27] of diesel trucks moving in and out on a
[2:08:30] regular basis. So, it it has been um
[2:08:35] useful to make sure that we are
[2:08:37] physically working to validate the types
[2:08:40] of things that we're talking about.
[2:08:41] Another example, you've heard in the
[2:08:43] news about Eagle Mountain. Um, they're
[2:08:46] in the news now because they're having a
[2:08:48] tax problem. Um, but there's nothing in
[2:08:51] common with that facility and the
[2:08:54] facility that we are proposing to the
[2:08:57] city. Um, this was a facility that uh
[2:09:01] the client asked for all kinds of
[2:09:03] incentives. They gave tax breaks. Um,
[2:09:07] and those tax breaks have come back to
[2:09:10] haunt them. They have a much louder
[2:09:12] facility. They use much more water. And
[2:09:16] so it's important to look and compare
[2:09:19] when you hear about these other
[2:09:20] facilities in the state and elsewhere.
[2:09:23] Those that are producing these negative
[2:09:25] outcomes are not the same. They are a
[2:09:28] different design. They are a different
[2:09:30] structure and they are a different
[2:09:32] approval process.
[2:09:36] This facility
[2:09:39] will have a value on site of over$4
[2:09:43] billion.
[2:09:45] Um
[2:09:47] that value will generate at least $40
[2:09:51] million of tax revenue that is
[2:09:54] distributed to the city, that is
[2:09:57] distributed to the school district.
[2:10:02] That's a meaningful contribution to
[2:10:06] a city that is growing, that has
[2:10:08] infrastructure needs. There are many
[2:10:11] scenarios where cities have have have
[2:10:15] been dramatically changed for the good
[2:10:19] because of the financial impact that was
[2:10:22] available to to the city. We are
[2:10:25] pledging an additional contribution
[2:10:28] um that we also think is meaningful.
[2:10:31] This just gives you a view of where this
[2:10:33] money will land for the school district
[2:10:36] over $490 per student. Um, as a benefit,
[2:10:41] it's substantial.
[2:10:44] We're the first uh company in the
[2:10:48] country to dedicate a separate community
[2:10:51] fund with a minimum of $500,000 a year.
[2:10:54] We think this will will grow
[2:10:56] substantially
[2:10:58] to work with the community directly in
[2:11:00] building out a process where we can
[2:11:03] touch at risk youth and help in
[2:11:07] addiction recovery, help in training,
[2:11:09] professional
[2:11:11] uh education, helping people move into
[2:11:13] this industry to know how to find their
[2:11:15] way into this new economy. And it's
[2:11:19] something that we're proud of and look
[2:11:20] forward to to be able to contribute to
[2:11:22] the city.
[2:11:24] Our development agreement that we've
[2:11:26] referenced earlier, it it holds us
[2:11:30] accountable to everything that we're
[2:11:31] talking about. There is not a scenario
[2:11:33] where we can use more water that we can
[2:11:35] take from the grid. Um, we're we're
[2:11:39] creating really interesting enforcable
[2:11:42] noise limits that will allow us to
[2:11:44] actually have sensors
[2:11:46] um within certain areas that will allow
[2:11:49] us to on an annual basis or otherwise
[2:11:52] have a a clear understanding of anything
[2:11:54] abnormal and then work to improve that
[2:11:57] if we ever uh find that something is
[2:12:00] off. We can do more. We can put up
[2:12:02] barriers. We can enclose equipment. Um,
[2:12:06] right now we think we're at the a range
[2:12:08] that we meet all of the requirements,
[2:12:09] but we can improve it if if we need to.
[2:12:15] The text amendment is necessary
[2:12:19] uh because it will allow us to generate
[2:12:22] onsite power right now. That's just not
[2:12:24] something that the city um has provided
[2:12:28] approval for in a standard industrial
[2:12:30] zoning. And so within this text
[2:12:33] amendment, we have provided an amendment
[2:12:37] that ensures that we or anybody else
[2:12:41] has to work under these same uh
[2:12:44] requirements around electricity use, no
[2:12:47] diesel, no wa no wasteful uh water
[2:12:51] cooling systems, noise limits, um
[2:12:54] storage safety, air quality sealing.
[2:12:57] These are all embedded in this text
[2:13:00] amendment so that whether it's valition
[2:13:04] or somebody else is held to a standard
[2:13:07] that ensures that these systems are as
[2:13:10] close to sustainable
[2:13:13] as possible.
[2:13:17] So as we get into the the text
[2:13:19] amendment, you know, this is these are
[2:13:20] really the categories that ensure that
[2:13:24] this is managed properly around water
[2:13:26] noise storage, uh capping, growth, uh
[2:13:30] making sure wastewater is not in any way
[2:13:33] utilized improperly, review authority,
[2:13:35] screening, decommissioning, power and
[2:13:38] air emissions.
[2:13:45] So, as we as we begin to summarize this,
[2:13:48] um,
[2:13:49] the vote is really about
[2:13:53] making a change to the amendment. Um,
[2:13:57] and it's not just about us or about one
[2:14:01] project. And there are still many hoops
[2:14:04] that need to be met in order for us or
[2:14:07] anybody else to proceed. We'll still
[2:14:10] need to submit all of our final site u
[2:14:14] engineering. We have to meet all of the
[2:14:17] permitting that is already required by
[2:14:20] the state. We have to finalize our air
[2:14:23] quality. We have to meet all of the same
[2:14:26] uh strict requirements that any
[2:14:28] industrial developer would be required
[2:14:31] to meet. So this does not stamp us or
[2:14:34] somebody else through to um to move
[2:14:37] forward in a way that it's not
[2:14:39] continually gated and monitored
[2:14:42] throughout the entire process.
[2:14:49] So as we kind of look at the timeline
[2:14:52] um
[2:14:54] the statute doesn't compel any specific
[2:14:56] action tonight. Um you know this is sort
[2:14:59] of as we have gone through the the
[2:15:02] process
[2:15:03] um we have submitted the the proper uh
[2:15:08] requests we've had the appropriate
[2:15:11] conversations together. Uh we took the
[2:15:14] extra step to go through these open
[2:15:16] house sessions. We think that was
[2:15:19] unprecedented. We don't know anywhere in
[2:15:21] the country where a company has taken
[2:15:23] the time to open this dialogue. Um but
[2:15:28] as as we come to this point,
[2:15:31] we actually would recommend to the
[2:15:34] council that we be allowed to give more
[2:15:39] visibility of when I when I talk about
[2:15:41] all of the answers to these questions.
[2:15:44] Um we would like to be able to make all
[2:15:48] of these available on our website. Uh we
[2:15:51] have a site that uh is for Spanish fork
[2:15:54] only that kind of outlines this entire
[2:15:57] process. Um we understand that we can't
[2:16:02] answer all of these questions
[2:16:04] tonight. In the last three weeks, we
[2:16:07] have not been able to answer yet all of
[2:16:10] them for everyone concerned or those who
[2:16:12] are paying attention and want to weigh
[2:16:14] in.
[2:16:15] Um, and we know that the city council uh
[2:16:19] is doing everything they can to do a
[2:16:21] deep dive and get all of the information
[2:16:23] they possibly can. So, our understanding
[2:16:26] is that this can be voted on tonight,
[2:16:28] but it could also be uh moved to push this to the next meeting. And I
[2:16:37] think our position is that we welcome
[2:16:39] more time for the city. We welcome more
[2:16:41] time for the council to continue to do
[2:16:44] their due diligence and we support that.
[2:16:48] So actually our recommendation would be
[2:16:51] um that after we hear questions from the
[2:16:53] community, it allows us to continue to
[2:16:56] capture those and and provide answers.
[2:16:59] Um that you may consider allowing more
[2:17:02] time for the community to continue to
[2:17:05] learn and and we want to accommodate
[2:17:08] that process. Before we open this up to
[2:17:12] some questions, I would like to invite
[2:17:15] um John, who is one of the property
[2:17:17] owners, to uh just give a little bit of
[2:17:21] feedback around their view on uh the
[2:17:25] potential use of this property.
[2:17:31] » Not John. I know John Bankhead, you guys
[2:17:34] are tired of me. Um no, I appreciate the
[2:17:37] opportunity to be here. Um and I I think
[2:17:41] the first time I stood in front of this
[2:17:43] group was probably four years ago and uh
[2:17:46] that went fast. Um looking back at it,
[2:17:49] um I did want to just talk through our
[2:17:53] view of what Volition is doing and also
[2:17:56] put that um I want to talk about the
[2:18:00] impact that it it could have on our good
[2:18:02] friend partner Edge Holmes. As you know,
[2:18:04] we we worked with the planning
[2:18:06] commission and staff for a couple of
[2:18:08] years trying to figure out the best way
[2:18:11] to develop this
[2:18:13] um a little bit of a unique site. It's
[2:18:16] got a lot of opportunity and a lot of
[2:18:18] challenges. And ultimately, we I think
[2:18:21] did a by we I mean everybody. Uh the the
[2:18:25] staff, the planning commission, uh I met
[2:18:28] with them a thousand times. They're more
[2:18:29] tired of me than you are. Um, but we
[2:18:32] ended up with an entitlement for 600
[2:18:34] homes. As you'll recall, we went to the
[2:18:37] legislature and got a $13.5 million uh
[2:18:40] grant from the legislature to build the
[2:18:43] uh new interchange with a bridge from
[2:18:46] Highway 6 into this overall property.
[2:18:49] Uh, one that was a big connection point
[2:18:53] for the trail system to connect. It was
[2:18:55] a big part of being addressing a
[2:18:58] significant worry about the amount of
[2:19:00] truck traffic that would be going
[2:19:02] through a residential neighborhood.
[2:19:04] There was a significant concern which we
[2:19:07] did the best we could to deal with about
[2:19:10] the noise and that the proximity of an
[2:19:12] industrial distribution or manufacturing
[2:19:15] facility close to homes. We worked
[2:19:18] through all of that. Edge purchased the
[2:19:20] property and they've started
[2:19:21] construction.
[2:19:23] And so obviously we um as owners and
[2:19:28] partners with Edge on this project
[2:19:31] uh want to know what they think and that
[2:19:33] was a concern for us as well um of
[2:19:36] anybody that's going to be impacted.
[2:19:38] It's Whispering Pines and we've had a
[2:19:40] chance to talk at length with Edge and
[2:19:42] with and and they are very aware that
[2:19:47] they are building homes next to
[2:19:48] industrial building. And in the last 6
[2:19:51] months, my partner and I have been
[2:19:53] approached by multiple data center
[2:19:55] people. We've been approached by a
[2:19:57] cement block manufacturer that would
[2:19:59] love to get another 12 megawws from the
[2:20:01] Spanish Fork City and a lot of natural
[2:20:04] gas and they would use a lot more water
[2:20:07] than we currently do. We've had uh
[2:20:09] people that want to come and enlarge the
[2:20:12] distribution center, add another 50 dock
[2:20:14] doors and and you know that would
[2:20:17] increase the noise, the emissions and
[2:20:20] the number of trucks significantly. that not only would have a negative
[2:20:25] impact on Whispering Pines, but two or
[2:20:27] three or 4 thousand additional vehicles
[2:20:29] on the road in Spanish Fork. That that
[2:20:33] spreads the emissions and the traffic
[2:20:35] and all that across the city. Now,
[2:20:38] that's
[2:20:40] that that's not that's just those are
[2:20:42] some of the options that we have been
[2:20:44] exploring. And so we have been really
[2:20:47] feeling lucky, if I can say it that way,
[2:20:50] in Edge Homes is feeling like this
[2:20:52] particular use in terms of its noise, in
[2:20:56] terms of trucks beeping, in terms of
[2:20:58] traffic going through that neighborhood
[2:21:01] before and after the bridge is installed
[2:21:04] is a s, you know, this data center is a
[2:21:07] significantly better option than the
[2:21:10] options that my partner and I have been
[2:21:11] exploring because we have a million
[2:21:14] square foot building and that's what
[2:21:15] those things are typically used for. So,
[2:21:19] we think this is a slam dunk
[2:21:22] for the city for what we've been through
[2:21:25] um trying to figure out a solution to
[2:21:27] this site and an opportunity for the
[2:21:29] city. We can't think of anything that
[2:21:32] would give back more to the city in
[2:21:34] terms of less impact on your
[2:21:37] infrastructure and citizens and more
[2:21:40] resources through property tax and other
[2:21:42] things than any other use that Jeff
[2:21:44] Graasso and I can think of. So, are we a
[2:21:48] land owner? Yes. and we we want to
[2:21:51] maximize the value for our investment,
[2:21:54] but we're not so not so blind to think
[2:21:57] that whatever we do there has an impact
[2:21:59] on the community. So, as I have been on
[2:22:04] the sidelines watching Valition work and
[2:22:07] I know a lot about the technologies that
[2:22:09] they're doing, I put in Bloom Energy
[2:22:11] Boxes in the first Adobe building in
[2:22:13] 2011 up in Lehi. Um, I just think that
[2:22:18] of the options that we're considering
[2:22:20] and the options that Whispering Pines is
[2:22:24] going to be living next door to, we
[2:22:26] can't think of a better option. So, I
[2:22:28] just wanted to get up as the the land
[2:22:31] owner and as somebody that's concerned
[2:22:32] because we're partners with Edge and
[2:22:35] kind of give our perspective that we
[2:22:37] think this is a really great opportunity
[2:22:40] in terms of pride and progress. We think
[2:22:43] this is a really awesome thing for
[2:22:45] Spanish sport. So I appreciate your time
[2:22:48] and letting me say that.
[2:22:49] >> Thanks John.
[2:22:53] » Thank you John. Um so as I conclude um
[2:22:58] again I I just want to
[2:23:02] emphasize
[2:23:04] um that
[2:23:06] we've said from the beginning that we've
[2:23:08] wanted to collaborate on this. I think
[2:23:10] that we have demonstrated that that's
[2:23:13] genuine. Um, I think that we have
[2:23:17] demonstrated that the equipment does
[2:23:20] what we say that it will do. I think
[2:23:24] that we've demonstrated that sound and
[2:23:27] heat are all within
[2:23:29] uh allowable,
[2:23:31] non-intrusive
[2:23:33] ranges. I think we've demonstrated that
[2:23:36] emissions are low. Um I I don't think
[2:23:41] that we have said or tried to say that
[2:23:43] everything about it is perfect, but we
[2:23:45] do think that compared to other data
[2:23:48] centers, uh what we're doing is
[2:23:51] innovative and what we're doing is a
[2:23:55] solution to this national challenge
[2:23:58] around the growth of data center
[2:24:01] infrastructure
[2:24:02] um and finding a way to do it better.
[2:24:06] Um, so I would encourage uh the council
[2:24:10] to really um continue to do the due
[2:24:14] diligence around
[2:24:16] what is best for the city at large. Um,
[2:24:21] and we hope that you'll support this
[2:24:22] initiative as we continue to go through
[2:24:24] the process. So, we look forward to
[2:24:26] continued uh questions and we're happy
[2:24:29] to answer any questions now or later
[2:24:32] before we have uh any commentary from the residents.
[2:24:39] >> Thank you, Jeff. Appreciate that. Uh I I
[2:24:42] think my council might have some
[2:24:44] questions for you and they might have
[2:24:46] some questions for you after hearing
[2:24:48] from the public,
[2:24:49] >> but they're not going to listen very
[2:24:51] well to the public if I don't use let
[2:24:53] some of them use the restroom. So, I I'm getting a message that I need uh a
[2:24:59] fivem minute break really quick uh and then we'd be right back in here to open it up for a public hearing. Uh
[2:25:06] if council's okay with that, staff, you
[2:25:08] all right with that?
[2:25:09] >> Yeah. And while they're doing that, you
[2:25:10] comfortable if we put the QR code up, we
[2:25:12] can start having people queue up in that
[2:25:15] uh in that virtual spot.
[2:25:17] >> There's the good break. You can use the
[2:25:18] restroom with us. There's a couple in
[2:25:20] the facility here.
[2:25:20] >> People are going to use the bathroom.
[2:25:21] let these five use it first so that we
[2:25:23] can get them back.
[2:25:25] >> But there there is the QR code right
[2:25:26] there.
[2:25:26] >> Yeah, if you want to if you want to
[2:25:28] speak in the public comments and then
[2:25:31] >> um
[2:25:32] >> Jeff and John, you guys on the front row
[2:25:34] there, that's our row for people to um
[2:25:38] to sit as they're queuing up to speak.
[2:25:40] So Emily back there is going to grab a
[2:25:42] couple of chairs and she's going to
[2:25:43] throw you behind Bronco in that black
[2:25:45] shirt there. If you'll just
[2:25:48] make that uh make that spot available.
[2:25:50] Yes. I move that we take a fivem minute
[2:25:53] recess.
[2:25:54] >> Motion made by Councilman Oiler, second
[2:25:56] by Councilman Marshall. All in favor say
[2:25:58] yes.
[2:25:58] >> Yes.
[2:25:59] >> Thank you.
[2:34:58] Yes, ma'am.
[2:35:00] >> Okay, Travis says we're ready. Still
[2:35:03] rolling here. And uh perfect. Thank you,
[2:35:05] Travis.
[2:35:06] >> Oh, yes, he does.
[2:35:06] >> This is uh something I neglected to
[2:35:09] mention. Spanish Fork City now is I
[2:35:12] don't know, Seth, would you say 30 plus
[2:35:14] years of uh of you know recording our
[2:35:18] meetings and we're on YouTube and it's
[2:35:20] live and and uh that's something
[2:35:22] >> not 30 but 24ish.
[2:35:24] >> Yeah. So, so pretty good stuff that uh
[2:35:27] we've uh we've tried to to live in that
[2:35:30] space for a couple of decades now where
[2:35:32] hey, if you can't make it to our
[2:35:33] meetings, watch them live and and we
[2:35:35] sure appreciate our SFCN folks and and
[2:35:38] Travis and Adam and and uh everybody
[2:35:41] that Jared keeps us keeps us going so
[2:35:44] everybody can be involved together. So,
[2:35:46] thank you everyone. Um, I don't think it
[2:35:49] needs uh rereading uh the the public
[2:35:52] comments uh public hearing section. Um,
[2:35:55] I think uh I think we can all just take
[2:35:57] it to heart that uh part of what maybe
[2:36:00] the applicant mentioned of Spanish Fork
[2:36:02] is the Spanish Fork way. We're
[2:36:04] respectful of each other and and can do
[2:36:06] this in in a in a in a good way that
[2:36:08] we've always done in uh in public
[2:36:10] hearings. So, make sure to keep to that.
[2:36:12] Please watch for that three-minute
[2:36:13] clock. I do have some signups that have
[2:36:16] come in here to to speak. Um, but I am
[2:36:19] going to switch it up just a little bit
[2:36:21] that Crosby is third on my list, but
[2:36:26] she's got, I believe, a four-year-old
[2:36:27] daughter that's been a trooper with us
[2:36:29] for a bit. So, we're going to have her
[2:36:32] come up first and uh have have her
[2:36:35] address us and uh and then we'll go back
[2:36:37] up to the top of the list and work that
[2:36:39] day. If Jesse Anne Rail and Sarah
[2:36:41] Stevenson are here, please come sit up
[2:36:44] here in the front as well. And then if
[2:36:46] you can uh kind of the way to do this is
[2:36:48] if when we're done speaking, if we can
[2:36:50] rotate out and I'll call up the next
[2:36:52] ones so we can all sit up here and be
[2:36:54] comfortable when we come speak. Uh
[2:36:56] again, the you can direct questions to
[2:36:58] us. We're we're going to write those
[2:37:00] down. Staff write them down. Applicant
[2:37:02] write them down possibly. But uh then uh we'll we'll try to cover those
[2:37:06] questions after the public hearing is
[2:37:08] over. So I would uh entertain a motion.
[2:37:12] I think we're back already, so you don't
[2:37:14] need to do that, but I would entertain a
[2:37:15] motion to go in the public hearing
[2:37:16] portion of this meeting if you guys have
[2:37:18] no questions before that.
[2:37:20] >> I move that we go into public hearing.
[2:37:22] >> Motion made by Councilman Carden, second
[2:37:24] >> and second by Councilman Tuk to go in
[2:37:26] public hearing for item 7.3.
[2:37:29] All in favor say yes.
[2:37:31] >> Yes. Okay, we're in public hearing. Yes.
[2:37:35] >> Um, my name is Crosby Mosinger. I'm
[2:37:37] originally from Springville. Um, born
[2:37:39] and raised Red Devil, but I live in
[2:37:41] Mapleton, just off the 89, which is very
[2:37:45] close to where this site is being. Say
[2:37:47] that again.
[2:37:47] >> I missed your name. Sorry.
[2:37:48] >> Crosby Mosinger, like Crosby Stills and
[2:37:51] Nash.
[2:37:51] >> Thank you.
[2:37:52] >> Very cool.
[2:37:53] >> Thank you.
[2:37:54] >> Um, so I I I know that this is just a
[2:37:57] vote on the amendment to the title. Um,
[2:38:00] however, I being a Mapleton resident
[2:38:03] just found out about this maybe a month
[2:38:05] ago and haven't our neighbor two
[2:38:07] neighborhoods, Mapleton Village and
[2:38:09] Harmony Ridge have gotten together and
[2:38:11] had some opposition to this. So, I'm
[2:38:13] coming in kind of representation of that
[2:38:15] group to um state our opposition to this
[2:38:19] data center. I came to um Valition's
[2:38:22] public qua sessions um and I asked for
[2:38:27] data essentially on the claims that are
[2:38:30] being made here. Um I've yet to be
[2:38:32] provided that data and I've seen that as
[2:38:34] the past hour or so has gone on um a lot
[2:38:38] of claims have been made but you can't
[2:38:40] like for example the West Jordan um base
[2:38:44] um you can't show a picture of a house
[2:38:46] and say see these residents aren't
[2:38:48] affected by this. Where is the data to
[2:38:51] back these things? Um, and so I'm not
[2:38:54] interested and our neighborhoods are not
[2:38:55] interested in being a test site to see
[2:38:58] if these claims take place because what
[2:39:00] has actually been proven is the intense
[2:39:03] effect of data centers on communities
[2:39:05] that surround them. This is a highly
[2:39:08] dense and it's just in the past few
[2:39:09] years become very dense residential
[2:39:12] space. Um, and the ability that this
[2:39:16] company has to dramatically affect our
[2:39:18] lives, I think is substantial. And I
[2:39:21] don't feel that um the due diligence as
[2:39:24] they've described has been fully vetted
[2:39:27] um because again we don't have the data
[2:39:30] to back the claims. Um but I do have two
[2:39:32] questions for the council tonight and I
[2:39:35] probably I have to go get my daughter
[2:39:37] down. She's two and she's the best. But
[2:39:40] um my first one is because this is a
[2:39:42] behind the meter project that bypasses
[2:39:44] traditional utility timelines. What
[2:39:46] specific independent environmental
[2:39:48] impact studies have been conducted for
[2:39:50] the local neighborhoods and where can
[2:39:52] the public read them? And then why was
[2:39:55] this project fasttracked and what
[2:39:56] mechanisms are in place to ensure
[2:39:58] residents have a binding vote or say
[2:40:00] before final zoning approval is granted?
[2:40:03] And that's all. Thank you for your time.
[2:40:05] >> Crosby, thanks for staying with us.
[2:40:06] Appreciate it.
[2:40:11] » Hello, my name is Jesse Anreel. I'm a
[2:40:15] resident of Spanish work. Have been for
[2:40:17] most of
[2:40:19] 40 years almost. Um I did move to
[2:40:22] Springville shortly, but then I came
[2:40:24] back.
[2:40:25] >> Um I would like to urge you the same
[2:40:28] that Mr. Chavez did. Um if this feels
[2:40:31] too fast, which I kind of it kind of
[2:40:33] feels like that to me, uh you guys take
[2:40:35] more time to um so I would kind of urge
[2:40:39] you to follow his guideline guidance and
[2:40:42] kind of take your time with this. Um, my
[2:40:45] ultimate question is why would there why
[2:40:47] does there need to be two? If you vote
[2:40:49] on this and you approve it today, it's
[2:40:51] ultimately for two data centers, not
[2:40:53] just this one. And why does there need
[2:40:55] to be two? Uh, we're we're a growing
[2:40:58] expanding city, but we're not large by
[2:41:00] any means. We're not like, you know,
[2:41:02] Provo or ORM size, for instance. So, I
[2:41:04] don't know you guys know square footage
[2:41:06] about the city and stats more than I do,
[2:41:08] but um in terms of residents and then um
[2:41:13] I think Councilman Marshall pushed it
[2:41:15] kind of in the direction that I was
[2:41:17] leaning toward more where um included in
[2:41:20] the amendment would be a development
[2:41:22] agreement if you are more inclined to
[2:41:24] vote yes today. Um they listed six
[2:41:28] things on their own slides and that was
[2:41:32] um water use cap, no grid
[2:41:35] interconnectivity
[2:41:37] covenant um to do that uh
[2:41:39] decommissioning plan if they do go under
[2:41:42] and then um enforcement of a noise limit
[2:41:46] and no diesel generators and an annual
[2:41:49] third-party reporting for the compliance
[2:41:53] of those promises. So, I feel like that
[2:41:56] should be included in a development
[2:41:57] agreement. Um, as they listed it, the
[2:42:00] same covenants would be applied to any
[2:42:02] other data centers if you do keep the
[2:42:05] two data centers there. Um, so that's
[2:42:08] all I have. Thank you.
[2:42:09] >> Thank you, Jesse. Appreciate it.
[2:42:13] » Hi, my name is Sarah Stevenson and I
[2:42:16] live in Spanish Fork. Um, we have lived
[2:42:19] here for about five years and u moved
[2:42:21] here from Sacramento and have loved
[2:42:25] Spanish Fork and um the values that
[2:42:29] we've seen and I'm grateful that you
[2:42:31] guys give public comment. I spent some
[2:42:34] time at the Sacramento Capitol and they
[2:42:36] would remove public comment so I'm very
[2:42:38] grateful. So, thank you.
[2:42:41] Um,
[2:42:43] so I um,
[2:42:46] sorry I'm a little nervous. I I really
[2:42:49] loved what Crosby said, the the first
[2:42:52] um, personally gave at the public
[2:42:53] comment. I feel like I can just echo
[2:42:55] what she's saying. Um, but I also wanted
[2:42:58] to bring up I I do work at the Fit City
[2:43:01] Center and they had us memorize our the
[2:43:04] mission statement and it's we strive to
[2:43:06] build and maintain a vibrant city
[2:43:08] through personal community interactions
[2:43:10] and innovative local government
[2:43:12] services. And the biggest thing that
[2:43:14] stands out to me is just the community
[2:43:17] and listening to what the community
[2:43:19] wants. And like Crosby had said that
[2:43:22] there's no guarantee, there's no data to
[2:43:24] back these things up. And I think the
[2:43:26] number one thing
[2:43:28] um this should be the most important
[2:43:30] input is what the people of Spanish Fork
[2:43:32] want. And
[2:43:35] from people who I talked to and the
[2:43:38] turnout tonight, I would say that the
[2:43:40] majority of us do not want the data
[2:43:43] center here. And after like the
[2:43:46] presentation tonight,
[2:43:48] um I just don't think like when they say
[2:43:53] close to no um emission to like the air
[2:43:58] quality, I just want none. Like I I I
[2:44:02] want to keep the air as clean as
[2:44:03] possible here. We already struggle with
[2:44:05] that in Utah. I just don't think it's
[2:44:08] worth adding even a little bit. Um, and
[2:44:13] then even just with the water,
[2:44:16] it's we're still using water. It even
[2:44:18] though they propose that it's not a lot,
[2:44:21] I just don't see the need for
[2:44:24] any use of
[2:44:26] extra water. Um, I just
[2:44:30] Sorry.
[2:44:32] Um
[2:44:35] I just
[2:44:37] I feel like our community doesn't need
[2:44:40] to serve like this innovation. Um the innovation should serve the
[2:44:46] community if that makes sense. Sorry. Um if we're serious about building and
[2:44:53] maintaining a vibrant city through
[2:44:55] personal community interactions, I
[2:44:57] really hope you'll show us tonight that
[2:45:00] this community interaction matters. Um,
[2:45:02] please don't just hear us, listen to us.
[2:45:06] And
[2:45:07] um, thank you.
[2:45:09] >> Thank you, Sarah. Thanks, Sarah.
[2:45:10] >> Thank you, Sarah.
[2:45:12] >> Okay. Uh, next on the list, I have James
[2:45:15] Burrky, Scott Nichols, and Madison
[2:45:17] Bringhurst. If you guys can move up to
[2:45:20] those seats and go in that order and
[2:45:21] then we'll get to the next ones.
[2:45:25] >> Right here.
[2:45:25] >> Oh, okay. You already got a seat. All
[2:45:27] right. So, are you James? No, James is
[2:45:29] coming in.
[2:45:32] James.
[2:45:37] » Hi, my name is James Burrky. I've lived
[2:45:39] up by uh the Diamond Fork Junior High or
[2:45:42] is it a middle school now? I can't
[2:45:44] remember. Anyway, um my main concern
[2:45:47] with this initially was, you know, all
[2:45:49] the other bad stuff that other AI data
[2:45:52] centers have been doing. But I am
[2:45:54] convinced with if everything that our uh
[2:45:58] the company I was saying is true, all
[2:46:00] right, that that assuagages a lot of my
[2:46:02] concerns. However, one that I do have is
[2:46:05] when this company eventually does get
[2:46:07] bought out by whatever mega
[2:46:09] conglomeration, uh, Amazon, Google,
[2:46:12] Apple, whoever, um, do we have the
[2:46:15] proper
[2:46:17] hardlined, uh, bylaws and city codes to
[2:46:20] ensure that they can't with their army
[2:46:22] of lawyers completely override all the
[2:46:24] good stuff that Valition may have done
[2:46:26] and essentially screw the community over
[2:46:29] at some point in the future when they
[2:46:31] surely will get bought
[2:46:33] Um
[2:46:35] as well as this question is more uh for
[2:46:38] my dad who who is a programmer who uses
[2:46:40] a lot of AI in his work. Um would
[2:46:43] Spanish Fork residents
[2:46:46] on whatever systems the company is
[2:46:48] operating and processing? Would we have
[2:46:51] some kind of priority traffic? we have
[2:46:53] some kind of preference in, you know,
[2:46:55] what we could do or potentially if we
[2:46:57] could get access to some like uh local
[2:47:00] tokens, you know, maybe some crazy
[2:47:02] amount like 1 billion. I think it'd be
[2:47:05] really good and, you know, it would help a lot out with some uh local
[2:47:08] innovation. Thank you.
[2:47:09] >> Thank you.
[2:47:10] James. Appreciate that.
[2:47:12] >> Scott.
[2:47:16] » Hey there. I'm Scott Nichols, uh,
[2:47:19] Spanish Fork resident for 10 years. I
[2:47:22] got my whole crew here. So, I'm one
[2:47:24] voice speaking for many, right? Um,
[2:47:28] first wanted to thank you for this has
[2:47:30] been a wonderful experience overall. Um,
[2:47:32] and very much appreciate how much
[2:47:34] diligence you have all taken in in
[2:47:37] looking at how things are written in
[2:47:39] modernizing them for the um the times
[2:47:42] that we're in.
[2:47:44] It's interesting. Did like a quick uh a
[2:47:46] quick uh search of like Gallup polls. Um
[2:47:49] you know, how many fans of data centers
[2:47:52] are there out there? Shockingly, it's
[2:47:54] like 29%. I would love to meet these
[2:47:56] people, the 29% that are pro data
[2:47:59] center. Um I don't suspect there's many
[2:48:01] of them here tonight, though. Um, I
[2:48:05] think
[2:48:07] it's a wonderful approach that you're
[2:48:09] taking and and segregating some of the
[2:48:12] most damaging portions of of what data
[2:48:15] centers uh have been doing to
[2:48:16] communities, isolating those and
[2:48:18] identifying them. Um, I I think my
[2:48:21] question is based on what we're trying
[2:48:24] to be as a town, why any like why two,
[2:48:28] why one, why not zero? Um, uh, data
[2:48:32] centers in in Spanish Fork, especially
[2:48:35] um, now that it seems like technology is
[2:48:37] moving where they can be self-powered
[2:48:40] and um, with closed loop systems and all
[2:48:42] of that, why not put it in the middle of
[2:48:44] nowhere? Like, why right here with us?
[2:48:48] Um we happen to live just right
[2:48:51] downstream from those windmills where
[2:48:52] this is going. So um the heat is a
[2:48:55] concern even you know he said 9% I think
[2:48:58] uh or 9 degrees rather um and that might
[2:49:01] just be local but it's hard to imagine
[2:49:04] like from where I can see 9 degrees not
[2:49:07] making a difference. My tomatoes are
[2:49:09] already dying. Don't need uh additional
[2:49:11] heat. So, um I think one of the other uh
[2:49:15] speakers um had uh said that a binding
[2:49:19] referendum on the actual permitting of
[2:49:22] the data center would be great. I know
[2:49:24] that's not what we're talking about here
[2:49:25] tonight, but I would like to voice my
[2:49:27] support for a binding resolution for the
[2:49:30] actual data center when it comes time.
[2:49:32] So, thank you. Appreciate you.
[2:49:34] >> Thank you, Scott. Appreciate it,
[2:49:37] >> Madison.
[2:49:41] Thank you all and thank you all for the
[2:49:43] opportunity that I've had to email you
[2:49:45] and for those of you that actually
[2:49:47] responded to me with meaningful
[2:49:48] comments, especially you, Councilman
[2:49:50] Marshall. You did an amazing job. You
[2:49:52] actually gave me confidence that you're
[2:49:54] thinking and during the public comments
[2:49:56] with Mr. Pel Pickle. Mr. Pel, you asked
[2:50:00] a very important question. Why not just
[2:50:03] add everything that makes this data
[2:50:05] center acceptable to the title 15
[2:50:08] amendment? And why was the title 15
[2:50:11] amendment proposed by valition
[2:50:14] did they not hold themselves to every
[2:50:16] claim they made tonight? If they do not
[2:50:19] intend to break them, why not put them
[2:50:21] in in the first place? Two of my biggest
[2:50:24] concerns actually have to do with the
[2:50:26] redlinining that was done after the
[2:50:28] planning commission met. Uh Valition
[2:50:31] promised that they intend to run a
[2:50:32] completely electrical isolation.
[2:50:34] However, one of the red lines that was
[2:50:36] added by the city council to Valition's
[2:50:38] document allowed them to connect to the
[2:50:41] grid in order to function their office.
