City Council Zoning Meeting - Regular Meeting

But they know how to code. So they're getting to see topics like that from people that work with coding every single day. They're getting to meet with some of our Accenture leadership, which honestly, we find a lot of value that they just hear about their career paths, whether that be their entire lives from high school to now, some of the courses that they took in college to be able to get to the point that they're at today. So really just those hands on kind of tactical skills or what they learn during industry days. What I would like to emphasize about the importance of exposing the high school youth to our industry is that there's no direct path to get here, and that is the beautiful thing about it.

You do not have to go to college and major in computer science or coding or, you know, get an MBA. Those things matter and those things are, of course, important, but everyone's path is different and that's something that we value. You know, we've talked about today how people that we work with, they have history majors or political science, just educational paths that you would not think that lead up to a career like this, but it does, and it's all valuable.

I think it's just giving them another outlet, something different that they may not be familiar with, and it really gives you confidence.

I like that She Built the City has a saying, like, when there's not a seat for you at the table, build one.

When you put together a chair or anything on your own, you're making the cuts, you're measuring, all those things, like, build your confidence in what you can do. Like, if I can do that, then

I can do this, and

it's just a trickle down effect.

I really want to own my own hair salon one day because I like to do hair. So I think I know more more stuff about business now and I think it'll work out pretty well. The program is to teach you how to be a better person in life and teach you how to work with tools. Not only it's a man job, but it could be for women and girls.

I hope the the community sees that we're putting in a lot of work just to make sure we're building a better, Charlotte's future.

Thank you all for being a part of this meeting today, and thank you for taking your time and energy around. I do want to say one thing, you know, I've got a little bit of a change in my life, and I just want to make sure that all of you are aware, and I'm just so grateful for the number of people that have been so supportive of me making a decision that was probably the most difficult thing that I've ever had

to do. But if you saw my little girls, oh my gosh, you'd

just know I was doing the right thing. So thank you all. I really appreciate it. Stop. You're going to make me feel like I'm in church.

So I want to say thank you. I mean, it's it's just amazing, and I don't know that I'd ever stop loving this city like I do now. So thank you so very much. But today, that's not what you guys came for. You came for real work and real opportunities to talk with all of us that we are in terms of our meetings and things. So I wanna say I'm gonna call our meeting to order, and we are going to start with our action preview, and we're gonna start our action preview with the city manager.

Did say Introductions?

Oh, introductions. You know You

just know who we

are, you

know. Maybe they

should know.

Maybe everyone should know, that's why. So let's move around. We'll start with our city clerk, staff person, and then we'll come around, and you'll get to know everyone else. Alright?

Victoria

Watlington at large. Joy Mayo representing District 3.

Good afternoon and happy bike month. Dante Anderson district one.

Good evening everybody. James Mitchell, mayor Proteo.

Good evening and thank you. I am Vi Louth.

Marcus Jones, city manager.

Kimberly Owens representing District

Malcolm Graham, District 2.

Ed Driggs, District 7. Good evening. Luana Mayfield, serving you at large.

Good evening. JD Masuela Arias, proudly representing the East Side District 5.

Good evening. Renee Johnson, and I'm honored to represent District 4.

Alright. Well, thank you mayor, members of council. We have two items in our action preview tonight. There'll be discussion about data centers as well as the MPTA transition update. And mayor, if you'd like to, we can go to the consent and wipe that out before we go into those

two idea. Thank you for making that possible for us. Let's go ahead and take it in.

Thank you. And good evening, madam mayor and council. Marie Harris with Strategy and Budget. And I've had a chance to get a couple questions from a few of you, but I was wondering at this time, was there any additional questions on any consent items that I could

Yes? Can't see where Johnson had a hand on. Miss Johnson, yes, please.

Okay, I'd like to pull item number 34. Please. 34.

Let's see. Which one is 34? That one. Okay. So I don't have the full document for it, so, miss we'll continue. Alright. And miss Mayfield?

Thank you, madam mayor. I would like to pull number 30 31 for separate voting and discussion.

3031 Yes, ma'am. 31. Right? Yes, ma'am. So, again, let's go ahead and start out with miss Johnson, who I think was the first to request that. So miss Johnson.

Thank you, madam mayor. I have a question about item number 34. In item 34, the last paragraph refers to the disadvantaged business enterprise And in accordance with US DOT interim final rule dated 10/03/2025, d b o DBE goals cannot be established on contracts executed after 10/03/2025. I understand that due to the federal policies,

but I

wanna know how does that affect our CBI program.

Yes, ma'am. If I may. So it does not affect our CBI. So that's a good point. Our c that this is a different program, the federal level. But for for locally funded, we still have an active CBI program in place, so it's separate. Okay.

Thank you. Thank you. Alright. If that completes miss Rose I mean, that completes you, miss Johnson?

Yes, ma'am.

Alright. Miss Mayfield, let's start with item 34.

Mine is actually gonna be item 30 number thirty and thirty one that I was pulling for a separate vote when the time came. But if we're moving forward now, item number 30, water and sanitary sewer service installation. Tonight, this is a request to approve a contract in the amount of $8,585,958.70. The challenge that I have is even though this is new, and thank you, Marie, as well as mister Powers for additional information with us moving this type of bid forward, our CBI team identified a 10% goal. That our established goals really are the bare minimums.

So for a 10% minimum goal to be identified, yet the commitment is 4.26%, which is less than $370,000. It's 365,500, so we'll say $366,000 out of, $8,600,000 contract. I have very clear concerns that community is understanding the opportunities that we have of not only protecting but growing our small businesses when we read reports that consistently speak of small businesses being the backbone and that being the true job creator when our larger corporate partners are laying off hundreds of individuals at a time to have, again, a $8,600,000 contract before us that has a commitment of less than 367, much less $400,000. To me, honestly, it's extremely disrespectful to what we have said as a council and what we have told the community. When we move to vote, I would like this as a separate vote because I will be voting no against this.

We must figure out how to do a much better job when a bare minimum has been identified and that bare minimum was 10%. If you can't even commit to supporting and protecting our residents who are taxpayers here and who small business owners, that's something we need to be taking into consideration as we seek to put out bids. I do realize that we had about five or so bids out there. One of them that did meet that 10% goal was also, I believe, around $16,000,000 more. That's ridiculous.

But to tell, it's hard for me to understand that out of almost $9,000,000, the best you could do is say that there's opportunity for a small business multiple small businesses that will equate to this amount. The concerns are gonna be the same for number 31, mayor.

Mhmm.

For state utility contractors. This one is an amendment. Tonight, we're being asked to support an amendment for $4,317,453. What was committed for this scope of work, which is also as we move forward and for community for you to understand with these type of projects, the city will negotiate contract participation for design build contracts after the scope of work is defined, which means you may have the opportunity to build upon it. The challenge that I have is what is noted is that state utility contractors has committed 136,125, which is the equivalent of 3.15% of the contract.

Again, on a $4,317,453 contract, and that minimum amount is split between multiple companies. When we are in a city that is quickly becoming unaffordable for many, that is also extremely disrespectful as far as I'm concerned and what what is the message that we're sending to these so called partners. Now I do recognize that one when this contract was originally approved, one of the partners, Stewart, was a minority owned company. Well, they sold. So as far as I'm concerned, that should have triggered an additional opportunity conversation because you sold your business, and it is no longer a majority MWSBE, whether that's minority women's small business enterprise.

So what that created was a reduction in the low participation that was already there. We want companies to grow. If you choose to scale and sell, we want you to have that ability, but not on the backs of our dollars. So I, again, for number thirty and thirty one, I wanna make sure that the record reflects it, that I will be a no with very specific reasoning. Because if we do not take the opportunity to stand by the goals after many years of discussion, paying for reports to be done, paying for studies to be done.

If our language is not gonna support our small businesses, I think we're doing a disservice to all of our partners that go through our trainings, receive our certifications, and that step into this with a genuine desire of good faith. Alright. Thank you.

Madam mayor, if I may, Angela Charles would choke me off. I don't bring out a point for her for it.

You'll bring to us.

For contract the one she mentioned, miss Mayfield's points are valid for water and sewer service installations. However, just please note before, they self performed these, so there was no goal. They got a waiver. So this is a rolling ongoing, not just a brand new. So they were trying to test the market, and this was an aspirational 10% goal. But just know this at least we have some goal and we're working. So CVI is working on a more calculated formula specific to these. But prior to this, they had no participation.

I'm gonna give the manager an opportunity to, talk about this.

Madam mayor, before just for clarification so we're all on the same page, and I do appreciate that, miss Harris, because mister Powers and I had that conversation. Again, we have the opportunity to do something new, so we're either gonna try to do it right or we're not. So for staff to identify a 10%, we already know historically staff is very conservative with trying to identify the companies. If they were able to identify that there might be opportunity and 10% being the bare minimum, coming in at 4%, coming in with really the what could be considered the salary of one employee in today's market in our city. I think we have opportunity if we say we're going to break up these contracts to get more participation.

That participation should not be pennies on the dollar where it actually costs the company more to wanna do business with the city than it actually benefits them. Mister manager? Mister manager?

Thank you, mayor, members of council, And council member Mayfield, thank you for your passion around this. I also wanna give you credit for something that's very important and to this council. And years ago, these projects were just low bid, but you've created these alternative methods like construction manager at risk and design build projects. And just on the docket tonight, you have animal care and control, which has a 18% small I mean, 18% MBE and WSB goal. You have the NASCAR Hall of Fame that has a 22% MBE and WSB goal.

You have the Remont Road, West Boulevard intersection improvements, a 20% MBEWSB goal, and 25% for the River District Firehouse forty four. And without these different types of tools in the toolbox, we may have had continuations of the conversation you had earlier. So just some of your policies have changed the way that we're able to have participation. So thank you.

All right. Thank you very much on this, to explain that and the opportunity that we can learn more about what we do on our own. So, Ms. Johnson.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'd like to piggyback off what Councilmember Mayfield is is asking. Can we get a report of the c b I guidelines or contracts per department? Are we able to get that? Can you share that with us?

And the reason I ask is because I've heard from a contractor specifically that has a contract with City Water and I remember there was a minority company that won a bid and they both all bids were over budget and the RFP was rescinded and this was a minority business that had won a contract that had had never gone to a minority owner before. And so I asked at that time, I I shared some concern and asked how often does that happen. So I'd I'd like to just just see by department how we're doing as far as meeting our c b I goals. If you can share that with counsel, I think that would be helpful. Thank you.

Any other questions or comments? Hearing none, let's move on to our next item.

Which would Madam Mayor, I think would be a motion for consent 24

The

comments. 43 with the exception of 35 has been deferred to the next meeting. So it's coming off the agenda, and I believe miss Mayfield would want to and I believe miss Mayfield wanted thirty and thirty one voted on Yes.

So moved. We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Hearing no further discussion, all in favor, please raise your hand. Anyone opposed? Alright, so that passes. So

thank And

now we can move forward with Ms. Mayfield. Do you want to vote together on thirty and thirty one?

Is it have

to go to the next part.

So number 30, we need a

motion Motion. And what I am going

to motion for number 30, the water and sanitary service. Sewer service installation. Honestly, I would like to motion for a deferral and get us get support for us to have the opportunity to really identify if we have if this MWSVE established goal is accurate. And if not, why? In order to give opportunity, I don't want to deny it, but I would like to motion for a deferral.

Second. Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any further conversation or requests? Hearing none. Oh, I'm sorry. Miss Ajmira?

Is this time sensitive or is it okay if you were late till the next business comes?

It can wait a few more weeks. Okay.

Alright. So that addresses your question. All right. So now let's see where we're going to go through.

We say we received a motion and a second. Thank you, Mr. Mayfield.

Need to vote. So we have to vote all in favor? Okay. Anyone opposed? I think that was unanimous. Thank you. No. Mr. Driggs, did you raise your hand?

It's got there late.

The last minute.

Okay. Thank you very much.

And now, mad madam mayor, can we consider item 31, please?

Yes, please. 31, water sanitary from Charlotte Water. Miss Mayfield?

Thank you, madam mayor. Also, for action item for number 31, I am asking for a deferral. This is to approve a contract amendment for the $4,317,453 to state utility contractors that has a commitment of 3.15% of the contract, is a 136,125. I am asking for a deferral.

