Board of County Commissioners - Regular Meeting

good evening everyone good evening thank you all for being here today is August 24th 2026 and this is the meeting of the Durham Board of County Commissioners this is our regular session I'm going to read the public charge and then I will have Commissioner Valentine read the land acknowledgement. After that, we'll then have Commissioner Jacobs lead us in the pledge. The Board of Commissioners asks its members and residents to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the Board and fellow residents. At any time, should any member of the board or any resident fail to observe this public charge, the chair will ask the offending person to leave the meeting until that individual regains personal control. Should decorum fail to be restored, the chair will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to the public charge is observed. Commissioner Valentine.

Thank you, Chair. As we convene for the Durham County Commissioners' Meeting, It's crucial to recognize the painful truth of history. We stand on the stolen ancestral lands of the Catawba. the Eno, the Okaneechi, the Shikori, and the Tuscarora peoples, whose deep connection to this land predates our arrival. We acknowledge with humility the unjust displacement and violence that occurred, leading to the dispossession of indigenous peoples from their homelands. Their resilience in the face of such adversity is a testament to their strength and spirit. May we humbly honor the ancestors and elders of these nations, both past and present, by committing ourselves to fostering understanding, healing, and justice. For all who inhabit this land, let us walk forward together with open hearts, acknowledging the past and embracing the future, guided by compassion, respect, and unity.

Thank you, Commissioner Valentine and Commissioner Jacobs. The next item on our agenda is agenda adjustments for our agenda review and approval. Are there any adjustments to the agenda as presented? I'll accept the motion to approve the agenda as presented.

So moved. Second.

It's been moved and probably seconded that we approve the agenda as presented. Any further discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed please use the same sign. It passes unanimously. Next item on our agenda Our announcements. Clerk Wallace.

Good evening, everyone. I will read the announcements published in tonight's agenda. Students have 30 days from the first day of school to get caught up on all required vaccinations. The Durham County Department of Public Health has all required vaccinations available in their immunization clinic by appointment or by walk-in as scheduled permits. Children who are underinsured or have no insurance can be vaccinated at no cost. For more information or to schedule an appointment, please call the Immunization Office at 919-560-7608 or you can visit the website dcopublichealth.org. Love cooking and giving back to your community? Durham Cooperative Extension is looking for residents to join the Extension Master Food Volunteer Program. Interested residents are invited to join an upcoming information session to learn how they can turn their skills and passion into meaningful support for families across Durham. EMFZs support and amplify cooperative extensions, nutrition, and cooking programs and can lead their own cooking demos in the community. Applications for the new cohort open later this summer and anyone interested must attend an information session. There is a link to register and receive additional information. Durham County Library and Duke Cancer Institute for Real Talk, Community Conversations About Health, a community-centered dialogue about health and wellness for adults at Stanford L. Warren Branch Library, located at 1201 Fevel Street from 6 to 7.30 p.m. on Wednesday, August 26. This open conversation brings together community members and health professionals to explore topics such as cancer prevention, clinical research, screening opportunities, and other health questions that matter to you. Bring your curiosity, questions, and experience and connect with others in a welcoming, informal setting. The public comment period for Q1 amendments to the fiscal year 27 Durham Transit Work Program is now open until Thursday, August the 27th. For additional information on the proposed amendments, you can visit the Transportation Department's website. There is a link. And you can also submit a public comment at transportation at dconc.gov. Most Durham County government offices will be closed on Monday, September 7, 2026, in observance of the Labor Day holiday. Offices will reopen with normal operating hours on Tuesday, September 8. For details on how the holiday may affect specific county services, please visit DCONC.gov. And lastly, Durham County Library invites you to view rare 19th century prints of the Declaration of Independence at the Durham County Main Library from September 8th through 20th, 2026. As part of the We the People, a Duke and Durham Initiative, Durham County Main Library and the Nasher Museum of Art at Duke University will present three historic copies of the Declaration of Independence on loan from the David M. Rubenstein Americana Collection. This exhibit offers a rare opportunity to explore how the nation's founding document was visually rendered and circulated in early American history. For more information about the exhibit, you can visit durhamcountylibrary.libcal.com. That concludes the announcements published in tonight's agenda.

Thank you, Clark Wallace. The next item on our agenda are the minutes. Oh, I'm sorry. Are there any other announcements from commissioners? Commissioner Jacobs.

Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to really celebrate the fact that we had the statewide convening of the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners here in Durham. The conference started Wednesday and then ended on Saturday night. It's the first time that we've had county commissioners from across North Carolina, from 89 different counties and their staff. here in Durham since 2017. And I really want to thank our staff, especially our clerk, Monica Wallace, our deputy clerk, Maceo Carlton, Many other people, Donna Riewoldt, our Director of Cooperative Extension, Brent Lewis, Deborah Craig-Ray, Dawn Dudley. I mean, I'm going to get into trouble by naming people, but Crystal Harris. Anyway, a lot of our staff have been working for months to make this conference possible. And we had over 600 people. downtown in the convention center and it was really a fantastic convening and I personally enjoyed a lot of different sessions one on data centers upcoming challenges around property tax I went to one on mental health trauma and I just found that there was a lot of really good conversations happening from rural urban young old Democrat Republican people building relationships and all focusing on the issues that all of our counties are facing and I did want to share with our board because I know everyone was not able to be at the the banquet, but I'm really excited. I was appointed by the incoming president to help chair his presidential initiative, which is going to be around social services and protecting social services, because we know that right now in the state and in our country, our safety net is under attack and so i really look forward to being a part of that and also including our board in that as well and durham county staff thank you okay any other announcements did you commissioner valentine okay

all right thank you thank you very much that um ncacc conference was a a great conference i was sick i couldn't be there but okay all right and hearing no other announcements from the commissioners next item on our agenda On approval of the minutes for August 10th, 2026, our regular session minutes. So moved. Second. It's been moved and properly seconded that we approve the minutes dated August 10th, 2026, our regular session. Any further discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, please use the same sign. Passes unanimously. Next item on our agenda, we move into ceremonial items. two proclamations. The first one is recognizing the Durham Library Foundation in acknowledgement of their fiscal year 2027 gift of $248,317.31 in support of Durham County Library Programs. Microphone.