[2:50:45] However, if Bloom cells are so
[2:50:47] wonderful, the small amount of power
[2:50:50] that they need to use for their office
[2:50:51] can certainly be generated themselves.
[2:50:53] there's no reason to allow them an
[2:50:55] opportunity to connect to the grid when
[2:50:57] they promised there's no reason for them
[2:51:00] to do to do so. The second set the
[2:51:03] second issue that I have is actually
[2:51:05] near the bottom. You have taken out the
[2:51:08] language that provides us an opportunity
[2:51:10] to put in new restrictions when legally
[2:51:13] allowed and reasonable. Why would we
[2:51:15] give up that opportunity? That doesn't
[2:51:17] make any sense. That only helps them,
[2:51:19] not us.
[2:51:21] And I would just like to also discuss
[2:51:24] the positives that were discussed in the
[2:51:26] April 21st city council meeting minutes.
[2:51:29] We're very excited obviously to bring in
[2:51:32] new tax revenue. However, a large
[2:51:34] portion of this tax revenue, and I
[2:51:36] apologize, my husband's a tax
[2:51:37] accountant, so this is pillow talk. Um
[2:51:41] but a large portion of this tax revenue
[2:51:44] is actually based on personal property
[2:51:46] taxes which are related to legally
[2:51:49] depreciable assets. If we build a city
[2:51:52] budget around a tax revenue source that
[2:51:56] is intended by its legal measure to
[2:51:58] lessen over time then we are building an
[2:52:02] unsustainable budget. And since the city
[2:52:04] does not have its own revenue, the
[2:52:06] citizens will have to make up that diff
[2:52:09] difference themselves when the time
[2:52:11] comes, which just means raising property
[2:52:13] taxes on families that might not be able
[2:52:15] to afford it, though they love to live
[2:52:17] here. I'd also like to mention that
[2:52:20] they've discussed potentially moving
[2:52:22] their headquarters here. Without a
[2:52:24] contract in hand, that is a meaningless
[2:52:26] promise that has been promised to Texas.
[2:52:28] And Governor Abbott actually had to come
[2:52:29] out and say, "No more data centers until
[2:52:32] you actually bring your headquarters
[2:52:33] here because we're tired of it. We take
[2:52:36] this promise without an actual contract.
[2:52:39] It's meaningless and cannot influence
[2:52:41] our decisions." Thank you.
[2:52:43] >> Thank you, Madison.
[2:52:46] >> Uh, next I have uh on the list here
[2:52:48] Sadie, Josh, and Darren. If Sadi, Josh,
[2:52:52] and Darren could make their way.
[2:52:59] Jordan, stop that.
[2:53:00] >> Come on, Jordan.
[2:53:04] » You can you can wait for a second till
[2:53:05] we stop beeping you. Sorry.
[2:53:08] >> Come on. Okay, they got it.
[2:53:10] >> One job.
[2:53:10] >> They got it.
[2:53:11] >> Satie.
[2:53:12] >> Okay, perfect. My name is Satie Balof.
[2:53:14] I'm essentially a lifelong resident of
[2:53:16] Spanish work, 30 years. Um, I've just
[2:53:19] written down a statement because I'm a
[2:53:20] little bit nervous. But while I believe
[2:53:22] valition are seemingly earnest in their
[2:53:24] desire to improve how data centers could
[2:53:26] operate, ultimately their model is
[2:53:28] conceptual and untested in full. I would
[2:53:32] ask you to not amend the title 15 uh
[2:53:35] amend title 15 tonight until a more
[2:53:37] mature materialized and empirically
[2:53:40] tested and documented propo proposal is
[2:53:42] put in place or until the success and
[2:53:45] safety of the technology is proven and
[2:53:47] not simply calculated as valition has
[2:53:50] shared so far. Uh making this amendment
[2:53:53] will open the door for not only this
[2:53:55] proposal but additional development
[2:53:57] whether from valition or companies in
[2:53:58] the future to come in and propose
[2:54:00] similar or additional data center
[2:54:02] facilities of the future. In addition
[2:54:04] and I brought this up both at the open
[2:54:06] house last Thursday and email and in
[2:54:09] email communication with many of you
[2:54:10] Stacy thanks so much for getting back to
[2:54:12] me. Um, I would like to state that last
[2:54:16] Thursday, Valition said they have not
[2:54:19] and do not have plans to f perform or
[2:54:21] facilitate any environmental impact
[2:54:23] studies as they relate to the
[2:54:25] surrounding habitat. They have
[2:54:27] calculated heat and acoustic
[2:54:28] measurements in relation to proximity to
[2:54:30] the residential areas only. Given the
[2:54:33] prop property's proximity to the Spanish
[2:54:35] Fork River Trail, I'd ask you to please
[2:54:38] consider this as a part of your
[2:54:39] decision. This area of Spanish Fork um
[2:54:42] is unique and delicate. There's been so
[2:54:44] much discourse around how we use and
[2:54:46] protect this land and I feel strongly
[2:54:48] that it requires more consideration
[2:54:50] before a decision is made.
[2:54:52] >> Thanks.
[2:54:53] >> Thank you, Satie.
[2:54:55] >> Uh Josh,
[2:54:58] >> there only one Josh in here. That never
[2:55:00] happens. You called Josh. I was like,
[2:55:02] "All right, who am I fighting?" Anyways,
[2:55:04] uh I'm Josh. I live in here in Spanish
[2:55:06] Fork. I'm a Republican delegate, state
[2:55:08] delegate, and uh you know, so I've been
[2:55:10] around these kinds of hearings and I
[2:55:12] also go to UVU uh majoring in digital
[2:55:15] marketing and minoring in
[2:55:17] entrepreneurship. Um and you know, we
[2:55:20] know that we're living in very divided
[2:55:22] times right now. Uh but I actually think
[2:55:24] it's the opposite. I actually think
[2:55:26] we're living in one of the most unified
[2:55:28] times in America in the last 10 to 15
[2:55:30] years. And this is because I will go to
[2:55:33] UVU and talk to the most lefty liberal
[2:55:35] arts students and I will hear the same
[2:55:37] things that I hear at the Republican
[2:55:40] state convention. Uh when that when that
[2:55:43] is also going on, one of those unifying
[2:55:46] topics is data centers. Lots almost it
[2:55:50] is almost everybody agrees that they do
[2:55:52] not want them in their backyard. And
[2:55:55] it's not as if this data center is
[2:55:57] coming to the outskirts of town. it
[2:55:59] finds itself in the heart of Spanish
[2:56:01] Fork right next to the windmills as
[2:56:03] well. Right. Um so in this case I think
[2:56:08] that we have seen that I will admit it
[2:56:11] is a very good marketing campaign. It
[2:56:13] has been a very good marketing campaign
[2:56:14] here because they come with answers to a
[2:56:17] lot of the anxieties that people have.
[2:56:19] But by guiding our eyes towards their
[2:56:22] marketing campaign and answering all the
[2:56:24] little questions that become the hot
[2:56:26] button topics in the news, we miss out
[2:56:29] on some things that I'm sure you'll hear
[2:56:30] tonight uh by other people by the data
[2:56:33] that they have not been able to actually
[2:56:36] provide and other claims that just have
[2:56:39] not materialized or are not in the
[2:56:40] actual uh thing that we're passing here.
[2:56:44] Um when it comes to that passing of the
[2:56:47] zoning change to allow these types of
[2:56:49] data centers, it also opens a black box,
[2:56:52] Pandora's box into whatever may happen
[2:56:54] next, whatever might change next and
[2:56:57] whatever might data center might come.
[2:56:59] So even if we completely trust Valition,
[2:57:01] we have to completely trust the next
[2:57:03] guy. I just don't think that is a
[2:57:06] Pandora's box that is worth opening here
[2:57:08] tonight or in the future for Spanish
[2:57:11] Fork. All I'm hearing is how bad could
[2:57:13] it possibly be, right? And again, this
[2:57:17] is Spanish Fork. We are citizens of
[2:57:19] Spanish Fork. Pride and progress. I just
[2:57:22] don't see much pride in this progress.
[2:57:25] Thank you.
[2:57:26] >> Thank you, Josh.
[2:57:30] » Uh Darren, right?
[2:57:32] >> That's right. Give me pull my notes
[2:57:34] here.
[2:57:36] >> All right. So, yeah, my name is Darren.
[2:57:38] I live about three miles from the
[2:57:40] proposed uh valition data center. I
[2:57:43] understand the economic opportunities
[2:57:44] project represents. My concern is
[2:57:46] ensuring the protection of residents u
[2:57:50] and that that lasts for the lifetime of
[2:57:52] the facility, not just the first 10
[2:57:54] years or so when equipment's running at
[2:57:56] its optimum. The rep represented this
[2:57:59] project as a quiet lowwater safe and
[2:58:02] environmental respon environmentally
[2:58:04] responsible. If those represent uh
[2:58:06] representations help justify approval,
[2:58:08] they should become measurable and
[2:58:09] enforceable commitments. First, require
[2:58:12] independent unannounced noise testing.
[2:58:14] Every year, testing should occur at
[2:58:16] random times during both the day and
[2:58:17] night and include measures uh near
[2:58:20] surrounding residential areas, not just
[2:58:22] at the property line like proposed. Uh
[2:58:25] the city should establish acceptable
[2:58:27] noise limits. If the facility repeatedly
[2:58:28] exceeds those limits, there should be
[2:58:30] enforceable consequences, including
[2:58:32] stopping the equipment responsible until
[2:58:33] the problem is corrected. Second,
[2:58:35] require annual independent monitoring of
[2:58:37] water consumption and potential impacts
[2:58:39] of our water resources. Third, require
[2:58:42] environmental monitoring of natural gas
[2:58:44] used to generate this electricity. These
[2:58:46] fuel cells do not combust natural gas,
[2:58:48] but they still produce carbon dioxide.
[2:58:51] Methane leakage can also occur during
[2:58:53] natural gas production and
[2:58:54] transportation.
[2:58:56] Requiring uh require reporting of
[2:58:58] natural gas consumption, carbon
[2:59:00] emissions, and independently verified
[2:59:02] methane leakage associated with the gas
[2:59:04] supply. The city should also evaluate
[2:59:06] whether the facility's natural gas
[2:59:08] demand could affect infrastructure or
[2:59:10] future utility costs for residents.
[2:59:12] Fourth, this location creates another
[2:59:14] concern. This facility sits near the
[2:59:17] mouth of the canyon where we experience
[2:59:19] significant winds that move uh out
[2:59:21] towards Spanish Fork and surrounding
[2:59:23] residential areas. I would ask that the
[2:59:25] city require an independent air
[2:59:26] dispersement study using actual local
[2:59:29] wind, weather, and terrain data. We need
[2:59:32] to understand where facility emissions
[2:59:34] travel and what happens during the AC
[2:59:36] accidental natural gas release which
[2:59:39] will occur particularly when canyon
[2:59:41] winds move towards residential areas.
[2:59:43] finally require an independent fire and
[2:59:45] explosion explosion risk assessment.
[2:59:48] Like I said, it isn't being uh we're not
[2:59:52] using it to combust for uh power, but
[2:59:54] there's unburnt natural gas that can be
[2:59:56] a combustion risk. This uh I am I am not
[3:00:01] asking you to assume this project will
[3:00:02] cause these problems. I'm asking you
[3:00:05] make sure that promises being made today
[3:00:07] are independently verified and
[3:00:08] enforceable tomorrow. uh requiring noise
[3:00:11] and water monitoring, requiring
[3:00:12] emissions and methane reporting,
[3:00:14] studying our unique canyon winds,
[3:00:15] requiring independent safety
[3:00:16] assessments, and establishing meaningful
[3:00:18] consequences if the facility fails to
[3:00:20] meet the standards used to approve it.
[3:00:22] >> That's it. Thank you.
[3:00:23] >> Thank you, Darren. Thanks. Appreciate
[3:00:25] it.
[3:00:26] >> Uh next up, I've got Jordan, Anna, and
[3:00:29] Christie.
[3:00:31] If you guys are in the room or in the
[3:00:34] other room, Jordan Stevenson, Anna
[3:00:36] Winkler, and Christy Smith.
[3:00:49] You can go while while they're walking
[3:00:51] in if you want. Are you Anna or
[3:00:52] Christie? You go ahead, Christie.
[3:00:55] >> All right. I will try not to cover
[3:00:58] things that have already been brought
[3:00:59] up, but I did make notes. So,
[3:01:00] >> good.
[3:01:02] >> Uh, so I'm I'm really concerned about
[3:01:05] Oh, Christy Smith, Spanish work. Sorry.
[3:01:07] >> Thank Um, so I'm really concerned about
[3:01:10] the fact that the process has even
[3:01:11] gotten to this point. Um, it's no,
[3:01:15] uh, it's no secret that there's negative
[3:01:17] impacts left and right from data
[3:01:19] centers. Uh, the thought that they're
[3:01:21] being built in mass is terrifying
[3:01:23] enough. Um, tens of thousands across the
[3:01:26] United States is concerning, but if it's
[3:01:29] right here in our backyard, that's
[3:01:31] really concerning. there's no need for
[3:01:33] data centers in this quantity and
[3:01:35] there's definitely not a need for any
[3:01:37] more that don't already exist. Um so we
[3:01:40] should not be discussing new data
[3:01:42] centers or opening up our text to allow
[3:01:45] those. We should be discussing banning
[3:01:47] them. Uh so countless reports of
[3:01:50] negative impacts and I know they've
[3:01:52] addressed some of these. Um
[3:01:55] that's all well and good but you can put
[3:01:57] promises in one hand and water in the
[3:02:00] other. which one's going to fill up,
[3:02:02] right? So, uh there is an increase in
[3:02:05] the temperature on average 12 degrees in
[3:02:08] the areas near data centers. Uh we
[3:02:11] already have an issue with global
[3:02:12] warming warming that we need to address
[3:02:14] as it is. We don't need to add to that.
[3:02:16] Uh data centers use water. Um they have
[3:02:19] addressed part of that. Uh but again, we
[3:02:24] have data centers that have come in
[3:02:26] saying they won't use more water and
[3:02:28] then they end up turning around and
[3:02:29] suing for more. Then what do we do,
[3:02:32] right? Um nobody can survive without
[3:02:34] fresh water, but we definitely can
[3:02:36] survive without data centers. Uh data
[3:02:40] centers can infuse chemicals into the
[3:02:43] ground and or water and or sewer. We
[3:02:47] can't have any of that leech. uh that's
[3:02:49] going to affect not only just the
[3:02:51] ground, but it could go into our crops.
[3:02:52] It could go into anything. Uh noise
[3:02:55] pollution. I know that we've talked a
[3:02:57] bit about that. And so there are people
[3:02:59] that live near data centers that they
[3:03:02] are negatively impacted and it's
[3:03:05] affecting them mentally. And there's so
[3:03:08] many cases where they can't even move
[3:03:10] away or sell their property because
[3:03:13] nobody wants to live near a data center.
[3:03:15] So they can't even sell their house to
[3:03:16] get away from it. Um, and that doesn't
[3:03:19] even factor in the noise that we humans
[3:03:22] cannot hear. I don't know if any of of
[3:03:23] you have seen Hoppers. Um, it's a Disney
[3:03:26] movie. I suggest watching it. Um,
[3:03:29] animals can hear things we can't and
[3:03:31] it's driving animals away. Um, so
[3:03:34] animals bees, it's driving bees away and
[3:03:38] that has a major negative impact on our
[3:03:42] food supply. Um, and just in general, if
[3:03:45] we don't have bees, if we don't have
[3:03:46] pollinators, we don't have earth
[3:03:49] anymore. We're all gone. Uh, let's see.
[3:03:54] And then, uh, also in areas with data
[3:03:58] centers, farmers are reporting fertility
[3:04:00] issues in their animals. There's still
[3:04:02] births or complete lack of pregnancy.
[3:04:05] Uh, if it's doing that to animals,
[3:04:06] what's what is it doing to humans? So,
[3:04:09] thank you very much.
[3:04:10] >> Thank you, Christie. Appreciate it. Uh,
[3:04:14] Anna, is this Anna? Thank you, Anna.
[3:04:17] >> Sorry, let me pull this up. I'm a little
[3:04:19] nervous. You're
[3:04:20] >> all right.
[3:04:20] >> My name's Anna. I'm a senior at Maple
[3:04:22] Mountain High School. Disregarding the
[3:04:24] morality issues of data centers, we
[3:04:27] shouldn't be prioritizing profit over
[3:04:29] humanity. We shouldn't be using our
[3:04:31] limited resources to further harm our
[3:04:33] earth.
[3:04:35] Just because it doesn't affect um our
[3:04:37] gas or our water, like they were saying,
[3:04:40] doesn't mean we should be using it. We
[3:04:42] should be saving it. Um what long-term
[3:04:45] jobs are being made rather than being
[3:04:48] replaced by AI. Um I would like to think
[3:04:50] that the study of Spanish Fork is better
[3:04:52] than that. I believe very strongly in
[3:04:55] human creativity, the environment, and
[3:04:57] the community. AI, I feel like, goes
[3:05:00] against all of those things. I've talked
[3:05:02] to so many people in Utah County,
[3:05:05] especially students from all different
[3:05:06] beliefs and all different political
[3:05:08] parties, and it seems clear the younger
[3:05:11] generation doesn't want data centers.
[3:05:13] Respectfully, my opinion won't change.
[3:05:15] Before we make so-called cleaner data
[3:05:18] centers, we need to close or remodel the
[3:05:20] ones that are already unfortunately
[3:05:22] around. Thank you for your willingness
[3:05:24] to listen.
[3:05:27] >> Appreciate it.
[3:05:28] Uh Jordan Stevenson. I don't know if if
[3:05:30] we missed him or not, but uh we'll go on
[3:05:32] to the next three that we have here are
[3:05:34] Stacy Heus, Karen Crossley, and Kaylee
[3:05:37] Lowry.
[3:05:46] » Hi, I'm Stacy Himus. I've lived here in
[3:05:49] Spanish Fork for 10 years. And about a
[3:05:51] year ago, we got our dream house. Um,
[3:05:55] one of the reasons that we live in
[3:05:57] Spanish Fork is because we love the
[3:06:00] fresh air. We don't want that fresh air
[3:06:03] disturbed. In fact, I would be happy if
[3:06:06] the distribution center was torn down.
[3:06:08] It's okay to like not have things right
[3:06:11] there. But if we have homes there,
[3:06:13] that's fine, too. Um,
[3:06:16] now one of my concerns is that this
[3:06:20] facility is actually right next to
[3:06:22] Powerhouse Road, the fault line. What
[3:06:24] happens in an earthquake? What if
[3:06:27] there's an earthquake and all of a
[3:06:29] sudden these things like combust or
[3:06:32] whatever they can do? I don't know. But
[3:06:34] that is a big concern. Um, I don't feel
[3:06:38] like this spot is the right place for a
[3:06:41] data center. There's got to be better
[3:06:43] places.
[3:06:44] Um Utah already has 45 to 50 data
[3:06:50] centers. Um, they each have
[3:06:55] I don't know the internet said something
[3:06:58] like 125 million between 3 million to
[3:07:02] 125 million gallons of water which if
[3:07:05] you add all of them together 45 to 50 of
[3:07:08] those that
[3:07:10] comes to like a couple billion gallons
[3:07:13] of water I think a year is that anyway
[3:07:18] um and that would be the size of a
[3:07:20] couple cities. like Spanish fork uses a
[3:07:22] billion something like that according to
[3:07:25] what I've seen. Um
[3:07:29] let's see. Uh the noise now I know that
[3:07:34] they say it won't be bad but if you know
[3:07:38] I'm within half a mile to a mile of this
[3:07:43] place um it a lot of times they do make
[3:07:47] a high screech. Maybe it won't. But if
[3:07:50] they're saying that it's like somebody
[3:07:52] talking, can you imagine go home and
[3:07:56] talk and start humming that that level
[3:08:01] into your ear? Like it's very
[3:08:02] unpleasant. Um, I have kids that are
[3:08:05] very sensitive to both allergies, um,
[3:08:10] hearing and, uh,
[3:08:13] you know, like concern from like say
[3:08:15] carbon dioxide emissions or like, yeah,
[3:08:19] we're really sensitive with that. So,
[3:08:22] um,
[3:08:25] and then I know that they say there's no
[3:08:28] smell. the natural gas um is supposed to
[3:08:31] actually have a smell so that you know
[3:08:33] it's there. Um so if there is a smell,
[3:08:35] it would be really stinky, but I'm not
[3:08:37] sure about that either. So anyway, yeah,
[3:08:40] I'm hoping there's a better spot for a
[3:08:42] data center, if at all. I don't really
[3:08:44] care for one, but thanks.
[3:08:46] >> Thank you, Stacy. Appreciate it.
[3:08:51] » Hi. Uh my name is Karen Crossley. I live
[3:08:53] in Spanish Fork. Um, my concern tonight
[3:08:56] is the removal of public input from this
[3:08:59] proposed change. Under the current code,
[3:09:02] a data center like this would need a
[3:09:04] conditional use permit and that means a
[3:09:07] planning commission decides the
[3:09:08] application in a public hearing and they
[3:09:10] can attach conditions to protect the
[3:09:12] neighbors. The planning commission is
[3:09:14] composed of residents appointed by the
[3:09:16] mayor. In their August 5th, 2026
[3:09:18] meeting, they split three to three on
[3:09:20] this proposal. The version that is in
[3:09:22] front of you now tonight takes the
[3:09:25] planning commission out of the process
[3:09:27] entirely. The conditional use permit
[3:09:30] requirement is crossed out. Their
[3:09:32] authority to attach conditions is
[3:09:34] crossed out. What replaces them is the
[3:09:36] development review committee. The city's
[3:09:39] own website calls that committee a staff
[3:09:41] committee with no citizen members. Mr.
[3:09:44] Pel confirmed tonight that after your
[3:09:46] vote to change Title 15, whether that be
[3:09:48] tonight or in the future, this now
[3:09:50] becomes an administrative site plan
[3:09:52] reviewed by staff and the development
[3:09:54] review committee. He told you there
[3:09:56] would be public meetings, but not public
[3:09:58] hearings. In a public meeting, we can
[3:10:01] only quietly watch. In a public hearing,
[3:10:03] we can speak. The applicant's own
[3:10:06] statement in your packet promises that
[3:10:07] every project would still get its own
[3:10:09] conditional use permit and its own
[3:10:11] public hearing. Their slide tonight
[3:10:13] called these conditional uses. The
[3:10:15] ordinance text in that same packet
[3:10:17] crosses both of these out. Mr. Anderson
[3:10:21] told you tonight that this is the first
[3:10:22] time in his 20 years here that has
[3:10:24] staffed a staff has formed a committee
[3:10:26] to evaluate a proposal. If this use is
[3:10:29] unpre unprecedented enough to deserve
[3:10:32] that, it is unprecedented enough to
[3:10:34] deserve a public hearing at every step.
[3:10:37] I'm asking you to add the public voice
[3:10:38] back into this process. Keep the
[3:10:41] standards, keep the caps, require a
[3:10:43] development agreement as a condition,
[3:10:45] the way your own council members have
[3:10:47] raised tonight, and add one sentence.
[3:10:50] Before any specific data center is
[3:10:52] approved, let there be public hearings
[3:10:54] at each step of the way. The applicant
[3:10:56] told you tonight that he act he welcomes
[3:10:58] more time. Take it and fix this one
[3:11:01] thing before you vote. Thank you.
[3:11:03] >> Thank you, Karen.
[3:11:04] >> Okay,
[3:11:06] >> I have a quick question before the time.
[3:11:08] Um, I'm speaking on behalf of 29
[3:11:10] residents. Does that mean I can have
[3:11:13] five minutes? Is that a group?
[3:11:15] >> You have 29 times three minutes, which
[3:11:17] is I don't know what that mean. No, I'm
[3:11:18] just kidding. Uh, if you if you can try
[3:11:20] to keep it to
[3:11:21] >> I'll try to keep it to three, but I like
[3:11:23] just in case of
[3:11:24] >> And we got a lot of we got a lot of
[3:11:26] people behind you and we also got a lot
[3:11:28] of uh emails that we can read too. So,
[3:11:31] anything that you could submit in
[3:11:32] >> I have submitted and he responded to me.
[3:11:35] Yeah, I really appreciate it.
[3:11:36] >> It's really good.
[3:11:37] >> Thank you. What's your name again?
[3:11:38] >> Uh my name is Kaylee Lowry and I live in
[3:11:41] Spanish Fork. I live within like a
[3:11:42] kilometer of the data center, a proposed
[3:11:45] data center. Um I have I have been a
[3:11:48] manufacturing controller as well as a
[3:11:51] director of business intelligence and
[3:11:52] now I'm a mom that researches data
[3:11:54] centers and uh so this is what I found.
[3:11:58] Um I have been to all three of the
[3:12:00] Q&As's as much as I could. Not the whole
[3:12:02] thing every time, but I tried. Um, so I
[3:12:05] have a few questions um to consider and
[3:12:07] a few points. Um, so the email from Mr.
[3:12:10] Chavez that he sent out today that he
[3:12:12] brought up on the permit talked about
[3:12:13] having the caps on noise and property,
[3:12:15] no grid, no diesel, and then diesel
[3:12:18] generators, etc. And then he asked us to
[3:12:21] trust him. Um, but also in the Q&A,
[3:12:24] someone asked directly to have um
[3:12:28] something written in there with PFAS.
[3:12:30] And I don't know the exact terminology
[3:12:31] that they agreed to, but he said to
[3:12:33] somebody, "Let's put that in the in the
[3:12:34] permit." And then he also said that the
[3:12:36] 500k he would put in the permit. And
[3:12:38] that was not in the email today. And so
[3:12:40] he's asking for trust, but there's a few
[3:12:42] things that were mentioned in those
[3:12:43] meetings that did not enter that email
[3:12:45] that I was sent. And so there's a little
[3:12:47] bit of like a hesitancy about trust,
[3:12:50] which is why I asked that this um like
[3:12:55] this amendment that we have it it's kind
[3:12:57] of a cart blanc um from my perspective.
[3:13:01] Um a lot of the things in the permit as
[3:13:04] has been mentioned by a lot of other
[3:13:06] people should be labeled specifically in
[3:13:08] the amendment. Um
[3:13:11] my a few concerns that I have is that
[3:13:14] there's no residential setback. Um that
[3:13:18] the amendment allows a huge facility
[3:13:20] without proportional review. Um
[3:13:22] including the fact that there are two
[3:13:24] proposed or two in this amendment. Um
[3:13:27] and then it um let's see the ultra low
[3:13:31] emissions if they qualify for the 0 um 7
[3:13:35] of nitrous oxide. It means that they
[3:13:37] don't have to measure any other
[3:13:38] pollutants and there are more things
[3:13:40] that are caused for concern as far as
[3:13:42] pollution goes than just nitrous oxide.
[3:13:44] Um there's no chromium analysis um or
[3:13:48] requirements made. Um the noise
[3:13:51] provision should be strengthened. It
[3:13:53] only measures DBA. It doesn't measure
[3:13:54] low frequency noise, total tonal noise.
[3:13:57] All these again can be mitigated with
[3:13:59] policies that we just hold them to.
[3:14:01] Right? I'm not I'm not saying that this
[3:14:02] data center isn't like potentially the
[3:14:04] best option for this facility. What I'm
[3:14:06] saying is that we need to have standards
[3:14:08] and measurements in place that they have
[3:14:10] to abide by. Um and actually that brings
[3:14:13] me back to what Mayor um Menden Hall
[3:14:17] said to me directly. He said, "We don't
[3:14:20] need the business. Um we set the
[3:14:22] standards and if they don't measure up,
[3:14:24] we cut them off." Um, so what are the
[3:14:26] punishments for not abiding by the
[3:14:28] standards which we put in this amendment
[3:14:30] and what at what point do we cut them
[3:14:32] off? Um, and then I have a printed copy
[3:14:35] of the emails I have sent you uh here
[3:14:39] and plenty more to talk about, but I'll
[3:14:41] pass it on.
[3:14:43] >> You can and we can take those if you
[3:14:45] Yeah, you bet. If if you want to leave
[3:14:47] them with us,
[3:14:48] >> certainly take Thank you, Kaylee.
[3:14:50] Appreciate it. Thank you.
[3:14:52] >> Okay. Uh after Kaylee I have Angie uh
[3:14:54] Parkin, Ben Berlin, and Jess N. So
[3:14:57] Angie, Ben, and Jess if you're
[3:15:01] >> Okay. Okay. Thanks, Ben. Uh Angie Parkin
[3:15:07] and then Jess N after.
[3:15:09] >> So Ben, just for the record, you're
[3:15:10] good. You're positively supported or you
[3:15:13] your comments have been addressed
[3:15:14] somewhere else?
[3:15:16] >> Okay. All right. Thanks.
[3:15:17] >> Thanks, Ben.
[3:15:19] >> Angie.
[3:15:19] >> Okay. Hi, my name is Angie Parkin and
[3:15:22] I'm a concerned citizen of Utah County.
[3:15:25] Please consider the best practices that
[3:15:27] other municipalities in the US have
[3:15:30] begun to implement as a protection in
[3:15:32] this data center in its data center
[3:15:34] ordinance. That is requiring a
[3:15:36] decommissioning bond, not just a plan
[3:15:39] like he mentioned. It was currently
[3:15:41] stated, an actual decommissioning bond.
[3:15:43] This is money or financial collateral to
[3:15:46] cover the cost of shutting the facility
[3:15:48] down and cleaning up the property. So
[3:15:51] when a company decides this isn't
[3:15:53] profitable anymore, the taxpayers and
[3:15:55] the city isn't stuck with a gigantic
[3:15:58] industrial mess and demolition bill.
[3:16:00] Data centers come in with big talk, lots
[3:16:04] of promises. They should be prepared to
[3:16:06] clean up their own mess should they
[3:16:08] choose to leave. One last thing, as of
[3:16:11] 2025, solar panels with battery storage
[3:16:14] are now the cheapest and quickest way to
[3:16:17] get power. Why is it that the applicant
[3:16:19] is using fossil gas? Also, light
[3:16:23] pollution. That was something that was
[3:16:24] not addressed. No more dark sky. Hello
[3:16:27] to interrupted bird migration. Bottom
[3:16:30] line, let's keep the written standards.
[3:16:33] Restore conditional use permit. The
[3:16:36] applicant asked for it, staff removed
[3:16:38] it. Putting it back costs the city
[3:16:41] nothing and keeps the public hearing on
[3:16:43] every project that follows. Thank you.
[3:16:46] >> Thank you, Angie. Thanks, Angie.
[3:16:47] >> Appreciate it.
[3:16:52] » Jess.
[3:16:54] >> Hi, my name is Jess. I'm also a resident
[3:16:56] and I'd like to start by acknowledging
[3:16:58] the significant time spent by the
[3:17:00] council. Um, I know that these city
[3:17:03] council meetings are lengthy clearly for
[3:17:05] all of us and the time that you put into
[3:17:08] these decisions and considerations for
[3:17:10] our city is impactful and much beyond
[3:17:12] these meetings. I'd also like to
[3:17:14] acknowledge Valition and their efforts
[3:17:17] to improve data centers and I think they
[3:17:21] have great starts in terms of improving
[3:17:23] water usage a separate gas line with
[3:17:26] Nbridge as well as other measures to try
[3:17:29] and reduce the pollutants and the
[3:17:33] uses of different resources in the city
[3:17:36] including not connecting to the local
[3:17:38] power grid. I do have significant
[3:17:40] concerns regarding the data center that
[3:17:43] have not been
[3:17:46] proven yet to be safe. I am primarily
[3:17:49] concerned for the Spanish Fork residents
[3:17:52] health as well as the health of our
[3:17:53] wildlife and the agriculture.
[3:17:57] And I also want to acknowledge that the
[3:18:02] council has emphasized the importance of
[3:18:04] uses subject to conditions and the how
[3:18:08] imperative it is to build a more robust
[3:18:10] title 15. I think that there is
[3:18:12] additional parameters of other as others
[3:18:14] have mentioned to continue to build that
[3:18:17] robustness of title 15. For example, I'm
[3:18:20] not aware that Title 15 includes any
[3:18:22] regulations on temperature. And as
[3:18:25] people who live nearby to the proposed
[3:18:27] data center have expressed temperature
[3:18:29] increases on site of 4 to9 degrees with
[3:18:32] temperature increases up to one degree
[3:18:34] within a half mile of the the data
[3:18:36] center and some, from my understanding,
[3:18:37] ambiguity in between those distances is
[3:18:40] of major concern to me given there are
[3:18:43] water sources very close to the vicinity
[3:18:46] of the proposed data center. And we
[3:18:48] simply don't have the local studies and
[3:18:52] data to prove that this would be safe
[3:18:54] for our residents, for our water supply,
[3:18:57] for the animals that live in the area,
[3:18:59] for the unique populations of fireflies
[3:19:02] and the unique populations that live
[3:19:03] within this flood plane that's already
[3:19:05] very unique to Utah. And my third point
[3:19:09] is that as of 5:00 pm today, the August
[3:19:12] 4 Spanish Fork City Council meeting had
[3:19:15] 654 views. This is in relation to the
[3:19:19] estimated over 48,000 Spanish Fork City
[3:19:22] residents as of estimated July 2025 data
[3:19:27] based on the census. This would be 1.3%
[3:19:31] of Spanish Fork residents that have
[3:19:33] viewed a portion of or that full city
[3:19:35] council meeting and I believe that this
[3:19:38] issue deserves increased visibility and
[3:19:40] public feedback. Thank you.
[3:19:42] >> Thank you.
[3:19:42] Jess.
[3:19:45] >> I have uh the next three I have are
[3:19:47] Megan Banks, Jim
[3:19:50] Apodaka,
[3:19:51] and Heather Miller.
[3:19:57] Megan, Jim, and Heather.
[3:20:06] » Hi, I'm Megan. Um, Banks.
[3:20:10] I'm kind of short. Um, I grew up here in
[3:20:13] Spanish Fork my whole life. Um,
[3:20:18] I have a hard time trusting. Um, so I
[3:20:23] was just thinking of my grandmother that
[3:20:26] was mayor. Um Marie Huff, she would say
[3:20:28] if it's too good to be true, it's
[3:20:30] probably too good to be true. And I do
[3:20:32] feel that way. Um my concern is heat and
[3:20:38] with so many concerns actually. One is
[3:20:41] heat and with us in a drought and all
[3:20:45] the fires have been so horrible this
[3:20:47] year and um so even just a little bit of
[3:20:50] degree that is a big concern to me. And
[3:20:53] also um
[3:20:56] the water and the environment and um
[3:21:02] and if it doesn't work out what it's
[3:21:06] going to cost us more money to
[3:21:09] have them fix whatever. So, I think that
[3:21:13] um money is a concern and
[3:21:19] um yeah, I'm just not for it and I don't
[3:21:21] think a lot of our residents are for it
[3:21:23] and so um yeah, sorry, I'm super
[3:21:27] nervous, but I think that's all I've
[3:21:29] got.