Second. Alright. We have a motion and a second.

So that would delay the project, but it's not it it wouldn't be the end of the world, but it would delay the project.

Madam mayor, that's that's gonna be my question. Is there any kind of time sensitivity around this particular project? So this would could someone from Charlotte Water answer? Would would it cause a delay, and how significant of a delay?

Yeah. Good evening, mayor, members of council. David Zur, deputy director. With Charlotte Water, it would cause a delay. We have this contractor already, out doing other work for us, but if it's the council's pleasure to defer it, we can keep them, busy on some other work.

Alright. Miss Mayfield? Thank you, madam mayor. So we've had this conversation, I would say earlier this year, regarding projects being brought before us that may be time sensitive. There it creates a challenge if the expectation that everything that comes before us is supposed to be a yes.

Council has three options. Vote to approve, vote to deny, vote to defer. If there are questions or concerns, the fact that any project that comes before us that doesn't even allow for a deferral in order to receive additional information should be a concern. Yes. Right now across the city, we are having a number of water main breaks, a number of items community wise, including a elder that reached out to me earlier today that has had water running in front of their condo.

But we also just approved two Mondays ago a list of partners that we have identified to help with addressing all the water related concerns. We're also, unfortunately, across the region, looking at we're going to experience a drought. I have great concern that a project is brought before us that says that there's no timeline for us to have a discussion about it when we just approved two Mondays ago multiple additional partners that's going to be helping us to address some of our water related needs. So to have this particular contract that was in the design phase to come in and say, well, unless we approve this $4,317,453 tonight, they're not gonna be able to move forward. And on top of that, you're offering out of that $4,317,453 an additional $136 and 125 $136,125, which is not even the equivalent our workforce salary that is needed in the city, and that amount is split between four different companies.

My colleagues, continue to vote how you tend however you see fit. I think it's concerning that to say to defer this to get additional information, that should be concerning because we should never be in a position where the expectation is to automatically be a yes because then you're telling me I only have two options, and that is either to vote yes or to vote no. And whereas I am trying to say versus voting no, let's have a deferral to get a little bit more information. Now if the at question is that I need to make a motion to vote no, I would gladly do that versus a deferral which would give time for conversation. But ultimately, it takes six plus votes. Thank you, madam mayor.

So, madam mayor, could I follow-up? Because So we have Mayfield jumped in there. Was still I I just wanted to continue with my

Yes. I I hear that. So, miss Anderson? Thank

you. And thank you for your answer. Here's my perspective, miss Mayfield. I agree with you. I'm getting lots of calls as well about water main breaks and effectively down broken areas within our system.

And we did, in fact, just vote to delay something, just previously. So these the all of these projects are not necessarily time sensitive, but given our system and what's going on and the urgency, I I'd like to see us advance this so Charlotte Water can continue to upgrade the system and make sure that we don't have any breakages additional breakages, especially during this time where we're experiencing a drought and could potentially be wasting water through a breakage on the street that can't be used by residents. So I I hope that we'd advance this particular project. Thank you, madam mayor. So

I I think wanted to have

miss Charles who has walked in on this. Could we have her address the concerns that we're having? Miss Charles?

Good evening, mayor council. Angela Charles, director of Charlotte Water. I just came in because, deputy director Zaire is correct. We are trying to increase capacity for water main repair due to the drought. We're trying to decrease our time frame.

Okay.

So I I I perfectly under understand, council member Mayfield, about the time to defer. We're just in a situation where we are trying to increase our contractor capacity.

All right. Any other thank you for your comments. I think I had after Ms. Johnson, did you Ms. Drake, sorry.

Ms. Drake. Yes. I think maybe this situation has come about because of the urgency of the situation. This went out on, what, Thursday night? This agenda was published. So did you try to get answers to your questions since then in order Well, for no, us it's to able

on vacation. So I came back

and asked All right. My That's not okay. I'm just saying there was an opportunity for people to read this and address questions to staff try to get answers to those And I believe if it's at all harmful to the project, in the current water environment, that we should move ahead with this and note your concerns so that the staff may recognize situations where questions like that are going to arise in the future and address them earlier. I I hope we can approve this tonight.

Thank you. Alright. Miss Johnson?

Thank you, madam mayor. I had a question about the the dates. What's the date that this contract is supposed to begin?

It's upon approval. Correct? Yes.

Okay. So then if we wait another week, you're saying it it delays the projects by a week or so?

It would be until your next business meeting, which is,

yeah, two weeks, three weeks.

Okay. Excuse me. And then my next question is, can we have the report that I asked for earlier from mister Jones before we make a a decision if we decide to defer this, if we can have that information to consider prior to that. Thank you.

Can I answer I I I thought you let me make sure I understand your question? You want the MWSBE percentage

Yes.

For Charlotte Water. In f y twenty five, it was $65,700,000.

I just wanted it for all of the departments, if we can get that. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you very much. Mister Jones, I think that ends this discussion. Before let's have a motion. Is miss Mayfield? We did. We have

a motion and a second.

Okay. We have a motion. All in favor? I'm sorry.

Mayor, just point of, information, what is the motion that's

what I'd like to vote?

The motion was to defer. Gotcha. Right. So for the defer

Does anyone have a subsequent motion?

All in favor, please raise your hand. One, two, 3.

That's what I get for eating.

Okay. So we have 4. 123. 34. 4. Anyone else over here? Okay. The motion

Did not pass. Did not pass.

So, Madam Mayor, can I motion that we approve this particular item?

Second.

We have a motion and a second for approval. Any other questions or comments? Okay. All in favor, please raise your hand. I think that's a majority. Thank you very much for the opportunity.

All opposed?

All opposed. So it could be all Three, four. Anyone else? Okay. Thank you, mayor. All right. Thank you. I'm sure there'll be another opportunity to have this conversation, so I don't worry about it too much. I think we have to continue to figure out how it works and make it possible for us to do this.

Mr. Jones? Thank you, Mayor and members of council. Back to the agenda preview. Our two items tonight, we'll start off with the data center's update and then a very important update also with the MPTA transition. So with that said, I'd like to turn it over to Allison Craig.

Thank you. Good evening, mayor, manager, and members of council. Allison Craig, deputy city manager. At your April 27, meeting, we talked about bringing more information about data centers, to, your May 11 meeting. I'm gonna give you a presentation giving you just some detailed information about just our land use context, defining different types of data centers, giving you an an inventory of what we have in Charlotte, talk about what zoning districts they're allowed in, some trends, some key areas of questions that I know that you've raised to us, also the community has raised, and then talk about next steps.

And I just wanna mention that this has been a work involving a lot of different departments, and you'll see I've got a lot of people sitting here in the room to be able to answer questions. So we've got Monica Holmes from planning, David Zerf from Charlotte Water, Cherie Hagler Gray from the attorney's office, Heather Bullock from the office of sustainability, and Nick Miles from INT. And there's also been other people involved as well, including economic development as well as Duke Energy. So what I wanna start with is what people are not talking about as much, though. I know we're gonna get into talking about water concerns, energy concerns, noise.

Okay. But what I wanna make sure everyone is really clear on is that in December 11 or on 12/11/2024, senate bill three eighty two, which became session law twenty twenty four fifty seven, was a significant occurrence for all municipalities in the state of North Carolina. Basically, what, what this legislation did is it severely limits local zoning authority, and so it restricts our ability to reduce development density or to limit permitted land uses, and it really restricts, municipal planning authority. We are watching this right now and and have had some conversations that there's some interest in the short session to potentially make some changes to this. And we're hopeful to that because I think it would enable us to have a lot more tools in our toolbox to be able to talk about about emerging issues like this.

Okay. So wanting to first just level set on the different types of data centers, and this will become important when I talk a little bit about our ordinance because in our ordinance, we define data centers with one definition. And there's a lot of different kinds of data centers. They're not all the same. In fact, there have been data centers in Charlotte for decades.

You've probably walked by them and have not ever even noticed that they were there. They range from facilities in a small server room serving one business to very large hyperscale campuses, supporting cloud computing, AI, and other things. However, as scale, increases, so does potential impacts to land use, infrastructure, power cooling, and community impacts. So starting with the server room, and going all the way through an edge data center, enterprise data center, a colocation managed service, and a hyperscale facility, they really range from something that may be in a basement or in a in a single room to something that is a massive campus. And you can see the different types of electrical power available for each of these centers to run IT, to cool the equipment, and other critical infrastructure.

And then I put some examples on the bottom. So in the server room, this again, it's a small business owner. They've got a closet with IT equipment. An edge data center, this one this type is really important in urban environments because it helps communicate to larger facilities that may be further away to make sure that you're processing data quickly, like for if you're doing telesurgery or if you're, doing banking, you need those things to be really quick, you know, versus when they're in the cloud. It's okay if it takes, you know, ten, fifteen seconds to download something.

So those edge data centers are important, in our urban areas. An example of that is, a current rezoning, the American Tower rezoning twenty twenty five one twenty. The city of Charlotte or a hospital, we all have, enterprise types of data centers. They support our internal systems. You've got the sort of getting larger, the colocation, ones.

You've got a couple examples of those, in permitting. Digital has one on North Myers Street. And then we have two hyperscale ones that are approved in Charlotte, and I'm gonna call them Morris Chapel or AREP or Powerhouse are the two that are the larger ones we have. So this is our current inventory. I mentioned the one that's that's in the rezoning process. It has been deferred this month. The public hearing will not be until June 15. This one is proposing up to 40,000 square feet on 58 acres. Right now, we've got about 1,000,000 square feet of single user facilities. We've identified these using, looking at tax parcels.

They are identified as, a data center in their tax parcel ID. And, definition matters. I'm gonna say that a couple times. There's a lot of different smaller types that may still be in existence, but they're not showing up on our tax roll. There are three that are approved and in permitting. I mentioned the AREP, the powerhouse one. This is up to two and a half million square feet. It's in the ETJ. The zoning that was approved in 2023 is I two c d. It's on a 122 acre campus, and it's got about 1,250,000 square feet total.

Moores Chapel, this was up to 3,000,000 square feet. It's also in the ETJ, zoning a similar I two c d on a 156 acres, and it was approved in 2025. And lastly, the digital realty, this one is a little smaller. This one is in permitting. It is allowed by Wright. The zoning district is urban core urban core or town core. Urban core. Okay. Forgot a second. So it's on two and a half two and a half acres of 40,000 square foot building.

So right now in the UDO, and again, you know, I mentioned earlier where we are in terms of current legislation. Right now, data centers, by the singular definition that we have, are allowed in eight different zoning districts, ranging from commercial districts to office or research campus districts, manufacturing and logistics, innovation mixed use, and uptown core. And again, those may look pretty much the same in those different districts because all data centers, regardless of size, are treated the same under the UDO and allowed in those eight districts. There are no prescribed conditions as part of these, and they're subject to the general development, standards of anything that's allowed in that particular district. This is an area where, you know, we would love to explore changes in the future.

Prescribed conditions are very common in zoning districts, where, like as an example, you might have an outdoor storage yard, and it's allowed in certain districts, but when it's adjacent to residential, it has some additional requirements subject to. This is a map of the existing and proposed data centers in Charlotte, and you're going to see different maps and different numbers of the total number of data centers, because again, the definition matters, and some of these are small and they may not hit certain maps, but, again, this is what we found in tax parcel IDs. And so you can see, the green are data centers that are existing. The ones that are orange are ones that are approved and or in permitting. And then the one in yellow is the one that is still going through the rezoning process.

There's been a lot of questions about proximity to residential zoning, and so here's a map showing all of the residential zoning districts in the city of Charlotte and locations of, the data centers that we have. And all of the, all of the data centers that have been approved and or in permitting are within 500 feet of residential. And so that's something that, again, we would like to look at in the future. So hang on. I wanted to hit on just some, some data center trends.

So AI is definitely driving, this demand. And so the growth of AI is increasing the demand for these higher density GPU facilities. I've learned a lot about, data centers in the last, couple weeks, and GPU is a lot higher processing, needs than, CPU. And so it requires then more centers, more facilities, more IT. And then what's really important, I mentioned this earlier with the edge facilities versus the hyperscale facilities, the distance from the user affects speed.