learning something new every day good evening everyone my name is Kara Nunnally I'm the executive director of the Durham Library Foundation thank you all for the invitation to be here tonight we are so honored to present this year's grant award of over $248,000 to Durham County Library this is possible because of our dedicated donors our passionate board members and the wonderful library staff who believe in the power of libraries in the Durham community The foundation exists solely to provide a margin of excellence to Durham County Library. It is already an impactful resource, and our job is to raise money to make it world class by providing enhancements to programming and events for all ages and stages of life that otherwise would not be possible. This award is a testament to our community, to our libraries, and to our future. Thank you.

And I'm Dana Connors. I'm the library director. We so much appreciate our partnership with the Durham Library Foundation. This year, this $248,000 is funding 14 different programs, including things that everybody in the community knows and loves, including our summer reading program, library fest that happens in April every year, and a myriad of other programs that we hope you all come to the library to enjoy. Thank you.

All right. Thank you.

All right.

all right so uh commissioner comments uh yes thank you chair and so uh miss nunley uh director nunley where are you you you uh you escaped the moment so i just want to say thank you to uh you and uh the board or the foundation every year you come into this chamber and uh you do a yemen job in supporting our libraries i think most of the people who have gathered here today would agree that the library is one of our largest assets it's an asset that all of the community can be involved and so the money that you raise goes towards a very important part of our community and maintaining it and adding to the programming that goes on in our library and so i just want to say thank you from from my seat here on the board and i'm sure there are others who will join me in that and so thank you um commissioner burke

yes thank you chair lee and thank you um miss donnelly for always supporting the library you know i love the library um and all the wonderful things that it does for our durham community and i just want to share that during the north carolina association of county commissioners conference that was held last week here in durham the durham county library the main branch was one of the sites that we did the tours where we had other county commissioners from across north carolina to tour our library downtown. And I know Commissioner Jacobs went to our affordable housing and she led that and I led the library. And those commissioners and other staff with NCACC, they were just blown away by our library. And I made sure that Dana mentioned about the important work of the library foundation. Thank you so much for all that you do for Durham County Libraries. We appreciate you.

Thank you.

Commissioner Alon.

Thank you, Chair Lee. And right before I give my comments, I just want to note, if you have an empty seat next to you, if you want to raise your hand so that folks who are standing know they can come file in, or if you guys scooch over to make room. The folks standing, if you want to sit down. But I wanted to join in in my thanks and appreciation for all the work that you all do to raise this money, because a lot of times folks don't know that Durham County government and local governments, we're not authorized or allowed to fundraise and solicit funds for vital programs. Our main source of revenue is property tax and sales tax. And obviously like that also, there's a drawback to that because most marginalized communities get impacted when those have to be raised. So having an entity like the Durham Public Library Foundation that steps in in this space that the county is not able to fill to do this fundraising, to do the hard work of reaching out to other folks who love our libraries, who see how vital of a resource it is, probably after Durham Public Schools, it's the most visited, used resource within Durham County and probably any local government. So y'all's work is really vital for us, not only to help keep the program running, but also supporting our tax rate not having to go up and up. But thank you so much for this work and for caring about our library so much. I know myself and my children love to visit and attend the story hours, and then also we are at East Regional Libraries, our closest. They have different crafts and activities. for young kids i'm hoping you guys bring back there was one day it got rescheduled i'm waiting to see when it's back there was like uh service dogs for kids um where people bring in service dogs and training to practice around young children um and so the fact that our libraries are welcoming to that type of programming is really great too thank you thank you commissioners

So there's 10 seats right up here, if anyone's interested in sitting in here. It's like 10 seats in these first two rows. And just in case anyone wants to sit down. All right, so thank you, thank you very much. All right, okay. Let's see, where were we here? all right the next proclamation the second one the last one of the uh celebratory items is a proclamation supportive of how uh housing week um do we have someone that's going to speak on housing oh yeah there we are microphone i sat and watched but did not learn

Chair Lee, commissioners, and members of the Durham community, thank you for recognizing August 24th through 28th as Supportive Housing Week here in Durham County. Supportive Housing Week is a national observance bringing communities across the country together to recognize the impact of supportive housing and the people and partnerships that make it possible. Here in Durham, that work connects directly to our community's longtime goal of making homelessness rare, brief, and non-recurring. Supportive housing is an essential part of achieving that goal because it combines affordable housing with customized, individualized services that help people who have experienced homelessness and often other significant challenges achieve long-term stability. For more than 30 years, Housing for New Hope has had the privilege of doing this work in Durham alongside an extraordinary network of community partners. And those years have taught us something important. Housing is foundational to ending homelessness, but housing alone is often not enough. That's why we have developed an approach we call supportive pathways. Supportive pathways recognizes six areas that contribute to long-term stability. Housing, mental health and emotional wellness, substance use recovery, employment and job readiness, life skills development, and relationship and community building. The emphasis is on pathways. because there isn't one path out of homelessness. For one neighbor, the next step may be connecting with mental health care. For another, it may be recovery. For someone else, it may be finding a job, developing the skills needed to maintain a home, or rebuilding relationships and a sense of belonging. No organization can provide all of those things alone. That's why partnerships is the heart of supportive housing. Alliance Health is an essential partner in connecting housing, with behavioral health services and supports. The Duke University School of Nursing helps us strengthen connections to health and wellness. Freedom House Recovery Center brings deep expertise in mental health and substance use recovery. And Step Up Durham helps our neighbors pursue employment and greater economic stability.