[3:21:29] >> Your grandma would be proud.
[3:21:31] >> Thank you.
[3:21:31] >> Thanks, Megan.
[3:21:32] >> Thank you.
[3:21:35] >> Uh Megan, uh and then Jim. Uh
[3:21:43] Hello, my uh my name is Jim Apodaka. I'm
[3:21:45] a resident of Mapleton uh fairly new uh
[3:21:48] to Mapleton. My I moved my family there
[3:21:51] from from Bluffdale about uh about four
[3:21:54] months ago. So, we we love the area and
[3:21:57] I just found out about this last
[3:21:59] Wednesday and um I've learned a lot
[3:22:03] during this process. And um I guess one
[3:22:06] thing that one question that I would
[3:22:08] have is that you know we we've talked a
[3:22:12] lot about voluition. We've scrutinized
[3:22:14] them. We've gone through all of their
[3:22:15] data you know and I and I think we we
[3:22:18] need to continue to go through that
[3:22:19] data. But my question there is that
[3:22:23] they've provided this information and I
[3:22:25] understand that if we don't have what
[3:22:28] I'm hearing is that I've got two options
[3:22:31] as a uh as a resident of Mapleton and I don't I don't really get a
[3:22:35] decision because I live in Mapleton
[3:22:37] right but when I drive down my hill
[3:22:40] the data science it's right there and so
[3:22:42] but my question is is so if we are going
[3:22:45] to put valition under the microscope
[3:22:48] that we we are but the other option is,
[3:22:51] well, there's a a trucking company
[3:22:53] that's going to push out 6,900 trucks a
[3:22:55] month through that that little tiny
[3:22:58] intersection right there where the acorn
[3:22:59] is, right? What what what is that going
[3:23:02] to do to that area? You know, what help me
[3:23:08] understand how that is going to impact
[3:23:10] the area? And I think if anything, we
[3:23:13] should put that same that that other
[3:23:15] potential buyer, if that's what they're
[3:23:17] planning on doing with this space, we
[3:23:19] should put them under the same lens and and make a decision that is best for
[3:23:24] the community, not just Spanish Fork,
[3:23:27] but for Mapleton. We live right there,
[3:23:29] too, you know, and it's it is in our
[3:23:31] backyard. And so, why not evaluate both?
[3:23:35] And and I and I've heard people say,
[3:23:37] well, you know, I don't even want the
[3:23:39] data center. Building doesn't even have
[3:23:41] to be there. You know, that's an option,
[3:23:43] too, because of the way it's zoned. It
[3:23:46] will support other options, you know,
[3:23:49] and
[3:23:50] why not purchase that spot, Spanish
[3:23:53] Fork, and do something with it. Give
[3:23:56] something to the community. Develop in a way that takes advantage of those windmills. That's one of the
[3:24:03] things we love about that community is
[3:24:05] those windmills. And one of the things
[3:24:06] that we love is it's I have I have yet
[3:24:09] to experience a bad sunset. And part of
[3:24:13] that beauty is looking over and seeing
[3:24:15] Spanish Fork. I mean, it's such a such a
[3:24:17] beautiful town. Such a beautiful town.
[3:24:20] And all I'm asking is that before you
[3:24:22] make any decisions, evaluate this other
[3:24:25] buyer and this other option, you know,
[3:24:28] because the idea of 6,900 trucks on our
[3:24:30] road, you know, that's that's really
[3:24:33] concerning. That's really concerning.
[3:24:35] And it seems to me like your neighbors,
[3:24:38] your neighboring city, Mapleton, should
[3:24:40] have a say in that conversation also
[3:24:43] because that's a lot of traffic right
[3:24:44] there where the the roads meet and the and the counties meet, right?
[3:24:49] um why not bring them to the table and
[3:24:51] maybe involve you do DOT in the
[3:24:54] conversation as well. All I'm saying is
[3:24:56] address both options and make the make a
[3:24:59] decision that's good for both
[3:25:00] communities. I'll stop talking. Thank
[3:25:02] you for your time.
[3:25:03] >> Thank you, Jim. Appreciate you coming.
[3:25:06] >> Uh after Jim, I had Heather Miller,
[3:25:08] Charlie Anderson, and Tia Young.
[3:25:12] >> Hello.
[3:25:12] >> Hi, Heather.
[3:25:13] >> I am Heather Miller. Um resident of
[3:25:15] Maple Mapleton. I'm actually Jim's wife.
[3:25:18] don't know how we ended up right behind
[3:25:19] each other in line or I ended up behind
[3:25:21] him. I'm not I don't know how that
[3:25:22] happened. Um regardless, a couple of
[3:25:25] questions here. One of the things that
[3:25:27] is a little concerning to me is, you
[3:25:29] know, I have watched um the council
[3:25:31] meeting as well as the planning
[3:25:33] commission meetings um and attended
[3:25:36] between the two of us attended two of
[3:25:38] the three open houses with valition. Um,
[3:25:41] one of the concern concerns for me in
[3:25:43] particular, and I think it's it's been
[3:25:45] mentioned by others in a similar way, is
[3:25:47] that the numbers keep moving. The
[3:25:49] numbers were being presented with by
[3:25:50] abolition. Again, um, they're minor
[3:25:53] discrepancies, but again, because
[3:25:55] they're moving, it is creating some
[3:25:57] worry. And so, I do want to ask that you
[3:26:00] do your due diligence on your part and
[3:26:02] actually scrutinize those numbers, have
[3:26:04] them independently verified by somebody
[3:26:06] that's not hired by valition if
[3:26:08] possible. Um, one of the numbers
[3:26:11] presented tonight, you know, at the
[3:26:12] planning commission meeting and city
[3:26:14] council meeting, um, the 500,000 gallons
[3:26:18] is accurate and has remained consistent,
[3:26:21] but the 250,000galon
[3:26:23] number has actually changed slightly in
[3:26:27] that it initially described a refill.
[3:26:29] Today, it's describing a, you know, the
[3:26:32] humidity output. It's needed for
[3:26:33] humidity in in their facility. So, which
[3:26:36] is it? And is there 250,000 for humidity
[3:26:40] plus 250,000 for eventual refills? Do
[3:26:44] you see what I'm saying? Like there are
[3:26:45] some discrepancies in the numbers that
[3:26:47] are being pushed out um to to us that's
[3:26:51] available to the public. So I would just
[3:26:53] ask that you really do look at that and
[3:26:55] scrutinize those numbers, please. And
[3:26:57] then um in regards to the decibels, that
[3:27:00] is one thing that I personally brought
[3:27:01] up with Valition at their open house.
[3:27:04] Um, again, 58 dB sounds minor. Um, the
[3:27:09] numbers that keep being presented and
[3:27:10] how they sound are all being presented
[3:27:12] during the day. I want to know what that
[3:27:13] sounds like at 3:00 a.m. Um, and that's
[3:27:15] something I have asked from them. The
[3:27:18] World Health Organization does say
[3:27:20] anything between 35 and 40 is acceptable
[3:27:22] for the night. This 50 is still above
[3:27:24] that number. And so, just keeping that
[3:27:27] in mind. I don't I don't know what tests
[3:27:29] are being conducted at this point, what
[3:27:31] it actually sounds like. we live a half
[3:27:33] a mile from this place. Um so that is
[3:27:36] one thing I would love for you to keep
[3:27:39] in mind and maybe question a little bit
[3:27:41] more. And then um one of the things that
[3:27:44] has been brought up in the council
[3:27:46] meeting as well as with Valition in
[3:27:48] their open house is a governance board.
[3:27:49] And I would ask that even regardless of
[3:27:52] where you live in this city um whether
[3:27:55] you're on the Mapleton side or Spanish
[3:27:56] Fork side that you consider residents of
[3:27:58] Mapleton as well to be a part of that
[3:28:00] governance board that is going to hold
[3:28:02] them accountable um to the things that
[3:28:04] they are promising. Um and I'm running
[3:28:07] out of time unfortunately so that's
[3:28:09] where I'll end but thank you. Thank you,
[3:28:11] Heather. Appreciate that.
[3:28:15] >> Hi, my name is Tia Young. Um, I lived in
[3:28:17] Spanish Fork all growing up and I
[3:28:18] currently live also in Harmony Ridge
[3:28:20] just across the highway from the
[3:28:22] proposed data center. Um, I do want to
[3:28:24] say I appreciate the respect Jeff and
[3:28:26] Valition has shown. Um, I appreciate
[3:28:28] their openness also to give back to the
[3:28:29] community. I think that's great. I wish
[3:28:30] that the larger companies across the
[3:28:32] country had this same interest in mind
[3:28:34] um to limit these negative effects on
[3:28:36] cities. However, I also agree with what
[3:28:38] everyone here has said today um that
[3:28:40] valition prevents presents many
[3:28:42] appealing promises, but at the end of
[3:28:44] the day, they are still just promises um
[3:28:46] with um not backed by quantifiable data.
[3:28:50] And I'll refrain from repeating what
[3:28:51] other people have said, but I do want to
[3:28:53] say um Jeff himself mentioned that many
[3:28:56] people have used the phrase, if this
[3:28:57] works out, it will be great. First of
[3:28:59] all, I don't think anyone has said that
[3:29:00] here today. Um, but I would say that's a
[3:29:03] really really big if because if it does
[3:29:04] not work out, it is our health and our
[3:29:06] community that is at stake and you guys
[3:29:08] already know those potential hazards as
[3:29:10] people have said. Um, thus if this
[3:29:12] proposal does go through, I echo what
[3:29:14] others have said to include in writing
[3:29:16] clear and specific restrictions um and
[3:29:18] the corresponding penalties that will be
[3:29:20] enacted if they fail to meet these
[3:29:21] requirements. And in my opinion,
[3:29:23] increased fees are not a satisfactory
[3:29:25] measures of those um things. And
[3:29:28] ultimately, I still do not support any
[3:29:29] proposed data centers until these thor
[3:29:31] thorough, quantifiable, verifiable, and
[3:29:33] repeatable studies have been conducted
[3:29:35] to determine the reality of these
[3:29:37] consequences on our communities. Thank
[3:29:38] you.
[3:29:39] >> Thank you.
[3:29:40] to you,
[3:29:42] >> Cherry Anderson. I don't know if we
[3:29:43] missed you, but if you're still here,
[3:29:45] you're welcome to come up. Don Young and
[3:29:48] Nora Newer.
[3:29:51] Thank you.
[3:29:51] >> Uh my name is Sher Anderson. I've lived
[3:29:53] in Spanish Fork for 19 years and I live
[3:29:57] not far from where the data center is
[3:29:59] being proposed. Um I have concerns about
[3:30:01] the validity of the claims by the tech
[3:30:03] company that the center won't cause
[3:30:04] pollution or water shortages. Uh partly
[3:30:07] because the financial fines or
[3:30:08] consequences um they're meaningless to
[3:30:11] billionaires and big tech companies.
[3:30:12] They rely upon our inability to
[3:30:15] comprehend the vastness of their wealth.
[3:30:18] Um it would amount to slaps on the
[3:30:20] wrist. Um, you know, fines just really
[3:30:23] don't really matter that much to
[3:30:25] businesses that have that much money.
[3:30:26] Um, and Spanish Fork, you know, maybe it
[3:30:29] seems like an easy bark. I you don't
[3:30:31] have to go far to hear what people think
[3:30:33] of people in Spanish Fork of being Hicks
[3:30:37] or whatever kind of thing. So, um, but I hope that maybe that's been challenged
[3:30:42] a little bit by a lot of the really
[3:30:44] intelligent um, arguments that have been
[3:30:46] made here today. So, um I'm a little bit
[3:30:50] skeptical of the benefits to Spanish
[3:30:51] Fork, um as far as just AI in general.
[3:30:55] And I realize everybody thinks that AI
[3:30:56] is inevitable and that we're all going
[3:30:58] to have it be taken over. Um the purpose
[3:31:01] of AI is to eliminate the need for big
[3:31:03] companies to hire people. Um some
[3:31:07] businesses, um billionaire Sam Alman
[3:31:10] envisions making humans rent
[3:31:12] intelligence from him like a utility.
[3:31:14] Um, all of that may be inevitable, but
[3:31:16] I'm not interested in helping it along
[3:31:18] with a data center in spitting distance
[3:31:20] of my house. Um, I'm aware of the
[3:31:22] possibility um that a lot may have been
[3:31:26] promised to Spanish Fork and maybe even some of you individually if
[3:31:31] we can get this over the finish line.
[3:31:32] Um, but I hope that you really do take
[3:31:34] into account the the wishes of the
[3:31:37] citizens of Spanish Fork um in the
[3:31:39] process of all this. I do appreciate all
[3:31:42] of the um all of the things that
[3:31:44] Volition has been um I think that's the
[3:31:47] name of the company, I'm sorry. Um that
[3:31:49] they that they're saying that they will
[3:31:50] do to make it um a better data center
[3:31:53] than what we've heard about like in Box
[3:31:54] Elder. Um but I have the same concerns
[3:31:56] as others of of who might buy it out and
[3:31:59] what what they'll do with with even less
[3:32:01] um concern for small things like fines
[3:32:04] that are easy for them to pay. That's
[3:32:06] it.
[3:32:07] >> Thank you, Sher. Thank you.
[3:32:11] » Don Young and Nora New Miller.
[3:32:16] >> Okay.
[3:32:18] >> My name is Don Young. Uh I am a student
[3:32:21] at Maple Mountain High School and a
[3:32:23] resident of Spanish Fork. Ultimately
[3:32:25] allowing any data centers in the city
[3:32:27] will hurt its residents.
[3:32:31] Uh let's see. This s um valition is
[3:32:34] admirable admiraably interested in being
[3:32:37] more eco-friendly especially if every
[3:32:39] promise comes true. However, this
[3:32:41] meeting has skated around an important
[3:32:43] issue. The technology itself is the root
[3:32:46] and what I find issue. The issue I and
[3:32:49] many others are concerned about is LLMs.
[3:32:52] It is a dangerous tool that is a threat
[3:32:54] to learning and overall security. Um MIT
[3:32:58] Media Lab found that quote brain only
[3:33:01] participants exhibited the strongest
[3:33:03] most distributed neural networks and LLM
[3:33:06] users displayed the weakest connectivity
[3:33:09] or in my own words it weakens critical
[3:33:11] thinking skills. This is a risk not only
[3:33:14] now but in the future as this technology
[3:33:17] has been pushed further. Supporting this
[3:33:20] proposal furthers an attack on
[3:33:22] education. These companies want a
[3:33:25] further reliance on this technology and
[3:33:27] this proposal gives them more power.
[3:33:30] These companies want to decrease our
[3:33:31] cognitive ability and the and
[3:33:36] um are motivated by profit. In addition,
[3:33:38] it has been a main contributor to the
[3:33:40] current unemployment crisis including
[3:33:42] residents of Spanish Fork. This proposal
[3:33:45] is not um in support of residents or in
[3:33:48] the long run the city. It is primarily
[3:33:50] concerned about company profits. The
[3:33:53] real issue I think we all need to be
[3:33:54] asking is what is this AI being used
[3:33:57] for? This is a net negative. Zero AI
[3:34:00] data centers should be allowed in
[3:34:02] Spanish work. Thank you.
[3:34:04] >> Thank you Dan.
[3:34:05] >> Thank you.
[3:34:09] » Hi to everybody. My name is Noran Miller
[3:34:11] and resident four years here and I was
[3:34:14] gone for a year and I back a few months
[3:34:16] ago and I noticed a change in the city
[3:34:20] and from four year for a year and a half
[3:34:23] ago. So it's changing is growing the
[3:34:25] city and I remember meeting when
[3:34:30] Mr. parents on one time when I moved to
[3:34:32] the city to talk about things I see in
[3:34:34] the city how is these things work and
[3:34:37] now a friend told me about this meeting
[3:34:40] I wasn't aware what was happening and I
[3:34:43] came last week one of the presentations
[3:34:45] and I was impressed uh how they did it
[3:34:48] how they presented well done and all the
[3:34:51] questions they trying they seem like
[3:34:53] they are concerned and they they want to
[3:34:55] reach to answer to everybody and you
[3:34:58] guys were looking this for a few months
[3:35:00] already too. The way it sounds, that's
[3:35:02] what I understood. Um I I see the
[3:35:06] concerns of the citizens, the residents
[3:35:08] in Spanish Fork and the Mapleton because
[3:35:11] they will be too affected.
[3:35:14] One of my concerns is because with the
[3:35:16] way they present is great the way
[3:35:17] they're doing because sounds like it
[3:35:20] won't hurt as much if you guys put
[3:35:22] something else. Uh my concern is voting
[3:35:25] for the two data centers. Why two?
[3:35:29] Please, if you approve, don't do two.
[3:35:32] Uh later if the company because
[3:35:36] everybody invest and they're looking in
[3:35:38] the future, but who knows? Did they sell
[3:35:40] it? Like somebody mentioned that can
[3:35:42] bring a new owner on new things that
[3:35:45] need to have restrictions, a lot of
[3:35:48] restrictions before they do that. The
[3:35:51] city council, please take a good look.
[3:35:53] What are you doing? If you not prove
[3:35:56] this business,
[3:35:58] what are you will bring there? And
[3:36:00] that's a concern too. Everybody's
[3:36:02] talking about the trucks, talking about
[3:36:05] uh a distribution when a lot of trucks
[3:36:08] and that concerns me because already my
[3:36:10] house is too close to the six and I see
[3:36:13] the traffic. I see so many accidents
[3:36:15] happening.
[3:36:17] the permits and zoning, how is how how
[3:36:21] is changing because the zoning if you
[3:36:24] guys change zoning and permits that can
[3:36:26] affect in a lot of things for later for
[3:36:28] other businesses. So in the long run we
[3:36:31] need to be careful about that. The
[3:36:33] residents should have a voice. I I'm so
[3:36:36] concerned because one of the residents
[3:36:39] mentioned that why they don't invite to
[3:36:41] their residents to be participating
[3:36:43] more. I have a question about this. I
[3:36:47] moved recently. Like I say, I wasn't in
[3:36:50] uh around much, but the inland port in
[3:36:53] Spanish for it was approved without the
[3:36:56] residents
[3:36:58] vote.
[3:37:00] I had a question because I wasn't a I
[3:37:02] wasn't here. So, if it was, you can see
[3:37:06] it's already over there a lot of
[3:37:10] uh industrial development in that area
[3:37:12] on the other side of the 15. So, please
[3:37:14] take a look there and see what are you
[3:37:17] doing. Thank you.
[3:37:19] >> Thank you, Nora. Appreciate it.
[3:37:21] >> Uh, next I have Zack Zack Davis, Reed
[3:37:24] Warner, and James Westwwater. Zack Reed
[3:37:27] and James.
[3:37:32] » Hi, my name is Zach Davis. I am a
[3:37:34] resident of Salem City. Um, I have two
[3:37:37] main concerns about the zoning
[3:37:40] amendment, but first, I'd like to make a
[3:37:41] request of the council. We have heard so
[3:37:43] many public comments specifically about
[3:37:44] the data center itself, about data
[3:37:46] centers by and large, but not about the
[3:37:48] zoning amendment. But I think in the
[3:37:50] context of this public hearing, we have
[3:37:52] to weigh comments about this valition
[3:37:55] data center to the amendment. This
[3:37:57] amendment is very much so sponsoring
[3:38:00] valition adjacent data centers. These
[3:38:02] questions and like interrogations of the
[3:38:05] valition data center will come up again
[3:38:06] and again and again with other proposed
[3:38:08] data centers if this amendment is to be
[3:38:10] passed. And I think those comments need
[3:38:12] to be weighed on the same ground. But
[3:38:14] first, I want to talk about competition.
[3:38:16] The way this amendment is written
[3:38:18] annexes out many different types of data
[3:38:20] centers. I'm not here to like spout my
[3:38:22] own opinions on digital infrastructure
[3:38:24] or data centers and whether we should
[3:38:26] have them. But this is driving out the
[3:38:28] opportunity for other data center
[3:38:30] companies to come in. We're getting rid
[3:38:31] of combustion and most importantly,
[3:38:33] we're getting rid of the grid
[3:38:34] connection. When Mr. Chavez spoke
[3:38:36] earlier today. He specifically mentioned
[3:38:38] that a data center of this size has not
[3:38:40] been sustained solely on cell fuel
[3:38:43] cells. How are we supposed to know it's
[3:38:45] going to work? The amendment they wrote
[3:38:47] could potentially annex their own model
[3:38:49] and any other model from coming in
[3:38:52] because it might not be sustainable for
[3:38:53] years to come. We cannot pass an
[3:38:55] amendment when we do not know if it will
[3:38:57] even be workable in the end. The second
[3:38:59] is I want to talk about the rhetoric of
[3:39:01] valition. I honor a lot of the public
[3:39:04] comment about how it's admirable about
[3:39:06] what they're doing, but I think
[3:39:07] ultimately it more so reflects wanting
[3:39:09] to get past and wanting it to get passed
[3:39:11] now. I think the public hearings while
[3:39:14] admirable are ultimately hollow. They
[3:39:16] rally public cry and then when they
[3:39:18] found out that people with Spanish Fork
[3:39:19] didn't buy this kind of greenwashing
[3:39:21] that they were selling, they moved to
[3:39:23] push it. I don't think that is in good
[3:39:24] faith. I think that is because they
[3:39:27] didn't get the outcome they wanted. I
[3:39:28] think this promise of money to the
[3:39:30] community is helpful and it is good and
[3:39:32] that it isn't bad, but I think it takes
[3:39:34] away from the focus of what this is
[3:39:36] about. And it's the same thing with
[3:39:37] their framing of this versus the
[3:39:38] trucking distribution center. It's not
[3:39:40] that we are weighing this data center as
[3:39:42] is it good for the people of Spanish
[3:39:44] Fork. Is it good on its own? We're
[3:39:46] weighing it as a a better of two evils, that will reinvest
[3:39:51] in the community. We're not being asked
[3:39:53] as citizens to evaluate whether this is
[3:39:55] a good project. We're being asked to
[3:39:58] succumb to the less of two evils and
[3:40:00] just accept it because what else are we
[3:40:02] to do? And
[3:40:05] ultimately, I just do not believe we
[3:40:06] should be trusting an organization that
[3:40:08] keeps shifting the goalpost. And this
[3:40:09] has been echoed by other public
[3:40:10] commenters.
[3:40:12] Numbers are shifting. Ideation is
[3:40:14] changing. Specifically, when I went to
[3:40:16] the public hearing, I asked about the
[3:40:18] partnership with Bloom Energy and their
[3:40:19] EPA fines for leaking benzene into the
[3:40:22] ground in their manufacturing sites. I
[3:40:23] was initially told in front of everyone
[3:40:25] that it didn't matter because it was
[3:40:26] about the production of the fuel cell
[3:40:28] the fuel cells themselves, not about the
[3:40:30] actual use of them. When I went to Mr.
[3:40:32] Chavez after, he told me it was a
[3:40:33] question of efficiency. I don't think we
[3:40:35] should be weighing city policy based
[3:40:37] upon a goal shifting organization.
[3:40:39] >> Thank you. Thank you, Zach.
[3:40:41] >> Thank you.
[3:40:48] » Good evening. Reed Warner, Spanish fork
[3:40:51] lifelong. So that puts me at 55. So I've
[3:40:56] been here a while.
[3:40:57] >> Go class of 89 Reed
[3:40:59] >> right there. So the microphone closer.
[3:41:03] >> You bet. You can't hear me. Most people
[3:41:05] tell me to be quiet. So thank you. Um
[3:41:10] I'm probably on the opposite, not quite
[3:41:12] the opposite, but a little different
[3:41:14] take on some of this. That is I've
[3:41:17] worked in IT for the last 30 years.
[3:41:20] I've worked in data centers. I worked
[3:41:22] out at the NSA data center. I've been
[3:41:25] associated with some of these different
[3:41:28] components.
[3:41:29] Um, part of the questions that come up
[3:41:33] are are the closed circuit. I would love
[3:41:35] to learn more about the closed loop
[3:41:37] that's actually being utilized. I've
[3:41:39] never seen one or heard of one that
[3:41:42] actually stayed closed and didn't have
[3:41:44] to have resupply constantly
[3:41:48] and some kind of evacuation. I love the example of of how it was pumped out
[3:41:54] and then shipped. That's great. I think
[3:41:56] there's just some things that need to
[3:41:58] come back. One of the pieces that
[3:42:03] approached me was the the discussion on
[3:42:05] trust. And if there's anything I've ever
[3:42:07] learned in 21 years in the military and a million other things is it's trust
[3:42:14] but verify. And so I'm trusting that
[3:42:17] what you're telling me is the truth. I
[3:42:19] just want to see some validation of it.
[3:42:22] And I think those are good things. I I
[3:42:25] my other part is probably the valuation.
[3:42:29] A $4 billion valuation that's great. The
[3:42:33] depreciating assets not so great. And
[3:42:36] how did that come about? And what's the
[3:42:38] reality of it? Is that at full
[3:42:40] production? And is full production in 10
[3:42:43] years or is full production in one year
[3:42:45] or year two? What does that look like?
[3:42:47] What's that rolling time frame? Um the
[3:42:51] other part that I had was
[3:42:54] why the fast track? Why not the chance
[3:42:57] to to really walk through it? I don't um
[3:43:02] I honestly believe that this should be
[3:43:05] tabled and there should be a longer
[3:43:08] period for
[3:43:10] the council members and others to read
[3:43:12] through the the red lines and the
[3:43:14] changes and a chance to have public
[3:43:17] comment again on on the updated changes
[3:43:19] to that. That's my my honest belief
[3:43:22] right now. We don't know enough other
[3:43:24] than
[3:43:26] what we saw very quickly run through
[3:43:28] this. I couldn't read it that fast.
[3:43:31] Maybe somebody else can. Um, so for me,
[3:43:34] that's that's the biggest part. And then
[3:43:38] going back to
[3:43:43] we change it today, they're going to
[3:43:45] change it in the future.
[3:43:47] So whatever we do here today, we have to
[3:43:49] realize is going to get changed in the
[3:43:52] future. So how do you fix or prepare for
[3:43:54] that?
[3:43:55] >> Thank you.
[3:43:56] Reed. Appreciate that.
[3:43:58] >> I should have Jim Jim, while you're
[3:44:01] coming up here, uh I think that's a good
[3:44:03] point that Reed brought up. The the
[3:44:05] documents I think that have been showed
[3:44:08] here today are in the agenda packet. So,
[3:44:11] we should be able to find those not
[3:44:13] having to search too far, but just
[3:44:14] search the meeting tonight and you
[3:44:17] should find everything that's presented
[3:44:19] here.
[3:44:20] >> Yeah. Those aren't the these aren't like
[3:44:22] his presentation isn't in the packet
[3:44:24] yet, but it'll be there within a couple
[3:44:25] of days.
[3:44:25] >> Oh, perfect. So, our our memo's in
[3:44:27] there, but probably not that.
[3:44:28] >> Yeah. Yep. It'll be there within a day
[3:44:30] or two.
[3:44:31] >> Perfect. Look for it in the day. Thank
[3:44:32] you,
[3:44:33] >> Jim. Yes.
[3:44:34] >> I'm Dr. James Westwwater, a 20 plus year
[3:44:37] resident of Spanish Fork. I like living
[3:44:40] here and think the city has been very
[3:44:43] well-run.
[3:44:44] Please don't spoil your record.
[3:44:48] A
[3:44:49] >> question for the audience. Please raise
[3:44:51] your hand if you think bringing a data
[3:44:53] center to Spanish.
[3:44:55] >> Dr. Westwwater, we're we're not here to
[3:44:57] you can address us, but you could pull the residents out outside
[3:45:01] if you'd like, but okay. We we don't
[3:45:03] want to again if there's people that are
[3:45:04] here going to speak, we don't want them
[3:45:06] to see hands and then not get up and
[3:45:08] >> and speak to us. Okay. In in the way
[3:45:10] they want to. Thank you.
[3:45:11] >> Thank you. Um I live I'll live directly
[3:45:15] downwind of this new proposed data
[3:45:18] center AI data center. The renowned
[3:45:22] four-star US Army general Omar Bradley
[3:45:26] delivered his famous Armist to stay
[3:45:28] address on November 10th of 1948
[3:45:33] to the press club in Washington DC. Here
[3:45:36] is the most famous and widely quoted section of the speech. Quote,
[3:45:43] "Our knowledge of science has clearly
[3:45:45] outstripped our capacity to control it.
[3:45:50] We have many men of science, too few men
[3:45:53] of God. We have grasped the mystery of
[3:45:56] the atom and rejected the sermon on the
[3:45:59] mount. The world has achieved brilliance
[3:46:03] without wisdom, power without
[3:46:07] conscience.
[3:46:08] Ours is a world of nuclear giants and
[3:46:12] ethical infants. We know more about war
[3:46:15] than we know about peace. We know about
[3:46:18] more about killing than we know about
[3:46:21] living. If we continue to develop our
[3:46:25] technology without wisdom, our servant
[3:46:30] will become our executioner.
[3:46:33] That's a literal quote from General
[3:46:36] Fourstar General Omar Bradley. May city
[3:46:40] council have the conscience and the
[3:46:42] wisdom not to permit a data center data
[3:46:48] center to be built in Spanish Fork. It
[3:46:51] would be harmful to our health, the
[3:46:54] health of the environment and the
[3:46:56] quality of life on which we, our
[3:46:59] children, nature and future and the
[3:47:02] future depend. If you're interested,
[3:47:06] please see me for a list of many reasons
[3:47:09] why people oppose these data centers.
[3:47:12] I'm provide I'll provide the list to
[3:47:15] you. I I'm providing the list to all
[3:47:18] city council members. And if you're
[3:47:21] interested, see me afterwards and I can
[3:47:24] help you with u acquire this list. Thank
[3:47:27] you very much for the privilege of
[3:47:29] talking with you.
[3:47:30] >> Thanks, James. Thanks for being here
[3:47:32] tonight.
[3:47:33] Okay. The next three that I have
[3:47:34] addressing is Terresa Pierce, Rick
[3:47:36] Josephson, and Paul Wood. Teresa, Rick,
[3:47:39] and Paul.
[3:47:53] » My name is Teresa Pierce. I'm a resident
[3:47:55] of Spanish Fork. I live right next to
[3:47:57] this proposed site. It is essentially in
[3:47:59] my backyard. I have listened carefully
[3:48:01] to all of the points and solutions that
[3:48:03] Valition has put forward. We are told
[3:48:05] that this data center will make us
[3:48:07] pioneers.
[3:48:09] Well, I don't feel like a pioneer. I
[3:48:11] feel like a lab rat. Here's the thing
[3:48:13] about pioneers. They choose their own
[3:48:16] path. They take calculated risks and
[3:48:18] make a decision not for others but for
[3:48:20] themselves.
[3:48:22] Lab rats are at the mercy of those who
[3:48:24] rule over them. Each test conducted on a
[3:48:27] lab rat is supposed to be beneficial and
[3:48:29] supposedly backed by Rossy studies. Yet
[3:48:33] there is a reason that we test on rats
[3:48:35] and not on humans first.
[3:48:38] Because no one wants to risk their
[3:48:40] health on a promising experiment.
[3:48:43] But isn't this exactly what we're doing
[3:48:45] here? Local surveys already showed that
[3:48:47] we don't want this. Valition has never
[3:48:49] built a data center before. Sure, he has
[3:48:51] some data claims and experience with
[3:48:53] Bloom technology, but in reality, this
[3:48:56] would be his first build and his first
[3:48:57] location. To this, I say, let Spanish
[3:49:01] Fork be the second location for Valition
[3:49:04] and not the first. Let this experimental
[3:49:07] first location be done somewhere else.
[3:49:09] Let's watch and learn. It's also
[3:49:12] important to note that many are already
[3:49:14] finding flaws and concerns regarding the
[3:49:15] Rossy data we have been given. As we've
[3:49:17] seen tonight, uh just a few the
[3:49:20] frequencies cited by Valition come from
[3:49:23] an incomplete study. Why are we already
[3:49:25] passing numbers as facts when the study
[3:49:27] is not even complete? It doesn't measure
[3:49:29] all types of noise either. The data
[3:49:32] around the truck traffic is also
[3:49:34] questionable. Um Valition projected
[3:49:37] truck volume based on the buildings uh
[3:49:40] 36 loading bays without actually
[3:49:43] counting any real trucks. But here's my
[3:49:46] big question for valition. If we who
[3:49:48] live near the data center happen to have
[3:49:51] health issues from the 247 frequencies,
[3:49:54] if our home values plummet because no
[3:49:56] one wants to buy a home from our from a
[3:49:58] near a data center, is Valition willing
[3:50:01] to compensate us? And if not, then any
[3:50:04] money that the city receives, any of
[3:50:06] these promises that make us happy, is
[3:50:09] not actually a gift, but a tax stolen
[3:50:12] disproportionately by those of us who
[3:50:14] are near it, who had no say to begin
[3:50:16] with. It may be true that maybe we need
[3:50:19] data centers, but it is not true that we
[3:50:21] need any in our backyard.
[3:50:24] We all use the dump, but no one wants to
[3:50:26] live by one, right? That's why we have
[3:50:28] zoning laws. We have plenty of land
[3:50:31] outside of city limits. Let's start
[3:50:33] there. Please honor the true pioneer
[3:50:36] spirit of Spanish Fork by allowing us as
[3:50:38] a community to decide our own path
[3:50:41] instead of building experimental
[3:50:43] first-of-akind data centers because we
[3:50:45] are not lab rats. Thank you.
[3:50:48] >> Thank you, Teresa.
[3:50:56] » Mayor, city council, thank you for your
[3:50:58] time. All my u all of my thoughts have
[3:51:02] been addressed but I'd like to add to
[3:51:04] the gentleman here that about the closed
[3:51:07] loop uh data center that he was
[3:51:09] referring to. Uh the closed loop as you
[3:51:12] understand is he's saying one and done.
[3:51:14] It's not one and done. You and it you
[3:51:17] have it has to be cleaned. Anifreeze
[3:51:21] methyl
[3:51:23] what do you say was filled with anyway?