And so there are some types of uses that need to be next to their users because they need to have faster processing. In terms of water, cooling and water needs are rising. The AI workload significantly increased water use. Cooling demand is rising, including liquid cool designs. Power is a main constraint in terms of the future capacity, but also, I would say in the city of Charlotte, land is too.

As you could see from the examples of the two larger hyperscale facilities that we have, those are really large campuses. There are a 120, a 150 acres, and it's hard to find large parcels of land that size zoned in this way for for data centers. Grid connections can take longer than construction, so there's a lot of work that the data center does with Duke Energy in terms of seeing what the the power capabilities are. And then facilities are adapting. They may pursue different types of things, on-site generation.

Closed loop systems are becoming more common because there's a lot of pressure to be more environmentally sensitive. And so there's this is an area just like technology and AI. It is quickly and and rapidly adapting. So, Duke Energy, wasn't able to be with us this evening, but they have been in our meetings over the past couple weeks. So data centers are growing, but they're not the primary driver of the current rate pressure.

So right now, less than 1% of the current share of statewide peak electric demand comes from data centers. However, this is projected to grow to 10% by 2030. That doesn't necessarily mean that's 10% for Charlotte. That's 10% for for all of North Carolina, and so there may be different areas where this is there are they find good sites. There is a threshold.

So with Duke, any project that's over a 100 megawatts, they are required to pay a nonrefundable impact fee. They're required to pay all of their upgrade costs, and so they do transmission studies and figure out where where upgrades are needed, and they are responsible for providing those. This can be a benefit to the community because you have the grid infrastructure being being updated and upgraded by by someone else and not by by Duke. And they were quick to make sure that that we were clear that recent rate increases are really tied to the growth and all the attraction that Charlotte is bringing. There's a lot of people moving to Charlotte, and that's really what is what is resulting in the the recent rate increases and not as a result of data center growth.

So we've had a lot of questions about water consumption, particularly in the the drought conditions that that we've been discussing recently. A smaller scale facility use about 20 64,000 gallons a day, whereas the larger scale facilities like your hyperscale, etcetera, it really depends on the cooling method. So open loop or evaporative cooling uses a lot more water, whereas closed loop, reduces water consumption by as much as 70%. So it's a lot more, sustainable. As a comparison, in some numbers you'll see in a minute, so the total irrigation demand for all users is 11,000,000 gallons per day, and so there's a lot of, water consumption that occurs in our community by, watering our lawns.

And when we're talking about stage two drought conditions, what we're trying to accomplish there is we wanna reduce water by 16,000,000 gallons per day. And so of that, centers use point 4%. So we have two hyperscale data centers that have been approved as powerhouse. Their peak summer use is 1,200,000 gallons per day. They are using reclaimed water and not drinking water.

And, of course, demand is is lower in in cooler seasons because you're not trying you don't need as much to cool the equipment. The Morse Chapel site, they're using domestic water only, about 35,000 gallons per day because their cooling is, by electric. It's not water based. Charlotte So Water, does a very detailed engineering review when these data centers come in. Again, from their perspective, like Duke Energy, developers are required to pay for required infrastructure improvements.

We certainly prefer that you use reclaimed water or use closed loop cooling system. These are more sustainable. And there's a lot of work that Charlotte Water does in updating its system wide master plan every five years, for growth, development, rising water demand, and trends. Noise is something that what we've learned is really the data centers in the past tended to be tended to be noisier there. It's often when there's on-site energy generation or when air cooling is used.

However, there's there's cities that are considering noise and sound studies as part of permitting just to ensure in a couple of I think the 2023 rezoning that came through, I think there was a field trip, that a group went and looked at an a nearby hyperscale facility. They found no noise concerns, but in that rezoning process, there were still conditional notes that requires noise mitigation as part of that approved plan. There's a lot of conversations about are there jobs involved in data centers? What sort of impact or benefit does municipality get? And I think what we've heard is that there's not a lot of people working in the facility.

There is a lot of jobs that are created as part of the construction. But once the facility is up and running, it's really only 20 to 50 new jobs per data center. This past year, the the data center contributed a little over $1,000,000 in 2025 tax revenue. But as they continue to grow and as as we start to see a lot larger facilities, as an example, a hyperscale facility with about two and a half million square feet in Charlotte could generate probably $40,000,000 in tax revenue annually. That's not to discount, some of the concerns with water and infrastructure and noise and, energy concerns, but they do, tend to create limited indirect limited direct impact on schools and roads compared to many other large development types.

So next steps. So, again, state law limits some zoning changes, but the city city still has tools to study impacts, strengthen review, and consider a temporary moratorium. So what we cannot do, we cannot change certain zoning criteria per senate bill three eighty two. We cannot revise location, buffer, zoning standards, change the district. Again, this is limited by that that law.

What we can do is we can coordinate an interdisciplinary staff team. As you can see, we already have that underway. We've been talking about what what additional study and standards we could employ under current legislation, including requiring certain application materials like a noise mitigation plan, an energy water conservation plan, looking at other performance based standards. And then, lastly, we can consider a moratorium. It must comply with general statutes one sixty d one zero seven, one of which is has a required step to hold a properly noticed public hearing and adopt an ordinance that meets statutory criteria.

There have been a number of cities that have, passed moratoriums in recent, and so you can see, a list of different municipalities here and the length of time that they have proposed. One of the things in the right column that I will mention is that there is some distinction in that many of these municipalities did not have a definite of a data center in their ordinance, whereas Charlotte does. And so there is some some things we've been talking to the the attorney's office about, you know, what additional risk would that involve for Charlotte should we move forward with considering a a moratorium. It's also worth noting that Chatham County was recently challenged in a lawsuit. Some of it relates to which projects would fall under the the moratorium among some procedural issues, but there is one active lawsuit out there right now.

So our recommendation is that we hold a public hearing for a moratorium. This could be done on May 26 if we meet certain noticing requirements. So this if if the moratorium is more than sixty days, it requires a two week notice period. This could potentially set council up for action or decision on June 8 should you desire to desire to do so. We also recommend that we refer this to the TPD committee, to talk about next steps and recommended actions, and then continue with our interdisciplinary work to convene on policy and what these next steps look like. And with that, I am available to answer any questions as, are my colleagues over here.

We're going to start with miss Anderson and her around and have the opportunity for everyone to have a chance to speak. And I certainly do know that we have a lot of people that want to be able to actually learn and do things with this. So, Ms. Anderson, will you start us off?

Yes. Thank you, Madam Mayor. And thank you, staff, for this information and pulling it all together very, very quickly. It's this is a robust presentation, and I appreciate it. One question I have before I get into it is, on slide five, where you have basically gone through our inventory of data centers and the types of data centers. Do you have a sense of what is the longest ten year data center in our community? Like, has have have any of these been around for ten years, eight years? Any temporal sense here?

So the American Tower is is proposed. Moores Chapel and Powerhouse are ones that were recently approved, so those are not in existence yet. The Digital Trade Street one, does anyone know

It's a it's a replacement.

So we we can we would have to we can do research, basically.

And there there are I mean, so I mentioned that there was $1,100,000 in tax revenue for 2025. So there are some smaller ones. And when you look at the map, there are some in existence Yeah. As you can see on this map. But I don't know the earliest one, and we'd have to get back to you on that. Okay.

Thank you for that. The other question that I have is you mentioned that the general assembly has limited some of our flexibility on this area. When we think about some of the technological advances that you brought up, specifically around cooling and having what's called behind the meter strategies where they can create their power on-site either through solar or battery, etcetera. Do we have the the ability to bake that into our zoning language and then have that codified?

So I would say that's not a yes or no answer. I think there are different levels of of risk in terms of being in compliance with with, that senate bill. I would say things like changing zoning districts and adding buffers is is pretty clear that that's not allowed. Starting to ask for things like a water conservation plan or an energy conservation plan as part of a complete application is probably, you know, easier to do and carries less risk, but not no risk. I don't know, Teri, if you wanna add anything. Okay.

Okay. So as we move forward with your recommendations, and I I fully support your recommendation that we hold a public hearing and then take a vote on the moratorium. But as we do that, I'd I'd like for us, this this advisory group here, to think about the types of guardrails we could bake into our policy, like behind the meter, strategies, like having greenfield data centers that would require that versus having them retrofit it into existing buildings because then that would tap on our municipal utility function. Also, having having the restrictions around using recycled water or or using liquid cooling for, the chips and things of that nature. I think if we could tighten that up as as much as we can in terms of the guardrails we can bake in for our residents, that would be a step in the right direction for us.

The last thing I want to say here is you talked about the different types of data centers, right? And thank you for going through those different types. Because the depending on whether it's a hyperscale or just a a server room, very, very different a very different pull on municipal utility as we think about touching our policy and tighten it up with guardrails, I think we need to, city attorney, redefine data centers in a more robust way because our definition now was just one definition that covers five different types of data centers. The reality is the growth of data centers is going to grow exponentially over the next twelve to twenty four months, just within The U. S.

So, I think our definition needs to be expounded upon. But I certainly support I thank you for this work. I certainly support the recommendation that we move forward with a public hearing, and then we take a vote on the moratorium while we do this work. Thank you so much, madam mayor.

Thank you. Thank you. Miss Mayo, would you like to miss Watlington?

Thank you, and thank you for the presentation. And thank you, council member Ishmura, for bringing this last week. While I appreciate the information that was brought, certainly, I would have been prepared or was prepared to support a moratorium last week. It's important because of how often and how quickly this industry is changing that we move with the speed of progress. So thank you for your leadership there. A couple of quick things for me just going through here. I wanted to just real quick on slide 14, the Morse Chapel Data Center. I was just curious. I noticed that it said that domestic water only was 35,000, GPD, but the cooling is electric. It's not water based.

What are they using domestic water for at 35,000 GPD?

Yep. Good evening. David Zurr again with Charlotte Water. The water usage they will have is basically for staff and just domestic purposes such as

Lavatories, toilets,

sinks Exactly.

35,000.

Okay. Thank you. And then just a couple things that have jumped out at me. I see here on the system planning where we've got the Charlotte water updates its system wide master plan every five years. Just as we have this broader discussion around moving at the speed of progress, I would be very interested to understand what it would take to increase that frequency and make us more nimble, because we certainly know that five years is a long time in a growing city.

So would be very interested to know what help looks like to improve that to improve the planning tools. And then just a few things lifting up. Do we have a sense of our load or our capacity versus the forecasted load for data centers? Or I see the information here for existing, but do we have any kind of assumptions built around when we think that or where we think the tipping point would be?

And and you're speaking in for water. Correct?

Mhmm. And my same question is for Duke Energy, but they're not here. So power as well.

Yes. So we build into this basin wide water distribution system master plan that includes forecasting out thirty years. That forecasting is based upon the UDO, it's based upon the comprehensive plan. So we use that information to develop the water demands as well as for the respective towns within the community. And so I believe baked into that on an aggregate basis is the type of zoning and development that we would expect to see long term.

So I'd be curious to know load versus capacity. What do we anticipate the load to be as we think about the data center industry and what we think we might absorb as a community? Are we and I don't expect you to have this answer right now, but that's what I'd be interested in is are we looking at the scale from edge centers to hyper hyperscale centers? What do we think our community could reasonably even hold that wouldn't trigger additional increased capacity demand? Do you follow what I'm saying?

Yes. Understood.

I'd like to understand that because that frames where our limits and our boundaries are. As it relates to the existing centers, again, I see some of the information here about what's been approved, and I see some of these smaller existing centers. Have we any data that would give us forecasted versus the actuals from what's already here in terms of usage?

The information that was provided for the smaller scale data centers Mhmm. I think that was a list of about 22 data centers, and that is the actual usage for all of them, about 64,000 gallons.

And do we have the forecasted the previous forecasted number so that we can see if there's a gap between what they anticipated and what they actually used? I'm just trying to figure out how we can dial in that

Most of these, I will tell you is that same. It's domestic usage. Mhmm. And in in a lot of cases when it's small scale usage, some of these were 300 gallons a day Mhmm. Which is equivalent to a residential house basically. We don't necessarily have any initial forecasted numbers for them, but I will go back and check that.