And they represent a much larger network of local government, health care, behavioral health providers, nonprofits, landlords, congregations, philanthropy, volunteers, and community members who make this work possible. The impact extends beyond the individuals we serve. Supportive housing reduces homelessness, improves housing stability and health outcomes, and helps public resources work more effectively. When someone has a stable home and appropriate supports, Emergency rooms, shelters, jails, and other crisis systems are less likely to become substitutes for housing. So during this Supportive Housing Week, we celebrate more than buildings or programs. We celebrate people, partnerships, and the belief that homelessness does not have to define someone's future. behalf of housing for new hope and those we serve thank you for this proclamation and thank you to the many partners across durham who make this work possible together we are building a durham where every neighbor has the opportunity not simply to be housed but to thrive thank you thank you thank you here we have comments from the commissioners commissioner tickups

Thank you so much Russ for bringing this to us and thank you Shante and all the staff of Housing for New Hope for the incredible work that you do as our nonprofit partner who is providing supportive housing in Durham. Russ, I wonder if you could take this opportunity since we have an incredible crowd here tonight. to talk about the new vision that you all are working on for Housing for New Hope and also to give us all an update on the Carver Creek campus for permanent supportive housing. Several years ago, the city and the county both chipped in to over $6 million to help Housing for New Hope buy an apartment building and basically create a 14-acre, is that right? am i right 11 acre campus uh for the vision is for uh permanent supportive housing campus so if you could give us any updates on both of those things certainly um so in this season where there are so many

changes at the federal level potentially and also at the local level around funding i think that's been part of our rethinking because we were one of the first agencies to bring housing first to north carolina nearly 20 years ago and so that supportive pathways approach of you know it's not just about housing but it's really customized services based on what people need in order to reach long-term stability is is really critical across the board in our work particularly at carver creek this is 48 units of historically senior affordable housing that was really saved by the action of the commissioners and the council three years ago we are preparing in the next two to three months to begin a first phase of rehabilitation on through the first floor community spaces and some of the units in partnership with the city with CDBG funds we've also partnered with the county and working with representative who she for a second phase potentially of rehabilitation that will create an integrated supportive housing community there between the existing 48 units and additional 24 units that were already there. And then finally, we have commenced with a new master planning process in partnership with Clearscapes to look at how those two campuses integrate but also to look at what additional housing could be added there. Do we go vertical and build 45 units? Do we build tiny home clusters based on what the neighbors that we serve tend to need most? So it's an exciting time with lots happening, yes.

Awesome. Very exciting. Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioner Alonzo, Vice Chair Alonzo.

Thank you, Chair Lee. Thank you so much, Russ, and your entire team for being here. I just wanted you to also take an opportunity with this amazing crowd that we have. Can you also share with folks about the point-in-time count? Because for folks who don't know, point-in-time is just the U.S. HUD or housing department's way of one night a year, communities, counties, cities go out and count, try to get a count of what our unhoused and unsheltered population is so that we can try to figure out how to provide support. resources and connect folks. So if you want to tell folks more about how Housing for a New Hope runs that and what we do with that data.

yes so hud does have an expectation that every year or so we do a community-wide count of those that are experiencing both unsheltered homelessness so the folks that you might see on corners and and in other spaces in addition to those that are in the shelters that gives us a baseline of what's happening in the community we always say quickly that the number is always larger but it gives us a sense of the trends and It actually impacts the funding that comes from, to some extent, the state, but definitely the federal level in terms of our ability to address homelessness.

And how can people help with that point in time count?

So generally it happens on the fourth Wednesday of January every year. Leadership for that is actually shifting back to the city. after a number of years and so we are anxiously looking to see eagerly looking anxious has the word fear in it eagerly looking to see what plans are for that and I think one of the exciting developments this coming year is there is conversation about coordinating with Wake County and Orange County potentially on the same night so that we can get a broader sense of what's happening across the entire triangle and that would be a new development for us here in the triangle

Wonderful. Thank you. Thank you. I urge everyone, if you have the time in January, I've done it. I know I think most folks on this guys have done it. You go out. I got to ride with a heart team member. Heart is the co-response response team from the city. And we drove around downtown Durham and we stopped and we would see someone who is unhoused, unsheltered. stop ask them questions see what resources they needed and we're able to document so that then either heart officers can follow up with them to see if they've been able to find housing or just providing that data to HUD so we can get funding to provide support so that is a volunteer mostly driven campaign so if folks can come out and help with that the more folks we have the better count we can get absolutely

Okay. Thank you, Vice Chair Long. Commissioner Burton, did you have anything? Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay, so that's the end of our ceremonial items. The next item on our agenda is a consent agenda. These items have come from various meetings mainly our work session but before we approve the consent agenda we have public comment on two of the items okay so we're gonna have to pull two and that public comment will come at the end of the meeting where we have the items pulled from consent the items will be pulled twenty six zero four two one That's 260421, and then 260441. Each one of those has a public comment requested on those, so we will pull those, and we'll vote on those separately. Okay? Go ahead.