[3:51:26] It's anifreeze. That's what it is. It's
[3:51:28] car antifreeze. It's is closed loop.
[3:51:30] It's just like your car. It goes
[3:51:32] antifreeze goes through your radiator,
[3:51:34] goes to your car, pulls out the heat
[3:51:36] into the radiator, and there's a fan
[3:51:38] that does that. Somewhere there's got to
[3:51:40] be fans or something to pull the heat
[3:51:43] out of that um out of that anifreeze.
[3:51:47] And in this fan, I have never met a
[3:51:50] quiet fan. I don't know if you have
[3:51:52] either, but they're they're noisy. And I
[3:51:54] don't know what what that proposal was.
[3:51:57] The other thing was uh if they had a
[3:52:00] breach in the system that anifreeze
[3:52:02] kills animals it kills a lot of things
[3:52:04] and they are attracted to it because
[3:52:06] it's a sweet taste. They want to drink
[3:52:07] it and that Spanish Fork River where
[3:52:10] dripping rock and all those beautiful
[3:52:12] places are that water if that had a
[3:52:14] breach and it's all downhill right to
[3:52:17] that river. So I like to know if they're
[3:52:19] going to propose a holding pond if that
[3:52:21] does that or something like that. Um,
[3:52:25] and how do they clean this water out? I
[3:52:27] mean, I guess it's going to be trucked
[3:52:28] out maybe, but uh, how is it going to be
[3:52:31] filtered? And that's all I have. So,
[3:52:33] thank you.
[3:52:34] >> Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it,
[3:52:35] Rick.
[3:52:38] Uh, next I have John Wang, Steven, and
[3:52:44] Christine Menchling. Mchling, sorry.
[3:52:48] John, Stephen, and Christine.
[3:53:08] John. Yes.
[3:53:12] » Hi, and thanks for letting me talk. I
[3:53:16] live in Spanish Fork since 2001. So it's
[3:53:20] uh 26 years uh by the golf course. So
[3:53:24] it's very close to that uh
[3:53:28] data center. I don't like this idea. I
[3:53:33] think most of people don't like this
[3:53:34] idea. So that's why full of packed
[3:53:37] house.
[3:53:40] They speak uh strongly against this
[3:53:43] thing. And I did some study uh on the
[3:53:47] nationwide it's seems the same
[3:53:51] situation. Nobody like it. It's 70% of
[3:53:54] people uh the cities they deny those
[3:53:59] kind of proposal just like people
[3:54:02] mentioned many times you have many
[3:54:06] remote area. Why they have to pick one
[3:54:09] so close to the densely populated
[3:54:13] people? If they pick some place not
[3:54:18] surrounded by houses, so all those
[3:54:21] issues will be not exist. We don't need
[3:54:24] this huge
[3:54:27] uh public hearing things because it
[3:54:30] won't affect nobody. But now there's so
[3:54:34] many new buildings surrounding this
[3:54:36] area. I even just saw a big sign for a
[3:54:40] big condo will be next to the uh this
[3:54:45] location where we built we have a clever
[3:54:48] house we have we have many uh
[3:54:52] communities
[3:54:54] so those people will really don't like
[3:54:56] it and for the noise seems like they
[3:55:00] downplay this noise but you have to
[3:55:03] realize we are in the canyon
[3:55:07] any sound will be echoed by the
[3:55:09] surrounding mountains. So the the sound
[3:55:12] will be multiplied especially in the
[3:55:15] middle of night. So nobody knows how
[3:55:19] this uh uh noise will be. The lighting
[3:55:24] pollution is also another big issues.
[3:55:28] uh nobody knows how tall the building
[3:55:30] will be and how the bright light will be disturbing people's uh sleeping.
[3:55:40] So also this company give a very rosy uh
[3:55:46] description of their technology but I
[3:55:51] most people here is not tech service we
[3:55:54] don't know those details if it's such a
[3:55:57] perfect technology why all those other
[3:56:02] data center company don't apply uh adopt
[3:56:05] it because to to solve those issues why
[3:56:10] They seems they are the perfect solution
[3:56:14] but only used in Spanish Fork. Anyway,
[3:56:18] so that's my opinion.
[3:56:20] >> Thank you, John. Don't appreciate that.
[3:56:24] » Good evening. Uh my name is Steven. I'm
[3:56:26] a resident in Spanish Fork. Um I plan on
[3:56:28] just coming tonight and listening, but
[3:56:30] uh listen to the presentation. There's a
[3:56:32] couple misre misrepresentations that I I
[3:56:35] wanted to address. Uh the first one was
[3:56:36] talked about briefly already. The the
[3:56:38] property tax. I know that's that was
[3:56:41] presented as this, you know, really big
[3:56:43] number and that's a huge consideration
[3:56:45] of course that that you guys take is is
[3:56:47] that we have a budget and we have needs
[3:56:49] we need to fulfill and where property
[3:56:50] taxes go largely to to the school
[3:56:52] system. There is a big incentive there.
[3:56:54] And so when we look at that $44 million,
[3:56:56] know, hey, that that's a that's a big
[3:56:58] number that's going to help us out, help
[3:56:59] our kids out and everything. Um, like
[3:57:01] was stated earlier, um, I'm a business
[3:57:03] owner here. When we think of property
[3:57:05] tax, all of us think of our houses. we
[3:57:06] get taxed and and that tax goes up every
[3:57:08] year. And so we look at this, oh hey,
[3:57:10] this is a tax that's going to go up year
[3:57:11] over year every year when in reality the
[3:57:14] vast majority of that that roy number
[3:57:15] presented is based off of the equipment
[3:57:18] they are buying um these these bloom
[3:57:19] power generators as well as the servers
[3:57:22] and the that tax rate depreciates based
[3:57:24] on that depreciation schedule. Um and which is significant. So, so like I
[3:57:30] said, the significant amount of that
[3:57:32] over the next 5 years, say it was built
[3:57:33] today, could reduce down to, I believe,
[3:57:35] if you go to Utah County's uh personal
[3:57:38] property tax um depreciation schedule,
[3:57:40] it's down to like 7%. And so, I would I would ask that you guys take a
[3:57:44] really close look at that and really
[3:57:46] look at what those numbers actually are.
[3:57:48] You know, hey, maybe it might be 44
[3:57:49] million that first year, but if there's
[3:57:51] a six a 67% reduction the next year,
[3:57:54] that can cause a really big boomerang
[3:57:55] effect in your budget. as well as again
[3:57:57] it's a it's a very rosy view and and I
[3:58:01] didn't like that it was that misre
[3:58:02] representation of hey look at this big
[3:58:04] number that we're going to bring you
[3:58:05] when in reality it's it's not exactly of
[3:58:08] course it's still it's tax revenue of
[3:58:09] course but it's it's not what what the
[3:58:11] story was um so that was the first one
[3:58:12] like I said I asked you guys to take a
[3:58:14] really close look at that the second one
[3:58:16] was a lot of the basis of this argument
[3:58:19] is based off of this inevitability this
[3:58:22] fear that this is going to happen no
[3:58:25] matter
[3:58:26] and we're your you guys' best bet. So,
[3:58:29] let us do it to you. And as as a dad, as
[3:58:32] an American, that that kind of
[3:58:34] fear-based worldview really didn't sit
[3:58:37] right with me. And I I ask that that you
[3:58:39] guys reject that and and just look at it
[3:58:41] based off the merit of the argument
[3:58:42] itself and say, "Hey, is this what's
[3:58:44] best for for us in Spanish for this what
[3:58:47] our citizens want?" and and and don't
[3:58:50] accept that that worldview just cuz
[3:58:52] something has happened around the world
[3:58:53] that that it has to happen to us. Thank
[3:58:55] you.
[3:58:56] >> Thank you. Appreciate you, Stephen.
[3:59:03] » Hi, I am Christine Meckling. I am from
[3:59:06] Salem. So, my concern is water used
[3:59:09] directly or indirectly. They're saying
[3:59:11] they're going to use 250,000 gallons a
[3:59:14] year. Is that truthfully the whole
[3:59:16] number? Some of these data centers, they
[3:59:19] tell you this number, but that is the
[3:59:20] direct water being used for the cooling.
[3:59:22] They don't tell you the water that is
[3:59:24] being used for the power plant. I know
[3:59:26] it's not a power plant. I know this is
[3:59:28] um batteries, but that is a concern. Are
[3:59:31] they telling us truthfully how much
[3:59:33] water they're using or are they having a
[3:59:34] hidden number that we will not find out
[3:59:37] till later after everything is done?
[3:59:39] Another thing is priority. We are having
[3:59:42] water shortages. What are we going to
[3:59:43] do? Who's get the priority? The data
[3:59:45] center or the people? Who's gonna get
[3:59:47] cut? Natural gas. The natural gas.
[3:59:50] They're pulling it in. All of these data
[3:59:52] centers that are trying to make these
[3:59:54] power plants, they are using natural
[3:59:57] gas. We're going to start having
[3:59:58] shortages when all of these data centers
[4:00:00] come online over the next 10 years.
[4:00:03] That's a concern. Our costs on utilities
[4:00:05] are going up. That's going to be a
[4:00:07] problem eventually. The batteries
[4:00:09] they're going to use, they have to be
[4:00:11] replaced after a certain point. Are they
[4:00:13] going to not be able to want to pay that
[4:00:15] money to replace them? Is that going to
[4:00:17] cause us issues with, oh, now we need to
[4:00:20] hook up to your grid or we need to bring
[4:00:22] in a new power source? That's something
[4:00:24] else to be thought about.
[4:00:27] The last one I talk about is jobs. How
[4:00:29] many jobs are they really creating? When
[4:00:31] they bring in a power plant, they create
[4:00:33] more jobs. Okay, that's a good thing.
[4:00:35] But for these data centers and this
[4:00:37] battery function that the batteries that
[4:00:40] they're going to be using, are they
[4:00:41] really creating that many? Data centers
[4:00:43] don't create that many jobs. It's the
[4:00:45] power plant that comes with it. And this
[4:00:47] isn't going to be a full power plant.
[4:00:48] This is going to be something smaller.
[4:00:50] So, are they really bringing in over 200
[4:00:52] jobs or are they going to bring in maybe
[4:00:54] 20, which I know we need the jobs in
[4:00:56] this economy, but what other negatives
[4:00:58] is this going to bring to our area?
[4:01:01] Thank you.
[4:01:01] >> Thank you, Christine. Thank you.
[4:01:04] >> Uh the next three I have are Mia, uh
[4:01:07] Paul, and Rod. So Mia, Carlos, Paul
[4:01:10] Hill, and Rod Helm.
[4:01:14] » Hi. Um I'm Mia Carlos. I'm a citizen of
[4:01:17] Salem and I have a couple concerns.
[4:01:19] First of all, other people have
[4:01:20] mentioned this. I'm very concerned by
[4:01:22] the lack of empirical evidence and the
[4:01:23] lack of external evidence. We look at
[4:01:25] this noise study that was conducted by
[4:01:26] link engineering who is subcontracted by
[4:01:29] Valition. we look at, you know, taking
[4:01:32] city employees to walk around a data
[4:01:33] center and randomly knocking on doors to
[4:01:35] pull civilians. That's not rigorous.
[4:01:37] That's not empirical. You know, that's
[4:01:39] not a substantial look at the actual
[4:01:42] impact of the West Valley data center,
[4:01:44] for example. I'm also extremely
[4:01:46] concerned by greenwashing. Specifically,
[4:01:48] when we're talking about Bloom Energy,
[4:01:50] they've been faced with multiple class
[4:01:52] action lawsuits from the EPA, from OSHA,
[4:01:54] from all of these things. But Bloom
[4:01:56] Energy is currently in a lawsuit for
[4:01:58] misleading shareholders, lying about
[4:02:00] business operations and financial
[4:02:01] stability, and it's caused significant
[4:02:04] stockholder losses. The Bloom Energy
[4:02:05] stock now, as of like 5 minutes ago, is
[4:02:07] down 10% because people don't trust them
[4:02:09] to actually deliver on the promises
[4:02:11] they're making because time and time
[4:02:12] again, they've shown that they're not
[4:02:14] like they don't deliver. They make all
[4:02:16] these promises and it doesn't come to
[4:02:17] fruition. Um, additionally,
[4:02:21] like we just we wouldn't be the first
[4:02:23] community that Bloom has lied to. we
[4:02:24] wouldn't be the first community that
[4:02:26] they've intentionally misled. And closed
[4:02:28] loop systems as a whole have failed
[4:02:31] nationwide. Like there's promise, but
[4:02:34] there's also countless examples of
[4:02:36] closed loop systems where they are
[4:02:38] forced to bleed the lines, pollution
[4:02:40] happens, or the there's a failure to
[4:02:42] sufficiently cool the system via these
[4:02:44] fans and then, you know, other
[4:02:48] concessions have to be made because the
[4:02:49] data center is already there. That's a
[4:02:51] massive concern of mine. I spoke to Jeff
[4:02:53] Chavez about this in public comment and
[4:02:55] he said, "Well, you don't always like
[4:02:57] everyone that you work with." But I
[4:02:59] don't think that that's an excuse for
[4:03:00] continuing to work with a company who
[4:03:02] has systemically failed. I also have
[4:03:04] evaluated other manufacturers of these
[4:03:06] solid oxide fuel cells, and I've yet to
[4:03:08] find a single one that doesn't face some
[4:03:10] sort of controversy over environmental
[4:03:12] impact, labor, or just lying to like
[4:03:15] straight up lying to shareholders. I
[4:03:18] think that Jeff is a great salesman, and
[4:03:20] I like I do admire his vision. I think
[4:03:22] that the vision of a sustainable data
[4:03:24] center is great, but I'm really not
[4:03:26] interested in supporting his bid to
[4:03:28] become a billionaire uh at the extent of
[4:03:31] our community. And that's all I have to
[4:03:33] say. Thanks.
[4:03:33] >> Thanks, man.
[4:03:34] >> Thank you, Mia.
[4:03:38] » Paul, I got Paul and then Rod.
[4:03:43] » Excuse me. Hi. Uh Paul Hill. Uh I'm a
[4:03:47] resident of Spanish Fork. I've lived
[4:03:49] here for 25 years, but I've been in the
[4:03:51] area many, many years. I'm one of the
[4:03:54] kids that was dragging Maine in 1983,
[4:03:59] back in the day, back when you could.
[4:04:01] Um, so I I say that to preface that I'm
[4:04:04] not one of those people that want it to
[4:04:07] be the same little sleepy town that it
[4:04:10] used to be. I enjoy the progress. I love
[4:04:14] the restaurants and all the industries
[4:04:16] that we've had lately. And I'm really
[4:04:19] pro what we've been doing, but the data
[4:04:22] center itself,
[4:04:25] all I've heard today is vague uh
[4:04:29] promises that they're going to do it
[4:04:32] better than these data centers are
[4:04:35] horrible.
[4:04:36] All we've heard today is we want to it's going to be better than they did
[4:04:40] it. And all we've heard is that it's
[4:04:43] going to be better than dozens and
[4:04:45] dozens of trucks as if these two things
[4:04:50] is the only thing out there. I really
[4:04:54] urge the council, the mayors to really
[4:04:57] think about
[4:05:00] the community we want to live in
[4:05:03] permanently beyond what's going to make
[4:05:06] some money right now. like I I want to
[4:05:11] live here. I'm gonna die here and I'm
[4:05:15] going to haunt my house and that's my
[4:05:18] plan. And I want to live in this
[4:05:21] community
[4:05:23] uh long-term, not just we're going to
[4:05:27] get a couple million dollars from some
[4:05:29] billionaires and that's going to be
[4:05:31] great for recreation or whatever for a
[4:05:34] little while, but what is it going to be
[4:05:37] beyond that? And I really urge you to
[4:05:40] think about longterm
[4:05:43] what the company what the community
[4:05:47] needs long term for all of us. So thank
[4:05:51] you
[4:05:51] >> Paul. Thanks Paul.
[4:05:57] » Rod Yum. I've lived in Spanish Fork for
[4:05:59] the last 18 years and uh I want the uh
[4:06:04] I think the conditional use permit needs
[4:06:06] to be restored.
[4:06:08] Um
[4:06:10] I I think the uh we need to make sure that something
[4:06:16] of this magnitude for residents is uh uh
[4:06:20] people need to be able to address it.
[4:06:24] So um
[4:06:27] I was completely opposed to a data
[4:06:29] center in Spanish Fork when I came to
[4:06:31] the planning commission meeting almost
[4:06:32] two weeks ago. Valition's proposal
[4:06:34] resolved mo almost all of my concerns.
[4:06:38] Their technology provides solutions to
[4:06:40] concerns about water power consumption
[4:06:44] and I appreciate their willingness to
[4:06:45] make contractual commitments to Spanish
[4:06:47] Fork.
[4:06:49] And I ask that contractual commitments
[4:06:53] are will be strong, stiff, and
[4:06:54] maintained by by Spanish Fork and make
[4:06:58] sure that they're enforceable.
[4:07:01] Um,
[4:07:04] I appreciate the seriousness that the
[4:07:06] city's approached this in, but uh, we're
[4:07:09] talking about a facility that could
[4:07:10] ultimately ultimately reach 500
[4:07:13] megawatts with homes as close as roughly
[4:07:15] a quarter mile away.
[4:07:18] Uh, my concern is noise and vibration,
[4:07:20] particularly persistent low frequency
[4:07:23] and tonal tonal noise. I'm not simply
[4:07:26] concerned about whether the facility
[4:07:28] will be loud. Highway six and the
[4:07:30] railroad and the windmills already
[4:07:34] create substantial uh noise and and
[4:07:37] vibration. The traffic comes and goes
[4:07:40] and trains pass periodically. A data a
[4:07:43] data center is different as cooling
[4:07:45] systems, fans, pumps, motors,
[4:07:46] transformers, and other equipment
[4:07:48] operate continuously 24 hours a day.
[4:07:52] If that equipment produces a persistent
[4:07:54] low-frequency hum, rumble, or vibration,
[4:07:57] that could create a very different kind
[4:07:59] of problem for nearby residents. Some
[4:08:01] people who are most particularly
[4:08:03] sensitive to sound or vibration,
[4:08:05] including people with sensory processing
[4:08:07] differences, such as autism. I'm not
[4:08:10] suggesting everyone will experience it
[4:08:12] that way or that this project
[4:08:14] necessarily will create a problem. We
[4:08:16] should know what the cumulative effect
[4:08:18] will be before we build it.
[4:08:20] I would ask the city to require an
[4:08:22] independent full spectrum acoustic study
[4:08:24] before final approval covering both the
[4:08:27] initial 250 megawatt configuration and
[4:08:30] the potential 500 megawatt buildout.
[4:08:34] That study should include DBA, DBC, low
[4:08:39] frequency and one-third octave
[4:08:41] measurements along with appropriate
[4:08:43] vibration analysis at the nearest
[4:08:45] residences, not simply at the property
[4:08:48] line. I'd also like the city to
[4:08:50] establish baseline measurements before
[4:08:52] construction.
[4:08:53] That baseline should account for the
[4:08:55] existing highway, railroad, and other
[4:08:57] sources so we can determine what the
[4:09:00] data center actually adds to the
[4:09:01] environment.
[4:09:07] Um,
[4:09:10] » thank you.
[4:09:10] Rod.
[4:09:11] >> Thanks, Rod.
[4:09:12] >> Appreciate it. Okay, the last uh two
[4:09:15] that I've got on my list here are Megan
[4:09:17] Williams and Paul Heber. Megan and Paul
[4:09:23] Weber.
[4:09:24] >> Oh, Weber. Sorry. Oh, good.
[4:09:26] >> Oh, man.
[4:09:29] We have
[4:09:30] >> Megan and Paul. Oh, sorry.
[4:09:34] >> Did you say Paul Weber or Paul Weber?
[4:09:37] >> Paul Weber.
[4:09:40] >> Okay. Thanks, Paul. You're after Megan.
[4:09:43] >> Megan Williams. I live in Spanish Fork.
[4:09:45] I live near the area of the proposed
[4:09:47] data center site. Um I'm opposed to it,
[4:09:49] but I wanted to mostly talk about um
[4:09:51] it's mentioned previously um about the
[4:09:54] environmental effects especially on like
[4:09:56] livestock and animals, the wildlife. Um
[4:10:00] nitrous oxide is a potent greenhouse gas
[4:10:03] and um any part of that in the
[4:10:05] atmosphere becomes PM2.5 which is like
[4:10:08] fine particulate matter and that um
[4:10:10] settles on forage feed and um that
[4:10:13] transfers um is triggered boine asthma,
[4:10:16] respiratory disease and cattle and um I
[4:10:21] know that this um council has stated
[4:10:24] that they would plan regionally and act
[4:10:25] locally. So, I just wanted you to
[4:10:28] consider please consider um looking
[4:10:30] further into studies on the effects of
[4:10:32] our livestock and um wildlife in this
[4:10:35] agricultural community. Thanks.
[4:10:37] >> Thank you.
[4:10:37] Megan.
[4:10:49] » Hi, I'm Paul Weber. I lived uh less than
[4:10:52] um half a mile away from the proposed
[4:10:55] site on the other side of the golf
[4:10:57] course. So when I found out about this
[4:11:00] proposal less than two weeks ago, I was
[4:11:02] horrified. I was concerned. Uh we even
[4:11:06] started to talk about do we need to move
[4:11:08] away from here? But after looking
[4:11:12] carefully at the uh proposed uh facility
[4:11:16] and going to the public hearings,
[4:11:19] um I've really swung almost 180 degrees
[4:11:23] in my uh overall assessment. And let me
[4:11:27] tell you why. I think that data centers
[4:11:31] have a really bad name deservedly
[4:11:35] uh from some previous um constructions
[4:11:38] including the one in the bo in box Elder
[4:11:41] County and you heard various numbers
[4:11:43] that are quoted 9 degrees temperature
[4:11:45] rise within a half a mile um distance
[4:11:50] away but this facility
[4:11:53] I I think is uh is is much better in in
[4:11:58] terms of the design, in terms of the
[4:12:00] physics. The fuel cell design is much
[4:12:03] more efficient. They're using an
[4:12:06] existing building and they're putting
[4:12:08] the fuel cells inside of the building.
[4:12:11] So, this will uh I I I believe there's a
[4:12:14] lot of merit in their figures about how
[4:12:17] low the sound levels will be simply
[4:12:19] because it'll be enclosed within a a
[4:12:22] structural building. I do have concerns
[4:12:25] about environmental effects and I agree
[4:12:29] that environmental a careful
[4:12:31] environmental assessment needs to be
[4:12:33] done. Um
[4:12:36] but I I come back to the point that was
[4:12:39] made by the gentleman from Mapleton
[4:12:41] which I think is a very good one. I know
[4:12:44] we there's it's nice to talk about um um
[4:12:50] higher more altruistic uses of the site
[4:12:53] that's there, but the fact of the matter
[4:12:55] is this is a $14 million facility and
[4:12:58] unless Spanish for can pony up and buy
[4:13:01] this, which I don't see happening, um
[4:13:04] something's going to happen to it,
[4:13:06] something industrial. And I agree that a
[4:13:11] good head-to-head study of a a major
[4:13:15] expansion, three-fold expansion in
[4:13:18] trucking facility versus what this um
[4:13:22] more efficient um data center um
[4:13:26] proposes is is worth uh carefully
[4:13:31] embarking on in making your decision
[4:13:33] about what to do with this site. And
[4:13:36] lastly, I just mention I do believe data
[4:13:38] centers will built in will be built
[4:13:41] inevitably
[4:13:43] and um the the proposal I think should
[4:13:47] be base though it should be judged in
[4:13:50] terms of its uh ultimate which is the
[4:13:53] better use of this site.
[4:13:55] >> Thank you.
[4:13:56] Paul. appreciate it.
[4:13:58] >> Uh,
[4:14:02] » I've got uh one more person that looks
[4:14:05] like uh signed up after I read that
[4:14:07] those last two. Brady Redern
[4:14:10] is there's Brady.
[4:14:16] » Good evening. My name is Brady Redfern.
[4:14:19] I live at the corner of Highway 6 and
[4:14:20] Canyon Road. So, I see the warehouse
[4:14:22] every day from my house. I have a PhD in
[4:14:25] industrial and systems engineering. I
[4:14:27] have degrees in IT and cyber security
[4:14:30] and I have built AI products and written
[4:14:32] AI policy since 2012. I have 20 years of
[4:14:35] experience related to this topic. So, I
[4:14:38] took it upon myself to spend 50 hours of
[4:14:40] personal time last week looking into
[4:14:43] this proposal, including site visits and
[4:14:45] in-person interviews at the various
[4:14:48] locations that have been mentioned.
[4:14:49] Nobody paid me for any of this. Uh the
[4:14:52] choice that the amendment offers the
[4:14:54] community is a fully leased warehouse
[4:14:56] versus a sustainable data center with
[4:14:58] protections written into law. The
[4:15:00] warehouse means up to 6,400 diesel
[4:15:04] trucks. That's my my calculation based
[4:15:06] on uh New Jersey estimates. Um there's
[4:15:10] different ways to calculate that. So
[4:15:12] 6,400 diesel trucks a month on Highway
[4:15:15] 6. The data center has zero. Nothing
[4:15:18] burns in a fuel cell. The main outputs
[4:15:20] are water and carbon dioxide. That is
[4:15:22] why the nitrogen oxide is so low. It's
[4:15:24] three and a half times lower than the
[4:15:27] aluminum plant we already have in this
[4:15:28] city and it's about the same as uh
[4:15:32] Provo's hospital. The warehouse draws on
[4:15:35] our grid. The data center cannot. It
[4:15:38] generates its own permanently islanded
[4:15:40] no interconnection and no export written
[4:15:42] into the ordinance. The diesel trucks
[4:15:44] and the train are louder than any
[4:15:46] equipment in the data center and limits
[4:15:48] are already in the ordinance. The
[4:15:50] warehouse is assessed at $51 million
[4:15:53] today in property tax value. The data
[4:15:56] center is $4 billion investment into the
[4:15:59] same building. The city share of the
[4:16:02] property tax would be about $4 million
[4:16:04] in the first year. That is almost 70%
[4:16:06] more property tax revenue for the city
[4:16:09] from a single site and roughly 120 times
[4:16:13] what the city's largest commercial
[4:16:15] taxpayer pays today.
[4:16:18] Valition has also committed to over
[4:16:20] $500,000 a year for the community, twice
[4:16:23] what the city collects from its 11
[4:16:26] largest taxpayers in property tax
[4:16:28] combined.
[4:16:30] Spanish Fork wrote real limits into the
[4:16:33] code. There's power limits, there's
[4:16:35] noise limits, there's pollution limits,
[4:16:36] there's water limits. No other Utah city
[4:16:39] has done that before. Tonight is about
[4:16:42] title 15 and title 15 is the strongest
[4:16:44] version of this ordinance in our entire
[4:16:47] state. I looked at every effect I could
[4:16:49] measure and I found no drawback to the
[4:16:52] community. I have no reservations in
[4:16:54] having Valition build this in my
[4:16:56] backyard. Thank you.
[4:16:58] >> Thank you Brady.
[4:17:00] >> Uh looks like I had another addition
[4:17:03] here on the list. I've got Adam Allen
[4:17:06] from Mapleton.
[4:17:11] How's it going? Adam from Mapleton. I
[4:17:13] live in Harmony Ridge, just kitty corner
[4:17:15] to the proposed data center site. I'll
[4:17:17] be quick because it's late and my kids
[4:17:19] asleep, so I probably got to get home
[4:17:20] for the wife um get her out of the bath
[4:17:22] and stuff. But um but yeah, I I came
[4:17:25] into this I learned about this a couple
[4:17:26] weeks ago. Um was not super thrilled
[4:17:29] after seeing the box elder announcement
[4:17:30] and stuff and all this all the
[4:17:32] controversy surrounding that. Um, I will
[4:17:34] say I've watched all the the different
[4:17:36] council meetings you guys have had and
[4:17:37] the planning commission and stuff and
[4:17:38] I've been really impressed with Jeff um
[4:17:41] with his ability to either be a really
[4:17:43] good pest control salesman basically or
[4:17:45] to really follow through on this stuff.
[4:17:47] Um, and I hope he does follow through on
[4:17:49] it. And you know, I I'm at the point
[4:17:51] where where I do feel pretty comfortable
[4:17:52] with it. Um, I have a young child,
[4:17:54] another kid on the way and we live again
[4:17:55] just Kitty Corner to it and Harmony
[4:17:57] Ridge. And so, um, talking to my wife
[4:17:59] and stuff, like I feel pretty
[4:18:01] comfortable with all the promises
[4:18:02] they've made. I just hope they follow
[4:18:04] through on them, right? Um, one of my
[4:18:05] concerns is, and I'm sure you guys have
[4:18:07] talked about this and addressed it, but
[4:18:09] um, does have to do with my property
[4:18:11] value, right? We bought a home there two
[4:18:12] years ago. We had no idea this was going
[4:18:14] in. Now, if it does go in, I'm not in
[4:18:16] Spanish Fork. I don't get to reap any of
[4:18:18] the tax benefits that come from this,
[4:18:19] the property taxes that are collected.
[4:18:21] Um, so I'm concerned with, hey, does my
[4:18:24] property value, you know, get dumped
[4:18:26] from this, right? 20, 40, $60,000. And
[4:18:28] so I'm curious what has happened with
[4:18:30] other Bloom sites. And I know this is
[4:18:31] Valition's first full data center. And
[4:18:33] so I'd be curious to do to look at a
[4:18:35] study. I've tried to research it with AI
[4:18:37] coincidentally, but I'm sure most of us
[4:18:39] have, right? Um and so we're part of the
[4:18:42] problem, guys. Um but uh but no, I you
[4:18:46] know, I've tried to research it. There just isn't a lot of data right
[4:18:48] now. And so there's a lot of unknowns, I
[4:18:50] think, with a lot of these figures that
[4:18:51] are thrown out. And that's why I think a
[4:18:52] lot of us are hesitant. But what he's
[4:18:54] saying is awesome. Like if that's the
[4:18:56] case and if that's what's going to go
[4:18:57] in, let's do it. I wish it was two miles
[4:18:59] further in the canyon, but if that's
[4:19:01] where it needs to be, that's where it
[4:19:02] needs to be. So that's it for me.
[4:19:04] Thanks.
[4:19:06] >> Appreciate that.
[4:19:07] >> I've got Dan Davis sign up next. Daniel
[4:19:11] Davis.
[4:19:16] I don't live up there, so I don't have
[4:19:21] um I'm not sure that it's fair for me to
[4:19:24] speak as if it's going to affect me. I
[4:19:26] live on that side of town, so but it
[4:19:28] could do. Um,
[4:19:34] I'm for the data center as long as the
[4:19:36] city holds their feet to the fire and uh
[4:19:40] puts them under the right rules and we
[4:19:41] run this thing so that it works out good
[4:19:45] and best for everybody.
[4:19:48] And as a smart elk, I'll say if uh you
[4:19:52] guys allow the data center, the second
[4:19:53] one to be put in, put it down on my
[4:19:55] place.
[4:19:59] Wait. Okay.
[4:20:05] » Okay. Uh, that's all I had signed up.
[4:20:07] Um, any anybody else that that is trying
[4:20:11] to sign up and in the middle of it that
[4:20:13] wants to come up here and speak.
[4:20:19] » Aiden Scott. I'm from Oram. Uh, less
[4:20:21] importantly, I'm a candidate. I'm an
[4:20:23] unaffiliated candidate for the US House
[4:20:24] of Representatives, Congressional
[4:20:26] District 3. Um, I've had the unique
[4:20:28] opportunity to knock thousands of doors
[4:20:31] uh in your neighborhoods and neighboring
[4:20:33] cities as well. Um, and there has been a
[4:20:37] direct opposition for data centers even
[4:20:39] before this announcement. Um, I'd feel
[4:20:41] I'd be doing a disservice to those that
[4:20:43] I've knocked into and they show support
[4:20:45] for me um if I didn't voice their
[4:20:47] opinions. Um, but what I will say is I I
[4:20:50] want to tip my hat to Valition. um
[4:20:52] they've nearly answered all of the
[4:20:55] concerns of those people that I've
[4:20:56] knocked into. Um which I think is
[4:20:59] amazing. Um what I can say is I I do
[4:21:02] want to tip my hat to you guys as well.
[4:21:04] It sounds like you guys have been
[4:21:05] holding uh really rigorous uh hearings
[4:21:08] with each other and opening up to the
[4:21:10] public's amazing. Um what I can say is
[4:21:12] uh and just a reminder and reiteration
[4:21:14] that um you guys represent Spanish Fork
[4:21:17] and uh you have no obligation to
[4:21:20] valition but you do to the people of
[4:21:22] Spanish Fork. Um what I can say from
[4:21:24] knocking doors down in Cedar um with
[4:21:26] their data center is they feel totally
[4:21:29] misrepresented and totally unheard. Um
[4:21:33] today you guys have a really good unique
[4:21:35] opportunity to hear the concerns of many
[4:21:37] of the community and I saw taking notes
[4:21:39] and that's awesome. Um just consider
[4:21:42] them. Um you have one of the greatest
[4:21:45] and fastest growing cities in the state
[4:21:47] and that's because of you guys and the
[4:21:50] hard work that you guys do and your
[4:21:52] ability to represent well. Um, but I
[4:21:55] just want to voice those concerns and
[4:21:58] what I'll say is that those that oppose
[4:22:01] it are probably because they have lack
[4:22:03] of information. I'm not saying whether
[4:22:05] I, you know, am for or against it, but
[4:22:08] information kind of deems their
[4:22:10] perception of our representation. So
[4:22:13] getting those independent studies goes a
[4:22:15] long way. And then having avenues to
[4:22:18] dispel that information to the public
[4:22:20] will probably be the best down the road.
[4:22:22] But I think you guys are doing great
[4:22:23] work and uh just want to shout out the
[4:22:26] public for participating in our
[4:22:28] government because that's the only way
[4:22:30] we see the beauty of it. Thank you.
[4:22:33] >> Appreciate it.
[4:22:37] » Okay. Thank you everybody. I'm not
[4:22:39] getting uh any other any other requests
[4:22:42] here of people that have signed up. Um I
[4:22:45] would uh yeah, we could hear from the
[4:22:48] applicant again. We can we could close
[4:22:51] the public hearing if somebody wants to
[4:22:54] entertain that motion. That doesn't mean
[4:22:56] we can't hear from the applicant and
[4:22:58] staff still and ask questions.