Perfect. Thank you for that. Could be curious just for the ones that were that went through rezoning, if there was any this is what we think it will take, just because if we need to adjust those assumptions, I think that'll be helpful. As it relates to economic development, and I've had a short conversation with economic development staff about this, I'd be interested to know, given the infrastructure cost, how that's baked into our incentives, if any, when we're dealing with data centers. I just wanna make sure that we are really receiving a net benefit overall when it comes to that that shared partnership.

And to that end, I'd be interested to know how we might incorporate a resource share because certainly the city has data. We've got we've got models to run, and we need GPUs. So I'd love to understand how we might work with potential data centers to leverage some of their their assets for that end. And then I lastly, I just wanna think about zooming out to a regional perspective. We're talking about Charlotte and maybe Mecklenburg County when we think about the ETJ. But as we think about the strategy for the broader region, how are we working with surrounding counties to make sure that we're helping to to guide development in those places where a data center might be a more appropriate play?

Is that from the water perspective or just in general?

In general. When we look at all of our resources, at some point, we've gotta ask the question, does it make more sense to try to build within the city, or are we better served across the region to work with our surrounding counties to help them recruit jobs, to to help them forecast what might be a benefit to them. So that's just one thing that I think we need to think about as well.

And I think that's something that our group can can take a closer look at. I mean, there are things like being near a wastewater treatment plant where you have access to reclaimed water or land or, you know, different incentives and things like that. So, certainly, we can bring that to the group.

Awesome. Thank you so much. I appreciate it.

Alright. Miss Ajmira.

Thank you, madam mayor. So first, I I just want to make sure that everyone knows this discussion is not about anti AI or anti our community is at risk right now unlike other municipalities. So it's taken this long for for you all to recommend a pause. I I find that I find that concerning because we when it comes to growth, when it comes to definitional bazard, we are leading. But when it comes to protecting our community, protecting our neighborhoods, and protecting our health, we are being reactive.

And then council member Johnson continued those conversations last year and asked some questions. Then council my council member, my district council member JD Masura Arias, as soon as he learned about data center in Far East, where I live, he immediately started asking questions about what this would mean for nearby neighborhoods and residents. So this concern has been building across multiple districts, multiple council members for quite some time. And for me personally, when I started hearing from residents, families, and experts, how much of this could continue moving forward by right because we do have How long would it take for us to put some guardrails in place? The

answer was

Bless you.

Six months. Do we have do we know how long it will take now?

So, again, this really depends on the conversations with our attorneys and our partners. So, as a reminder, senate bill three eighty two came about in 2024. Conversations started occurring then, which very severely limited what staff could do, because if that was not in place, there's a lot of really smart people sitting at this table right now that would have had something in place already, could we actually put something in place, but we weren't. There is there is very significant legal risk in changing the UDO, and actually having a definition in the UDO does also increase our legal risk in moving forward in this way. And so that takes some time to really navigate.

You can see that that all the other municipalities that have done this do not have that. And so there is additional concern that that might be perceived as a down zoning. And so these are things that we have been working through. So, what will happen next is over the course of, let's say, a couple months, we will look at what performance standards we might be able to incorporate, or requirements of an application, and really check that with the attorney's office. Meanwhile, we're also working to monitor what's happening with the short session.

We have heard that there is a lot of activity occurring right now in conversations about a compromise as it relates to senate bill three eighty two, and really hoping that something gets resolved during this session so that we have clear guidance as to what we can actually change in our ordinance to address some of these emerging issues like this and others.

The legal risk of taking action. Could you also speak to the risk of not acting if these projects continue moving forward under rules we may later decide are inadequate as clearly stated in this presentation?

No.

Who lives in Far East, near Red Island, he talked about how he's raising his child with autism. And he talked about the fear of constant twenty four hour humming noise from cooling systems and backup generators. And honestly, as a parent, that stays with you because this conversation is no longer hypothetical. This is about our children. This is about our health, and this is about whether families can peacefully live in their homes.

So we have residents worried about the noise, air quality, water usage, traffic impacts, and whether their neighborhoods will drastically change. And those concerns do deserve respect. And what I would like to see that I know right now in your recommendation, there is no specific ask in terms of the number of days for a moratorium. I would like to ensure that till we come up with the guardrails and protections in place, that the moratorium does exist during that period. So we need to be very specific about Mhmm.

How much time it's going to take for the planning to ensure that our community is protected and have a moratorium during that time. So if we can get some guidance from the planning director as to how long it's going to take.

If I

may quickly before we can add

it to miss Allen, with respect to the timing for any public hearing notice, there are two different tracks, and so I wanted to be really clear. Anything that is sixty days or less would require at least seven days notice before the hearing, and anything sixty one days or longer would require at least a once a week notice for two successive calendar weeks, and so typically no less than ten days and no more than twenty five. And so as you consider that, think about that component, and I'll back to Ms. Allen. I'm sorry. Miss Holmes. We

in looking at the calendar and knowing the legal language in which we're working within and we have to be actively doing work and coming up with solutions, we are feel strongly that a hundred and fifty days gives us the adequate time and knowing your calendar. That gives us the adequate amount of time to be able to do the research, look at what potential options may be, get it back to you all. There's obviously an option always of extending it if it took more time, but we think a hundred and fifty days is appropriate. That gets us through the month of October and gives us enough time with the council calendar to have something back in front of you.

I I appreciate the timeline, miss Holmes. So on slide 19, I know we have a whole public hearing for a moratorium. I just wanna make sure that the motion is for a hundred and fifty day moratorium because that gives you all to put some guardrails because it is Wild Wild West right now. I just wanted to make sure. I think on one of the slides, you had mentioned, miss Craig, about $40,000,000 in property tax.

But I know that these facilities also get tax incentives from the state under the state law. And I know that governor Stein has asked state legislatures to eliminate those tax intensive tax incentives, but currently, it is costing our city. Do we know how much it is costing our city and how much are our residents subsidizing for these facilities?

I don't have those numbers. And, again, the ones that are actually in existing are small, and so that would be something we'd have to look at for two very large ones that are are approved and starting to come out of the ground. And so I don't have that information, but we can do some some research on that.

Yeah. I think it'd be important to also consider that because currently, they are not paying their fair share because they are getting tax incentives. And some of our revenue comes from sales and use tax, so it is costing us and our residents having to subsidize that. Lastly, so I know that my colleagues, talked about, some of the guardrails and protections. As you are looking at that, I just wanted to highlight some of the organizations that I would like them to be part of the stakeholders groups.

If you can convene a stakeholders group, Action NC has been leading this, as well as Clean Air Carolina. Also, UNC professor Williams, who is who is an expert on data center, Craig Reynolds, and few others, but also someone from the industry so that we have a balanced perspective as we are developing regulations to protect our communities. Lastly, I just wanted to ask so, miss Leslie Fide, if you can just talk about so I know that under this timeline, if you can go back to slide number 19. So till June 8, there is no pause. So could you speak in terms of if projects continue moving forward during buy write while we are taking an action on the pause, could they gain vested rights before council has a chance to adopt a pause?

I'm going to defer this question to Ms. Heikkinen Ray. I believe she's able to.

Sure. With respect to moratoria, it's very specific in 160D-one hundred seven that there are certain projects that are exempt once the moratorium is in place. So, if there are approved rezonings, those would be exempt once the moratorium takes place, and if there are applications in the pipeline that have not been approved but have been submitted and completed prior to the moratorium, then they would have an opportunity to get what we call permit choice so they could proceed under the previous rules or if we were to adopt, if if counsel rather were to adopt any new rules, they would have the choice about under which they proceed. But that but so during the before a moratorium, they could proceed by right.

So they could proceed by right before June 8?

Yes. They

would have to have a complete application. So you can't just turn in a form and and and they're

And the complete application, how long does it take generally?

It it really depends on I mean, it's it's a matter of having there's a a full checklist and full construction plans and all all of that. So it can't just be like a site plan and that's it.

It would be very difficult to

It would

be unlikely. Right?

Yeah. Because you

if you yeah. You can't just fill out an application. You have to actually clear what we call gateway, which is that full checklist.

Detailed construction plans are not Okay. Done overnight. Yep.

So what I'm hearing, you say it's it's highly unlikely before June 8 that by Wright, any of these hyperscale data centers could get approved. We Or allowed by Wright.

Oh, it's highly unlikely. I mean, never say never, but it would be very difficult. We we have tried to do our research of anything that may be in development that we're unaware of, and we have not found one that is in development. Again, I don't wanna say that with, you know, there could be something out there, but we believe that there is nothing. There is not a project out there that we do not know about.

We do get signaled because in order for Duke Energy to move forward with some of the things that they do, they have to have a zoning verification letter issued from the city, and so we don't have any of those currently.

We don't care. Well, that that's all I have, madam mayor. I will make a motion after everyone is done speaking, so I'll hold that. But that's all I have. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Okay, thank you. As the district rep in District 4 just outside of 2023030, The petition, the massive petition, 2,500,000 square feet. For the record, I do wanna say I did vote against it along with council member Mayfield. However, it did pass.

I will be holding a community meeting about this petition tomorrow, a virtual community meeting, just to share some additional details regarding the rezoning so that residents are familiar with what's being proposed. Interestingly, when that that petition went to hearing in 2023, we did not have a lot of community opposition. There was one person that that led the opposition and as stated, residents went to on a field trip in Forest City to take a look at the rezoning so that they could hear the noise. That was the primary concern back then was the noise and we did ask specific language in the site plan to address the noise ordinance. I do have questions.

Specifically, miss Craig, why are you recommending a moratorium?

This is something that we have been talking about. There's I think one of my greatest challenges is that it is hard to introduce changes into the ordinance right now because of where we are with current state legislation. I think the community has been, very vocal in some concerns that they have, and they would like to see things introduced into our process that provide them assurances that we would like to research to see if we could actually incorporate.

So assurances due to concerns. Right? Of potential

make sure that we are, you know, a sustainable city. We, you know, are looking at, you know, as we talked about with Charlotte water, are there possibilities to require, you know, a closed loop system and we can do that in the rezoning process or be able to do more with our reclaimed water system.

So my question is, if we know that there are potential concerns enough to recommend a moratorium for future petitions. We as counsel need that ability to incorporate guidelines on data centers that are existing and pending. If we are concerned about the impact on environment and if we're concerned about the impact on our water, if we're concerned about the impact to our residents' utility bills, those same impacts are going to be felt from an existing or a pending petition specifically a hyper massive data center of 2,500,000 square feet. So I've asked the city attorney and I'm asking again and I'm asking our state legislators and our whomever, we have to take a look at what we as council members can do for this petition and I've said this, if we if someone came to us and wanted to build an asbestosis factory, we would say no due to our police power. I believe, I hope, due to our police power because of our duty of care to our residents.

So, I would just suggest if possible, any moratorium that we enact if we could include petitions for those by rights by right data centers and also for pending. We we need to stop, we need to pause, we need to resend, we need to do we need to halt until we know that there's there's no harm to our residents. I mean, think of the tobacco industry a hundred years ago. We just really I just really think if we're going to pause this and take a thoughtful approach, if there's any way, Madam City Attorney, we need the ability to pause petitions and permits also. I do have some questions as far as the presentation.

Is there any information about the environmental impact of data centers in the presentation?

We

focused really on the key things that we've been hearing, as it relates to energy, water, and noise. But we've been working closely with, the office of sustainability, and Heather's been involved in this work group. I don't know if there's anything that you wanna add, Heather. No. I think the I think that's exactly what it is. It's water, it's air pollution, it's or sound pollution, and energy usage. Those are the key issues in terms of environment.

Okay. So, air pollution and also, can we get some information? I've heard that the temperature around data center increases by a certain percentage. If we can get that information as well, the environmental impact. Also, regarding power outages, are they increased surrounding data centers? And I'll tell you, in District 4, my power goes out a lot most times when it storms. So, I like information on power outages as well. Employment, there was a number for employment, the number of employees near data centers. Can you tell me what kind of jobs those are?