I'm wondering should we I know we approved the agenda could we amend the agenda to move that like the items pulled from consent to before the public hearing since the public hearing will likely be a long period and we don't want it like if staff needs to stay back we don't have staff waiting having to stay we don't have to vote to move that do we

All right. So let's make a vote. I'll accept a motion to move items removed from consent agenda to just after the consent agenda so staff wouldn't have to wait.

Second.

It's been moved. We have a motion on the floor to move the items moved from consent agenda. It's been properly seconded. Any further discussions? All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, please use the same sign. Okay, so that item will be moved right after consent agenda, right after we vote to remain a consent agenda. Commissioner Jacobs.

I just had a quick question for our library director. I'm really thrilled. to see item 26-0411 about doing a library master facilities plan. Is Dana still? Okay, great, awesome. really glad to see this this is an appropriate use of general fund balance since it's one-time funding just wondering if you could tell us a little bit about your thoughts you know you're coming in from other library systems you know what what what your hopes are for this and also Will this also look at like the current library conditions and things that we need to keep up with like maintenance and repair was one of my questions, what the timeframe is for the plan. This is for the manager. Do we have money in our CIP for library improvements? And then my last question is, and I was over at the main library today. Originally, because I was part of renovating the library, When you walk in, the area off to the right was originally envisioned to be like a coffee shop, which is a great enterprise opportunity, you know, for small business, plus we could raise money for the library. You know, the Austin Library, even the Little Rock Library has swag for sale. So I just wondered if you thought about that and

as well as a part of this or maybe even we don't need to wait for this let me see if i can address all of those questions so this facility master plan will allow us to engage a consultant to look at the entire county and determine do we have libraries where we are meeting the needs of the community and if we don't where are those areas that we need additional libraries And if we have libraries already in those places, such as our regional libraries, are they meeting the needs? Do they need to be expanded? What do we need to do to those libraries to make sure that they can meet the needs of the community? As far as looking at main library, we had a different facility master plan for that years ago, and that resulted in the new main library. So we'll pay attention to it some, but not as much as we will to the rest of the county. generally the the money not my department but it would be entered as part of a capital improvement plan which i think we're talking about later in the year so the facility master plan will take some time to complete and we'll do that in conjunction with the county engineering department As far as the cafe area in the main library, we can certainly look at that. Some of my experience with food and food services in libraries has, I've had quite a bit of it, and some of it's been positive and some of it's been negative, so it would require a lot of study for us to be able to determine if that's something that we can look at. We've also been talking with the Friends of the Library about a long-term plan of selling Durham County Library swag through the Friends of the Library, and that way it's not coming through the library budgets. Did I catch all your questions?

Thank you so much, and I look forward to the next steps with the plan and also hearing more about how to really activate that space. Thank you.

All right, any other comments from commissioners? Okay, I'll accept the motion to approve the consent agenda minus the two that were moved. That's 260421 and 260441. So moved.

Second.

All right, we have a motion on the floor. It's been properly moved and seconded. Any further discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, please use the same sign. Passes unanimously. The first item pulled from the consent agenda is 260421, which is approval of property tax releases and refunds for June 2026. We have a public comment from Pablo Friedman.

All right, good evening, Chair Lee, Vice Chair, alum, members of the County Commissioner, the hundreds of folks in the audience and the millions of people that watch these meetings online. So I was the one person that pulled this item, and I pulled it for one important reason. These properties are entitled to their refunds, but the public deserves the minutes for why the board granted billions of dollars of property tax removals for commercial property owners, and those minutes still have not been posted. The last meeting that you had with the city council, members point blank asked in somewhat pointed terms when are those minutes coming when the reporter from the indie week asked those minutes to be produced they still weren't produced and so while these properties are entitled to their refunds i think the public at a minimum whether you agree with these property valuation um billions of dollars or not we the public the taxpayers deserve an answer as to how they were granted and the only way we will ever know is through the minutes and the minutes have not been posted so to ask tonight One is I'd like the county attorney to issue some guidance to these boards to follow the Public Records Act. That's number one. And number two, I want commissioners on the dais to say something publicly about these minutes. We deserve them. The public deserves them. White commercial owners got to write off billions of dollars of their property tax valuations. Thank you.

all right uh papa you had two items pulled did you want to speak first on the second one which is essentially the same no okay thank you yes um all right qr doyle good afternoon commissioners qr doyle tax administrator hello to the public everyone is here tonight um i do want to address the

The records that have been requested have been provided. The Durham County Department of Tax Administration has never posted meeting minutes on our public website. There are some minutes on the website. They are from 2023 and 2024, and they are specific to personal property. So the minutes that were requested and have been requested have been provided to those requests. Anybody who would like those can please send a request through public information. There's one thing that needs to be said about minutes and about anything requested. It is illegal for Durham County Tax Administration or Durham County to provide confidential information. So the information that is deemed to be confidential within those minutes that you are requesting has to be redacted. That is by law, that is not a choice that we make here. So just in general, so that everybody understands, If you go to Durham County website and you pull up minutes for anything related to Durham County Tax Department, you will see some minutes, and they are from 2023 and 2024. There are no minutes prior to that and there are no minutes after that. So it's not specific to 2025's reappraisal. There was a 2019, a 2016, and a 2008 reappraisal. There are no minutes for any of them, all right? so there were minutes specific to 23 and 24 and you can see them they're still there nobody removed them but minutes specific to a particular year can be requested we will provide them but i do want you to know that there is no confidential information within all right any more questions from the board or the public commissioner burton

Yes, thank you, Mr. Doyle. And I understand residents' frustration around the reevaluation and how much money was refunded to commercial property owners. Can you explain briefly why that occurred? Because I know our residents and You know, when they saw that number, it was very large. And we want to be as transparent as possible. So if you can explain briefly why that occurred and state laws and things of that nature. Thank you.