[4:23:01] >> Before we close it, can we maybe give
[4:23:03] just few more seconds to see if there is
[4:23:06] anybody else that wants to speak to
[4:23:07] this?
[4:23:08] >> Can I make one comf?
[4:23:12] » What would it like to be Dr. Westwwater?
[4:23:16] >> Sure.
[4:23:18] I live immediately downwind of the site
[4:23:21] and as we all know if you live downwind
[4:23:24] of Spanish Fort Canyon you're going to
[4:23:26] get a nice blast of wind and that wind
[4:23:28] is going to carry sound. It's going to
[4:23:31] carry heat. So the previous studies of
[4:23:35] how uh contained the the heat and the uh
[4:23:39] sound are I think may not apply in our
[4:23:43] Spanish Fork situation because we get
[4:23:46] that very powerful wind coming down the
[4:23:48] canyon uh uh in the morning. So we're
[4:23:52] going to feel that heat and we're going
[4:23:54] to feel uh hear that noise. Thank you.
[4:23:57] >> Thank you. I uh this is truth that I'm
[4:24:01] going to tell you here, but I have been
[4:24:02] a elected official for 13 years. There
[4:24:05] was an email sent to me when a new
[4:24:08] subdivision at the mouth of the canyon
[4:24:10] was built and some shingles were blown
[4:24:14] off the top of the roof and an email was
[4:24:16] sent to the governing body that said,
[4:24:18] "It's really windy here. The windmills
[4:24:21] were already up, so yes, you should be
[4:24:23] able to know that it's windy there. What
[4:24:25] are you going to do about the wind
[4:24:27] problem in Spanish fork? It's taken off
[4:24:30] my shingles. And uh that's a that was a
[4:24:33] real email.
[4:24:34] >> We don't want to know how you replied.
[4:24:35] >> Yeah, I didn't reply that one. Good.
[4:24:37] >> But that yes, there was a response sent,
[4:24:40] but that was a very real email.
[4:24:42] >> Really?
[4:24:42] >> It was a very real email.
[4:24:44] >> Real email.
[4:24:44] >> Mayor, I would move that we close public
[4:24:46] hearing.
[4:24:47] >> Motion made by Councilman Oiler.
[4:24:50] >> Second. Seconded by Councilwoman Beck to
[4:24:53] close the public hearing portion of
[4:24:54] this. All in favor say yes.
[4:24:55] >> Yes.
[4:24:56] >> The public hearing of this item is
[4:24:59] closed. Again, it goes without saying,
[4:25:01] but thank you. Thank you everybody for,
[4:25:03] you know, we've got your names and notes
[4:25:05] and everything that that were said. So,
[4:25:07] we sure appreciate you sticking with us,
[4:25:08] especially the ones with kids here and
[4:25:11] kids at home. Uh it's uh it's great to
[4:25:13] see you involved in the public
[4:25:16] discussion. Uh Mr. Chavez, is there
[4:25:19] something that
[4:25:20] >> Yeah, I just uh echo appreciate the
[4:25:23] comments. Um I uh there are notes that
[4:25:27] we take. There's things that we'd like
[4:25:28] to be able to, you know, respond to, but
[4:25:31] I don't think that we need to take more
[4:25:32] time to do that. Um we want to make sure
[4:25:36] that we direct people to what will be
[4:25:38] this um you know, growing list of
[4:25:42] answers to detailed questions. We've
[4:25:44] collected you know new angles on some of the similar questions that we've
[4:25:48] heard before. I think uh there are
[4:25:50] things around depreciation that we've uh
[4:25:52] presented before. We will we will
[4:25:54] resurface so that you understand that we
[4:25:57] are factoring in the depreciation of
[4:26:00] equipment how our equipment depreciates
[4:26:02] at a different pace than the GPUs. Also
[4:26:05] I think it's worth noting we'll be
[4:26:06] clarifying that the figures that we put
[4:26:09] up are actually conservative. we're not
[4:26:11] factoring in the additional value that
[4:26:13] will come into the building uh with our
[4:26:15] clients, it may actually be double the
[4:26:17] amount. So, we look forward to, you
[4:26:19] know, showing more data to you and that
[4:26:22] the public can access. Um, and I think
[4:26:25] also going a little deeper on helping
[4:26:27] you understand the viability and
[4:26:28] reliability of the Bloom Fuel cell. Um,
[4:26:31] while their stock may have dropped 10%,
[4:26:33] I think she mentioned uh over the last
[4:26:35] year it's up 300%. And the reason it's
[4:26:38] up 300% is because the market is
[4:26:40] collectively uh validating that the fuel
[4:26:43] cell works. Um it's reliable. It is 15
[4:26:48] years proven. And so I think we'll look
[4:26:51] to demonstrate a variety of additional
[4:26:53] areas where the Bloom and other fuel
[4:26:55] cells have uh been extremely reliable.
[4:26:57] So there's just a couple examples of
[4:26:59] things that we look forward to providing
[4:27:00] more information on. But I think now
[4:27:03] we'd love to hear from you and then if
[4:27:04] you have any questions for me, I'm I'm
[4:27:06] here. Thank you. Perfect. Appreciate you
[4:27:08] staying here, too.
[4:27:09] >> Yeah. Don't go too far, Jeff.
[4:27:10] >> And we'll be here for questions,
[4:27:12] discussion, uh, up here. That's a lot of
[4:27:15] notes, council, that we've taken and, uh, and again, I think, uh, I think
[4:27:19] there's some wisdom in in what's been
[4:27:21] discussed here of of, um, of questions
[4:27:24] and issues that that if you don't feel
[4:27:26] like, you know, that there's answers
[4:27:28] that you want to get to and things like
[4:27:30] that that there's, you know, possibly
[4:27:32] time to do that. So, uh, I don't know
[4:27:35] when you all turn into pumpkins. Uh, if
[4:27:37] it's at to It's early.
[4:27:39] >> Okay. It's early. Kevin's
[4:27:41] >> Kevin's had his going to say caffeine,
[4:27:44] but he's just have water. Let's see how
[4:27:45] far the Mountain Dew.
[4:27:47] >> Yeah. I would I I would say again, um,
[4:27:50] thanks for the the the respectful nature
[4:27:52] of, you know, I think Mr. Chavez, you
[4:27:56] said there's something different about
[4:27:57] Spanish Fork. There is something
[4:27:58] different about Spanish Fork. and what
[4:28:00] it is, whether you live in Mapleton, and
[4:28:02] I did talk to your mayor and said, "Hey,
[4:28:03] we're going to have some of your
[4:28:04] residents here tonight." And I'm going
[4:28:05] to let them speak, and it's going to be
[4:28:06] great. So, let them know they can come
[4:28:07] to our our city and and speak. That's
[4:28:10] not always a common thing, but thank
[4:28:12] you. Thank you for coming uh uh wherever
[4:28:14] you came from. Uh and the the way we do it in Spanish for is we ask questions
[4:28:19] and we try to get answers and we try to
[4:28:21] get facts uh o over maybe fiction or
[4:28:24] emotion or whatever it may be. Um even
[4:28:27] those subjects are emotion. And the
[4:28:29] reason is is because we have a history
[4:28:31] of seeing each other in the grocery
[4:28:32] store or in the schools or in the church
[4:28:35] pews and not necessarily attacking each
[4:28:37] other on on on the way we think or why
[4:28:40] we think what we think, but that we are
[4:28:42] a community together. And so I
[4:28:43] appreciate all of you keeping keeping
[4:28:46] that respect in your in your public
[4:28:47] comments and your questions here and and
[4:28:49] you're going to see that from your
[4:28:50] elected officials as well uh to to to
[4:28:53] talk about the merits of things and and
[4:28:55] not not the personal side of things. So
[4:28:58] that's my warning to Kevin because
[4:28:59] sometimes he gets in that way. I mean, I
[4:29:01] was just going to start.
[4:29:02] >> He goes after I he went after someone
[4:29:04] from PAC a couple weeks ago and
[4:29:06] >> there was a guy from PAC here. He said
[4:29:08] something about PAC.
[4:29:09] >> Oh, it's PAC
[4:29:11] >> again here tonight.
[4:29:13] >> Um, mayor, I would just like to say the
[4:29:16] similar thing that the conversation
[4:29:18] tonight was really good. Um, I learned
[4:29:21] some things that, you know, I need to
[4:29:23] ask more questions about. I appreciate
[4:29:26] some passion that was shown. Um,
[4:29:30] some
[4:29:32] really good points, but all in a in a
[4:29:34] very
[4:29:35] >> Yeah.
[4:29:36] >> productive way tonight. Um, we only got
[4:29:39] told one time that there is in in it
[4:29:42] there's something in it for us
[4:29:43] personally. Um, and I thought that might
[4:29:45] come up more than it did. So, I thank
[4:29:47] you all. There was nothing in it
[4:29:48] personally for us, only the benefit of
[4:29:50] our community. Um, one way or the other,
[4:29:52] that's what we're that's what we're
[4:29:53] looking out for. So, I appreciate the
[4:29:55] citizens coming and coming with the
[4:29:58] passions you brought and really giving
[4:30:00] us something to think about. Um, I guess
[4:30:04] buckle up for the next couple hours and
[4:30:05] let's have some more conversations about
[4:30:06] this thing.
[4:30:07] >> I turn into a pumpkin at 10:30.
[4:30:10] >> Well,
[4:30:11] >> and it's
[4:30:12] now
[4:30:13] >> I wanted to also say quickly if there
[4:30:14] are people in the room next door, we
[4:30:16] probably have 20 empty seats. If you
[4:30:19] guys would like to join us in here, it
[4:30:20] might be a little more comfortable.
[4:30:22] >> Nobody's over there. Okay.
[4:30:24] >> I think maybe adding to what you guys
[4:30:25] just said though too is I think it's
[4:30:27] important to note that we've received at
[4:30:29] least I personally have received I put
[4:30:31] it into a folder because never in my
[4:30:33] four years of serving and I guess I
[4:30:35] haven't I don't have as long as some of
[4:30:36] the folks up here. I haven't had asking
[4:30:38] about wind blowing my shingles off but
[4:30:40] um I have 80 emails about this data
[4:30:43] center both for and against the the idea
[4:30:46] of the data center. So um our community
[4:30:49] is involved. They're they are voicing
[4:30:51] what they feel and I I appreciate it.
[4:30:54] And most of those emails are productive.
[4:30:56] Most of them are not saying things that
[4:30:59] are negative. It's this is why I want
[4:31:01] this or this is why I don't want this.
[4:31:02] And so I appreciate all of the comments
[4:31:05] both from email, from conversations I've
[4:31:07] had in public, but also in here. So
[4:31:10] thank you.
[4:31:14] Uh
[4:31:16] yeah. Is is there some questions that
[4:31:18] were were burning at the top that you
[4:31:21] thought were were some new things that
[4:31:22] you maybe wanted to to ask the applicant
[4:31:25] about or or the or the city staff about?
[4:31:27] I I will tell you again um you saw from
[4:31:32] other public hearings the to even
[4:31:34] tonight but if you follow Spanish fork
[4:31:36] politics too much you'll know that um
[4:31:41] we're looking for ways to to uh you know
[4:31:44] there's a private business that's
[4:31:46] approached the city about doing
[4:31:47] something and so we I've tried to look
[4:31:50] at it in that lens uh all the time of
[4:31:53] that that um that there's been instances
[4:31:56] over the past decade where uh for one
[4:31:59] reason or another we've we've said yes
[4:32:02] to to to private companies coming and and maybe stretched it on parking or
[4:32:07] something like that. I can I can think
[4:32:08] of a couple now uh that that come to
[4:32:11] mind and uh thankfully some of those
[4:32:14] companies have made right after after
[4:32:17] we've probably been like, "Yeah, we
[4:32:19] really want that building to be redone
[4:32:21] or whatever it may be." and and and
[4:32:24] thankfully those things have been, you
[4:32:26] know, have been remedied and and and
[4:32:28] things like that. The lens we're looking
[4:32:30] at when a private business like this is applying to something, this is a
[4:32:34] little bit special because they're
[4:32:35] asking to not pay a power bill to
[4:32:38] Spanish Fork. If you or I and our
[4:32:40] business say we don't want to pay a
[4:32:41] power bill,
[4:32:43] that's that would be a public hearing,
[4:32:45] too. So, remember, that's what we're talking about here.
[4:32:48] It's not that we get to say,
[4:32:52] uh, this chicken restaurant's better
[4:32:54] than this chicken restaurant, so we're
[4:32:55] allowing that chicken restaurant. I know
[4:32:57] everybody loves the chicken restaurant
[4:32:59] analogy, but that's what government,
[4:33:02] let's especially local government
[4:33:04] doesn't get that, you know, and and
[4:33:07] really, do you would you want that
[4:33:08] oversight? Would you want government to
[4:33:10] just say this is what private business
[4:33:13] can and can't do? We're we're we're for
[4:33:14] private business being safe and uh and
[4:33:17] effective and and generating revenue for all of what we do. And that's what
[4:33:22] we're trying to weigh here as a council
[4:33:24] in this uh in this private business
[4:33:26] application.
[4:33:28] Um
[4:33:29] questions. Did you highlight any that
[4:33:31] you wanted to start off with uh and and
[4:33:34] try to get answers to?
[4:33:36] >> Yes. Jeff, we'll start with you if
[4:33:38] that's all right. Got a few questions
[4:33:40] for you first. if you could in your best
[4:33:44] voice possible share your website where
[4:33:46] people can go to see the questions that
[4:33:50] you've been answering kind of what you
[4:33:51] showed earlier.
[4:33:53] >> Yeah, it's valition.eco
[4:33:59] Spanishfork.
[4:34:00] >> Okay, perfect. Thank you. Couple of
[4:34:04] questions for you. Um,
[4:34:07] how much are you paying to purchase the
[4:34:09] building? That was kind of
[4:34:10] >> Yeah. I know. It's great that you
[4:34:11] brought it up because uh somebody just
[4:34:13] mentioned 14 million.
[4:34:15] >> It's we're buying the building for 142
[4:34:18] million.
[4:34:19] >> Yeah. I would love for Spanish for to
[4:34:21] put a park there or a bike track, but
[4:34:24] it' be an expensive park.
[4:34:27] >> 142
[4:34:29] afterwards.
[4:34:30] >> Yeah.
[4:34:31] >> Okay.
[4:34:32] >> Thank you for sharing that. Um do you
[4:34:34] plan on using any battery storage with
[4:34:36] your facility? No, there's no no battery
[4:34:40] storage on this design. Uh, let me let me correct that.
[4:34:47] Um,
[4:34:49] our design with Bloom
[4:34:52] does not require battery.
[4:34:54] If for some reason we utilized another
[4:34:58] fuel cell, um if there was an inventory
[4:35:02] problem with bloom or something like
[4:35:04] that, if we were to use something like
[4:35:06] the um fuel cell energy product,
[4:35:12] we probably would feel comfortable
[4:35:15] adding some battery storage to
[4:35:17] complement that battery because there is
[4:35:22] a a process of evening out what we call
[4:35:27] workloads coming in and out of the
[4:35:30] facility and so there could be a
[4:35:33] scenario where uh a battery could be
[4:35:36] used in a configuration with a fuel cell
[4:35:39] other than bloom.
[4:35:40] >> Okay. Thank you. Not looking at just
[4:35:44] valition but the industry in general.
[4:35:46] What can you give an estimate as to what
[4:35:50] it would cost
[4:35:52] Valition or a data center when it comes
[4:35:55] to your customers if you were down for a
[4:35:58] day?
[4:36:00] Yeah. So, um we have the SLA service
[4:36:05] level agreement that we agree to that
[4:36:09] requires our uptime.
[4:36:12] Um and so we have a very small grace
[4:36:15] period like 4 minutes if we're down
[4:36:20] where there's no penalty and then it
[4:36:21] increases from there. Um
[4:36:25] so forget about a day. If we are down
[4:36:29] for eight hours, for example,
[4:36:33] um it could theoretically cost us
[4:36:37] uh
[4:36:40] over $50 million,
[4:36:44] eight hours.
[4:36:46] >> Yes.
[4:36:48] What are some scenarios that could cause
[4:36:50] that to happen?
[4:36:53] >> Um catastrophic.
[4:36:56] So when we look at the way the fuel cell
[4:36:58] is built, so the primary way that
[4:37:00] something would cause us to go down to
[4:37:03] that level is just an you know a total
[4:37:07] uh reduction in power.
[4:37:10] And so we build the system so that we
[4:37:13] have uh a huge amount of backup.
[4:37:17] I'm making something up. If there's a
[4:37:20] forklift driver who somehow lost control
[4:37:22] and knocked out a portion of the fuel
[4:37:24] cell, then we immediately move into
[4:37:28] emergency scenario where natural gas is
[4:37:30] shut off. Um but we have enough
[4:37:34] redundancy
[4:37:36] on the property that that kind of
[4:37:39] scenario will not affect um our our
[4:37:42] uptime. Uh but a massive earthquake
[4:37:46] um you know a real substantial event
[4:37:50] that's knocking down all of our power in
[4:37:52] the city and nobody has power and nobody
[4:37:55] has a gas. Uh that's a scenario but we
[4:37:59] do that that is also the one scenario
[4:38:01] where in our agreement we actually have
[4:38:03] coverage uh force majour where uh we
[4:38:07] would not face those penalties. So where
[4:38:10] we're uh primarily at risk would be um
[4:38:15] you know some kind of on-site
[4:38:16] operational
[4:38:18] breakdown where we would have to see a
[4:38:21] really large section of fu of fuel cells
[4:38:24] all at once go down. Um, and the way
[4:38:28] that the fuel cells are built, uh, where
[4:38:30] they are kind of daisychained, islanded
[4:38:34] blocks, uh, they're built so that if one
[4:38:37] goes down, the rest don't go down. So,
[4:38:40] we are comfortable, it's a little
[4:38:44] nerve-wracking, but we're comfortable
[4:38:46] with that seriously punitive risk of
[4:38:50] being down for several hours. Um we
[4:38:55] don't expect that to happen.
[4:38:58] >> Um one more question from me. A lot of
[4:39:02] people or a lot of concerns have been
[4:39:04] raised about Volition as a company. Um
[4:39:08] speak to that a little bit meaning the
[4:39:12] concern of Spanish Fork being a guinea
[4:39:14] pig. Speak to
[4:39:18] your team and the people around you.
[4:39:20] >> Yeah. Um, I'd prefer to put, you know,
[4:39:23] these slides up that illustrate. I don't
[4:39:25] want to do that. We're just going to
[4:39:26] talk right now. Um, so the way that we
[4:39:30] operate is not different than the way
[4:39:33] many
[4:39:34] large uh companies still operate today.
[4:39:37] Nike is one, Nvidia is one where the
[4:39:41] company has a core team, a vision, a
[4:39:44] capability, but to accomplish that
[4:39:48] vision, they have to rely on a myriad of
[4:39:51] third-party contractors to um
[4:39:56] manufacture chips, any number of
[4:39:59] mechanisms to bring about a final
[4:40:02] product. and valition uh operates in the
[4:40:06] same way as really an orchestrator. So
[4:40:09] we are a group of original team that has
[4:40:12] expertise in uh identifying business
[4:40:16] models, managing capital, um very well
[4:40:20] networked in the technology industry. uh
[4:40:23] decades of experience in managing a P&L,
[4:40:27] managing teams, uh understanding
[4:40:29] technology, understanding trends,
[4:40:32] understanding software, understanding
[4:40:34] data to give us enough insight to
[4:40:37] understand uh the opportunity at hand
[4:40:40] and the way that we could innovate. Um
[4:40:43] so the company was formed three years
[4:40:45] ago um after having understood that
[4:40:49] there is a way to do data centers
[4:40:51] better. Um we are a team of seasoned
[4:40:55] professionals. Um our uh chief strategy
[4:40:59] officer Brian who is here with us for
[4:41:02] example spent uh over a decade or about
[4:41:06] a decade um high level Fortune50
[4:41:10] um projects while on the strategy team
[4:41:14] at Salesforce. Um, our head of capital
[4:41:17] development has been involved in
[4:41:19] billions of dollars of clean energy
[4:41:23] projects and financing and mechanisms to
[4:41:25] ensure that those are successful. And I
[4:41:27] could go down down the list. Uh, we're
[4:41:30] small but extremely experienced as a
[4:41:32] team. We've also stayed small because we
[4:41:35] are economically prudent. Uh, we could
[4:41:38] have hired 30 people by now. Um, but
[4:41:41] we're trying to make sure that our
[4:41:43] business model, uh, is healthy as we
[4:41:46] move into these projects that we have
[4:41:48] the opportunity to build. So, uh, we
[4:41:51] think we're a very well-qualified team.
[4:41:54] And because we're qualified, we have
[4:41:56] gained the trust of third-party
[4:41:57] operators who have decades of experience
[4:42:01] in implementing everything that we
[4:42:02] propose to implement. Big D
[4:42:04] construction, link engineering, AEIA,
[4:42:07] uh Hunt Electric. Um, and these teams
[4:42:12] have to do their own due diligence about
[4:42:15] who will they work with. There's no
[4:42:17] shortage of people who claim to be able
[4:42:18] to go out and build a data center right
[4:42:20] now. Um it's a pretty hot uh industry
[4:42:24] and I can assure you that the parties
[4:42:26] who have contracted with us um
[4:42:29] ultimately chose to work with us for a
[4:42:32] reason and um so they have confidence in
[4:42:35] us, we have confidence in them. So our youth as a an organization
[4:42:43] um is not indicative of our experience
[4:42:47] over the decades.
[4:42:50] I lied. I've got one more
[4:42:53] >> liar. It was mentioned or brought up
[4:42:56] tonight. Would you be comfortable or
[4:42:58] willing to include in a contractual
[4:43:01] agreement moving or locating Bloom
[4:43:04] headquarters to Spanish for
[4:43:06] >> uh valition headquarters?
[4:43:07] >> Sorry, Valition. Sorry
[4:43:10] question at least.
[4:43:12] >> Valition's headquarters to Spanish.
[4:43:15] >> That is Yeah, we will agree to that.
[4:43:17] is our intention. We want to be
[4:43:19] here
[4:43:21] contractually.
[4:43:25] » When would you like me to? You want to
[4:43:26] give me a document? If you tell us that
[4:43:28] we're going to be able to move forward,
[4:43:29] I'll put it in writing right now. I'll
[4:43:31] write on the back of this paper that we
[4:43:33] would agree to to put our headquarters
[4:43:35] here. There's no
[4:43:37] >> that the thing that, you know, it's
[4:43:38] hard. I understand. I appreciate
[4:43:40] people's concerns. Um there are no
[4:43:43] tricks in what we're proposing to you
[4:43:45] any.
[4:43:46] >> Thank you, Jeff. That's now I'm done.
[4:43:48] >> So, this isn't a question that I'm going
[4:43:50] to ask, but it's it's a statement that
[4:43:52] when if you're all here and most of you
[4:43:55] are here at the first of this meeting
[4:43:56] and we went to the meetings of the
[4:43:58] council members went to one of the uh
[4:44:00] one of the sections that I go to and
[4:44:03] Stacy goes to for me a lot is UMPA.
[4:44:06] We're a public power city, so you pay
[4:44:09] your power with your city bill. um that
[4:44:12] we're part of an organization called
[4:44:14] UMPA that uh is us and Salem and Provo
[4:44:18] and Manti and Levan and Nephi. All
[4:44:21] together we have contracts to purchase
[4:44:24] power. We are owners of pieces of power
[4:44:28] plants that make up your energy mix of
[4:44:31] when you turn your lights on in Spanish
[4:44:32] Fork. You are using some solar, you are
[4:44:36] using some wind, you are using some
[4:44:38] coal, you are using some natural gas,
[4:44:40] you are using some hydroelectric. And
[4:44:42] now it's pretty on the top of
[4:44:45] everybody's mind about how long you're
[4:44:47] going to be able to use hydroelectric
[4:44:49] power with the levels of of Lake Me and
[4:44:53] when that's going to stop. It's
[4:44:55] unnerving to a public power consortium
[4:44:58] too of that's a that's a big part of
[4:45:00] your power mix that we get that power
[4:45:02] from. I will tell you the fuel cell
[4:45:04] technology uh if if if you've paid
[4:45:07] attention to our public meetings in the
[4:45:09] past,
[4:45:10] the fuel cell technology in 2028 will be
[4:45:13] powering our homes here in Spanish Fork.
[4:45:16] That that plant is already approved and
[4:45:19] being built uh in Nei uh with not Bloom
[4:45:23] technology but similar
[4:45:24] >> main spring And just to just to
[4:45:28] clarify, so it's not a fuel cell, but it
[4:45:30] is a it's a horizontal uh generator, but
[4:45:32] there's many of the same um aspects and
[4:45:36] elements. It fits into the same
[4:45:38] category. For example, our proposed text
[4:45:41] amendment meets the requirements. If we
[4:45:43] ever used mainspring, it would meet the
[4:45:45] requirement. Just to be clear on record,
[4:45:47] it's not a fuel cell.
[4:45:48] >> Okay.
[4:45:49] >> But natural gas, yes. Uh
[4:45:52] >> low emissions, low sound, all of those
[4:45:54] things. So I guess in the in the nature
[4:45:56] of and there were some good questions in
[4:45:58] your open houses Jeff about hey why do
[4:46:00] we this is brand new technology and why
[4:46:02] would we do this just as your mayor I
[4:46:05] kind of want to let you know you will be
[4:46:07] participating in purchasing power from
[4:46:10] uh things like this uh it's it's already
[4:46:12] in the works because we want to make
[4:46:15] sure
[4:46:15] >> your base load power is reliable and
[4:46:18] this is part of the technology that's
[4:46:20] making that possible for for all of us.
[4:46:22] So when you say you don't mean Jeff, you
[4:46:24] mean you collectively the citizens of
[4:46:26] Spanish will be using this?
[4:46:27] >> Yes. Yes. Yes. Sorry. Sorry. I just want
[4:46:29] to make sure what I'm getting at is I
[4:46:31] don't think this is uh this is just uh
[4:46:33] some technology for uh on-site power
[4:46:36] generation.
[4:46:37] >> It is something being used and I know
[4:46:39] it's already being used in a lot of
[4:46:40] states and and places in Utah too for
[4:46:43] public power.
[4:46:44] >> Oh yeah. Some of the largest utilities
[4:46:46] in the country are are purchasing huge
[4:46:49] chunks of fuel cell inventory to back up
[4:46:52] the grid to create, you know,
[4:46:54] complimentary power that can be stored.
[4:46:56] Yeah, they're they're
[4:46:58] this is mainstream now.
[4:47:02] >> Thank you. Sorry, didn't want to forget
[4:47:03] that part of it. I had it written down.
[4:47:05] >> Couple of things for me. Um
[4:47:10] quite a bit of concern about trust,
[4:47:12] data, those type of things.
[4:47:14] Um
[4:47:16] I I think and to to Kevin's point um
[4:47:20] about the viability of your company, I
[4:47:22] think it's you've got the you got great
[4:47:24] people. I think you've demonstrated that
[4:47:26] very well. Um you've done a ton of
[4:47:28] research. No one's going to invest, you
[4:47:30] know, $4 billion into something that
[4:47:32] isn't going to pan out. So I think
[4:47:34] there's some there's some financial
[4:47:36] things backing up the claims. Um but I
[4:47:39] think from our perspective uh we need to
[4:47:42] make sure that if it doesn't work what
[4:47:46] happens and leave that up to you to make
[4:47:48] it work. You know I don't think
[4:47:50] government should be in your business
[4:47:51] about you should use this technology
[4:47:52] that technology.
[4:47:54] >> It should be here's our ramifications.
[4:47:55] Here's the the standards you need to
[4:47:57] meet.
[4:47:58] >> Whether that's 0 tons per megawatt or
[4:48:01] 0.5 whatever we need to determine that
[4:48:03] you need to meet it and we need to hold
[4:48:04] you accountable to that. If something
[4:48:06] goes wrong, we need to hold you
[4:48:07] accountable that if it if your business
[4:48:09] goes out of business, we need a way to repurpose that building for something
[4:48:14] in the future. So, I think our job is to
[4:48:16] hold you accountable to the things that
[4:48:17] we agree to. If if it gets to that point
[4:48:20] and that is the protection that the
[4:48:22] citizen needs if you don't succeed, then
[4:48:25] what? If you don't succeed, that means
[4:48:27] you're not here and those things get
[4:48:29] removed. So I think we got to put those
[4:48:31] protections in place and rely on um the
[4:48:35] business that you are to be successful.
[4:48:37] I don't think we need to dictate your
[4:48:39] success. Um from a you have not provided
[4:48:43] enough data standpoint. Um
[4:48:47] I think that that could be true from a
[4:48:48] third party perspective, but I think
[4:48:50] you've provided a ton of data. So I
[4:48:51] don't think that's a fair statement to
[4:48:53] have been made that you don't have not
[4:48:55] provided enough. It may not be
[4:48:56] accessible enough. We need to make sure
[4:48:58] that those that are concerned about it
[4:48:59] can get their hands on it and evaluate
[4:49:01] it more. The proof will be though um if
[4:49:04] this is approved in the evaluation on a
[4:49:08] monthly, quarterly, yearly basis as we
[4:49:10] move forward. And I think those are the
[4:49:12] protections we needed in place. And I
[4:49:13] think to a lot of people's points, we
[4:49:15] need to make sure that those are
[4:49:17] enforceable and we if if ownership
[4:49:21] changed or whatever might happen,
[4:49:22] they're still enforceable and we can as
[4:49:25] a city, as a community, um if you're not
[4:49:27] meeting your obligations, we can ask you
[4:49:28] to leave. So, I think that we have some
[4:49:30] due diligence to do on that side of
[4:49:32] things just to make sure that whatever
[4:49:34] rules we put in place are enforceable
[4:49:35] and you can be held accountable, which I
[4:49:37] don't think you have a problem with
[4:49:38] whatsoever because I I I believe that
[4:49:40] you have full intention of fulfilling
[4:49:42] all the obligations you've talked about
[4:49:44] today. Um, so it is refreshing to have
[4:49:47] an in front of us is like, "Yeah, put
[4:49:48] that in writing. I'll I'll sign it. I'll
[4:49:50] do that right now." Um, because you you
[4:49:52] planning to back up your claim and and I
[4:49:54] think if you back up your claim, I think
[4:49:55] we're going to be okay as long as we set
[4:49:56] the ground rules in the appropriate way.
[4:49:58] Um,
[4:49:59] >> and Shane, can I just mention one thing?
[4:50:00] I think want to give you an example of
[4:50:04] >> um, you know, ideas that have come out
[4:50:06] of this dialogue that we think are are
[4:50:08] really good. Um, so when we talk about,
[4:50:11] >> you know, enforcing our uh, covenants,
[4:50:15] you know, from our standpoint, we're
[4:50:17] kind of just shrugging. It's like, well,
[4:50:18] these aren't going to be hard because we
[4:50:20] are not connecting to the grid. That's
[4:50:22] easy.
[4:50:23] >> Uh, we are not using extra water at all.
[4:50:27] That's easy.
[4:50:29] um we know that um our uh decel range is
[4:50:36] what we say that it is. And this brings
[4:50:38] me to a point about you know good ideas.
[4:50:42] Um we we have always uh proposed in the
[4:50:46] amendment and everything that we show
[4:50:48] that we are testing sound you know at
[4:50:51] the perimeter all around Mapleton
[4:50:53] everywhere up on the ridge a mile out
[4:50:56] half mile out. Um, and so it was
[4:50:59] recommended that we uh find create a
[4:51:02] series of sensors that that we can place
[4:51:06] um that they're out there all the time
[4:51:08] 247 and uh so that's a really great
[4:51:12] idea. You know, we'll we'll do that. But
[4:51:14] that's also easy because we already know that, you know, people
[4:51:18] are concerned with decibb. The reality
[4:51:20] is if everybody here, you know, download
[4:51:24] the highest rated decibel app, they're
[4:51:27] extremely accurate and just go out at
[4:51:29] night and turn it on and look at what
[4:51:31] the current ambient noise is or get
[4:51:35] anywhere close to this property and just
[4:51:38] turn it on and you're going to see 55 to 80 dB at any
[4:51:43] given given time. So, we're also
[4:51:46] comfortable that we're going to fall
[4:51:47] within sound and we're also comfortable
[4:51:49] that we're going to fall within heat.
[4:51:51] Uh, you know, when we talk about what
[4:51:53] the rest of the city, just industry
[4:51:55] does, just a civilized civilized city,
[4:51:59] um, you know, 40 acre parking lots, any
[4:52:02] number of standard development that goes
[4:52:05] on, it produces some heat. And um
[4:52:11] typically that heat is not measurable
[4:52:15] um at any at any distance or any for any
[4:52:17] prolonged period of time as an actual
[4:52:21] change to the climate in our city and we will not produce that either. I I
[4:52:26] think the challenge is going to be
[4:52:28] proving that that one
[4:52:31] true and then in the field that it well
[4:52:34] one before you build that it's true and
[4:52:35] then secondly proving it that you are no
[4:52:38] you're not really add into the
[4:52:39] background measurement and someone here
[4:52:41] today said um some baseline measurements
[4:52:43] is good and you just talked about how
[4:52:45] you might do that and I think it's
[4:52:46] extremely important for if you are in
[4:52:49] place a year from now how are we
[4:52:50] measuring and how are we holding you
[4:52:51] accountable um and I think I I I believe
[4:52:55] what you just said and I think we just
[4:52:57] need to make sure that if this does move
[4:52:58] forward we're in a position that if in
[4:53:00] fact it's if you're not in violation for
[4:53:02] noise there's ramifications and it's not
[4:53:05] just fines it's I mean you said it a
[4:53:08] minute ago to Kevin if you're down for
[4:53:09] eight hours it's $50 million you're not
[4:53:11] going to want to violate those if we if
[4:53:13] one of the covenants is you're down
[4:53:15] until we get a fixed so I think there's
[4:53:17] some there's some good things in place
[4:53:19] that incentivize you to be successful um
[4:53:22] and back up everything you've said it
[4:53:25] would be nice to have some more upfront.
[4:53:29] Um, it's too late to come up with the
[4:53:31] right words now. It starts with the
[4:53:33] collaboration. Corroboration.
[4:53:35] >> Yeah.
[4:53:35] >> Is that a word? That's the right word,
[4:53:36] huh?
[4:53:37] >> Yeah. Got it.
[4:53:37] >> Dang, I must have went to Spanish High
[4:53:39] School. Um,
[4:53:42] that back up some of the claims.