So there are there's two different kinds of jobs as part of data centers is when it's under construction, and I think there's a lot more, employed as part of that. But then, when the actual data center is up and running, steady state, so anywhere from 20 to 50 typical new jobs per data center. Salaries can range from 50 to 80 or so annual salary for technicians that work there. And there may also be adjustments too. Some data centers have ancillary office uses, things like that.

So a lot of it depends on the actual type of data center, if it's standalone, if it's an enterprise, or if it's one that's got co location. So there's multiple different companies that have IT there. So, it can range, but this is probably a good average.

Okay, so some of these are construction jobs, some of

those These numbers are for steady state.

Okay, did you say Can we go back Can you go to the slide that shows the map of the existing data centers? Okay, thank you. Now, see quite a bit in District 4. Is that the Research Park area?

Yes.

Okay. And can you give us information? I know you couldn't answer councilmember Anderson's question, but can you give us information on those existing data centers with the square footage is and I may have I know I've sent you emails historically so we may have that information and also I want to give a shout out to a District 4 resident, Ms. Antoinette Mingo who has been on this since day one. Thank you.

She was on this when she was the chair of the district four coalition so go ahead and give her a hand. She has been Thank you. She has led She's led the discussion on this. She's pushed back and and also her successor, Juan Juven, who's the chair of the data The District four coalition, we received information from him. I think you all have received information as far as the tax incentives.

He did a calculation. I think there's a tax break of about $12,000,000 he calculated for this petition, this 2,500,000 square foot. So, if you could get us confirmation of that number, if that sounds right. Thank you. Did you say that these existing data centers, the average was 500 feet near residential area?

So I was mentioning the ones that are in orange or yellow. The ones that are approved or proposed are within 500 feet of residential. There are probably a mix of proximity and the existing ones because again some of those are really small facilities that have maybe have been there for decades.

Okay. And I'm almost finished. Thank you. Slide 13. I want to understand the usage. Total irrigation demand for all users is 11 mgd. What does mgd stand for?

It's a million gallons per day. So,

total irrigation demand from watering our lawns is 11,000,000 gallons per day.

Correct.

And that's citywide. Is that right?

It's the city, county and all of the towns that we serve.

City, county and all of the areas that we serve is 11,000,000 gallons per day. Correct?

Yes.

Can you go to the next slide? Maybe not the next slide. Let's see, hold on. Maybe it's the slide before that. I got to find it. It's the slide that talked about the large data center and I believe I got to find it.

Are you talking about the powerhouse using

Yes. 2,000,001 gallons per day. One place, one site. Is that am I understanding that one site uses 1,200,000 gallons per day and city area wide we're using 11,000,000 gallons per day.

Yeah. But there's a a difference there that 1,200,000 gallons is of reclaimed water, which is highly treated wastewater effluent from the Mallard Creek facility. So it's not drinking water that they are using.

So they're the sole user of that water plant?

The the discharge would otherwise be going to the creek, but reclaimed water again is that highly treated effluent. We have a small distribution system and UNC Charlotte will be using it for irrigation and the Traditions Golf Course likewise uses it for irrigation.

And can we require that process for all data centers?

Not right now.

Not right now. It could we could make that we don't have the capacity to do that or you're saying We

can't we can't add additional restrictions to applications per state law.

Is there any risk of that recycled water leaking?

No. No? No. It it it could leak. There is not a risk from it leaking. The degree that it is treated to, I would categorize that as safe.

Safe. Okay.

It's not fit for drinking.

It's not fit for drinking, but it would be safe if it leaked, right?

That's what you said. Okay.

I think that's all my questions for now.

Thank you.

Thank you.

If I may respond quickly, Council Member Johnson, to your earlier comments with respect to those applications that are vested, if you will. Senate Bill three eighty two is the down zoning statute that we are talking about that prohibits us from limiting or prohibits the city from limiting, any sort of regulation on those data centers that already exist. When you talk about what are our avenues to potentially aid in that effort, this the senate bill five eighty seven that is pending before the general assembly is an opportunity to restore some of the police powers that cities are accustomed to with respect to zoning. But again, this well, let me specifically call it the cession law. I've I've I've used the term senate bill three eighty two, but it is it is a statute now in its succession law 2024 dash 57 that limited city's ability to utilize certain zoning tools that we would have ordinarily used in the past.

And so the opportunity there is for the general assembly perhaps to consider restoring that type of power to municipalities.

Thank you for that. Do we have any law that gives us a duty of care? Like a dude like like I said, we would if if someone proposed and anything that we know is harmful, that's proven harmful and we had approved it, surely we would rescind it. So that's what I'm asking for. What what ability do we have if if in if they if we know this is enough for us to pause new applications for five months?

If there's potential harm and we know that, what do what can we as counsel do? And what's the risk if we do something? What is the risk if we do if we were to do something else? Those are my questions.

And so that's a landscape that that is is very layered, but what I will say is generally cities and local governments generally don't have a duty of care to individuals. However, your duty is to the masses by way of your regulations. In this instance, I think your staff is proposing an interdisciplinary conversation and exploratory set of processes that would look not just at zoning, but some of your other mechanisms to address this question. And so as those as as your staff comes forward with recommendations, there are opportunities, and and when I will talk I will say this. When it comes to some of the environmental concerns, the city is not in this alone.

Right? There are other state and federal regulatory agencies that would play a part in the conversation, and so as your staff bring those stakeholders to the table, that's an opportunity to look at ways to mitigate it. But think the risks are I wouldn't say they're nonexistent because the risks are always abounding, right? But the duty of this body is to certainly explore it, do the due diligence and this is part of the exercise that's happening now.

Thank you. And then residents can also reach out to their state representatives. And again, laws that need to be changed.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thanks, staff, for the presentation. Know, we were talking about earlier, you know, the need for urgency for this, and think it's crucial because I wanna thank council member Mayfield, Johnson, Ashmira for leading on this, and I wanna thank the city attorney for picking up my phone call when I first brought this up in December when I learned about the rezoning that's happening in District 5 in the Far East, American Towers. I listen. I I gotta be frank and honest.

We there's so much we don't know about data centers, but it's also there's so much we do know about data centers that we should have acted on this way beforehand, especially since Councilmember Mayfield brought this up in 2023?

Yep.

Yep, 2023. We knew this was coming down the pipeline, and we really should stop reacting when things are happening. I mean a perfect example is we define data centers in a UDO. That's a direct consequence of us moving at the pace of growth in our city because we want to grow, grow, grow, grow, that we are often superseding the concerns of the people that already live here, not the 157 people that are not yet here to come. I also think when we talk about the legal risks, as a governing body, we will always have legal risks, right?

Whether it is our men and women in uniform and the cross fires when they're on duty, whether it's our firefighters protecting our residents and being the first responders on scene, whether it is development, whether it is infrastructure, whether it's a bad construction project that went over a disarray, we will always have a legal risk as a governing body, but there is more of a human risk in not acting now in protecting our residents. And legal risk should not take a precedent. And legal risks should not take a precedent over human risks, especially when what we are considering right now with this moratorium is the right thing to do for the people. I do wanna ask in slide I don't know which slide this is, but the one that shows all the municipalities that are going through a moratorium. For Chaddock County one, I wanna ask clarifying question because I see the asterisk at the bottom there.

Who were they challenged by? Were they challenged by the developer proposing a data center which they profit off of or was it challenged by our state legislators in Raleigh?

But, the lawsuit was filed by ECOTIP, which I believe is the data center itself. Okay. The developer.

The reason I say that is because just recently, up in Raleigh, our state legislators are doing a bipartisan effort to not exempt data centers from tax credit. I mean, to exempt them from, to not exempt it, to roll back that regulation, or that statute that they passed, which would give them tax credits, right? And they're considering that. So this is a bipartisan approach. And oftentimes, we need to be good faith partners with Raleigh, instead of being hesitant to partner with Raleigh when it comes to doing something like this.

The other thing is, wanted to ask about when we talk about guardrails as we consider a moratorium. Alison, if you may, who will have jurisdiction over these guardrails? City staff, independent third party, as we move forward? I kinda I'm I'm asking more of a hypothetical question when we move Certainly,

there's gonna be an interdisciplinary team from multiple departments weighing in on that, of what we have control and authority over. But that also means that there are other stakeholders and and those that we should be partnering with and getting their perspective. And so I think ultimately we have to make sure that we understand what we as a city can do and what we can do in the UDO or in other ordinances that we have. But that that doesn't mean that there aren't other people that will be, part of the process to come up with, solutions.

And do you think we could consider if there's appetite for the frequency of visits from let's say code enforcement to these data centers to ensure they're not out of code or out of practice?

Sure, I'd be happy to talk to housing and neighborhood services about that.

Got it. I'm also pleased that we did not have a corporation who profits off of data centers telling us how good data centers are for our community, especially when they just recorded record profits and were continued to lobby to increase the costs of consumers. Did we talk about in this presentation the health impacts of data centers? I would like to see more information about the health impacts. And for the closed loop water systems, did we make a difference between the open loop water systems versus the closed ones? Did we see the pros and cons for each one?

So the open is uses a lot more water. So I think the example that I was given about a closed loop is that it's kind of like a radiator. You fill it up, and if you're having to add water to it, there's probably a problem. And so the water continues to recycle through that. So it tends to be a much more sustainable way to run. And I think that's really what the trends are for data centers going forward is to use that closed loop system.

Thank you. The reason I bring that up is because the what's it called? The what's that data center type called that's going into East Charlotte? The etched data center of American Tower that's going into East Charlotte is going to use a closed loop water system. And I'm interested to learn more because I've had two weeks to do my research on closed loop water systems with data centers.

Although, they require less water, they do have a higher electricity demand 10% to 40% more. They increase greenhouse emissions and they require chemical adhesives such as anti corrosives and pH adjusters, which must be carefully managed to avoid environmental harm if leaks occur. And, in order to use clean water, a closed loop water systems, the water waste has to be discharged through evaporation. That is mineral discharge going into our air. That increases air pollution.

And so, would like to know a little bit more about closed loop water systems because typically, it is used as an argument to mislead the public that closed loop loop water system data centers are better for the environment. I will be in support of the recommendation staff will make of the motion that I'm sure will be on the floor for a moratorium. And I would like to be also more specific and ensuring that any pending petitions are also part of that moratorium, as well as making sure that we start working on policy that would restrict data centers near residential areas because they just simply don't have a place in residential areas.

Thank you.

Miss Mayfield?

Madam madam mayor, if I may, I just want to clarify something that the city attorney said earlier. And what I said is that either we are bound by state law, which is North Carolina one sixty d one zero seven, and is very specific about what types of developments are exempt from moratoria. So we want to make sure that we're in compliance with state law as you consider this moratorium.

Perfect. Thank you so much.

Alright.

Thank you, madam mayor. Staff, thank you for the presentation. I wish we had had this conversation prior to today because as you can hear, there are a lot of questions and concerns. I wanna get some clarifying information. When we think of whether it's a closed loop or an internal recycling system, on what end are PFAS being tracked?

Is that on our end through the water? Because if it's on our end, it's already in the water before we see it. So what is the mechanism to ensure the protection of our water quality?

Yeah, that's a good question. So first I'd like to say that Charlotte Water does its own PFAS testing and everything from the raw water in the lakes through drinking water, through wastewater. If we have suspicion that one of our significant industrial users could have PFAS, can build that into their permit for testing. We're not aware of that currently though.

So you say it can be built into the expectation of the water testing?

Correct. Yes. For the for the private company.

Thank you. And for clarification, you also noted earlier that Duke Energy needs a zoning verification letter. So if we move forward when we move forward with this moratorium, would that zoning verification letter also be on pause?

So the zoning verification letter is a request to check to see if the zoning is, valid. Right. And so that would in essence, there would be no way to proceed forward if there was a moratorium in place. So we could verify that the district is what it is, but they still would not be able to move forward with any type of, construction plans.

So for me, for clarity, it makes more sense for it to clearly be stated that any zoning verification letters will also be on pause. And I say that because even though it is not this particular situation, we are dealing with a project that permitting allow to have happen even though that's on the county side in a de restricted area of our community, and clear cutting has already happened. Construction is starting, and now everyone's throwing their hands up and saying, well, I don't know how that slipped through. If we're going to have a moratorium, it should be clearly explicit so whoever desk it runs across, whether it's someone who's been here for years or it's a trainee, they would clearly know that a zoning verification letter should not be going out.