It's not a real brief response to that question, but I'll try my best to be respectful to time, but as transparent as possible. The overall reappraisal for 2025 resulted in 10,500 appeals. $10,533 to be exact. Any responsibility or error or problems or finger pointing needs to be pointed directly at the tax administrator, myself, Kiardo, the Board of Equalization and Review, the tax office, the staff. Everybody did a wonderful job. I went out and I asked you all to appeal, and you did. and you gave us $10,533 more than we'd ever seen. The goal was to make sure that those appeals were done before January 5th. That's the number one error. We did not get the appeals done by January 5th, which means that we were still handling appeals and processing appeals after delinquency. These things impact more than just value in regards to people's property values. It affects Durham County's budget. So the number one thing that happened was our office not handling 10,500 appeals by January 5th. That's the number one thing. The second thing is that there were two property types in the commercial realm that were over-assessed. Not assessed and then given a discount. That's very important to understand. They were over-assessed to begin with. two particular property types, all right? Those things were adjusted, and they were adjusted downward, and those adjustments impacted our overall value. The overall value was an increase from roughly 53 billion to about 80 billion, 85 billion, somewhere in that ballpark. Four billion was adjusted. So in the grand scheme of things, $30 billion increase, a $4 billion decrease came afterwards. The two main property types to answer the question that was asked, two main property types within the commercial properties, those being apartments and office buildings, experienced the largest adjustments. That was not an act of a Board of Equalization and Review. you appeal the property in this room you know that you file an appeal you hear from an appraiser adjustments can be made and then that value goes before the board of equalization and review for the final authority and approval or denial but an appraiser cannot sell the value of value for you you have to go before the board so the board has the final say it doesn't mean that they cut value themselves it means that they have to vote on the value that is is given to them, that they hear before them at that particular hearing. So that is a misconception or a false narrative that the Board of Equalization and Review by themselves reduced a whole bunch of values. That's not how the process works. Anybody in this room who has appealed to property understands that.

Any other questions? Vice Chair Alam, you had your hand up.

I did, but I was mostly going to ask, Mr. Doyle, obviously I know you stated that we'd have to redact anything confidential, which is probably a significant part of the minutes because it's talking about people's property, addresses, everything, personal information. Is there any, besides the amount of time that that would consume for staff to be able to post the full meeting minutes for the 2025 for Board of Equalization Review, are there any legal restrictions that would block us from publishing those or concerns?

Publishing them online?

Yeah, on the Board of Equalization Review.

I do not believe so. There is no requirement by the state that they be published on an actual website. It is a requirement that we deliver that upon request. It is public information. So if anybody asks for that information, we have to deliver it. has to be redacted from confidential information but it is not a requirement that it be posted to a website that was the only misconception I believe that was because the question was asked and it looked like something was being done and it stopped that was I understand that confusion but there were never there was never a practice of this particular County posting minutes on the website But it can be, if you're requesting, can we, yes.

Okay. If it's, I mean, we would have to find out like how many pages it is and how much time it would take. Obviously, I don't know.

Yeah, it's 10,533 records. Okay. Yes.

Seeing how much time it takes and then like maybe it's not going to happen overnight, but if that is something that. there is capacity for staffing to be able to redact in post, I think would ease some concerns for residents.

We would certainly do that at your request.

Okay. Anyone else? Questions for these topics, these items that are pulled off of consent?

uh commissioner jacobs i just want to thank you keyar for providing information to the community we do not control tax laws in north carolina they are from the state legislature and we have to follow what the rules and the laws are according to state statute. And so I know that there are a lot of things that are frustrating about how personal property tax is calculated and measured versus commercial and apartments. If you could explain, there are like three different methods of appraising property. And so there are more tools for people when it comes to commercial and office than residential. And if people are very concerned about this issue, then it's important for us to see change at the state level, because we don't have that authority. at the local level and it's also a process where our board is not directly involved the board of equalization and review is a quasi judicial board and so and they are also following the state statutes and people who are not happy with what the board of equalization and review has done they have the ability to go to the state level to the North Carolina Property Tax Commission. Is that correct? Yes. But anyway, if you could maybe explain about the differences in the methods of the appraisal too. I know that was helpful for me personally.