[4:53:44] However, I think we may have to think
[4:53:46] about some more of a performance
[4:53:49] specification type of a thing moving
[4:53:50] forward and and less about because it's
[4:53:53] is it you this hasn't been done.
[4:53:56] >> Yeah.
[4:53:56] >> Pieces that have been done collectively
[4:53:58] hasn't been done, but I think all the
[4:54:00] pieces are there to give me some some
[4:54:01] sense that it can be accomplished if we
[4:54:03] put the right guard rails in place. So,
[4:54:05] it feels like it's right that right
[4:54:07] there.
[4:54:07] >> Yeah, we are. I think we're right there
[4:54:08] and we're happy to do that.
[4:54:09] >> Appreciate it. on the on the penalties
[4:54:11] and the 50 million. Let me just
[4:54:14] >> let's not let that be something that we
[4:54:16] run with on our penalties because those penalties are aligned with
[4:54:22] the revenue lost by the customer in our
[4:54:24] building. So that customer I just want
[4:54:27] to know that that's commensurate with
[4:54:29] the the business model.
[4:54:30] >> Right. My point was the business model
[4:54:33] is incentivizing you to not be down. Oh
[4:54:35] yeah. We don't need to say to you give
[4:54:37] us $50 million. we could say to you
[4:54:40] you're down for eight hours that is
[4:54:41] incentivizing you to be successful.
[4:54:44] >> So in that vein I think it's an
[4:54:45] important part to touch that I think uh
[4:54:48] I think I I will attempt to speak for
[4:54:51] the whole council here. What I want the
[4:54:54] residents to know on this front is yes,
[4:54:58] when you are talking about a business
[4:55:00] versus a business that's in there now
[4:55:02] and a potential business that could be
[4:55:04] there in the future, I want you to know
[4:55:06] that there's not an amount of money that
[4:55:09] could come to Spanish Forks
[4:55:13] wise or community involvement wise that
[4:55:16] if we can't get there as far as we think
[4:55:20] the effects
[4:55:22] uh
[4:55:23] >> would be detrimental to the public
[4:55:25] health that we're trading that for
[4:55:27] dollars. That's not been anything that
[4:55:30] has come from this company and that's
[4:55:32] not anything that that that we're
[4:55:35] looking at at a lens through um we are
[4:55:38] simply trying to we we're a comp we're a
[4:55:40] community that's led out. We've had
[4:55:42] purple air monitors at the mouth of the
[4:55:44] canyon right when purple was new and we
[4:55:46] went and got the got the monitors and
[4:55:49] got uh got the the grants for it and put
[4:55:51] them all over our communities, put them
[4:55:53] on elementary schools so we could see in
[4:55:55] the inversion times of of being in front
[4:55:58] of of helping kids be safe. And so you
[4:56:02] live in a community that public health
[4:56:04] we we bonded for $85 million to build a
[4:56:08] public health facility for mental,
[4:56:10] physical, and social wellness. Um we
[4:56:13] lead out in those things in Spanish Fork
[4:56:16] and uh and and and there's not an amount
[4:56:18] of money that's that that that that
[4:56:20] would compromise that for us. Uh it's simply is it safe and is it a fit
[4:56:26] uh for uh for our community. So, um I
[4:56:29] think it's important to remember that facility that's there and what it's
[4:56:32] doing now is is an important context uh
[4:56:35] contextual
[4:56:37] uh point of of this proposal.
[4:56:40] >> Good point, Mike. Can can I follow up on
[4:56:41] that a little bit? I think there was a
[4:56:42] couple of questions, a couple of
[4:56:43] comments of the lesser of two evil
[4:56:45] conversation. Um that's not what this is
[4:56:48] about. And I think I think the the other
[4:56:51] alternative is a piece of context
[4:56:55] to just to to sort of weigh what we're
[4:56:58] talking about in context. Not if you do
[4:57:01] this then this or that. It is simply
[4:57:04] there is a business operating today that
[4:57:06] brings trucks in and out. Plain and
[4:57:08] simple. That's what happens today. Um
[4:57:10] that's some context about what this site
[4:57:13] is. It's not a it's not a green site. It
[4:57:15] is something is something's happening
[4:57:17] there today. They use water, they emit
[4:57:21] emissions, they emit sound, they emit
[4:57:24] light, they emit heat. All of those
[4:57:25] things happen. So the idea is not to say
[4:57:28] it's this or that. It is the context of
[4:57:33] what you're proposing with that in
[4:57:35] place. And so I think it's it's not the
[4:57:36] lesser of two evils. There's something
[4:57:38] happening there today. We're not voting
[4:57:40] on stopping something, right? That's not
[4:57:42] it. It is it is a it's just a way to
[4:57:45] give us context of what you're proposing
[4:57:47] versus something else. And so, um, I I
[4:57:50] it's I understand where it can be
[4:57:52] construed as a lesser less of two evils,
[4:57:55] but that's not
[4:57:56] >> and I guess I guess the context about
[4:57:58] it, too, because we I I I tell the
[4:58:02] council this all all the time this that
[4:58:03] I assume we're all here together and
[4:58:06] we've been here together and stuff, but I grew up at the mouth of this
[4:58:09] canyon uh for for most of my 46 years uh
[4:58:14] and worked at the gas station uh that
[4:58:17] that's still there and and spent a lot
[4:58:19] of my childhood up and down the exact
[4:58:22] location that we're talking about. So, I
[4:58:24] do know it intimately. I remember when
[4:58:26] it was built and I remember when the
[4:58:27] windmills were built and sometimes the
[4:58:30] stuff the windmill discussion
[4:58:34] was that all videoed or was that
[4:58:35] >> pref
[4:58:37] I want to say it was this is going to
[4:58:40] sound kind of crazy but I think it was
[4:58:41] January of 2006. So, we were
[4:58:44] broadcasting.
[4:58:44] >> Is that right? Okay. So, you can go back and find that, but the hypothetical data of placing
[4:58:52] those windmills where they were at was a
[4:58:56] lot of and your dad could speak to it,
[4:58:58] who was the city manager, was a a lot of
[4:59:00] concerns about public health, about the
[4:59:04] noise, about the environment, about the
[4:59:07] wildlife. Um, that now I think it's so
[4:59:10] cool that we're a landmark that has
[4:59:12] those windmills. I think there's a lot
[4:59:14] of people that know us by it and we've
[4:59:16] incorporated it into a lot of our stuff.
[4:59:18] And so we I just want to remind
[4:59:21] everybody we've stepped out there and good good planning, good city staff,
[4:59:26] good elected officials helped that to
[4:59:28] become a reality and we don't that power
[4:59:30] goes on the grid and gets bought some.
[4:59:32] It's a private company, but they lease
[4:59:34] that ground and put those windmills up
[4:59:36] and I don't think it's done anything
[4:59:37] detrimental to us except except be
[4:59:40] something cool to look at when you go up
[4:59:41] and down the canyon. I will say if you
[4:59:43] stand next to it, I don't know what that
[4:59:45] decibel reading is, but they're loud.
[4:59:47] They're very loud and they're operating
[4:59:48] all the time.
[4:59:49] >> 68.
[4:59:50] >> Is that what it is? Okay. So,
[4:59:53] >> take much to get above 60. I really
[4:59:55] doesn't. I think you're right. I think
[4:59:57] go out. I would encourage everyone to go
[5:00:00] out with the most sophisticated meter
[5:00:01] you can get and and measure sometimes.
[5:00:03] And you have to be there a minute,
[5:00:04] right? Because it's an average over
[5:00:05] whatever period you're out there. But
[5:00:09] >> background noise is much higher than you
[5:00:10] think it is. Oh yeah.
[5:00:12] >> So I guess I have a question for the
[5:00:14] council and then I have one for you and
[5:00:16] Jeff. So there was a lot of questions
[5:00:18] thrown out. I know that Jeff has taken a
[5:00:20] lot of notes. We've taken a lot of
[5:00:21] notes. What is the best process for us
[5:00:23] to go through this? Because there's a
[5:00:25] lot of just different things like some
[5:00:28] of them are hypotheticals, some of them
[5:00:29] it sounds like Jeff you already have the
[5:00:31] answers to. Is it, hey, we I know um
[5:00:34] Jeff had suggested that we table this
[5:00:36] that we come back and readress it after
[5:00:38] maybe there's some time to go through
[5:00:39] these questions and figure it out. Is
[5:00:41] that the best option? Is it better for
[5:00:43] us to um Stacey already said that she
[5:00:46] turned into a pumpkin 30 minutes ago,
[5:00:48] but is it best to start going through
[5:00:49] them one by one and start going through
[5:00:50] that? I don't know that that's the best
[5:00:52] option.
[5:00:53] >> I've got
[5:00:53] >> I guess I'm looking what what is what do
[5:00:55] we want to do as a council? And then I
[5:00:57] do have one question for Jeff, too.
[5:00:58] >> I've got questions.
[5:00:59] >> I've got some questions, too. I've got
[5:01:00] questions that I want to ask tonight.
[5:01:02] >> Okay, perfect.
[5:01:03] >> Um, not all of them because yes, there
[5:01:06] are a lot of questions that were brought
[5:01:07] up, but I do have specific ones that I
[5:01:09] want to address tonight.
[5:01:11] >> Okay, we might lose Stacy. She might
[5:01:12] walk off.
[5:01:13] >> I'm good. I'm good.
[5:01:15] >> So,
[5:01:16] >> wait, wait, wait. We didn't answer your
[5:01:17] question, Jess.
[5:01:17] >> You didn't answer my question.
[5:01:19] >> I think it's important.
[5:01:20] >> Actually,
[5:01:21] >> I didn't What? What did he say?
[5:01:23] >> Say anything before that.
[5:01:26] >> Okay. Um,
[5:01:28] what is the process moving forward? How
[5:01:31] do we get
[5:01:32] >> there's some there's some things that I
[5:01:34] would like changed in the in title 15?
[5:01:36] >> Yeah.
[5:01:37] >> Right. There are some there are some
[5:01:39] stuff that that Jeff's agreed to in the
[5:01:42] development agreement that I would
[5:01:43] rather see in writing up front than in just in there. How do we get them?
[5:01:49] What is the process we need? Do we say,
[5:01:51] "Hey staff, here are the 15 things that
[5:01:54] I want to see." You do the same. and we
[5:01:55] all do the same and they start compiling
[5:01:57] that into some new version of this.
[5:02:00] Do we sit here and you spout out your 15
[5:02:03] and I spout out my 25 and whatever my
[5:02:05] two whatever and we get to somewhere
[5:02:07] like that is a good question. I think we
[5:02:09] need these everyone in here needs to
[5:02:11] know
[5:02:11] >> how this is going to play out
[5:02:14] >> as most transparently as we can as we
[5:02:16] move forward.
[5:02:16] >> Well, I'm going to tell you my feelings.
[5:02:18] are ask your questions that
[5:02:19] you need to ask tonight that you think
[5:02:21] are the most important ones. But I think
[5:02:23] the that the onus is on an applicant
[5:02:25] that's asking that wants to probably
[5:02:27] answer those questions and probably
[5:02:29] answers them better than us stepping
[5:02:32] over somebody to to ask them. A lot of
[5:02:34] them asked to them. Uh the ones that
[5:02:36] were asked to public officials and and
[5:02:38] to this the staff. Yeah. Let's start
[5:02:40] compiling those. Let's let's start let's
[5:02:42] start sharing those and let's let's do
[5:02:44] our due diligence over that. I I I love
[5:02:47] that the proposal was was, "Hey, let's
[5:02:49] take these questions and and and not
[5:02:51] make a rush decision, but but let's talk
[5:02:54] about it and see what we come up with."
[5:02:55] So, um
[5:02:57] >> I agree.
[5:02:57] >> Me and the in the in the event of time
[5:02:59] of of people's time and and school just
[5:03:02] started and we got a lot of people with
[5:03:04] kids and everybody to to get to to the
[5:03:07] next second day of school is to ask a
[5:03:10] few of your most important questions.
[5:03:12] All these questions have been taken into
[5:03:14] account and we can we can compile those
[5:03:17] and and and try to get some um some
[5:03:21] movement on that in the next in the next
[5:03:23] few days. And we don't meet like this
[5:03:26] without a with you know we we do public
[5:03:28] meetings and and and and so we wouldn't
[5:03:31] do another public meeting for two weeks.
[5:03:33] Um but that doesn't mean that we can't
[5:03:36] all look at a documented questions that
[5:03:38] are asked and answered. Is am I
[5:03:40] >> You're doing great. I just want to I
[5:03:42] wonder this may be completely out of
[5:03:44] order and if it is
[5:03:46] send me home.
[5:03:47] >> All right.
[5:03:48] >> Um
[5:03:50] >> I Mr. Chavez gave us a something he
[5:03:54] suggested you know not acting tonight
[5:03:56] and I I imagine a lot of these people
[5:03:57] are probably wondering are they going to
[5:03:58] vote vote to pass it tonight? Are they
[5:04:00] not? Um do you have any feelings or
[5:04:03] directions you want to give on that? And
[5:04:05] if you don't want to and don't and
[5:04:07] you're not ready to say one way or the
[5:04:08] other in terms of hey let's ask
[5:04:10] questions and not pass anything denied
[5:04:12] or let's ask questions and maybe pass
[5:04:14] something tonight if you've got any
[5:04:15] thoughts on that. I someone they might
[5:04:17] want to know that and and for their sake
[5:04:19] >> that's a good point. There probably is a
[5:04:21] possibility that you could say hey
[5:04:24] somebody make a motion to to table this.
[5:04:26] Is that the right
[5:04:27] >> and I wouldn't say table anything yet
[5:04:28] but I just if your intent is we're not
[5:04:30] going to we're not going to pass this
[5:04:32] tonight but we're only going to ask
[5:04:33] questions. I think you could give
[5:04:34] somebody.
[5:04:34] >> I don't think you're going to get three
[5:04:35] votes to pass.
[5:04:36] >> There is no way I'm voting on this
[5:04:37] tonight or I would be comfortable voting
[5:04:39] on this.
[5:04:39] >> Well, why didn't he say that 25 minutes
[5:04:41] ago? Y'all could have went to sleep.
[5:04:42] >> You couldn't tell.
[5:04:43] >> Dang.
[5:04:45] This first time he spoke.
[5:04:48] >> All right. All right. So, if you're
[5:04:50] comfortable with that, that's probably
[5:04:51] what's going to happen tonight is is
[5:04:53] there's not a vote on this, but there's
[5:04:54] going to be more questions. So, if you'd
[5:04:55] like to hear more questions, Jesse's got
[5:04:58] a couple of questions. And and one thing
[5:04:59] I would say about the process is that
[5:05:01] we'll do what we've been doing, which is
[5:05:03] we're capturing uh we we probably have
[5:05:06] an idea of the some of the things that
[5:05:09] we would that you would want to see in
[5:05:11] the text amendment. So, we will right
[5:05:12] away start working on suggesting those.
[5:05:15] We'll be working with Vaughan and get
[5:05:17] those and I think as he collects
[5:05:20] feedback from the council on so I think
[5:05:23] there's immediately going to be a back
[5:05:25] and forth on capturing the the intent
[5:05:29] here and so we will be doing that
[5:05:32] immediately just in in real time and we
[5:05:35] see it going back and forth until we've
[5:05:37] captured the additional guidance that we're contemplating about the the
[5:05:43] text amendment
[5:05:44] >> and and in terms of the development
[5:05:45] agreement. We have been taking notes in the public hearing. Sorry, in the
[5:05:48] open houses and in these meetings of the
[5:05:51] development agreement language. This
[5:05:53] should be there. We promise this. We say
[5:05:54] that and we're we'll do some cross
[5:05:57] check. And I think somebody in some of
[5:05:58] their comments mentioned they promised
[5:06:00] this. It's not in the agreement. There
[5:06:02] was some email mentioned that today you
[5:06:04] had sent some email to some people I
[5:06:05] guess and I don't I don't know what that
[5:06:07] email was but okay.
[5:06:08] >> But you know if there was some something
[5:06:10] like that like we we have that and and
[5:06:13] there's a lot of information flying
[5:06:14] around. So, we'll do a little bit of
[5:06:15] cross-checking as well to make sure that
[5:06:17] things are um if if we if we have said
[5:06:20] or if they have said this should be in
[5:06:22] there or we agree that it should be in
[5:06:24] there, we'll make sure that we we cross
[5:06:25] check those on that development group.
[5:06:27] >> Yeah.
[5:06:27] >> Perfect. I on that there is a point
[5:06:32] where title 15 becomes ours and I
[5:06:34] appreciate Jeff and Vaughn working on
[5:06:36] language changes, but at some point we
[5:06:38] got to own it. It's not the applicants
[5:06:40] title 15. It's our changes to title 15
[5:06:43] and we need to be comfortable with it.
[5:06:44] And I I appreciate the work you've done
[5:06:46] to this point because we didn't know
[5:06:48] where to start and now we have a pretty
[5:06:50] decent idea to start. We need to be
[5:06:52] owning that ourselves.
[5:06:54] >> Um this is a big deal
[5:06:55] >> and I think my balance to it has always
[5:06:57] been like well the the part that we own
[5:07:00] it if we start writing it for people
[5:07:02] it's like well you're 100% for this
[5:07:04] you're writing it for
[5:07:05] >> that is a problem. I get how about you
[5:07:07] propose what you think would work. I
[5:07:10] agree with you 100%.
[5:07:11] >> I would not want to try to take
[5:07:12] ownership at at least till now. But it
[5:07:16] is our if we're going to approve it, it
[5:07:18] needs to be our title 15.
[5:07:18] >> But I think to that same point as we're
[5:07:20] going through the title 15, that doesn't
[5:07:21] just because you're helping with the
[5:07:23] title title 15, that's what I was going
[5:07:25] to say. It doesn't mean that it's going
[5:07:26] to pass
[5:07:27] >> 100%.
[5:07:28] >> That means that we're saying these are
[5:07:29] the things that we need to see in there.
[5:07:31] I could still help write title 15 and
[5:07:33] still say no.
[5:07:34] >> Absolutely. It's a great point, Jesse,
[5:07:35] because I I think when we start talking
[5:07:37] about, oh, let's make this change and
[5:07:39] this change, the assumption is we have
[5:07:40] agreed to something, and that is not the
[5:07:42] case.
[5:07:43] >> Absolutely not.
[5:07:45] >> So, ideally though, my thoughts are
[5:07:47] we're going to work to that end,
[5:07:50] >> you fine-tune it to a point where you
[5:07:52] are absolutely comfortable that if
[5:07:54] you're going to put it in title 15 that
[5:07:58] something could apply and get through.
[5:08:01] Otherwise you do a moratorum or you just
[5:08:03] say we don't want them at all
[5:08:04] >> or we don't do anything because it's not
[5:08:06] in our title 15 today.
[5:08:07] >> Exactly.
[5:08:08] >> So wouldn't need moratorium. Right now
[5:08:10] data centers are not allowed in Spanish
[5:08:12] for so you just stop the processing.
[5:08:14] >> Self gener selfg generation is not
[5:08:16] allowed.
[5:08:16] >> Yeah. Neither of those things are
[5:08:17] allowed currently. So we would just stop
[5:08:19] the process and be done.
[5:08:20] >> Yeah. So, so the point of what we're
[5:08:23] going through is are we getting to a
[5:08:25] point where we would be comfortable and
[5:08:27] the community would be comfortable with
[5:08:29] having whatever it is that's allowed in
[5:08:32] title 15 to come to Spanish board.
[5:08:34] >> I don't know. I think all of us watched
[5:08:37] planning commission, right? Like there
[5:08:38] were things that were added in planning
[5:08:40] commission and then still voted no.
[5:08:42] >> And there are things that they added
[5:08:43] planning commission that I might not
[5:08:45] like. What I'm saying by that is that
[5:08:47] they went through the process of adding
[5:08:48] things to it but then still voted like
[5:08:50] they added to it in a separate motion
[5:08:52] and then they still voted no. Right?
[5:08:53] >> That's what I'm saying to the process is
[5:08:55] we're not saying hey
[5:08:56] >> three voted no
[5:08:57] >> three voted yes it was a so technically
[5:09:00] it was a denial because they didn't have
[5:09:01] a quorum to approve it. Right?
[5:09:03] >> So if it gets to that point it's not
[5:09:07] saying hey I'm comfortable with this.
[5:09:08] It's saying hey these are the things I
[5:09:10] think need to be in there. I still you
[5:09:12] still me whoever might still not be
[5:09:14] comfortable with that going forward.
[5:09:16] Does that make sense what I'm saying?
[5:09:18] >> Not really, but it's okay.
[5:09:19] >> Yeah. I think the I think the part that
[5:09:20] you're that you're missing there is the
[5:09:22] development agreement part of this in in
[5:09:25] the the risk that I don't want to take
[5:09:28] is changing something in title 15 and
[5:09:31] being renamed data center city instead
[5:09:34] of Spanish fork city. I think that's
[5:09:36] where development agreements, just like
[5:09:38] we've done in in in the past with with
[5:09:42] things to hold people to standards and
[5:09:44] businesses to standards, is do you spell
[5:09:46] that up out enough that just like you've
[5:09:49] heard from people that say, "I was
[5:09:53] adamantly against this and I'm not going
[5:09:54] to pretend that that's that's a ton of
[5:09:56] people that are that way, but
[5:09:57] >> right,
[5:09:58] >> boy, if you'll put that into agreement,
[5:10:00] what's the downside?" You know? So, so
[5:10:02] it's not just the title 15 change, it's
[5:10:04] the development of agreement that holds
[5:10:06] that all
[5:10:07] >> I guess
[5:10:07] >> in check.
[5:10:08] >> I think Jesse is saying for instance,
[5:10:10] one of the questions we heard tonight,
[5:10:12] why two? Why not one?
[5:10:14] >> I can weigh in and say I would prefer
[5:10:16] one. I would prefer two. I would prefer
[5:10:18] no limit.
[5:10:20] You guys say I agree with that. Whatever
[5:10:21] the decision the decision is, and I can
[5:10:23] still vote no for something else in the
[5:10:25] agreement. So that
[5:10:26] >> right that's the point is we can work on
[5:10:28] what the language could potentially be
[5:10:30] and still say no at the end.
[5:10:31] >> Correct.
[5:10:31] >> That's what you're saying.
[5:10:32] >> Yeah. Correct.
[5:10:33] >> But it it it doesn't by working on it
[5:10:36] doesn't imply that I have proof.
[5:10:38] >> Correct.
[5:10:39] >> It means that I'm working towards
[5:10:40] something that I want I want to see it
[5:10:42] better. It may not get there and I may
[5:10:45] not be able to approve it or vote for
[5:10:46] it.
[5:10:47] >> Right.
[5:10:49] >> Okay. Now, am I good to ask my questions
[5:10:50] now?
[5:10:51] >> Yeah.
[5:10:51] >> Ask your questions.
[5:10:52] >> Okay. I'm just making sure. Um, there
[5:10:54] was a lot of talk tonight about data and
[5:10:56] I know Shane just brought that up. There
[5:10:57] was a lot of talk about third-party
[5:10:59] studies.
[5:11:00] >> Jeff, do you already have those or is
[5:11:02] that something that would need to be
[5:11:03] done later? Like I just know that there
[5:11:05] was a lot of like there was um I could
[5:11:07] find one quick one. Um Mr.
[5:11:11] I can't find it now. I thought I had it.
[5:11:13] Um Mr. Helm, that's right. He talked
[5:11:15] about a dec like more than just um a
[5:11:18] sound study. He talked about like a
[5:11:19] acoustic study and he said some things
[5:11:22] that I've never heard. DMA, DBC,
[5:11:25] >> um,
[5:11:25] >> was it tone?
[5:11:26] >> Tone, tone, frequency,
[5:11:28] >> infrared sound.
[5:11:29] >> There there was a whole bunch of
[5:11:30] different things. We use a third party
[5:11:32] acoustics engineering there. They broker
[5:11:35] through uh, link engineering, right?
[5:11:38] >> So, we we can increase the detail in
[5:11:40] that study without
[5:11:42] >> without a problem. So, we can take what
[5:11:44] we've already done
[5:11:44] >> and I guess my question
[5:11:45] >> we can go further with it. My question
[5:11:46] is there was that about that there was I
[5:11:50] think the heat study and I want to say
[5:11:52] the air quality study I think those were
[5:11:54] three that I had written down throughout
[5:11:56] that process are those things that you
[5:11:57] already have
[5:11:58] >> air quality is uh yeah that's completely
[5:12:00] third party I mean that's we have to we
[5:12:02] use stand
[5:12:03] >> it's a third party
[5:12:05] >> and they take it to the state
[5:12:07] >> the state reviews it independently
[5:12:10] that's third party so you know yeah all
[5:12:13] of those they're they're third they're
[5:12:16] third party um sound. Um you know what
[5:12:20] we what we find pretty rapidly with any
[5:12:23] third-party conversations is that it's
[5:12:25] been shown over and over again that when
[5:12:27] you already have 50 60 dB
[5:12:31] in ambient sound where you are and then
[5:12:34] you have equipment that has proven to be
[5:12:36] you stand next to it the sound is the
[5:12:38] sound and you have another 60 dB. I
[5:12:41] mean, it's it's really not a a difficult
[5:12:44] equation. And while we haven't employed
[5:12:47] a separate party to do that, that that
[5:12:50] actually wouldn't be hard for us to do.
[5:12:52] And there are also um many studies that
[5:12:56] we can draw from that have been done,
[5:12:59] third party studies in different areas,
[5:13:01] data centers, and so forth. So
[5:13:04] >> I think we won't have a a challenge in
[5:13:07] providing more third party data on
[5:13:11] sound, heat, um, etc.
[5:13:14] >> And then I guess the other one was
[5:13:16] environmental studies. So just as you're
[5:13:18] putting them out through your your
[5:13:20] website or however you're putting that
[5:13:21] out, I think those are answers that
[5:13:22] people that were here tonight and in
[5:13:24] emails were asking.
[5:13:25] >> Yeah. And just I think it's also fair to
[5:13:27] say that um
[5:13:31] I don't think that the burden should be
[5:13:33] on us to answer to every person's
[5:13:37] request about every single topic that
[5:13:40] there are you know environmental studies
[5:13:42] that are tied to the existing building
[5:13:45] for example there are previous
[5:13:47] environmental studies about the existing
[5:13:51] um state of the building and so I think
[5:13:54] we need to be able to draw from some
[5:13:56] existing studies that were previous to
[5:14:00] us and so forth, you know. So, um I I
[5:14:05] think we will we are amendable to
[5:14:09] providing as much information as we can.
[5:14:11] It doesn't mean that we're going to go
[5:14:12] ahead and sponsor a study for every request for a study, if that makes
[5:14:18] sense. I don't I don't know that that's
[5:14:20] what um many industrial operations are
[5:14:24] asked to do. You know, I don't think
[5:14:25] Quickqu Quack was asked to do a water
[5:14:27] study and they're using more than we do.
[5:14:28] So, there's, you know, I think that
[5:14:31] there needs to be a reasonable
[5:14:32] expectation about um what hoops we're
[5:14:36] asked to jump through when we're willing
[5:14:37] to jump through so many, but that
[5:14:39] doesn't mean that we're going to do
[5:14:40] something, you know, on a Firefly, for
[5:14:43] example.
[5:14:44] >> Got it. Okay. Um then the other question
[5:14:47] I have right now is there were some
[5:14:49] questions about shifting numbers. One of
[5:14:52] the numbers that I had written down
[5:14:54] before I came tonight is when you
[5:14:56] presented to us two weeks ago the number
[5:14:58] that you presented was 250 megawws and
[5:15:01] then in planning commission the next
[5:15:03] night you talked they talked about
[5:15:05] putting a limit on the high end right of
[5:15:07] five and you had said we would be
[5:15:09] comfortable with 500 which is really
[5:15:11] high compared to 250. And then the error
[5:15:14] I I'm gonna say it wrong. The error
[5:15:16] impact submission that you have in what
[5:15:18] is that called the that you have into
[5:15:20] the state. You just said it just
[5:15:21] >> Oh yeah. Yeah. Yeah. The Yeah. through
[5:15:23] Stantech.
[5:15:24] >> It has a It has 393
[5:15:27] >> four.
[5:15:27] Okay.
[5:15:28] >> Yeah.
[5:15:28] >> Okay. 400. Can you tell us why why are
[5:15:31] these all these numbers?
[5:15:32] >> Yeah. I think this just gets this just
[5:15:34] helps you know sometimes when we're
[5:15:36] there's levels to you know the detail in
[5:15:39] an engineering design for example. So
[5:15:42] when we begin a conversation for example
[5:15:44] with a client they say to us we need 100
[5:15:47] megawws of of compute we need 100
[5:15:51] megawatts of critical power and so we
[5:15:54] have a conversation about 100 megawws
[5:15:56] and typically the conversation in the
[5:15:58] public
[5:15:59] you're talking about that compute 100
[5:16:02] megawatt so that's standard that you
[5:16:04] would reference the amount of power that
[5:16:07] the compute requires
[5:16:10] behind that sits the full engineering,
[5:16:13] the name plate. That means how much
[5:16:16] power will be required to do everything
[5:16:18] that needs to be done on that property
[5:16:20] to power the cooling
[5:16:23] um to have enough power if you needed to uh tap into your um your backup
[5:16:31] power.
[5:16:32] um the fuel cell or other technology may
[5:16:38] operate at 60 or 70% efficiency. So you
[5:16:41] will put more you know fuel cell on on
[5:16:45] the property. So that gives you a full
[5:16:48] boore if if you needed to power every
[5:16:50] single thing at once, a name plate, that
[5:16:54] ends up being typically
[5:16:57] um you know 50%
[5:17:01] sometimes higher more than your compute.
[5:17:05] So in our name plate in our engineering
[5:17:08] we believe that we may need up to 394
[5:17:12] megawatts of power on site to ensure
[5:17:15] that we always have 250 megawatts of
[5:17:20] critical compute power available without
[5:17:22] any drop off. So that's so that's what
[5:17:25] happens when you know you're you're
[5:17:27] talking about the difference between
[5:17:29] power for the compute and power for the
[5:17:32] whole facility. And so that's just the
[5:17:34] that's the natural language of language
[5:17:36] of the industry. So I think in our
[5:17:38] initial conversations it it's natural
[5:17:40] for us to say this is a 250 megawatt
[5:17:43] facility. When you get into the details
[5:17:46] of engineering it's a 395 megawatt name
[5:17:49] plate. So um so in that conversation
[5:17:52] when we started talking about limits
[5:17:54] that's when I clarified okay if we're
[5:17:56] going to put a limit we need to be sure
[5:17:58] we're covering the name plate. And when
[5:18:00] we talk about 500, I think that's just
[5:18:03] my uh creating a buffer if in some case
[5:18:07] in for some reason, you know, but we
[5:18:09] don't we already know that this property
[5:18:12] it maxes out. We cannot we cannot
[5:18:16] support more than 250 megawatts of
[5:18:18] critical power on that property. And
[5:18:20] there's no more room to create a power
[5:18:24] generating system on that property. And
[5:18:27] in fact, there's a chance that we may
[5:18:30] not even be able to produce 250
[5:18:32] depending on just final final
[5:18:33] engineering. It could end up at 200,
[5:18:36] 180, 225, 240. Um, and so we think that
[5:18:42] a name plate of 395
[5:18:45] really does represent the the maximum
[5:18:48] that we would need on site.
[5:18:50] >> Thank you for explaining that.
[5:18:51] >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
[5:18:54] >> Okay. I had five questions and four have
[5:18:56] been answered.
[5:18:56] >> No.
[5:18:57] >> Oh, are you ready to go?
[5:18:58] >> Whatever. I can go after you though.
[5:19:00] That's just fine. I'm happy to wait. You
[5:19:01] want me? I just got four. I'll go I'll
[5:19:03] go quick. Maybe it'll be one of your
[5:19:04] >> questions.
[5:19:06] >> All right, Jeff. Thank you. I the at the
[5:19:08] beginning of the evening, I appreciated
[5:19:09] when you said we're going to kind of
[5:19:11] slow things down a little bit. I feel
[5:19:12] like especially everybody in this room,
[5:19:13] even who's still here, would agree that
[5:19:15] that's something that um they
[5:19:17] appreciate. They've been feeling a
[5:19:18] little bit rushed in the process. And
[5:19:19] so, so thank you. And you know, as a
[5:19:23] city council member, I my job is to
[5:19:25] listen to the residents. And so I love
[5:19:27] this evening listening to everybody
[5:19:29] share their the pros and cons and how
[5:19:31] they feel. I mean, that's my job. And
[5:19:33] so, uh, I want to be their voice. That's my responsibility. So, so on in
[5:19:38] that spirit, I I had 14 takeaways, uh,
[5:19:43] from the comments this evening from
[5:19:45] everybody. So, thank you. Um, some of
[5:19:48] the questions have been answered, you
[5:19:50] know, in the last couple minutes. Uh,
[5:19:52] 14, but I'm just going to ask about four
[5:19:55] of them right now and then I could even
[5:19:57] send you the rest because I know you're
[5:19:58] going to put them.
[5:19:59] >> These are the four hardest of the 14.
[5:20:00] I'm assuming
[5:20:01] >> ones that are really going to upset you.
[5:20:03] No,
[5:20:04] >> no, but I just feel like these are these
[5:20:05] are a good four. They may even be some
[5:20:07] of yours, Stacy. So, we can
[5:20:08] >> Good. Now, I won't
[5:20:09] >> two birds stone. So, so uh and feel free
[5:20:12] to be brief because again I'm sure
[5:20:14] you'll want to expound on some of these
[5:20:16] uh later slide or on your website or
[5:20:18] something. So, the first one I was
[5:20:20] curious about that was was asked earlier
[5:20:23] was about the two data centers and I
[5:20:25] didn't really understand I maybe I've
[5:20:27] missed I was at Saturday's session but
[5:20:30] quickly what what is that?
[5:20:32] >> What do you mean like
[5:20:34] >> planning commission?
[5:20:35] >> Okay. Was that I missed
[5:20:36] >> planning commission?
[5:20:37] >> Wait the two what? Oh, I thought it was
[5:20:39] to allow potentially two data centers.
[5:20:41] >> Oh, allowing the two data centers is
[5:20:43] just this is just something that came
[5:20:45] out of natural conversation with the
[5:20:47] commission where um the city is
[5:20:51] contemplating a limit um and not, you
[5:20:56] know, effectively opening the floodgates
[5:20:58] for every developer in the world to say,
[5:21:00] "Hey, we can run down there to Spanish
[5:21:02] Fork and duplicate this." And all of a
[5:21:04] sudden, you've got all this stuff going
[5:21:05] on. and and we don't have any opposition
[5:21:07] to a to a limit.