Sure. And we do zoning verification letters for lots of different reasons and for different things, but we can certainly make sure that any zoning verification request for this use is clearly, under the guidelines of of a moratorium if it goes into place.

So Manager, I would like for us to make sure because, again, we're going through major conversations right now regarding a project that moved forward that should not have moved forward in the first place because there were deed restrictions in place. So we have created a fee in lieu on a number of particular projects, and this might be for our attorney. Is there a way for us to have the ability to adjust the cost? Basically, can we create a service speed that's tied to the g for the to the GPD? So if we're gonna have gallons per day, is there a way for us to have a service speed that that's that's directly tied to that for the simple fact that because of state statute, because individuals went, talked to the right people, figured out the right language that supersedes whatever we're trying to do on a municipal level, again, we have three options, move to approve, move to deny, possibly move to defer.

If, like with one particular project, they receive funds of tax dollars from a state that ain't passed the budget in two years, but they found money to give tax incentives to a company. And when that company then comes to us, it is almost a mandate that we're supposed to just approve whatever comes for us. Whatever language that we may have to create the space for us to do our job, which is to protect our residents to the best of our ability, would be helpful. So is there a way you do you can say it is or it isn't to not, but you can bring it back later for us to identify a cost of service when we are in the budget discussion and we are talking about as part of water and sewer services increase, but we're also recognizing that our state has created incentives for certain companies, which is putting a strain on our resources. We need to figure out a way for them to cover basically what is the cost of doing business in Charlotte versus the cost of the residents.

Go ahead, Tony. Let me know something.

I can speak a bit to that. We can certainly take a deeper dive. But first on the front end, any new customer pays a system development fee that is proportional to the amount of water that they would be using. So a larger industry will pay a higher fee and that's to cover a portion of the capital infrastructure cost that has been invested. The other thing that I can tell you is that our water rates and fees currently use a tiered system. So the more water volume you are using, you pay more per gallon for that and that's designed to encourage conservation.

Having that information would be helpful during this conversation as we're working on a moratorium. Also, is there a way and miss Holmes, you may know the answer to this one. When we look at potential locations, not a lot we can do about the currently approved. But I'm trying to understand why it would not do we have the ability to directly encourage that if it is the development of a center, we're looking specifically in our industrial area? So let's think of the fact that the airport has basically purchased the entire community behind it.

That's going to be industrial warehouse space, which is more than a couple of 100 feet from the nearest residential when we know that there are environmental impacts, the humming, the other things. Is there a way in our language that through the UDO, we can identify the more desirable spaces for these type of buildings to be placed in our community?

Yes. I think there is. And I think that that's one of the things with the interdisciplinary team that we would want to explore specifically in partnership with Charlotte Water, Duke Energy to understand where there are, to your point, land use is appropriate. Access to you know we have access to water that's maybe in the most efficient way, but we under want to understand like the pros and cons of that strategy. Other cities are taking that approach where it's they're being strategic about saying we want them here.

So I think that is one of the strategies that with three eighty two we can take.

That is helpful to know and I would again, manager like for us, well, like it to be noted that I share some of my colleagues concern that when we have this team, that team needs to be made up of some community members. We have members in the community that have been following this for quite some time, who are in the community, who have family members, who are already in community that where centers are already identified and up and running. We have limited information based on what we thought a data center what a data center was considered back in 2012 versus what it could be today. If we're gonna have transparency, the community needs to be at the front end and not a afterthought to make sure we take it all the considerations on the front end. And I would like for us to see us move quicker because, again, we're in 2026.

We could have started this conversation more than two years ago, which would at least given us some type of leeway when you look at all of our partners around the state that have moved forward. A lot of it, that legislation just happened in February and April. We were already having this conversation start attempted to start it a couple of years ago. Imagine where we could be right now with having a better understanding if we did not just kick it down the road back then. Being a little bit more nimble to address the concerns of the community versus being so proactive to give business whatever they want, I think, will be to the benefit of us.

Thank you, madam mayor.

Mister Driggs.

Thank you. I agree that we need to study this. We need a framework, and I'm in support of the staff recommendation. I'm curious, the other communities that don't have a definition, can they just do whatever they want without down zoning, or how does that work?

I'll say that because they don't have a definition of data center, they are using their moratoria periods to research and create definitions and to add a data center use to a UDO would obviously not be in violation of the down zoning law. So, are able to add a data center use.

They had some basis for considering data centers before, and now they introduced these regulations. Could that be interpreted as a down zoning of whatever they were using prior?

So it will depend on so we don't know the exact details of all the jurisdictions. It would depend on if they have they have existing data centers. So that makes a difference.

Alright. I'm interested that there is nothing in the pipeline at all. With this boom going on in AI and data center demand everywhere and the projections of growth, why isn't there anything in the works that we should be thinking about?

I mean, I wouldn't say that there's absolutely nothing in the works. We're just saying that we haven't gotten a pre submittal request or a zoning verification letter, but there may be land transactions going on that we are unaware of.

So exactly, what does the moratorium when does the moratorium bite? Like, at, peep there are different stages in this process. We have a moratorium, and that says that for this period of time, we will not do what?

So we will not be approving any new plans for new data centers.

Approving or accepting applications?

I would say I would say accepting too.

Yeah. I would say you you have the discretion to craft it the way you'd like, but typically would be not accepting applications or approving new data centers.

Right. If there's a data center under construction and they're subject to site plan inspections, do those would anything that's currently underway get stopped?

So that's what I was referencing earlier is that complete applications would probably have the opportunity to they may be paused, but they would have the opportunity to resume once the moratorium expires and get a choice as to whether they would like to proceed under the existing rules or whatever new rules the council may adopt. That's per state statute.

So on on the legal point, our ability to give land use permission cannot be changed according to state law. But can we come up with new policies about the kind of pollution impacts that you can make and so on? But they couldn't be part of the decision process about the land use. Is that the way that would work? Because those would then also be applicable to existing or other facilities, and we do have latitude to make policies like that.

But, I think the critical thing is that the state should understand we do not intend to, to get really tricky about our compliance with state law. We're considering what policies are available to us away from the approval of a rezoning because there are other ways, right? I mean, could tell somebody, sure, you know, you can do your rezoning, but bear in mind, you may not make more than such and such, you know, hot water or pollution. So I'll be interested to see how you want to bring that forward. And I was wondering also, are we following discussions between Duke Power and the Utilities Commission and the sort of larger power demand landscape?

So we've had a couple conversations with Duke Energy, and I think as part of this process of if we go into a moratorium, there would be a lot more detailed conversations. They're an important stakeholder in the conversation, and, you know, they're not controlling city ordinances and rules, but they are a very important provider of of data centers, and so we need to understand that context.

So there are also discussions going on between Duke Power and the Utilities Commission, and they're talking about various complicated arrangements for buying future meeting future power needs, all of which could have implications for the public. So I'm wondering how this might relate to that. If you could just think about that.

Absolutely.

Alright. Thank you.

Next, Nick, can I follow-up for this question? It's up to mister Graham. He's up mister Graham is next, so it's up to mister Graham.

Thank you. So councilmember Driggs made a point and I think it's he said the same thing that I was asking. And so and and there wasn't a confirmation of what he said. I think that's important. I know we can't change rezoning laws for or rezoning policies for petitions that have already been approved. But he said that we could create policies, environmental policies, would be that that previous or or petitions already approved would have to comply with. Did you all hear him say that?

So I asked a question as to whether we had the latitude to create policies that might be applicable to existing as well as prospective facilities trying to make a separation between a land use decision and our exercise of our rights in terms of environmental regulation.

Thank you. Is that the case?

I believe that's the sort of thing that the staff is recommending be studied during this moratorium period. It's difficult to say without knowing specifically what policies we're talking about. It would really depend on the policy and how it's applied. But, yes, council member Johnson, it's something that I think this team would like to explore.

Great. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you Madam Mayor I don't have much because much has already been said in reference to the impact of data centers on our community. I think the action step that we're taking today which is to thank the staff for their presentation and the recommendations moving forward I support. Just one question in reference to the general assembly and as chairman of the intergovernmental relations committee I would like to get a lot more information in terms of where that pending legislation is at. At the end of the day that' going to determine what we can and what we can't do because the state' going to have the last word certainly on what we can do. The conversation is great I agree with everything that has been said around the table but I think we really should I don't see our government affairs person here, but I think that's what we really need to be focusing on even making sure that as that legislation is being written that our input is there, right, because that's where at the end of the day we'll decide what we can and what we can't do here in Charlotte and throughout the state.

Thank you.

Alright, Kimberly.

Thank you madam mayor. I, I I appreciate the opportunity to, just very briefly address a couple of things. I was one of the people who voted to get more information on this before I was confident and comfortable making decision, and I really do appreciate the engagement. I've also had a good opportunity to have some engagement with my residents, and have tried to escalate and elevate some of their questions, many of which have been answered. A few of which have not, and I'll just put these into the conversation as well, as a good steward of their inquiries.

One of the questions I had was around the generator backups and the underground storage tanks and risks to the water table. I didn't hear any of that addressed, but it's my understanding, and again, this was transmitted by one my constituents, was that particularly centers, you know, the 2,500,000 square foot, 3,000,000 square foot, I mean, that's a large center to have to have a generator backup. And so, for me, that does suggest some diesel underground storage tanks. So, if we could put that into the calculation of some of our expectations, I think that would be very helpful. In addition, I will say that, you know, council member or doctor Watlington spoke of moving at the speed of progress.

A couple of things that I have heard about these data centers is that there is appetite to move these, literally offshore, like into the ocean and or into space. And I'm just wondering as we look at three and a half million square foot spaces and things, do we have any sense for what, you know, the timeline maybe before even these are obsolete, if we now find different ways to do things better? I just I would caution us around those giant data centers, and the the end use of that really not being foreseen. Sure. So those are two things that I would put out.

And then very briefly, I wanna draw your attention and just have a query on slide number, I believe it's 12. And there's a number here that I don't know what the genesis of it is. It gives a 100 plus, I guess that's megawatt threshold whereby projects pay a nonrefundable impact fee and all upgrade costs. Who sets that? Is that statutory or is that Duke Energy? Duke Energy. Okay. Is there appetite to have Duke Energy at the table to perhaps question whether that threshold is appropriate at this stage in time?

Think that's certainly part of this conversation because we've talked amongst ourselves too is that I think we all can agree that the server closet is really small and has minimal impacts impacts and that the hyperscale facility has more significant impacts, but there's a continuum in between that we need to look at further, which is why wanting to bring forward the definitions and talk through that.

So yeah.

Well, and to that point, and this is the last comment that I'll make, I I am, again, very appreciative of the fact that I never want to overpromise and underperform in this community, and having folks understand what we were talking about when we were talking about a moratorium, because it could mean very different things, particularly when we have such a single definition of data center, but a reality of the myriad different types of data centers, and making sure that we actually are addressing the problem. So, I'm excited to support this. I'm excited to now feel as though I have been able to escalate some of the concerns by my constituents, and I look forward to working with all of you to get to a good place on this. So thank you.

Thank you. Alright. Let's see we'll go ahead with Mayor Pro Tem.

Just thank you for my colleagues Johnson, Mayfield, JD, and Ashmir for bringing this to our attention. Thank you to staff for making a recommendation I will be supporting to do the moratorium, and then have the hearing on June 8 and definitely referring this to TPD committee because I think what's very important for us to update our definition of data center. It's long overdue and so I do think that conversation will be very helpful. Let me just make sure I'm clear on the recommendation. It'll be a hundred and fifty days from June 8. That's when the clock will start ticking. Correct?

Assuming council votes that evening, then yes. Yep.

Okay.

Thank you,

have staff. Certain noticing requirements in order to have the May 26 public hearing. We just need to make sure we hit this.

Thank you, Thank

you, staff.

Alright. Wanna recognize miss Ajmira. Thank you, madam mayor and mister

mayor pro tem. Thank you. So I move I make a motion to hold a public hearing for a moratorium of hundred and fifty days and have a public hearing on May 26.

Second. We

have a motion and a second. All in favor, please raise your hands.