Okay. So the three approaches to value are the cost approach, sales comparison approach, and the income approach. The income approach is the benefit beneficiary that these commercial properties are deemed to have received and it's really just a matter of the type of property type so property types dictate which particular use is going to be the use that is going to be the deciding factor or the judge for this particular property all right so income properties you would assume would use the income approach I live in a home. My home is owner occupied. That home would not use the income approach. It's going to be based on the cost approach, sales comparison approach. If I move out of my home and I rent that home, I might be able to use the income approach because I'm in another property. That property is now a rental property. It's based on I'm using it for income. I have rents. The property type dictates the use. So we as residential property owners who live in our homes, unfortunately we do not get the benefit of the income approach. That is an appraisal practice. That is not somebody's decision that they're sitting around deciding on their own. That is an appraisal practice, all right? And just to speak to one more thing that the commissioner mentioned, just so that you all know, in September of 2025, we went before the board Actually, I believe this was, yes, definitely September 2025. Went before the Board of County Commissioners. This board right here voted to start a second Board of Equalization and Review. The goal was to get more members involved, more people hearing cases, to get the cases done before January 5th. We didn't get enough people applying to fill up a second board. Just so that you know, the effort was there. They voted. They allowed us to ask. They allowed these people to post it on the website. We didn't get applicants. So that was the effort in September of 2025, months prior to January 5th, to try to get a little more runway, a lot more accomplished in that small period of time. Just wanted to make sure that that was mentioned. But the three approaches to value, cost approach, sales comparison approach, and the income approach.

Okay. Commissioner Burton.

Yeah thank you Mr. Doyle for that and I think this is important for our residents to understand that the state controls a lot of things and I think they think we have a lot of more authority than we actually have and also it's important when we have these committees and commissions and such to apply for them we want residents to apply for these boards to be involved. And like Mr. Doyle said, we approved for another Board of Equalization and Review, a second one, to get through these evaluations, and we hardly had anyone to apply. i know that it feels like i know people are upset and angry about what occurred with the reevaluation that's why it's important that we vote for the right people at the state legislature to change laws at the state level at the county commissioner level we do not make laws the legislature makes the law so thank you mr doyle for that and i yield back to the chair okay

Commissioner Valentine.

Chair, actually I have a question for you. With respect to Commissioner Lam talking about transparency and accountability and whether or not the administrator in his office has capability, I don't want to just leave that hanging out.

Okay.

I think that we should probably handle that in some kind of way with respect to giving guidance as opposed to it sort of just languishing out there and that's not addressing what I think probably needs to be addressed here this evening.

So the request was to give us an estimate of the amount of time that it would take or to just do it?

I think a timeline, yes, of publishing the meeting minutes, more specifically around the revaluation year. Board of Equalization Review only meets during revaluation, right? Or do they meet outside of revaluations, too?

Board of Equalization Review just finished meeting for 2026 about two weeks ago. They meet every year.

I think at least if we can start with the records, request that the records related to the revaluations, getting those published, because I think that's the ones that are most questions about.

Published or made available?

Published on the website. On the website? Yeah, on the website.

Okay.

With the redactions.

So, Larissa, do you want to?

Yeah, I would say that that would need to be done in coordination with my office to ensure that no confidential information is released. And we would need to work together to see what exactly it is that we would be dealing with. So I know for me it would be a little difficult to give a timeline without knowing exactly what we're working with, the amount of time that it would take to redact any confidential information, how much confidential information may be included. that would also affect the timeline as well. So we can work together and maybe come back with that.

So maybe at our work session if we can receive like an update of this is how long it'll take us.

I'm okay with that. My main issue is just ensuring that based on the unprecedented nature of the chain of events regarding this tax cycle that we be as transparent as we can. I think that's important.

I just have one quick comment. I agree that we should come back and also share context what other counties are doing and benchmarking what a best practice is considering the volume and the timeliness of the information and then the laws that surround what we're doing. We want to be transparent and we want to be responsive. It's also what does that look like in trying to achieve both.

Okay. So do we, do you feel comfortable with that instruction to the staff?

So on our work session, Mr. Doyle.

Do you feel comfortable with that? I feel comfortable with that. Okay. All right. Good. So the staff has instructions. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Doyle. All right, I'll accept the motion to approve the two items, 260421 and 260441. That was pulled off of the consent agenda. So moved. Second. It's been moved and probably seconded. We approve the two items removed from the consent agenda. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, please use the same sign. Passes unanimously. Okay. That was the completion of the consent agenda and the items removed from the consent agenda. All right, moving on with our agenda, the next item that we have is our public hearings. We just have one today. In case you guys didn't know, we have a public hearing today. All right, so I'll open the public hearing and we will hear from staff first and then we'll have questions if should there be any from the county commissioners after that we'll start with our public comment within the public hearing once public comment has been completed we'll close the public hearing and then the commissioners will have opportunity to make their statements make statements and then we'll vote on the outcome whatever the outcome would be within the for the public hearing okay that's the process that's the kind of the way to public hearings work all right so I'll open the public hearing and we'll hear from staff thank you chair Lee and good evening everyone I'm Maurice Jones deputy county manager tonight the Board of Commissioners