[5:21:09] >> Okay. Yeah.
[5:21:10] >> And that that was a planning commission
[5:21:12] suggestion right now.
[5:21:13] >> Yeah. It was a one of the things that
[5:21:14] they added to the
[5:21:16] >> Excellent.
[5:21:17] >> Another question that I was curious
[5:21:18] about your answer from valition is
[5:21:21] >> a couple folks are really curious. This
[5:21:23] is the emails as well receiving but how
[5:21:25] can we know we directly benefit from you
[5:21:28] guys and maybe that's hard to articulate
[5:21:30] but is there a way that we can start
[5:21:32] broadcasting that this is how you can
[5:21:34] someone asked earlier like how is there
[5:21:36] a way to actually benefit from this
[5:21:37] energy that's being created and I know
[5:21:39] you have these massive customers that'll
[5:21:40] be tapping into this but
[5:21:41] >> well how can you benefit from our power
[5:21:44] >> yeah well I mean
[5:21:45] >> you're so
[5:21:46] >> besides the besides the tax and you know
[5:21:48] the financial piece of questions in a
[5:21:51] second
[5:21:51] >> so I'm going to go into a really
[5:21:55] scary territory that gets a lot of
[5:21:56] people really uptight. But you asked it.
[5:21:59] I move we adjourn.
[5:22:03] >> Listen, Landon, if it were up to us,
[5:22:08] so I don't know how many homes are
[5:22:09] coming into Edge. Uh
[5:22:11] >> 600 units.
[5:22:12] >> No, in that devel No, I think there's
[5:22:14] 600 there in that little development
[5:22:15] right by us.
[5:22:16] >> It's close to,
[5:22:17] >> isn't it? 5 to six.
[5:22:18] >> Six.
[5:22:19] >> How many?
[5:22:20] >> It's close to 600. Okay,
[5:22:23] >> we were
[5:22:23] >> if if it were up to us, um we could
[5:22:27] provide we could power every one of
[5:22:29] those homes and we could give them heat
[5:22:33] at no cost. And guess what? We would be
[5:22:36] happy to do it. But you start putting a
[5:22:39] proposal out there like that to the
[5:22:42] utilities and to people are going to get
[5:22:44] crazy crazy. I don't know that we that's
[5:22:47] a fight we're wanting to go sign up for.
[5:22:49] But just to give you an example, what
[5:22:51] I'm saying is our ability to share our
[5:22:55] power um is
[5:22:58] our hands are tied. We can't we can't do
[5:23:00] that. But we would do it in in two
[5:23:02] seconds. A part of our long-term model
[5:23:05] just share with you. Uh maybe this shuts
[5:23:08] us down, you know, somebody hears about
[5:23:09] it. But our long-term model, our
[5:23:12] original model
[5:23:15] always contemplated, we have so much
[5:23:17] power.
[5:23:19] So how do we allow whoever's in
[5:23:21] proximity to our power to access that
[5:23:24] power at a radical discount? And um it's
[5:23:28] still part of our model long term. Uh we
[5:23:32] just don't know how that would be
[5:23:33] implemented. We're talking about over 10
[5:23:34] and 15 years. So you get approval to let
[5:23:38] us to to borrow our power and
[5:23:42] take it. It's yours.
[5:23:44] >> To maybe address the other side of that,
[5:23:46] um there's a limit to the amount of
[5:23:48] power that the grid can handle. It's it
[5:23:50] has its capacities and this blows that
[5:23:54] up.
[5:23:55] Um we have uh we have the approval to
[5:23:59] grow our uh power consumption another uh
[5:24:03] 50 megawws in Spanish Fork in the system
[5:24:06] that we have. Uh there is another
[5:24:08] company that um has asked about an
[5:24:11] additional 50 so we'll call it 100.
[5:24:14] Beyond that somebody has to pay $400
[5:24:16] million to build some additional
[5:24:19] capacities in the Rocky Mountain power
[5:24:20] transmission system.
[5:24:22] um that was 400 million
[5:24:25] and so
[5:24:27] uh we don't have that. We can't buy the
[5:24:29] building and do that. Um
[5:24:32] so if they were to plug in and this
[5:24:38] these are conversations that we've had
[5:24:39] with Jeff too. If they were to plug into
[5:24:41] the grid to give us the power
[5:24:44] >> Yeah.
[5:24:44] >> those changes have to happen.
[5:24:46] >> Yeah. We can't
[5:24:47] >> So So you can't take it and you can't
[5:24:49] give it. They both work the same way,
[5:24:51] right? power goes in both directions.
[5:24:53] So, it it's just it's at the moment,
[5:24:55] right? It's a non-starter to
[5:24:56] >> Yeah.
[5:24:57] >> If we had any requests to connect in any
[5:24:59] way or to net meter or share our power,
[5:25:02] then we're then we're strictly undermpa
[5:25:07] guidelines and wouldn't work.
[5:25:10] >> Thank you. Just two more questions. Um,
[5:25:13] someone asked earlier about is it worth
[5:25:15] it to consider a a decommission bond? I
[5:25:18] thought that was interesting and I'm
[5:25:19] just curious your thoughts. Well, we we are the ones who recommend we have
[5:25:23] recommended decommission
[5:25:25] uh decommissioning plan that that is our
[5:25:27] suggest suggestion in the original
[5:25:31] uh amendment. Now uh we also need to be
[5:25:34] smart about how we do it. You know, do
[5:25:36] we want to have
[5:25:39] call it $40 million just tied up in
[5:25:42] perpetuity? No, we don't. But I know
[5:25:45] that our team is looking at ways to
[5:25:48] accomplish this. We just had a meeting
[5:25:50] about it just two days ago. So we will
[5:25:54] solve for a decommissioning
[5:25:58] uh structure that would ensure that um
[5:26:02] if if we just completely failed that
[5:26:04] there would be capital available to be
[5:26:06] able to decommission the the property.
[5:26:10] >> Okay.
[5:26:10] >> Landon, can I piggyback on that?
[5:26:12] >> Go ahead. So Jeff, you kind of have
[5:26:15] alluded to what it might cost for you
[5:26:17] guys to come and and be there. What does
[5:26:20] a decommissioning look like if we have
[5:26:22] to haul if you had to move stuff out and
[5:26:25] do the reverse? Any idea what the cost
[5:26:27] of that would look like?
[5:26:28] >> Yeah, there's been a few numbers that
[5:26:30] have been bounced around. Um, but we
[5:26:33] think that it it would be north of $30
[5:26:37] million.
[5:26:38] >> Okay. Okay. Good to know. Thank you. Um
[5:26:42] final question for tonight. So, um, see
[5:26:46] if I can articulate this one when it
[5:26:47] comes to, and you had some great slides
[5:26:48] earlier showing, you know, the financial
[5:26:51] benefit to Spanish city, nebo school
[5:26:53] district,
[5:26:54] >> uh, you know, the tax revenue, that sort
[5:26:56] of stuff. And then there were a couple
[5:26:57] questions and I've received some emails
[5:26:59] as well about what is that reality?
[5:27:01] Could that change? How was that? And you
[5:27:03] mentioned it just a minute ago, like it
[5:27:04] could be a lot more, you know, based on
[5:27:06] once we get certain clients in there.
[5:27:09] So, I don't know exactly what the
[5:27:10] question is, but if you could just
[5:27:12] address maybe the reality of that.
[5:27:15] >> Yeah, I I think the reality of it is
[5:27:17] that um let's look at if it's smaller.
[5:27:22] So, how could it be smaller? Um let's
[5:27:25] say we proceed with this um
[5:27:30] and something happens with a demand for
[5:27:32] data centers. And so instead of
[5:27:35] contracting with a large client to take
[5:27:38] all 250 megawws for a 12-year
[5:27:41] commitment,
[5:27:43] um maybe they say, "We're just going to
[5:27:46] take 50 megawws for now." And and for
[5:27:51] whatever reason, we don't get more
[5:27:54] clients, so we could just be smaller. Um
[5:27:58] I think that those who are concerned
[5:28:00] about a data center probably then
[5:28:03] welcome that. So I think they would win
[5:28:04] if we ended up being smaller. It might
[5:28:06] make them feel better. So you would have
[5:28:08] a um you know uh an equal you know kind
[5:28:14] of prora decrease on the amount of
[5:28:17] income that's coming into the city but
[5:28:19] it would still be would still be pretty
[5:28:21] substantial coming into the city. So
[5:28:23] that's one scenario. Um I think um
[5:28:28] another scenario
[5:28:30] uh is that this is
[5:28:34] larger likely larger because we are not
[5:28:38] calculating the computer the GPUs we
[5:28:42] build everything what we say up to the
[5:28:43] rack. So, we have all the infrastructure
[5:28:45] in there and then a client, let's say
[5:28:48] it's IBM, uh they then plug into that
[5:28:52] rack all of their GPUs and the
[5:28:55] cumulative
[5:28:57] uh value of those GPUs is actually
[5:29:00] substantially higher than our
[5:29:02] infrastructure. So if our infrastructure
[5:29:05] is valued at 3 to 4 billion, the GPUs
[5:29:08] are going to be valued at another
[5:29:12] 3 to four billion plus. I'm still being
[5:29:15] conservative. So there is a uh the the
[5:29:21] reality is this will be a higher figure
[5:29:24] probably more than double than the
[5:29:27] numbers that we've been discussing.
[5:29:29] >> Okay. Thank you. And piggyback on that,
[5:29:33] the math that I'm running is when when
[5:29:36] they say maybe the net to to our city
[5:29:39] could be $4 million and you think, well,
[5:29:43] okay, if that's what we're thinking it's
[5:29:45] going to be and and no, we're smart
[5:29:47] enough financially in the city that I I
[5:29:50] think it was some good points that hey,
[5:29:51] don't don't certainly spend that before,
[5:29:54] you know, that's I think that's got some
[5:29:56] cities certainly in trouble that counted
[5:29:58] on something and and we're really Martin
[5:30:00] and Spanish Fork that we're not counting
[5:30:03] on things and till they're in the bank
[5:30:06] account and when we're spending things,
[5:30:08] but from the math of of of $4 million
[5:30:12] and then a commitment of $500,000 a year
[5:30:15] to support different things like I mean
[5:30:18] that's that might be a a pretty good
[5:30:21] faith thing that well here we haven't
[5:30:23] paid any tax because this stuff isn't in
[5:30:25] there but here's $500,000 in this fund
[5:30:27] to do this this and this.
[5:30:30] that starts to be a piece of $4 million,
[5:30:32] you know, in a fund. Um, and again, not
[5:30:35] that we'd not that we'd run out and and
[5:30:37] buy a shiny new vehicle with that for
[5:30:40] the city or something, but but I think
[5:30:42] that's shown some good faith there. Um,
[5:30:46] the empirical the I've heard the word
[5:30:49] empirical evidence and because I'm a
[5:30:51] Spanish for Kairad, I had to Google that
[5:30:53] um what that exactly meant. And so the
[5:30:57] definition of based on direct obver
[5:30:59] observation, measurement or real world
[5:31:02] experience, I think that's important. Um
[5:31:07] we experienced some of that real world
[5:31:09] uh importance uh and observation the
[5:31:11] other day. I would encourage um I don't
[5:31:15] think everybody's I I I don't feel like
[5:31:17] I've been asked to just believe
[5:31:18] hypothetical
[5:31:20] uh things either. Um, obviously this
[5:31:23] isn't built, but there are things that
[5:31:25] are built in in this technology running.
[5:31:27] And and I can tell you from those
[5:31:29] pictures shown that that that is
[5:31:32] something that's important for I think
[5:31:35] all of us if we haven't seen it to see
[5:31:36] it within this time frame. Um, and uh
[5:31:39] and see if that could be arranged
[5:31:41] because hearing it, seeing it, touching
[5:31:43] it and and and talking to the people
[5:31:47] that live next to it is is pretty is
[5:31:50] pretty important. We think so too. And I
[5:31:52] would look there there is there's public
[5:31:56] access.
[5:31:57] Anybody can, you know, take a drive up
[5:32:00] to
[5:32:02] uh the Nova data center and and you can
[5:32:06] get right in front of that building
[5:32:08] right where the homes are, get out of
[5:32:11] your car, see for yourself, do your own
[5:32:14] measurement, listen. Um that that's
[5:32:17] somebody the other a woman the other day
[5:32:20] was you know she had said well can I can
[5:32:23] I go see this for myself? The answer
[5:32:24] actually is yes. You're not going to get
[5:32:27] in the boundary. You're not going to get
[5:32:28] toward the computer. You're not going to
[5:32:29] get to where it's actually loud in
[5:32:31] there. But if our argument is uh our
[5:32:35] concern is how loud is it at the
[5:32:37] perimeter and how loud is it a quarter
[5:32:40] mile away or by the homes?
[5:32:42] anybody anybody in Utah can drive right
[5:32:46] up there and and see for yourself. And I
[5:32:48] do really
[5:32:51] I I expect that every member of this
[5:32:54] council to do something like that. And
[5:32:56] for those who have not gone to NOVA to
[5:32:59] get a more detailed tour, and I don't
[5:33:01] think the two of you have been yet, I
[5:33:03] just we'll coordinate that. I don't
[5:33:05] think Shane's been. So, um, we'll
[5:33:09] coordinate that so you get, uh, onto the
[5:33:11] property with us.
[5:33:13] >> Mayor, can I can I speak to that?
[5:33:15] >> Sure.
[5:33:16] >> So, Stacy and I yesterday had the
[5:33:19] opportunity to go up to Nova and
[5:33:22] >> Oh, and the mayor.
[5:33:22] >> And the mayor. Yes, the mayor was there.
[5:33:24] >> I was in shorts, though.
[5:33:25] >> He was in shorts, so I didn't see him.
[5:33:27] >> Seth, don't feel bad. They forgot you
[5:33:28] were there, too. But Seth was also
[5:33:30] there.
[5:33:31] >> Seth, Dave, Von, were all there.
[5:33:33] >> My directions were so bad yesterday. I
[5:33:35] don't know where I was. Yeah, Von was
[5:33:37] there, too. Yes.
[5:33:38] >> So, I had a person, a resident today
[5:33:41] reach out to me and messaged me and
[5:33:43] said, "Do you consider yourself a
[5:33:44] steward?" A steward of Not Stewart. I'm
[5:33:47] not a steward. I'm an oiler. A steward
[5:33:50] of Spanish Fork. And I said, "Yes, I
[5:33:52] do." And when it comes to projects like
[5:33:55] this, my responsibility is to do my
[5:33:57] homework. So, I want to report back on a
[5:33:59] little bit of homework that I did when
[5:34:01] in regards to the field trip that we
[5:34:04] took yesterday. So, one of the concerns
[5:34:07] that we've had obviously is is heat.
[5:34:09] Heat's been a concern of mine. Uh, this
[5:34:13] was not scientific, but I did notice on
[5:34:16] my car as I left Spanish Fork. There's
[5:34:20] the temperature meter that tells you how
[5:34:22] hot it is outside, right? So, I watched
[5:34:25] it as I left Spanish Fork. It was 93
[5:34:28] degrees when I left. When I got about 10
[5:34:31] miles away from the Nova data center, it
[5:34:35] was down to 92 degrees. I got to the
[5:34:38] data center. I parked my car. We were
[5:34:40] there what, an hour?
[5:34:42] We were there an hour. When I got back
[5:34:44] in my car, it was still 92 degrees. Um,
[5:34:48] that does not mean that there wasn't
[5:34:50] heat. When we got out and we walked over
[5:34:51] to the Bloom fuel cells, they were hot.
[5:34:55] They were very, very hot. Uh, you could
[5:34:57] feel the wind blowing. you could feel
[5:34:59] that heat. Uh you step away from them
[5:35:01] and go a decent distance away, the heat
[5:35:05] wasn't there. Um I didn't notice the
[5:35:07] heat on my vehicle. So that was my first
[5:35:10] unscientific experiment that I did. Take
[5:35:13] it for what it's worth. Yeah. Second uh
[5:35:17] thing of interest,
[5:35:19] Utah state law as of 2026 as of as as of
[5:35:24] this year requires that all large data
[5:35:26] centers report their annual water use.
[5:35:29] That's public information. The NOVA data
[5:35:32] center, the data center in Las Vegas,
[5:35:35] there's a data center in Grand Junction,
[5:35:36] Colorado. Um, you can go on to their
[5:35:40] websites and they have to disclose and
[5:35:42] show their actual water bills. The one
[5:35:45] in Las Vegas, I think they've got six
[5:35:47] different meters. Landscaping,
[5:35:50] construction,
[5:35:52] um, commercial use, um, the use inside
[5:35:55] the building, they're all separately
[5:35:57] metered and you can see everything. Uh,
[5:36:00] the Nova data center in West Jordan
[5:36:03] shows that as well. And after seeing
[5:36:06] this and talking to the people at at
[5:36:09] Nova, water is not a concern for me
[5:36:13] based on then the 2025 the entire year
[5:36:16] report that they showed of all their
[5:36:18] water consumption. Water use with the
[5:36:21] closed loop system is not a concern for
[5:36:23] me. So that was that was one thing that
[5:36:27] I noticed. Um
[5:36:30] after oh and the other thing that they
[5:36:32] pointed out is at the Nova data center
[5:36:34] there's no turf. You won't find grass as
[5:36:36] part of their landscaping. They hired a
[5:36:39] landscaper that did a study and has put
[5:36:43] in all natural droughtresistant
[5:36:46] vegetation. after 3 years of watering
[5:36:49] their landscaping. Those those plants
[5:36:52] will be um
[5:36:56] not established. Thank you. They'll be
[5:36:58] established. They'll no longer need to
[5:37:00] water them. And so again, water water
[5:37:03] wasn't a concern for me after after
[5:37:05] seeing and doing some research there.
[5:37:08] After we were done with the tour, I did
[5:37:11] what you guys did, it sounds like, and
[5:37:12] what one of our residents did because I
[5:37:15] knocked some houses that said, "Hey, we
[5:37:17] had another guy from Spanish Fork that
[5:37:19] was here." Over the weekend, I went and
[5:37:22] knocked doors and Jordan, I don't know
[5:37:25] if you can bring up Google Maps. I want
[5:37:27] to show just everybody the exact
[5:37:29] proximity of the residential
[5:37:31] neighborhood to the Nova data center.
[5:37:34] So, this is an old map. If you were to
[5:37:36] go up there now, there's the the
[5:37:38] building just south of the red dot is
[5:37:40] the Nova data center. There's now two
[5:37:42] additional buildings, one on each side
[5:37:43] of that one. So, there's three
[5:37:46] buildings. Um the residential
[5:37:48] neighborhood is directly north and
[5:37:51] directly to the west of that residential
[5:37:54] neighborhood that you can't see in the
[5:37:56] map is a another residential development
[5:37:59] that's being built right now of
[5:38:01] highdensity three fourstory condos. So,
[5:38:05] I went and knocked doors for an hour and
[5:38:07] just want to share again, take it for
[5:38:09] what it's worth. This is what I've
[5:38:11] learned talking firsthand to individuals
[5:38:14] that live and have lived by this for
[5:38:16] multiple years. The the ground or the
[5:38:19] ribbon cutting for the Nova Data Center
[5:38:21] took place in 2021. So, it's not
[5:38:23] something that opened yesterday. It's
[5:38:25] been open for five five plus years.
[5:38:28] So, the first house I talked to or
[5:38:32] knocked knocked on, um, obviously not
[5:38:36] everybody answered their doors, but I'm
[5:38:37] going to speak to those that I spoke
[5:38:39] with. Um, the first house I knocked on,
[5:38:43] I asked very first question, what's what
[5:38:45] are the concerns that you've had,
[5:38:47] especially surround sound? You've got a
[5:38:50] data center in your backyard.
[5:38:53] What what are the sounds that you hear?
[5:38:55] Um, the answer was nothing. We don't
[5:38:57] hear anything. I said, "What about at
[5:38:59] night when you've got your windows
[5:39:00] open?" Again, nothing. We don't hear
[5:39:03] anything. In fact, actually, the
[5:39:05] business to the east of us, which I
[5:39:08] won't name, but it's another industrial
[5:39:10] business. That's where the sound comes
[5:39:11] from, not from the data center.
[5:39:13] According to these people, the other
[5:39:15] question I asked was, "How long have you
[5:39:17] lived here?" And these people had been
[5:39:18] there for 15 plus years. They long-term
[5:39:21] residents. I said, "What have you
[5:39:23] noticed about the value of your home and
[5:39:25] the property taxes that you pay?" Um,
[5:39:28] and they said, "Our property value has
[5:39:29] only gone up every single year that
[5:39:31] we've lived here, including the five
[5:39:33] years that the data center was there."
[5:39:34] So, that was another response. I got
[5:39:37] that response from multiple people. The
[5:39:39] next house that I knocked was somebody
[5:39:41] that's lived in that home for 4 days.
[5:39:43] They just barely purchased that home.
[5:39:45] They did not get a discount on their
[5:39:46] purchase price because it's next to a
[5:39:48] data center. They paid full market
[5:39:50] value.
[5:39:52] Um, as I went further south, I knocked
[5:39:54] on the homes that are directly you go
[5:39:57] out their backyard and you look at the
[5:40:00] street and you look at the data center
[5:40:02] which was right across. Um, one
[5:40:05] gentleman, we spoke for probably 10
[5:40:07] minutes. His concern, he didn't like
[5:40:10] that the data center was there and I
[5:40:12] said, "Why not?" He says, "Because I
[5:40:14] preferred the field that was there
[5:40:15] before and the deer that ran through
[5:40:17] it." Um, I says, "Well, the data center
[5:40:20] is there now. What are your thoughts?"
[5:40:23] He said, "I would rather the data center
[5:40:24] than the three-story condos that are
[5:40:26] being built down the street." Um, I
[5:40:29] said, "Okay, that's good info info uh
[5:40:31] input. What about if it was the Amazon
[5:40:35] distribution center that's around the
[5:40:36] corner? If you had the choice between
[5:40:38] the data center that's there or the
[5:40:40] Amazon distribution center, which would
[5:40:42] you prefer?" He says, "The data center."
[5:40:45] Um, I hate the beeps that I hear from
[5:40:46] the Amazon distribution center. So, I I
[5:40:50] asked him as well, this is right in your
[5:40:52] backyard. Do you ever hear anything? He
[5:40:54] says, I never hear anything. Even at
[5:40:56] night when the windows are open, I don't
[5:40:57] hear it. Next door, uh, the guy let me
[5:41:00] in. He was actually nice enough to take
[5:41:02] me through his house, show me the
[5:41:04] addition that he put in the rear. He
[5:41:06] said he built it himself.
[5:41:08] >> Did you have a lesson? That's
[5:41:10] >> We we went out back. Um, he he walked me
[5:41:14] to his backyard where I could look
[5:41:16] directly into the data center from his
[5:41:19] backyard.
[5:41:21] First thing I noticed was the noise. It
[5:41:24] was extremely loud, but then when the
[5:41:26] neighbor next door on the other side of
[5:41:27] the fence turned off his lawn mower, it
[5:41:30] got quiet. Um, next thing I noticed was
[5:41:33] the awful smell, but then I realized he
[5:41:36] just lit up a Cuban and that's what I
[5:41:38] was smelling. Um, that was the noxious
[5:41:40] odor. I asked him, I said, "How long
[5:41:43] have you been here?" He says, "I've been
[5:41:44] here for for years." I says, "Have you
[5:41:46] ever noticed any noises,
[5:41:49] any sounds, any hums, any high pitch,
[5:41:52] anything from the data center?" He says,
[5:41:53] "The only time I ever heard a noise
[5:41:56] coming from the data center was while it
[5:41:58] was under construction. After
[5:42:00] construction was finished, I've not
[5:42:02] heard anything from it." Same
[5:42:04] complaints. He he doesn't like the
[5:42:06] residential that's being built. Uh, but
[5:42:08] as far as concerns about the data
[5:42:10] center, he had none. I knocked doors for
[5:42:13] an hour. There was not one resident that
[5:42:17] I spoke with that had a concern about
[5:42:20] living next to the data center. That was
[5:42:22] my firsthand experience. So, doesn't
[5:42:25] mean I have don't have any more
[5:42:27] questions. I've got a million questions,
[5:42:30] but I want the residents to know that I
[5:42:33] take this serious and I'm doing my
[5:42:35] homework because like the mayor said,
[5:42:37] none of us want to put something in
[5:42:40] Spanish Fork that's going to be a
[5:42:41] detriment to the people that live here.
[5:42:44] >> So, thank you, mayor. That was probably
[5:42:46] longer than it needed to be.
[5:42:47] >> That was good.
[5:42:48] >> Thank you for doing that.
[5:42:49] >> That was good. I will tell you as the as the resident uh Stacy's got to
[5:42:54] say something too, but the the the the
[5:42:56] resident that grew up here uh and grew
[5:42:59] up here when there was a powder Trojan
[5:43:02] powder plant across the highway from
[5:43:04] this uh that tested explosives. That's
[5:43:07] what used to be at the mouth of Spanish
[5:43:08] Fort Canyon. Um
[5:43:10] >> that was loud.
[5:43:11] >> It was loud.
[5:43:12] >> That was a little loud.
[5:43:13] >> It was loud. Um it used to be loud up
[5:43:15] there. where there's cracks in in
[5:43:17] people's uh floors because of some of
[5:43:20] those explosions getting a little bit of
[5:43:21] out of hand. That was probably John
[5:43:23] Mendenhal putting a little bit too much
[5:43:24] powder in the keg at Trojan Powder. But
[5:43:27] uh um the wild the the the environmental
[5:43:30] aspects of up there again that's where I
[5:43:32] grew up as a kid. Um
[5:43:35] you would think it would decimate the
[5:43:38] wildlife when you built the distribution
[5:43:40] center. Um the deer and elk and
[5:43:43] everything else are pretty hardy and
[5:43:45] then pretty smart. They do come down to
[5:43:46] that river to drink and then they know
[5:43:48] that they're pretty protected by some of
[5:43:50] these facilities. And so that's the
[5:43:52] place they're not getting shot versus up
[5:43:55] on the mountain where you can hunt. You
[5:43:57] can't hunt inside these private
[5:43:59] facilities that are fenced off. And so
[5:44:02] if you want to look at some decentsized
[5:44:04] deer and elk, golf on the golf course,
[5:44:06] look across the way. I don't think
[5:44:08] that's going to change with this center
[5:44:10] either. You're going to be able to see
[5:44:11] some wildlife
[5:44:13] uh that uh that are usually pretty
[5:44:15] protected because you can't you can't go
[5:44:18] hunt them there. You have to go up on
[5:44:19] the on the mountain to catch them. So,
[5:44:21] sorry that was my wildlife speech.
[5:44:24] >> I feel like I'm the last speaker before
[5:44:26] lunch or dinner and they're like just
[5:44:27] hurry up and let's get out of here.
[5:44:28] >> I have more.
[5:44:29] >> You do not.
[5:44:30] >> Okay, never mind. I don't.
[5:44:31] >> Okay. My question is back to a number,
[5:44:35] Jeff, that I think in your meeting, I
[5:44:38] mean, in your presentation before the
[5:44:40] public hearing, you said that the heat
[5:44:43] got up to 90, excuse me, nine degrees
[5:44:46] and I thought I had heard five before
[5:44:49] and then by the time it's a quarter of a
[5:44:51] mile, there's nothing. Can you just
[5:44:53] confirm numbers with the heat? Yeah, our current uh study indicates that at
[5:45:00] max
[5:45:02] on property
[5:45:04] uh heat, so this would be a day where
[5:45:07] maybe there's less wind
[5:45:10] um that we may experience 9 degrees of
[5:45:14] onpropy increase. And then um our our
[5:45:20] studies indicate that the the decay of
[5:45:25] that heat, you know, with within
[5:45:29] um before a half mile,
[5:45:32] uh you will be less than one degree max
[5:45:37] of
[5:45:39] um you know incremental additional heat
[5:45:42] because of our property. that that is um
[5:45:47] yeah that that's the latest number that
[5:45:50] we work with.
[5:45:51] >> Okay.
[5:45:52] >> From our our research and and third
[5:45:55] party studies.
[5:45:56] >> Okay. Okay. That's helpful. Thank you.
[5:45:59] Um just yeah all my other questions were
[5:46:02] answered by everyone else up here. When
[5:46:03] I was up there yesterday we were having
[5:46:05] conversations just walking around and I
[5:46:08] was amazed that I I I I was so engaged
[5:46:11] in conversation. And I didn't realize
[5:46:13] the bloom cell was just really right
[5:46:15] there until someone I think it was Seth,
[5:46:18] of course. Can you hear that? And I'm
[5:46:20] like, "What?" And he's like, "Those are
[5:46:21] the cells." I I didn't even know we were
[5:46:23] standing right by them.
[5:46:24] >> Yes.
[5:46:24] >> And then the company to the east,
[5:46:27] whatever they were doing, they were on a
[5:46:29] forklift and someone dropped someone and
[5:46:31] it dinged and I think we all looked
[5:46:33] over. Like it was shocking. A diesel
[5:46:35] truck drove through Nova's parking lot.
[5:46:38] We had to stop talking. Like it was
[5:46:41] really interesting how acute we were to
[5:46:44] like all the exterior noises around us.
[5:46:46] Um a big diesel was out on the main road
[5:46:48] driving that was so loud. But where we
[5:46:51] were standing,
[5:46:53] the noise does not concern me. But I
[5:46:56] think it's really important to still do
[5:46:58] th those independent studies and all
[5:47:01] those other things that one of the
[5:47:03] residents were mentioning to make sure
[5:47:05] that we don't have those high pitched or
[5:47:08] low pitched or tonal sounds or whatever
[5:47:10] they're saying that we just need to be
[5:47:11] really aware that residents aren't
[5:47:13] affected by those. Yeah, there there are
[5:47:15] um
[5:47:17] these sort of um
[5:47:21] disproportionate
[5:47:22] uh comparables that are that are real.
[5:47:27] Uh, for example,
[5:47:29] if a data center is built near a rural
[5:47:35] community with 5,000 people and no real
[5:47:38] industry
[5:47:40] before that data center shows up, that
[5:47:42] is a beautiful place where you probably
[5:47:45] will step outside at night and it will
[5:47:47] be almost silent where you will have 20
[5:47:51] 30 dB. That's why we love these these
[5:47:54] places. But when you build a data center
[5:47:57] there where there is no additional or
[5:48:01] existing industrial
[5:48:03] uh ambient noise and there are no other
[5:48:07] structures to offset the noise from that
[5:48:11] facility and you combine it with a
[5:48:15] developer who's using
[5:48:18] uh antiquated equipment with no
[5:48:23] governance, no
[5:48:25] oversight. So, they're running diesel
[5:48:27] generators and they're a bunch of fans
[5:48:30] and
[5:48:32] yeah, that that is the scenario where
[5:48:35] these folks are really suffering, but
[5:48:39] it's not in any way uh an appropriate or
[5:48:44] comparable
[5:48:45] uh against what these modern data
[5:48:49] centers uh can do. and uh the amount of
[5:48:52] oversight and being dropped into maybe
[5:48:56] an existing industrial area where uh
[5:48:59] you're every day you're already sitting
[5:49:01] at 50 50 dB. So that's why you can get
[5:49:05] this um disproportionate reaction to
[5:49:09] data centers um because there are
[5:49:13] scenarios where they're just really bad you know and the analogy I
[5:49:17] you know just like when we our old
[5:49:18] vehicles my mom's old Volvo you know
[5:49:21] driving around who knows what emissions
[5:49:23] that thing was putting out you know
[5:49:25] compared to her now driving a hybrid a
[5:49:28] hybrid vehicle you know and so these it
[5:49:31] is true that these technologies have progressed. So that's why uh
[5:49:38] genuinely we we
[5:49:40] I am um absolutely confident that and
[5:49:45] this doesn't you know this is not I'm
[5:49:48] not the the point of decision here but I
[5:49:50] just I know unequivocally
[5:49:53] that our experiences are going to be the
[5:49:55] same as what we're finding by just
[5:49:56] knocking on doors and Nova is not as
[5:49:59] dynamic a design as ours. they have uh a
[5:50:04] variety of of power gen systems on there
[5:50:07] out there that are not as dynamic as
[5:50:09] ours. So, I'm confident that you know my
[5:50:12] if my daughter is still here, she is
[5:50:14] still here. I haven't said it once. This
[5:50:16] is Allison. Um and we can see this
[5:50:21] property from from her house in
[5:50:22] Mapleton. Uh our our two granddaughters
[5:50:26] are there, her daughters are there. Um,
[5:50:29] and just this weekend we had, you know,
[5:50:32] we had a a birthday party and we could
[5:50:34] see the windmills were in eyesot of of
[5:50:36] this. Uh, we're testing decibb. Um, I am
[5:50:41] confident that she and her neighbors and
[5:50:44] the new edge homes are going to have an
[5:50:48] experience that is quite uneventful as
[5:50:51] it relates to our being in their
[5:50:52] backyard.
[5:50:56] » Thank you.
[5:50:59] May I maybe adding to Kevin's experience
[5:51:03] as he was talking to those neighbors. It
[5:51:04] was really eye opening for me to see
[5:51:05] those houses. I in some of the public
[5:51:08] open houses public in some of the open
[5:51:11] houses that this group had last week
[5:51:14] residents expressed concerns about
[5:51:17] property values. Tonight I took some
[5:51:19] notes and a handful of people expressed
[5:51:20] concerns about property values. So,
[5:51:22] knowing that there were houses right
[5:51:23] next door to this, I went I went and did
[5:51:25] some online research and I think Zillow
[5:51:28] is
[5:51:30] as reliable as Zillow is. It's, you
[5:51:32] know, a standard that it's applicable
[5:51:34] anywhere. It's it's as good as it is
[5:51:36] here or there. So, I went and looked at a number of homes in that area to see
[5:51:41] their property values. The homes in that
[5:51:43] area started to be constructed in 2015.
[5:51:45] The data center went in in 2020. I think
[5:51:48] it was fully I think it was the first
[5:51:50] building was operational probably in 21
[5:51:52] and then as Kevin said they've added two more since and I went and pulled
[5:51:57] some data from Spanish Fork homes um in
[5:52:02] town with relative proximity to the
[5:52:04] site. So Jordan, if you'd pull that up.