And lastly, I just wanna recognize the city attorney. They led on this issue. Her and her team, they deserve a big hand. Thank you. I appreciate your help.

Eagle.

Alright. So I believe that is the end of this part of our agenda.

So thank you, mayor. Mayor rooms, the council. The last item that we have tonight on the agenda preview is the MPTA transition discussion, and that will be led by our city attorney as well as Catherine Claude Felter from Parker Poe. I do wanna just frame this a little bit and start off by expressing my appreciation for members of the MPTA as well as their officers. Do believe we have minister Mack in the room, one of the members of the MPTA, so thank you.

And it's a partnership and it's very, very important to understand that you just can't cut the switch on to to tonight or July 1 or January 1 or maybe even 07/01/2027. There are three phases in this process and each one is always designed to have the employee first. So with that said, I'd like to turn it over to the city attorney.

Alright. So the city attorney is gonna if we can if we can start with our city attorney and then we can continue.

Thank you. Good good evening mayor,

members to keep our noise so that we can all hear in this room. I know it's not exactly the best way. It's not a movie theater. It's just a conference room. If we could do that and have everybody understand what's going on. Okay. Thank you. Alright. Ashmearer?

Attorney. Thank you, madam mayor, members of council.

Go back to the manager?

To the attorney.

To the attorney. Sorry. We'll keep going.

Thank you, madam mayor, members of council. Good evening, and mister manager. The establishment of the MPTA is a generational and transformational project that will impact transit operations in Charlotte for many years to come and the region. Today's presentation is a continuation of council's March retreat discussion about how the Charlotte City Council and the MPTA will jointly undertake an orderly transition of the Charlotte area transit system as contemplated by the PAVE Act. At this point, the city has secured the law firm of Parker Poe to assist with the transactional work needed to effectuate the transfer.

As the city and the MPTA continue to facilitate the orderly transition, the trustees and the council members will continue to explore the appropriate cadence and format for update between the parties. At this point, your city staff has worked diligently with the MPTA transition staff led by Deborah Campbell and Carolyn Flowers to ensure that the PAVE Act's requirements are achieved. As part of that orderly transition, there are a couple things that have to happen, and that is upholding CAAT's obligations, including federal compliance and grant compliance, also supporting strong transit operations through an efficient transition, and lastly, but also importantly, it encourages the stability of the system and that transit riders and our community can expect a strong system. So with that, I would like to turn it over to Catherine Claudefelter, a partner with Parker Po, to walk us through where we are as of today. Catherine, the floor is yours.

Thank you. It's a pleasure to be back with you all. We were first together at a workshop a couple of months ago speaking at a high level of what transfers of assets of the city would normally look like or have looked like in other situations. Today, we're gonna dive into a little bit more detail, and that is because we have a draft proposed agreement for the interlocal agreement that's required under the PAVE Act to transfer assets, liabilities to the MPTA. So what I would like to do is just ground you all with the shared vision that we took away from our last meeting, and that is a commitment to orderly smooth transition of the public transportation system.

A collaborative transition is, of course, essential for supporting and retaining employees, maintaining an uninterrupted transit service, and protecting the interests of the riders and encouraging growth. We are proceeding in this agreement with the shared discretion that's afforded to the city and the MPTA under the PAVE Act to determine what that transfer looks like. I don't know if there's anything else. Recall that this agreement we are talking about, the proposed draft that you all should have received in your packets, is required to be passed by July 1 by both the city and the MPTA. I'm

sorry to interrupt, but Is

it okay?

Okay. So, staff, can can you all provide copies of this handout? I purposely did not bring them. Did y'all pass them out today? I I didn't get one. So, yeah. So may I have a I'm sorry. I'm sorry, but

I didn't get one.

Think seven of us did not get a copy.

Thank you. Who Yeah. Have that. I have

Ashmir, Mayo, Anderson, and Johnson. We we don't we don't have a cockpit. So can you just bear with us, please? Follow along with you.

Happy to make sure we're all on the same page.

Mayo. No. I thought I was the only one. Council member Johnson, do you have a copy? I do.

I do.

Staff, can we provide thank thank you, Sean. I'm sorry, mayor. I just wanna make sure we are. Okay.

That's a good good idea.

Thank you.

Fiko, absolutely. So, again, the reminder that the proposed agreement that you all are are hearing an update about today is required by the payback to be passed by July 1. The payback specifically requires certain things to be in this agreement. It requires the agreement to set out how transfer of ownership, personnel from the city to the MPTA would occur and on what timeline, to speak about the funds that will need to be paid back to the city once the flow starts to go to the MPTA in order to pay the city for the debt outstanding on the public transportation system, and talk about any interim agreements, use agreements that are needed while those transfers happen. I will reinforce this that what you have is not a final agreement.

It is a proposed draft. We are at a place of needing input and needing to have this type of discussion. What my plan is is to reground you a little bit in the basics of what we're doing and why, and then talk you through in summary where we are with the proposed provisions, and then tell you what the next steps are for receiving more input and how this will come back before you because this will come back before you in in a couple of different ways. So let's briefly touch base on the factors that are impacting this transfer. You'll recall that the city currently holds debt related to the public transportation system.

That debt cannot transfer to the MPTA, and some of the assets that are serving as collateral won't be able to transfer to the MPTA until that debt is paid. In addition, there are federal and state grants that have certain requirements that must be met while they are outstanding. So, again, the the the thought is that a phased approach to this transfer, because some assets must remain with the city, debt must remain with the city, that that phased collaborative transition is what is gonna help us meet the requirements of the PAVE Act. What this proposed draft seeks to do, first and foremost, is to satisfy all the requirements of the city and the MPTA under the PAVE Act. It sets out a timeline for transfer of all the assets, the liabilities, the operations, and the employees, and conditions that must be met for those transfers to happen.

And I'll talk you through what those conditions are. The important thing to know is, again, we're relying on the need for a smooth transition to set some of those conditions. It also this proposed agreement will determine between the parties how flow of funds needs to work so that the city is able to pay off the debt for the assets as that debt becomes payable, and also still be be able enable the city and the MPTA to address the liabilities that arise in the operational expenses. Importantly as well, it will allow the MPTA to delegate some operational well, to delegate operational control back to the city for some brief period of time at the very beginning, and that's once again to ensure operational continuity. You might remember this visual from the workshop.

At the time I showed it to you last time, we were we had not yet gotten a good picture of what some of the milestones would be in the transfer. I think I can give you some more detail as to where we are in the proposed draft. That first big point, dot point, I will I will call those sort of a a point in time or a milestone. That first big point in time is the 07/01/2026 requirement to have an agreement passed. Leading up to that time in the green background, that's the MPTA being set up.

That will continue through July 1 and for a while. Now once we hit July 1, phase one of this proposed agreement will start. Again, that's where the MPTA receiving operational control under the PAVE Act is going to delegate that back to the city for a very brief period of time during phase one. Ownership of the assets will remain with the city as will debt as required by law. We will then move towards phase two, and the the intent is for phase two to start 01/01/2027.

So for six six months is the is what we contemplate for phase one. When phase two starts, on the same day, employees all transfer from the city to the MPTA. Operational control all transfers back to the MPTA from the delegation that was made to the city. At that time, some assets that aren't covered by debt or other grant funding obligations will transfer, And we will be in what's known as phase two for a very brief period of time as well. The intent behind another brief phase is because there are most likely some services, back office services that the city may need to continue to provide to the MPTA in order to be able to ensure this operational continuity.

Now, if that occurs, that we are contemplating that the latest that the city would still be providing those kinds of back office services would be 07/01/2027. So phase two, if it is a period of time at all, will be, again, brief and we contemplate six months. We have now the benefit of professional input for the MPTA's transition experts to be able to better identify those time periods. So that's phase two ending as the third point in time that you see there. We next enter into phase three, which is when what you're really looking at is the MPTA paying off all the debt that the city holds and assets beginning as that debt is paid.

I we have three small points in time there just to represent the three pieces of debt that will first come out into maturity, be able to be prepaid first, and then a fourth, just noting the final debt paid, either paid or refinanced, it would at least come off city books and moved to the MPTA. If you are wanting to see it more on a date timeline and see the dates associated, these are the dates that are contemplated. What I think might be helpful is for me to give you a very brief in summary form walk through of what the phases will look like again. Again, these are this is just a summary. The the agreement that you have, the proposed draft goes through in more detail.

But to summarize, again, if you think back to we will be in phase one, we contemplate from 07/01/2026 through 01/01/2027. The city is still owning assets. The MPTA and the city are agreeing to a joint operation of the public transportation of the system with the city holding operational control and authority delegated back from the MPTA. The MPTA is the policy body, and so at that point in time, they will be providing budget approval, approval of the FTA requirements, safety plan, and a long term governance oversight. The contracting would be performed by the city and you will note I'll take the moment to say, you will note different places in this proposed draft where you see brackets or the word placeholder.

That's to tell you that discussions are still in progress to to really better flesh out what this some of these provisions will need to look like. So the the provision that is in progress right now is to present to you all for further con discussion and consideration is a discussion of what, if any, input into contracting the MPTA needs to have from July 1 to January 1, that brief period of time, because there are policy implications to the contracts. Still in phase one, July 1 to January 1, all state taxes tax revenues are going to start flowing to the MPTA as of that date. We contemplate currently in the draft that they flow to the city for this period of time. There's another placeholder and a lot of the flow of funds provisions simply because the MPTA is still being set up, and there's still an ongoing discussion of the structure of how the MPTA will hold funds ongoing.

Liability will be paid by the public enterprise funds, so that will be consistent with the budget that everyone is also considering and will be approved before July 1. Again, there will need to be established coordination, and there currently is practically established coordination between the executive committee and the the committee with the city, and that will need to remain in phase one as well. So before we enter phase two, there are certain things that need to occur for that smooth transition to continue. For and and I will say, we call we are calling these gates. You all can also call them milestones.

But the important thing to remember is is that those are contemplated being in place to protect the operations, the smooth transfer. One of the main ones is that the MPTA is able to receive the transfer of CATS personnel on the first day of that phase one. And as it's currently contemplated, what we are expecting on day one is that CATS personnel are informed that they have salary or hourly wages, bonus opportunities in retirement and health and welfare benefits that are no less than the base salary or the current wages, bonus opportunities, retirement and health and welfare benefits provided by the city. That their service be counted for vesting, eligibility, and accrual purposes, except where it would be double dipping, of course, and that benefit plans will waive or cause to be waived preexisting condition exclusions and activity at work requirements. That's what's currently in the draft, and it's there, of course, with the emphasis, we heard you loud and clear, to protect the employees in the transition.

Again, another gate for phase two that the assets that are encumbered or unencumbered need to be determined so that they can start being transferred from the city to the MPTA. So we will determine during this phase before January 1 what assets are not collateral for debt and that can be transferred. Contract assignment will also be prepared, what contracts can be assigned and which would remain with the city based on the assets. Equally important for the flow of funds is that the MPTA have the capability, the capacity, and the infrastructure to direct funds for debt service payments back to the city once all of the operations transfer to the MPTA. And another in progress discussion is what reserve the city will keep so that the city is able to pay off any of the liabilities that are incurred from from it's really the October 1 through the 01/01/2027 operating period.

We contemplate, of course, the capability of continued requirements with grant agreements and that the MPTA is ready to take on all of the operation functions, and that includes receiving approvals from federal and state authorities. Once those conditions have been met, then phase two starts. And, again, we contemplate that being 01/01/2027. Day one, operations and employees transfer. The governance and policy, which has been with the MPTA, remains with the MPTA.

There is going to be the need, and this will be long term, to have coordination between the city and the MPTA when it comes to transit infrastructure planning. So we hope to have those conversations and work out what that looks like long term. That'll be something new to get used to at the city at that point in time. Once again, flow of revenue, the funds will come back to the city for debt service payments, and there's just a note that work in progress is to determine exactly what the structure of how the MPTA holds funds looks like. Fund balance will transfer to the MPTA at this point in time, and liabilities will start to be all paid now through the funds, the operating capital that the MPTA is holding because all of those funds will remain with the MPTA.