As the chair mentioned, we'll be holding a public hearing to consider a proposed temporary moratorium on the development of data centers in Durham County. We look forward to receiving feedback from the public, answering any questions the board may have on this issue, hearing the discussion amongst the commissioners, and then, if ready, having the board vote on the moratorium. We'll begin by providing a general definition of a data center. They are physical facilities or buildings that house groups of networked computers, servers, and data storage infrastructure used by companies to organize, process, store, and share large amounts of digital information. There are different types of data centers largely defined by their uses and size. Here are four of the more common descriptions. cloud or hyperscale data centers those are large facilities used by companies like google meta and amazon to manage their data needs ai focus those are large facilities with a heavy emphasis on artificial intelligence enterprise data centers those are smaller buildings used for internal use many times they are secondary uses for an institution like a hospital or a university and edge data centers those are smaller data centers used to speed up processes for local users. Although data centers have become an important part of our everyday lives, there are, as all of you know, growing concerns about the impact on the environment, electricity use, water usage, and the noise they generate for their neighbors. These issues have led to concerns about the future of data centers around the country, and here in Durham, especially because our current Unified Development Ordinance does not address how data centers can be regulated, leaving us potentially vulnerable to the construction of hyperscale facilities. Currently, we do not have specific definitions for data centers, data processing facilities, cryptocurrency mining operations, or any other uses associated with data processing. This issue is not exclusive to Durham County. Many local governments in North Carolina are now catching up on this growing use, leading to a significant increase in moratoria across the state. An estimated 30 localities have passed moratoriums in the last six months. In each case, like ours, a moratorium was passed to provide staff the time they needed to research this complex issue and to engage the community through the regulatory processes. Our proposed moratorium will prohibit the development of new, large data centers in Durham County. It's proposed to be nine months long in order to align with the City of Durham's moratorium, which was passed back in June. There is an exception being proposed for the enterprise or edge size data centers. This exemption of data centers was offered in order to help ensure that an application for smaller scale data centers can move forward, especially in the Research Triangle Park, while still protecting the public against the more concerning byproducts of larger scale data centers. The exemption is limited to a maximum of 100,000 square feet during the moratorium. This is roughly the average size of an enterprise data center and well short of the hyperscale projects that we have found through our research. Those hyperscale centers tend to be roughly a minimum of 200,000 square feet and can be as large as millions of square feet. So this evening, we'll have the public hearing and the Board of Commissioners discussion and then a vote, if appropriate, and then once it is approved, the regulatory process will continue. And I'd like to turn the presentation over to Sarah Young, the Director of Planning and Development, to discuss what we should expect in the coming months leading up to a discussion next year about the future of data centers in Durham County.

good evening commissioners sarah young director of planning and development we have already begun working on the research phase of the project to develop regulations that address data center uses we have been meeting with representatives from the environmental affairs board and are involving them in the process we have been part of a working group with the central pines regional council to work on this from a regional perspective. So there's a lot of research and best practices coming out of that work group, including a model ordinance that they've been working on. We expect to have a draft of regulations prepared roughly by December. And our first stop would be to present that to the Joint City-County Planning Committee at their December meeting for discussion. And then depending on the direction that we get at that body, we would move forward to initiate the adoption process after the first of the year.

And that will take any questions that the Board of Commissioners has.

Okay. So... Do you have comments, questions? Okay, I'll go with you, Vice Chair, alum, then Commissioner Valentine, then Commissioner Jacobs.

Thank you, Chair Lee. Thank you, Deputy County Manager Jones and Planning Director Sarah. I have some questions at the end, but I just want to make a few comments before I got to my questions. To preface my comments, I have said this, I think I've talked to everyone almost, that I don't My issues around, I have issues around obviously the language of the moratorium, but also the process that we have been going through. And I know I've talked to folks about this, that at our meeting on August 3rd, we had a public work session where we had this discussion about the data center moratorium. And during that discussion, we all kind of like stated our stances on the moratorium language and what was drafted then. But at the end of that discussion item, I had asked clarifying next steps so that if we could ask each commissioner to state where they are at on this issue. And from that conversation, a majority of us stated at that meeting that we were in one way or another opposed to carve outs. And I went back and I watched the meeting as well to make sure that I didn't misremember. But then when we got the draft on our agenda, the agenda, the item that we're talking about today, it did include the carve outs. So my issue is beyond just the moratorium language is as a board of commissioners, when we conduct public meetings and we're telling staff what our policy stances are and stuff, that is us giving direction to staff. that's one of our roles and responsibilities by general statute and it also in general statute says that when we have public policy decisions at these hearings and deliberations that it's supposed to be public and so I have a significant concern the fact that a majority of the board stated that we were opposed to carve outs but then in between that public meeting to our agenda being posted a what a majority of the board said was not reflected in the draft that we're discussing today because that creates a significant like break in trust of the public if they are watching our meeting and they see well okay majority of folks are leaning this way but then if folks change their mind that's completely fine i have no issue with folks changing their mind i have changed my mind between a work session and a final vote or a meeting and a final vote But our greater issue is that that change happened not on this dais. That if there was a public conversation and we're relieving the public with the perception of like, okay, this is what they can expect as next steps, but then they see something else, I think that is a grave concern for how we govern and how local bodies shouldn't be working. I have a question. And I wanted to bring up an example, because I also had a lesson learned, and I've been reflecting a lot about this related to how we've had issues in the past about when we haven't had conversations out in public, and how it has come back and not only bit us in the butt, but also just was not the proper way that we should have done things. Like, for example, with Pride last year. That was something that were conversations, and I was chair, so I own... that I could have conducted that practice better, and that's something that I've learned. but there was decisions made about funding that weren't done in public and that caused a lot of grave concern and confusion to folks. And I think it's important for us, that should be a reflection for us that we need to bring more of these conversations out into the public and have them deliberated. And for folks to hear and be able to state if they do change their minds, if they have one stance or another stance, the public knows what brought them to that. And so I learned that from last year, and that is why I've consistently said throughout this process that I support this moratorium being a temporary moratorium, that our end goal is really the UDO changes. That is what's really going to be the conversation about where we put in how we define hyperscale, what size or cooling systems are allowed and what isn't, but that it should also be a public conversation like a collaborative process with all the stakeholders and the community partners. So all I had to say was just my concerns with just what is being presented to us today. And I did have questions also in addition to that. I wanted to start out with first, county attorney, for section four of the draft, it currently contains four exemptions Are any of those required by state law, or are those specifically within county authority to be deciding?