[5:52:06] These are just two graphs. Um there it's
[5:52:09] kind of interesting. Sorry the numbers
[5:52:11] are a little bit actually the numbers
[5:52:13] are really not that relative. What's I think really interesting is to
[5:52:17] see the graphs themselves. So the one
[5:52:18] that you can see
[5:52:20] um there that shows the the value of one
[5:52:23] of the homes in West Jordan. So zip code
[5:52:25] 84081
[5:52:27] I think. Um and you can see that in 20 I
[5:52:30] think the first hash mark is 2018. Is
[5:52:32] that right Jordan?
[5:52:35] >> Um don't Oh, you don't have it in the
[5:52:37] screen in front of you. Okay. So I So
[5:52:40] you can see that the house here
[5:52:41] experienced the same market increase
[5:52:43] that we all did in 202021 with a peak in the um sometime in 2022. And then you
[5:52:52] see kind of this jagged I'm not sure if
[5:52:54] I want to go up or down for the next
[5:52:56] four years that we've been experiencing
[5:52:57] I think all across our houses. If you
[5:53:00] scroll down just a little bit so you can
[5:53:01] see the graph of a house in Spanish
[5:53:03] Fork, you can see it has a very similar
[5:53:06] trajectory, right? It has this rapid
[5:53:07] growth in 20 21 with a peak. We have
[5:53:11] kind of a weird peak at least on this
[5:53:12] property in 20 sometime in 21 and then a
[5:53:15] valley and then it goes it has that peak
[5:53:17] in 22 and then a drop and then it has
[5:53:19] that kind of jagged up uptick. Um,
[5:53:24] if you look at both of those graphs
[5:53:25] together, it's fascinating that these
[5:53:27] two properties, and I didn't handpick, I
[5:53:29] just had to take a picture of some that
[5:53:30] I was looking at, but you can do your
[5:53:33] own. This is all just public information
[5:53:36] on Zillow, right? Look at your house,
[5:53:38] look at its graph, and compare it to
[5:53:40] some of the neighborhoods by this by
[5:53:42] this project. It was really fascinating
[5:53:43] for me to see that that the peak, if
[5:53:46] you'll scroll just a little bit back to
[5:53:48] the West Jordan home, that the peaks
[5:53:49] came as the data center was was opening
[5:53:52] and and the valleys, you know, you might
[5:53:55] say, "Oh, that's that had an impact on
[5:53:56] the house." Well, you scroll down nonP
[5:53:58] non-data center, Spanish fork, it was
[5:54:00] the exact same valley, just what the
[5:54:03] markets were experiencing. Again, this
[5:54:05] is not data for all circumstances.
[5:54:08] to use the new word of the day for the
[5:54:10] mayor um for at least today in six
[5:54:13] minutes we can choose a new word but
[5:54:15] empirical so it's not necessarily
[5:54:17] empirical right but it was fascinating
[5:54:19] for me and and we'll probably continue
[5:54:20] to do some of this research
[5:54:22] >> it's again publicly available but it's
[5:54:24] interesting because I think if you have
[5:54:25] a concern about the home values like
[5:54:27] looking at this from a place that's real
[5:54:29] and is experiencing something today and frankly if you go back to that map
[5:54:35] >> like it's it's surrounded on three sides
[5:54:37] by growing industrial like it was not
[5:54:40] it's if you go back and you can't on
[5:54:42] this map, but if you go back on Google Maps, sorry, Google Earth, you
[5:54:47] can you can do some historical images.
[5:54:49] And this was a neighborhood out in a
[5:54:50] field like the guy like that guy was
[5:54:52] saying,
[5:54:53] >> that that same guy was not happy because
[5:54:55] his realtor that sold him the home
[5:54:58] promised him and told him that the
[5:54:59] property across the street would be
[5:55:01] residential.
[5:55:02] >> Don't believe realtors. No, that's not
[5:55:04] true. But like, yeah, they they must
[5:55:06] have had a shift in in where they were
[5:55:08] headed, right? But it's got a lot of
[5:55:09] industrial around it and those those
[5:55:12] homes have held their value. So,
[5:55:15] >> empirical evidence is that when I was
[5:55:17] elected mayor, we had our best home
[5:55:19] value increase.
[5:55:20] >> That's a fact. Okay,
[5:55:22] >> fair enough.
[5:55:23] >> Mayor, I know it's getting late, but I
[5:55:25] would love to report on another homework
[5:55:28] assignment that I did in regards to
[5:55:30] this. So, I emailed the mayor and city
[5:55:33] council of West Jordan. And to go back
[5:55:36] to the point of not every two data
[5:55:39] centers are the same. Um, Eagle
[5:55:41] Mountain, they're struggling with some
[5:55:43] of the things that they chose to do with
[5:55:44] their data center and they're facing
[5:55:46] some serious property tax increases in
[5:55:49] their city. Some of that's related to
[5:55:52] subsidies and whatever that they chose
[5:55:54] to do with the data centers that came to
[5:55:56] Eagle Mountain. West Jordan did not
[5:55:59] choose to go that route and give they've
[5:56:02] got two large data centers, not just the
[5:56:04] NOVA, but they've got a second one as
[5:56:06] well. They did not give them discounts
[5:56:09] and subsidies. Um, each of the council
[5:56:12] members and mayor that responded back to
[5:56:14] me all said that they are are glad that
[5:56:18] they've got the data centers in their
[5:56:20] cities. Um, one of the individuals whose
[5:56:24] precinct or area the data center resides
[5:56:27] in his area said that he's never
[5:56:30] received an email complaint from any
[5:56:32] residents concerning the data centers
[5:56:35] specifically. Um, another um, council
[5:56:39] member shared with me that
[5:56:43] let's see, we're living in today in our
[5:56:45] city, we have two large centers, Aligned
[5:56:47] Energy and Nova. They're also the top
[5:56:50] two property tax entities and she shared
[5:56:53] with me the top 10 taxing entities in
[5:56:57] West Jordan. Aligned has a 2025 taxable
[5:57:01] value of 416 million.
[5:57:05] NOVA has a taxable value of 401 million.
[5:57:09] The third one is half of those and the
[5:57:12] fourth one is half of that. And so they are definitely substantial taxing
[5:57:19] entities in a city they reside. Just
[5:57:22] wanted to share that.
[5:57:25] >> Mr. Mayor.
[5:57:26] >> Yes.
[5:57:27] >> Uh just to acknowledge some things that
[5:57:29] have been said about taxable value and
[5:57:32] depreciation. I feel like I just want to
[5:57:34] say that's real. Uh we understand that
[5:57:38] there's a schedule for that. uh that
[5:57:41] varies from one type of personal
[5:57:44] property to another. And yeah, that
[5:57:47] being said, I appreciate the numbers
[5:57:48] that Jeff has shared. I understand the
[5:57:50] rationale and the logic and I think that
[5:57:52] holds true at least for year one. But we
[5:57:54] understand that the taxable value for
[5:57:58] what we're talking about here likely
[5:58:00] would not be consistent year overyear.
[5:58:04] That like Jeff described um a really
[5:58:07] expensive part of having a center. the CPUs, GPUs, whatever it is, the
[5:58:14] computation equipment in the building
[5:58:17] that depreciates rather quickly over a
[5:58:19] five or six year period of time. We also
[5:58:22] understand that typically that
[5:58:23] equipment's replaced um pretty rapidly
[5:58:26] on a fairly regular schedule. Um
[5:58:29] therefore, when that's replaced, that
[5:58:32] value then goes back to full freight and
[5:58:35] so forth. So, um, should this move
[5:58:38] forward,
[5:58:39] >> I think that's something that we'd we'd
[5:58:40] need to come up with a process to
[5:58:42] monitor and yeah, take into account as
[5:58:44] we try to predict what that revenue
[5:58:46] would look like.
[5:58:46] >> This council member Dave, to your point,
[5:58:48] she shared with me a recent article from
[5:58:50] KSL talking about that exact thing with
[5:58:54] data centers, the depreciation and and
[5:58:57] the changes, the fluctuations that take
[5:58:59] place with the with the property tax
[5:59:01] rates. Um, she said this would be an
[5:59:04] interesting read. you should read this,
[5:59:06] consider it. Just for point of fact, she
[5:59:08] says, "I have not seen any big swings in
[5:59:12] West Jordan." So, that was her firsthand
[5:59:15] experience.
[5:59:17] >> Uh, to that end, I I don't think I don't
[5:59:19] think it should be minimized either. And I appreciate Jeff, you you putting
[5:59:23] it in in a contract mode of of moving
[5:59:26] your your folks here and and and your base here. Um,
[5:59:32] again, I've been served long enough on
[5:59:34] this council to know that we have
[5:59:36] participated in private businesses to
[5:59:39] keep them in town with with tax
[5:59:43] increment financing
[5:59:46] that has kept or created jobs in our
[5:59:49] city. And those have been in the 200
[5:59:51] range of things and and the residents,
[5:59:56] we're better for it as a city. I don't
[5:59:57] look at any of those as a mistake. those
[5:59:59] were gauged, calculated, mathed to to
[6:00:04] where it was better for the city to do
[6:00:06] that. Um, so so I talked to a gentleman
[6:00:10] today that reminded me that, you know, I
[6:00:13] wouldn't certainly compare your your business to like Geneva, but he
[6:00:18] said, you know, Geneva back in the day
[6:00:19] that employed thousands of people,
[6:00:22] hundreds of those people lived in our
[6:00:24] town. And what do you think they did
[6:00:26] every Tuesday when they were paid except
[6:00:28] go to your grocery store and except buy
[6:00:31] your, you know, buy your gas and
[6:00:34] everything else. And so I don't think it
[6:00:36] should be completely minimized either
[6:00:37] that it's not just a taxing
[6:00:40] >> uh strategy here, but I I I wouldn't
[6:00:44] divulge the type of badges that were
[6:00:47] shown at NOVA the other day, but they're
[6:00:50] with companies that don't pay small
[6:00:52] wages for anything. Y
[6:00:54] >> and um and and you're talking about the
[6:00:57] largest companies in the world. And so
[6:01:00] that that dollar figure
[6:01:02] coming to our city potentially is is
[6:01:04] something that's different from the tax
[6:01:06] as well that I don't think that he
[6:01:08] thinks is just an important important
[6:01:11] thing to know.
[6:01:13] >> I keep going.
[6:01:14] >> You can keep going. Uh or Councilwoman
[6:01:17] Beck will tell you to stop.
[6:01:19] >> 12:01.
[6:01:19] >> I know it's late. I'm I'm This is really
[6:01:22] my final question and it's to Von the
[6:01:26] city attorney. So Von, this this is kind
[6:01:30] of a big one for me. And what is what
[6:01:34] are the what kind of teeth do we have in
[6:01:37] Spanish Fork legally to make sure that
[6:01:41] we're protected? If this wasn't Jeff
[6:01:42] standing here, this was Elon Musk and he
[6:01:46] had a data center that he wanted to
[6:01:48] bring to Spanish Fork and he has
[6:01:51] obviously unlimited funds to to fight
[6:01:55] whatever battle he needs to in court
[6:01:57] legally.
[6:01:59] We've talked about conditional use
[6:02:01] permit or uses with conditions and the
[6:02:05] some have requested that it go back to
[6:02:07] one or one or the other. Conditional use
[6:02:09] permit is what they're asking for. What
[6:02:11] kind of safety measures and security and
[6:02:15] teeth do we have as a city to make sure
[6:02:18] that if something were to happen and
[6:02:20] this were to go to court legally that we would be okay?
[6:02:27] » That's a difficult question to answer,
[6:02:29] but um the development agreement that
[6:02:32] we've been talking about has all those
[6:02:34] remedies in them. if they breached any
[6:02:36] of those those promises about water use
[6:02:40] or or noise etc. There's remedies in
[6:02:43] there. There's the liquidated damages.
[6:02:46] There's beyond that and more importantly
[6:02:48] I mentioned before is there's the
[6:02:51] equitable remedies of specific
[6:02:53] performance which means the court can
[6:02:55] order
[6:02:57] you know the breaching party to change
[6:03:00] you know to do something different. the
[6:03:02] court can order an injunction is it
[6:03:04] could prevent them from doing something
[6:03:05] that is violating the agreement. So
[6:03:08] those are remedies there uh already
[6:03:10] there in that agreement. Um the city
[6:03:13] already has a business license ordinance
[6:03:16] that says for repeated violations of the
[6:03:19] zoning that applies to that ordin to
[6:03:22] that business that the license can be
[6:03:24] revoked after a hearing. And so there
[6:03:28] are remedies that would and what he said
[6:03:31] about downtime that would have a serious
[6:03:33] impact um if he gets his business
[6:03:36] license revoked. So there are there are
[6:03:40] remedies both monetary damages plus the
[6:03:42] equitable remedies plus the business
[6:03:45] license revocation. There are are things
[6:03:48] that are in place
[6:03:49] >> and the likelihood if the if and I'm not
[6:03:52] saying this would happen. I'm just
[6:03:53] saying worst case scenario. If it were
[6:03:56] to go to court
[6:03:58] and an injunction, that's a bigger word
[6:04:00] than I know at midnight. But that were
[6:04:03] to be that were to take place, a judge
[6:04:06] could basically say, "You guys need to
[6:04:07] stop business until you take care of
[6:04:09] these issues."
[6:04:10] >> I don't know what they might order. He
[6:04:11] might order stop doing the thing that's
[6:04:13] violating the contract, like stop using
[6:04:16] so much water if that's the issue or um
[6:04:20] generating so much noise. And if they
[6:04:22] don't stop, what would next steps be?
[6:04:24] >> Then they've faced contempt of court
[6:04:27] for violating the judge's order.
[6:04:30] >> Is there a world in which they wouldn't
[6:04:31] side with us?
[6:04:33] >> Yeah, I'm sure there is. I'm not, you
[6:04:35] know, I can't predict a future,
[6:04:37] especially on a hypothetical like that,
[6:04:39] but I mean, that's the way things work
[6:04:41] in litigation. You're pursuing them for
[6:04:44] breach of contract and you have the
[6:04:45] remedies that the contract specifies,
[6:04:48] >> but we as a city would have control over
[6:04:50] the business license.
[6:04:51] If we
[6:04:52] >> right that would be an administrative
[6:04:54] process. You know, you have to give them
[6:04:55] the due process of notice and a hearing
[6:04:58] and and then we have to prove that
[6:05:01] they're you know the repeated violations
[6:05:03] of the zoning the title 15 amendments
[6:05:05] we're talking about.
[6:05:06] >> Is it a monetary fine for a business to
[6:05:09] function or run without a business
[6:05:11] license?
[6:05:11] >> There is. That's a that's a state code
[6:05:13] violation. It's criminal violation. Um
[6:05:16] so they can be prosecuted for that and
[6:05:18] there is a fine but it's insignificant.
[6:05:22] Okay.
[6:05:23] Thank you.
[6:05:26] >> Good questions.
[6:05:28] >> Kevin, can I just ask one just came to
[6:05:31] mind the legal topic? So, someone
[6:05:33] earlier this evening asked about a I
[6:05:35] believe it was a lawsuit that Valition's
[6:05:36] currently involved in. Is that
[6:05:39] >> Oh, is it Bloom? Okay.
[6:05:41] >> I hadn't heard about that.
[6:05:44] There's uh when a company's public,
[6:05:48] you have shareholders,
[6:05:51] uh investors, it's not uncommon that um
[6:05:55] you know, there are entities that would
[6:05:56] benefit to see a stock decrease. So, you
[6:06:00] know, allegations don't always u mean
[6:06:03] that they're true. You know that. And so
[6:06:06] yeah, you can you can dig up litigation
[6:06:09] in various stages on pretty much any any
[6:06:12] public company.
[6:06:14] >> Landon, just to add to that, I did look
[6:06:16] into some of this.
[6:06:17] >> Yeah.
[6:06:17] >> A lot of the allegations that are being
[6:06:20] thrown out against Bloom are individuals
[6:06:23] that short stocks to try and
[6:06:26] >> Wow.
[6:06:27] >> to try and stock
[6:06:29] >> make money.
[6:06:30] >> Yeah. you try and put bad news out about about a business knowing that
[6:06:35] you shorted it with the intent of trying
[6:06:37] to make money off the stock market. So
[6:06:39] that's what I've researched with some of
[6:06:41] these should be
[6:06:42] >> I'm not saying whether it's true or not.
[6:06:43] I've not looked at the case. I don't
[6:06:45] know all the details just from the
[6:06:47] articles that I've read. Those are some
[6:06:49] things that have been pointed out
[6:06:50] >> that's what they're litigating. To be
[6:06:52] super clear, we're not even thinking
[6:06:54] about approving a technology that Jeff
[6:06:56] has to use, whether it's Bloom or Bloom
[6:06:59] 6 or whatever. We're going to give him
[6:07:02] some performance criteria he has to
[6:07:03] meet. We're going to hold him
[6:07:04] accountable that criteria and you're
[6:07:05] going to choose the technology you need
[6:07:07] to use.
[6:07:08] >> We should not be weighing in on the
[6:07:09] technology you should or should not use.
[6:07:11] >> Right.
[6:07:12] >> Yeah.
[6:07:13] >> But it's late.
[6:07:15] >> But you did get me nervous about some
[6:07:16] lawsuit against us that I didn't know
[6:07:18] about. I could have sworn somebody said
[6:07:20] it was against valition. I'm sorry to
[6:07:22] get you on the conversation.
[6:07:23] >> Yeah.
[6:07:24] >> I'm glad to hear that's not the case.
[6:07:25] >> Yes. Right.
[6:07:27] >> Thank you, Jeff. Appreciate you taking
[6:07:29] our questions here into the wee hours of
[6:07:31] the morning and and uh and and um the
[6:07:35] last three days or three days last week
[6:07:38] of taking questions and
[6:07:39] >> and we'll continue uh asking those
[6:07:41] questions and u appreciate your
[6:07:44] presentation tonight.
[6:07:45] >> So, it's late at night. You know how you
[6:07:46] get punchy, you know, late at night.
[6:07:48] Yeah.
[6:07:49] Um, if you want to know the PG-13
[6:07:54] number one online comment that was
[6:07:57] lobbed at us, I could share it, but it's
[6:07:59] it is PG-13.
[6:08:00] >> It's fascinating.
[6:08:01] >> We're all for it.
[6:08:03] >> I think there is no rating requirements
[6:08:06] after midnight.
[6:08:07] >> I'm seeing some seeing some shaking of
[6:08:09] heads over here like don't do it. Don't
[6:08:11] do it. You can tell us offline.
[6:08:16] >> Oh, you missed a good one. Okay, we'll
[6:08:17] do it later.
[6:08:19] >> We should remind you there are two other
[6:08:21] agenda items still. So, when these guys
[6:08:23] all get up and walk out, we still have
[6:08:24] at least two more items to deal with
[6:08:26] tonight.
[6:08:26] >> Good point.
[6:08:27] >> If there's someone here that wants to
[6:08:28] talk about parking and has sat through
[6:08:30] all of this,
[6:08:31] >> the parking,
[6:08:32] >> it's more the detached ADU and parking,
[6:08:35] but still. Yeah.
[6:08:37] >> We even have candy bars in our drawers.
[6:08:39] Does anyone need chocolate before you go
[6:08:41] home?
[6:08:42] >> It's 12:010.
[6:08:44] Everyone just go home.
[6:08:45] >> Chocolate.
[6:08:46] Okay. Um, we still have a couple of
[6:08:49] items as Seth pointed out on the agenda.
[6:08:52] >> So, we
[6:08:54] >> do we want to talk about
[6:08:56] >> No, we don't. But do we want to talk
[6:08:57] about how we get to some resolution on
[6:09:00] some title 15 stuff? Do you guys want to
[6:09:02] say,
[6:09:03] >> hey, did you
[6:09:05] >> six hours ago?
[6:09:06] >> I know you said we should talk about it,
[6:09:07] but did we talk about
[6:09:09] >> No, we haven't decided on what.
[6:09:10] >> So, do you want to do you want to give
[6:09:12] us a couple of you to come and sit down
[6:09:14] with staff? Do you want staff to just
[6:09:17] guess what's in your head? Uh, I'd
[6:09:19] rather
[6:09:19] >> I thought we said we're going to compile
[6:09:20] our notes and send it to somebody.
[6:09:22] >> You're going to compile your notes and
[6:09:23] send it to us by when
[6:09:25] >> that we did not talk about that.
[6:09:27] >> Our notes.
[6:09:28] >> Well, your thoughts. So, I think from
[6:09:31] the public's perspective and mine, if
[6:09:33] you're talking about concerns that you
[6:09:35] have with title 15,
[6:09:37] >> I think it would be helpful to know what
[6:09:39] those are.
[6:09:39] >> Yeah. So, one one of mine is is having a
[6:09:42] limit of two. I would rather just start
[6:09:44] with one and if we decide down the road
[6:09:46] it worked well then we can change it but
[6:09:49] I don't think we need to put two in the
[6:09:51] condition at this point.
[6:09:52] >> I will write down all my concerns with
[6:09:53] title 15 by which day would you want
[6:09:56] them by?
[6:09:56] >> Which day can you have them to
[6:09:58] >> all your concerns at title 15
[6:09:59] >> in all of my title concerns.
[6:10:01] >> That's a lot.
[6:10:02] >> That's a big document.
[6:10:03] >> I'd say 48 hours.
[6:10:05] >> Okay. Dave, will you
[6:10:07] >> So is that by Friday because it's
[6:10:09] Wednesday now.
[6:10:10] >> Okay.
[6:10:12] Send them to Dave and Von and me
[6:10:14] >> by the end of this week
[6:10:15] >> by Wow,
[6:10:17] >> it's it's Wednesday.
[6:10:19] >> Exactly.
[6:10:20] >> Monday A.M. is as good as Friday PM.
[6:10:23] >> That is true.
[6:10:24] >> Yeah. He's probably not looking at it
[6:10:26] Friday at 5. So by Monday.
[6:10:28] >> So Dave, Seth, and Von just send those
[6:10:30] to us. We can compile those and we'll
[6:10:32] give you we'll just put them together
[6:10:34] and you can start to see each other's
[6:10:36] comments. Okay.
[6:10:37] >> Deal. If we don't hear from you by
[6:10:40] Monday morning at 8 a.m. Tik Tok, the
[6:10:43] game's locked. Is that
[6:10:44] >> We're gonna have a conversation at
[6:10:45] That's right. another one up here.
[6:10:47] >> Okay. Thank you. We'll work with that.
[6:10:49] >> Do you uh
[6:10:52] Is it a requirement to to to table an
[6:10:55] issue like this? The public hearings
[6:10:57] done.
[6:10:59] >> Um
[6:11:00] >> Dave, you wanted you want a motion to
[6:11:01] table?
[6:11:01] >> I'm just used to that. Okay. So,
[6:11:03] >> all right. Motion to table till
[6:11:05] September one.
[6:11:06] >> Yeah. If you guys that is the next
[6:11:08] council meeting is September one.
[6:11:10] >> So if there's somebody that want would
[6:11:12] like to make a motion to that end that's
[6:11:15] the next time that we would talk in the
[6:11:18] public about this together.
[6:11:21] >> I'll move that we table agenda items
[6:11:25] item 7.3 ordinance to amend title 15
[6:11:30] >> motion.
[6:11:31] >> And do I need to state until when?
[6:11:32] >> Yeah state that day usually likes that.
[6:11:35] >> You don't have to. But just table and we
[6:11:37] put on the agenda.
[6:11:38] >> Okay.
[6:11:38] >> Motion made by Councilman Oiler.
[6:11:42] >> Second.
[6:11:42] by Councilman Tuk. Uh roll call
[6:11:45] vote here. Councilman Marshall?
[6:11:47] >> Yes.
[6:11:47] >> Councilwoman Beck. Councilman Oiler?
[6:11:49] Yes.
[6:11:49] >> Councilman Carden?
[6:11:51] >> Yes.
[6:11:51] >> And Councilman Tuk?
[6:11:52] >> Yes.
[6:11:53] >> Okay. Item 7.3 is tabled. Thank you.
[6:11:58] >> Dave, you're taking us back to 7.1.
[6:12:00] >> Detached accessory dwelling units.
[6:12:04] >> That's it.
[6:12:06] state law changed with the last
[6:12:08] legislative session. So, we need to make
[6:12:11] one slight change to title 15 relative
[6:12:14] to uh the parking that's required for
[6:12:17] small detached accessory dwelling units
[6:12:20] or properties with small detached
[6:12:23] accessory dwelling units. The proposed
[6:12:25] change would would do that and bring us
[6:12:27] into conformity with state code. Uh both
[6:12:31] the development review committee and
[6:12:32] planning commission have recommended
[6:12:33] this that this be approved. Cities have
[6:12:35] until the 1 of October of this year to
[6:12:38] bring their zoning codes into compliance
[6:12:40] with this. So if you act on it tonight,
[6:12:42] we'll be well ahead of that deadline.
[6:12:45] >> Questions for Dave before public hearing
[6:12:47] for something that we have to clean up
[6:12:49] for state code?
[6:12:52] Okay. If there's not, I'd entertain a
[6:12:53] motion to go into public hearing for
[6:12:54] 7.1.
[6:12:56] >> So moved.
[6:12:57] >> Motion made by Councilman Carden.
[6:12:59] Second.
[6:13:00] >> Second by Councilman Tuk. All in favor
[6:13:02] say yes.
[6:13:02] >> Yes.
[6:13:03] >> We're in public hearing for 7.1 title 15
[6:13:05] modifying the parking requirements for
[6:13:08] ADUs smaller than 650 ft. Anybody from
[6:13:11] the public that would like to speak to
[6:13:13] this item? Seeing none, I'd entertain a
[6:13:15] motion to go out of public hearing.
[6:13:17] >> So moved.
[6:13:18] >> Motion made by Councilman Marshall.
[6:13:20] >> Second by Councilwoman Beck. All in
[6:13:22] favor say yes.
[6:13:23] >> Yes.
[6:13:24] >> Discussion back up here. Anybody want to
[6:13:26] take a stab at
[6:13:29] questions, comments, or a
[6:13:32] uh proposal for 7.1
[6:13:36] to approve the ordinance to amend title
[6:13:37] 15 to change requirements of detach
[6:13:39] accessory dwelling units.
[6:13:40] >> Motion made by Councilman Carden.
[6:13:42] >> Second.
[6:13:43] by Councilman Marshall. Roll call
[6:13:45] vote. Councilwoman Beck. Yes. Councilman
[6:13:47] Oiler. Yes. Councilman Carden. Yes.
[6:13:49] Councilman Tuk. Yes. And Councilman
[6:13:51] Marshall.
[6:13:51] >> Yes.
[6:13:52] >> 7.1 is approved.
[6:13:54] takes us to new business of our agenda.
[6:13:57] Uh interlocal cooperation agreement for
[6:13:59] building inspection and plan review
[6:14:01] services. This has to do well. Where's
[6:14:04] the Mapleton City? Do we have any
[6:14:05] Mapleton folks that hung about? This is
[6:14:08] left
[6:14:10] >> at the request of Mapleton City.
[6:14:13] >> Exactly. Yes. Uh Mapleton City
[6:14:15] approached our building official a few
[6:14:16] months ago. uh and he John Little has
[6:14:20] worked with um our colleagues in
[6:14:22] Mapleton.
[6:14:24] Van I believe your office has looked
[6:14:26] this agreement over um and in short it
[6:14:29] sets forth provisions that would allow
[6:14:31] our inspectors to do inspections in
[6:14:33] Mapleton and conceivably vice versa. Um
[6:14:36] provided that uh communities are
[6:14:39] compensated
[6:14:40] uh in accordance with the agreement. Uh
[6:14:43] we are required by state law to have
[6:14:47] multiple different options for
[6:14:52] uh certified inspectors to perform
[6:14:54] building inspections in Spanish Fork. We
[6:14:58] haven't used those options very often in
[6:15:01] recent years. Typically cities will have
[6:15:03] contracts with uh private contractors
[6:15:06] and that sort of a thing as we do but
[6:15:08] also occasionally they will have
[6:15:11] interlocal agreements like this to have
[6:15:14] u that type of resource available should
[6:15:17] it be needed for any reason. I think the
[6:15:19] motivation there is to simply make sure
[6:15:21] that um there's not an impediment to
[6:15:24] inspections being performed
[6:15:27] um with immediiacy as they're needed as
[6:15:31] things are being built.
[6:15:34] >> They've cities helping cities.
[6:15:37] >> I love the city's help and see you. I
[6:15:39] think that's awesome. There are two
[6:15:40] private contractors that also perform
[6:15:42] the service for Spanish city. How does
[6:15:45] the distribution of the service work?
[6:15:48] Who who decides who gets called? Is it a
[6:15:52] list? Is it rotating? Um,
[6:15:55] do we not use it enough to know?
[6:15:59] >> We haven't used so, excuse me, Sunrise
[6:16:02] Engineering and Shums Kota,
[6:16:06] we have not used them that I'm aware of
[6:16:08] ever. So, we have contracts in place
[6:16:11] with them because the state requires us
[6:16:14] to have an arrangement with three. Uh
[6:16:17] it's coincidental Germaine to the
[6:16:19] discussion though that uh the third
[6:16:22] party that we contracted with that we
[6:16:25] did use very regularly, you guys know
[6:16:28] Chris Winson, I think probably a lot of
[6:16:31] you.
[6:16:31] >> Um he was our go-to and we would use him
[6:16:36] for probably a few hundred hours a year
[6:16:38] and had pretty consistently over the
[6:16:40] course of the past I would say 12 or 13
[6:16:44] years. he is now the building official
[6:16:47] in Mapleton. So, he is no longer
[6:16:50] available for us as that resource that
[6:16:52] we'd used him so much for. Um, so that
[6:16:55] partly is why now we have this
[6:16:57] agreement.
[6:16:58] >> Yeah.
[6:17:00] uh you might want to think about a
[6:17:02] process to put in writing that says
[6:17:05] we're going to rotate through here or
[6:17:07] Mapleton's our first call and then we'll
[6:17:09] rotate the two private just to make sure
[6:17:11] that no one's going to say, "Hey, so and
[6:17:13] so only picks X."
[6:17:16] >> That's a great thought. Um our building
[6:17:18] inspections, frankly, they're starting
[6:17:20] to pick back up after having had kind of
[6:17:22] a loft for the last 18 months or so. Um,
[6:17:26] I think that that's that's a timely
[6:17:28] suggestion. Okay.
[6:17:32] » You want to make that suggestion in a
[6:17:34] motion or are you that worried about it?
[6:17:36] >> If if staff says they're going to write
[6:17:38] a policy or process in place, I'm fine
[6:17:40] with it.
[6:17:42] >> Okay.
[6:17:42] >> We don't it's going to end up being
[6:17:44] somebody, right, that isn't trying to do
[6:17:47] anything that's going to get accused of
[6:17:48] it. So, I think to protect our
[6:17:50] employees, put something in place they
[6:17:51] can follow.
[6:17:52] >> They don't all charge the same. I will
[6:17:54] say that. So, by way of our go-tos, that
[6:17:58] has a lot to do with that decision. So,
[6:18:01] >> I would bet that the contract mechanism
[6:18:03] didn't say we're going to pick the
[6:18:05] cheapest one.
[6:18:07] >> So, just write something down. This is
[6:18:09] the process we're going to do.
[6:18:10] >> And and maybe for not necessarily what
[6:18:13] you're saying, but for the public that
[6:18:15] eventually watches this part of the
[6:18:17] meeting.
[6:18:19] Um,
[6:18:21] we have to have these because if we
[6:18:23] don't get to a an inspection within 72
[6:18:26] hours, then then we can pull the rip
[6:18:28] cord or the the builder can.
[6:18:30] >> Uh, our policy is to do to do
[6:18:32] inspections. Uh, we get it within 24
[6:18:35] hours except for on a weekend and maybe
[6:18:38] that is then, you know, if you call on Friday, you may not have the
[6:18:42] inspection till the next business day,
[6:18:44] which is Monday. Uh I think you've most
[6:18:46] often used that individual you mentioned
[6:18:48] when we have two of our inspectors that
[6:18:51] go on vacation at a time and so then you
[6:18:53] have that hold. So I think that's the
[6:18:54] window of time where we would use
[6:18:56] >> frankly I would say taking what Shane is
[6:18:58] saying I would say to you let's
[6:19:00] >> let's use this one and see how they do
[6:19:04] and let's use that one and see how they
[6:19:06] do like we need to
[6:19:07] >> if there's a there's some performance
[6:19:08] criteria in the contracts. Absolutely.
[6:19:10] That's
[6:19:10] >> we want to know how they see our code
[6:19:11] and how they call the code.
[6:19:12] >> Sure.
[6:19:12] >> Yeah. I think the having them on call
[6:19:15] like that is really important.
[6:19:17] Otherwise, we'd be hiring a third person
[6:19:18] or whatever to have on staff and we'd be
[6:19:21] over staffed. So, this is a perfect way
[6:19:22] of handling the the issue
[6:19:24] >> to just make it fair and and transparent
[6:19:27] so that we all know how they're getting
[6:19:28] selected.
[6:19:30] >> We'll do.
[6:19:31] >> Good stuff. Thank you, David.
[6:19:33] >> Great for that.
[6:19:34] >> Thank you.
[6:19:35] >> Uh I would uh entertain a motion for
[6:19:38] item
[6:19:40] Jeez, sorry, guys.
[6:19:42] 8
[6:19:42] >> 8.1
[6:19:43] >> is it just 8
[6:19:44] >> 81 8.1
[6:19:46] >> new business 8.1 I would to entertain a
[6:19:48] motion
[6:19:49] >> I move to approve the interlocal
[6:19:50] cooperation agreement for building
[6:19:52] inspection and plan reuse services
[6:19:54] >> motion made by Councilman Marshall
[6:19:56] >> second by Councilman Carden a roll call
[6:19:59] vote here Councilman Tuk yes
[6:20:01] >> Councilman Carden Oiler yes
[6:20:03] >> Councilwoman Beck
[6:20:04] >> yes
[6:20:04] >> Councilman Marshall
[6:20:05] >> yes
[6:20:06] >> that's approved
[6:20:08] are we adjourning to close session we
[6:20:09] are not adjourning to close session we
[6:20:11] are adjourning ing council meeting. I
[6:20:13] would entertain a motion to adjurnn.
[6:20:15] >> So moved.
[6:20:16] >> Motion made by Councilman Carden.
[6:20:17] >> Second by Councilman Tuk. All in favor
[6:20:19] say yes. Yes. We're adjourned. Thank you
[6:20:22] all for joining