There are gates for entering phase three. If you remember, phase three is just going back to assets coming out of being encumbering encumbered by debt and moving from the city to the MPTA. So we will transfer assets and contracts through phase three. Those are the phases. Phase three will probably take a little bit of time.

I wanna tell you some of the provisions, and these are just a few that I think you might be most interested in that occur throughout the entire agreement. This is a public enterprise, so the city should expect there to be no general fund liability. You will not continue the maintenance of effort payments that you've been making. You should expect that grant compliance be maintained throughout the life of the agreement, certainly when the grants are there. The parties will need to coordinate with each other to make sure each other have the information necessary for auditing, etcetera.

And there are probably going to be some additional agreements that come before you. Some of those will be required by statute to have council approval, things like leases. And some of those might be better determined at the discretion and and for a designee, things like the services that are required after January 1. Those would need to be any additional agreements that didn't come before you would need to be consistent with what you all have approved in July 1. And then a final big placeholder for something that remains in progress are the indemnification provisions that the city will expect when performing some of the services for for the MPTA after July 1.

This is where I tell you next steps, all the additional times this will come before you. There, you will be receiving by email information about staff availability for office hours. This is in parallel to how the MPTA board is also being able to provide input. So you will hear from staff times that you can provide input, comments, questions. You will also be receiving in your Thursday packets updates as this agreement progresses.

We do have on the calendar a placeholder for an additional discussion on June 1 at the Transportation Planning and Development Committee, and we also have a placeholder for additional discussion on the June 8 action review. Following that, this will need to be determined before July 1, so we contemplate that you consider adopting the proposed agreement on the June 22 date. Those from me.

Mister the manager

So mayor, members of council.

So

thank you so much for the presentation. We started an hour earlier today with two agenda items. I would like to make a suggestion. It's that we have

That's

good. We have the chamber filled right now with the expectation of a public hearing on the budget and a discussion about I 77 South

Mhmm.

On managed lanes. I would hope, Katherine, that you would be available to stay a bit later Yeah. And that we could come back and have any questions for her after we deal with those two issues in which we have a packed chamber for.

That's fine. Okay.

Does anybody have questions for Catherine? I have no questions.

No can't wait.

The only reason I would ask, I didn't want her to have to stay for no reason.

Is this

That could be coming.

Is this going to TPD?

Colleagues, I just want to

People asked about it, so I think Ed wanted

I just wanted to say the working group that was established consisting of myself and Doctor. Wellington and Ms. Owens met today to go over in detail the draft contract with an eye towards identifying issues for the benefit of the council. We did not express like opinions or participate in policy. What we're doing is looking at it and trying to lay it out for the council as excessively as possible because it's complicated and there are a lot of questions that need to be answered.

On Wednesday, the meeting will take place, the biweekly meeting will take place between MPTA and the city. And so before the end of the week, you'll have a staff report on what was discussed at that meeting and also our comments for your benefit of what we saw in the agreement, things that we need to think about. My concern is that's a tight schedule. This is a big deal, right? It's an important agreement, and we don't have any latitude to go past the first of July without breaking the requirements of the payback. So we're trying to make sure everybody can keep up and knows exactly what's going on. Thank you.

All right. Manager, you want us to all go downstairs and let's get this done at the beginning, okay? Good evening, everyone.

Good evening.

Hi. I'm Vi Lows, and I am so proud to be see this room so full and so ready. I this is a wonderful experience because it's so much to have you come in and be a part of this work that we try to do to make everyone feel good and safe and make it possible for everyone to have a part of what we're doing in this great city that we have. So I wanna call this meeting to order. I wanna say good evening and thank you for joining us here in person, and we also have people watching online for our May business meeting. Let's begin with introductions around the dais, and we'll start with our city clerk.

Billy Tons, deputy city clerk. Andrea Leslie Feit, city attorney.

Good evening. Dimple Ajmera at large.

Hey, Charlotte. Victoria Watlington. I have the pleasure of serving you as a member at large.

Joy Mayo, representing District 3.

Dante Anderson, District 1, and welcome to District 1 this evening.

Marcus Jones, city manager.

By laws, mayor.

Good evening, everyone. James Mitchell, mayor pro tem.

Good evening. Kimberly Owens, representing District 6.

Now from Graham District Two. Ed Driggs District 7.

Good evening. Luana Mayfield, council member at large.

Good evening. JD Masuda Arias proudly representing the East Side District 5.

Good evening. I'm Renee Johnson, and I'm honored to represent District 4.

So I really would say thank you. We but we have a few special guests that we have today, and I hope that they would be happy enough to be recognized. Where's our DA, district attorney? Where are you, And someone that I know well, Jennifer Roberts. Where are you, Jennifer?

So thank you again. What's the Bradley?

Senator Woodson. Who's over here? Woodson Bradley.

Woodson Bradley.

Oh, Woodson. Where are you? I can't see Usually, you see Woodson at another kind of event. She's always busy doing something. I can tell you that now. So but tonight, we're going to try to follow-up our recognitions as well as do some business. And so now I'm going to turn it over to I'm going to turn it over to our our community leaders who are Victoria Watlington

you, ma'am.

Have that presentation.

Thank you, madam mayor. We'd like to give a special thanks to US Navy captain Wade Smith. Is he in the building? If so, please stand. Doesn't it? He's with us tonight either. Okay. Well, so that you'll know, captain Smith is a native of Matthews and a graduate of North Carolina State University. We also wanna thank all of the Navy sailors who were here in Charlotte during Navy Week participating in various service projects and community projects. We thank you for your service to your community and, of course, from a grateful nation to our country.

Very much.

Alright. And now I'd like to ask Moana Mayfield to also talk about someone that's done something really good in our city. Thank you, madam mayor. I

have the honor of reading this proclamation. Whereas public works professionals focus on infrastructure, facilities, and services that are of vital importance to sustainable and resilient communities and to public health, high quality of life and well-being of the people of Charlotte, and whereas these infrastructure facilities and services could not be provided without the dedicated efforts of public works professionals who are engineers, managers, and employees at all levels of government and the private sector, who are responsible for rebuilding, improving, and protecting our nation's transportation, water supply, water treatment, and solid waste systems, public buildings, and other structures and facilities essential for our citizens. And whereas it is in the public interest for the citizens, civic leaders, and children in Charlotte to gain knowledge of and maintain an ongoing interest and understanding of the importance of public works and public works programs in their respective communities. And whereas the year 2026 marks the sixty sixth Annual National Public Works Week sponsored by the American Public Works Association. Now, therefore, our mayor, by Alexander Lyles, mayor of Charlotte, do hereby proclaim May 17 to the twenty third two thousand twenty six as National Public Works Week in Charlotte and commend its observance to all citizens.

I encourage everyone to join with representatives of the American Public Works Association and government agencies in activities, events, and ceremonies designed to pay tribute to our public works professionals, engineers, managers, and employees, and to recognize the substantial contributions they make to protecting our national health, safety, and advancing quality of life for all. Witness the hand and official seal of the city of Charlotte, our mayor by Alexander Louse.

Mayor, did you know

that have

that we have any public works employees? Well, I see some sitting around the room.

You definitely see a few. I think they're wearing Thank you guys for what you do. Thank you very much. I think we're gonna go back and ask miss Watlington to, while the person is not here, we need to understand that they are going to be a part of what our city is doing. So we'll go ahead and ask miss Watlington to do this.

Thank you, madam mayor. Whereas the United States Navy was founded on 10/13/1775 and the Department of the Navy was established on 04/30/1798, and whereas the Navy's mission is to maintain, train, and equip combat ready naval forces capable of winning wars, deterring aggression, and maintaining freedom of the seas. And whereas the United States Navy has announced May 2026 as Navy Week in Charlotte, North Carolina, returning after twenty years and bringing sailors to directly and meaningfully engage with the community, whereas the Navy Week program has served as the Navy's principal outreach effort in areas of the nation without a significant Navy presence with over 300 Navy Weeks held in 95 different US cities, And whereas Charlotte is a leading city that has a rich connection to Navy history and heritage with thousands of veteran residents living in Charlotte Mecklenburg area, one of which is sitting at this dais. Whereas Navy Week showcases a lineup of service projects, performances, demonstrations, and community engagement opportunities designed to inspire, educate, and strengthen the bond between the Navy and the people of Charlotte. And whereas currently, there are approximately 341,000 sailors serving actively in the US Navy in addition to 59,000 reserve personnel who also exemplify courage and selflessness to protect our nation.

Now, therefore, Vi Alexander Lyles, mayor of Charlotte, does hereby proclaim May 2026 as navy week in Charlotte and commend its observer observance to all people. Alright.

So so do we have any navy folks out there? Stand up, please. Please, if you're Navy. Yes. Navy.

I'm a marine.

Yes. Thank

you so much for all of that service, and thank you for this proclamation for all of them. So now we're going to go ahead and begin our meeting, and we start our meeting with an invocation and expression or inspiration followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. This invocation is intended to solemnize our proceedings. We celebrate the religious diversity of our community, including those without a religious faith. Tonight, I'm going to ask mayor pro tem to provide our invocation. And as he finishes and completes, please stand to join us with our pledge of allegiance to our flag. Thank you very much.

Can we all stand, please? Please bow your head if you feel so. O wise and gracious father, we thank you for another day called life in the city of Charlotte. Lord, now we ask that you be with this mayor and city council, be with our city staff, be with all the citizens that call Charlotte home. Lord, let your spirit be in this chamber this evening, so we will hear and listen to our residents. Be with the city council, we make the decision that will continue to uplift your city, the city we love, the city we call Charlotte. Let all believers under my voice say amen. Amen. I

pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America Now, thank you all for being a part of this. I believe that our next item is a public hearing decision that we're going to have, and I believe miss Rudesyl would like to speak in opposition to this process. Miss Rudisil, are you here? If you would come down, be careful. Those steps can be tricky.

I don't know.

She's heavy for black.

Black. Tell him

about it.

Okay. Honorable honorable council members. I appreciate the opportunity to talk today. Is my lipstick alright?

It's always alright. Thank you.

Okay, I'm Lisa Russel, a Charlotte native whose people came to this area in 1760. I'm almost that old. The Russel Gold Mine is the main reason that we've had the second largest banking center in The United States here but things have changed too much here in Charlotte in the years that I've seen. Over the past two decades, banks and other corporations have come here from across The United States. From Bank of America, we have added Wells Fargo, which is one of our tallest skyscrapers downtown, Truist, SunTrust, US Bank, Chase, you can go on and on with it.

Actually, all of this is overwhelming our locals, our banks, our citizens, and just the people here. Sumitomo Masatomo from the fifteen hundreds was from a family of samurai warriors who became a monk and then started a business. From this grew Sumitomo Corporation headquartered in Tokyo, Japan, one of the largest and diversified businesses in the world. They already own land on our Catawba River, the source of drinking and electricity for over a million people just in the Charlotte area. And I don't want to say this but I'm going to. P. S. The Catawba out by I-eighty 5 now smells because we have new sewage treatment plant out there.

And you do this upon your time.

Do we want a foreign company to have a big stake here that's from the other side of the world, from Japan? Do we want our their profit dollars to go to that country? Say they will bring 1,200 good paying jobs here,

but we get

a everyone gets two minutes of of conversation.

I'm sorry.

I thought

it was three.

Nope. That's no. When you have a crowd like this, you have to have two.

Oh, I didn't know that.

Oh, thank you. So, if you can provide the information Yeah. To the clerk, then we'll go ahead and proceed to the next item.

So I just wanted to end by saying, mayor mayor, Lyles, that you've done a wonderful job.

Thank you so very much. I'll tell someone about that, right? Okay. So, do I have we also have we are now going to open the public hearings for on the SMBC Business Investment Grant. Madam Clerk, do we have any speakers beside Ms. Ruticent? No, ma'am. All right. So We're to hearing.

Second. Have

a motion

to Ms. Close Ruticent.

And move forward. All in favor of that motion, please raise your hands. Anyone un all right, everybody's good down here. So, that passes unanimously. All right, so the next item is we're going to now open a public hearing on municipal service districts and District 5 boundaries expansion. Madam clerk, do we have any speakers? Item now, one.

We have one.

Who is our speaker for this? Jason Davies. Mister Davies, come on down. Take

your time, please.