The only exemption that's required by state law would be Section B, where it refers to the exemptions in the actual statute, and those are listed. Anything outside of those exemptions are within the board's discretion.

And if through this discussion, just I'm asking this like now other than later, but if after the hearing and after the board discussions, if the commissioners wanted to adopt something different from what is presented, if we made changes, Is the notice that was published for this meeting still cover that, or would a separate public notice have to be? We could still vote on it with the amendments.

Absolutely, yeah. The notice that was published actually was broad enough to be able to encompass any possible changes. I believe it says something to the effect of, I pulled it up here actually, changes to the proposed action may be made following the public hearing. So we put the public on notice that there could be possible changes.

Thank you. And then additional questions I had, these ones for Manager Hager or Deputy County Manager Jones. In the memo that's provided attached, it says that at least two projects under 100,000 square feet that are close to submitting development applications. And I wanted to get clarity on that. I know there's often times that, like, things are confidential, we can't, we as board members don't even know what these projects are, but can you share when the county learned about these projects and where they are in their application process and then also follow up for Sarah Young on that last point, if an application has been submitted and is at any stage, would either qualify for either of the two exemptions, 4A or 4D, as drafted, as well as are they impacted by a moratorium if their application is already in, since the application came in before the moratorium was put into effect, or does the moratorium become retroactive to every pending applications?

i'll let director young handle that that question um the first question you asked was about the the projects um i don't believe they have submitted application um i believe the way we phrased it was preparing to submit an application and that was information that we received from the research triangle park i believe they sent a letter to the board explaining that they knew of at least two projects that were interested in applying during the moratorium

And while you're coming up, Sarah, my next question was also related to the planning department. Since we share a city-county UDO and planning department, it's a joint staff, I'm also concerned about the additional work it creates for our planning staff to have two different moratorium languages and to have to be managing that with the applications. And that's something also City Attorney Rayburg stated as a concern back in May when the city first discussed it. So I want to see from your staffing perspective, could there be potential roadblocks or issues from having two moratoriums?

So meaning the fact that one has some exemptions that are different from the other one. You know, certainly it is an additional thing that staff needs to look at as applications come through. I will say that it is not completely burdensome that we can't do it. There are a lot of things where we have to parse out specifics of an application in order to fit it into one bucket or another for lots of other reasons. So staff is used to looking critically at the intake of an application to the particulars and making sure that it gets routed to where it's supposed to go.

And then to the previous question about is the moratorium retroactive?

So I will ask the attorney to assist. My understanding is that if, and actually, why don't I defer to you on that?

So there isn't a definite answer. We would have to look at what the application says, where they are in the process. Some of them may be covered by the moratorium but depending upon how far along in the process it is they may not be so hypothetically i can't give you a straight yes or no it just it depends on what the application is for and where it is in the process got it okay so i think

Yeah, I mean, me, I also have concerns and we'll hear, I know RTV Foundation has representatives here as well tonight, but I have concerns with carving out exemptions for potential projects when like the point of the overall moratorium is to be conducting the research necessary to decide what is and isn't good for Durham related to data centers and to provide those carve outs now before we even get to that research. is putting the cart before the horse.

I'm going to go to Commissioner Burton first and then come over on this side. Commissioner Burton.

Thank you, Chair Lee. Yeah, I remember the meeting from August 3rd. And at that point in time, thinking about why we're doing this moratorium thinking about, okay, we want to do a UDO to regulate data centers. So in my mind at that time, on August 3rd, I was like, okay, why do we just get this done? Why do we need the exemptions? You know, because we're going to write this UDO. At that time, I did not recognize I was giving direction to staff. I just thought we were just talking about it on the dais. But I see what is what you're saying. so at from august 3rd from talking to residents talking to other stakeholders doing my research driving to look at data centers driving to person county things change going to ncacc listening to the experts there so things change during that two-week period so but i hear what you're saying but i did not think i was giving direction to staff i just thought i was saying this is how i'm thinking at that moment in time so thank you so much

Yes, I'd like to speak on two matters. First, my esteemed colleague, Vice Chair, mentioned the decision around pride funding on last year. And so I made my position very clear last year, and it remains true today. When there's major policy decisions that need to be made in this community, it has always been my position. bring it out to the dais put it before a vote for in front of and before the people so that they are clear about what our positions are and we as a board had the power the authority to bring it out here for discussion and at that time we didn't move on it we could have very well have Put that on the agenda. But I want to make it publicly known that it was my position in real time that we come out here and discuss this on the dias. So I agree with you. We need to bring things that need to be discussed in the light out to the light. We have the power and we have the authority to do it. On the question of my comments on August the 3rd, I did not in any way send signals to staff or anyone otherwise with respect to my position on exemptions regarding data centers. I had a concern with 100,000 square feet being the left and sort of uh benchmark for what could potentially be something that we could agree on during the uh the moratorium period if we decided to go in that direction but i was in no way shape or form signaling to staff that i was against exemptions so to anyone to construe that as such would be absolutely false and inconsistent and so I stand before you today really still having some concerns about that 100 square foot exemption because it is a conversation of yesterday in many regards the technology is here It's moving very fast, and so 100,000 square feet might be okay today. Six months from now, it might not be okay. And so I still have some concerns about that, particularly at a time when our resources are being stretched. But in no way did I say, Commissioner Valentine, from his mouth, that he was for or against exemptions. And please, if you would like to go back and take a look at that August 3rd meeting, I would ask that you do so. Thank you.

All right. Did you have any questions for staff?

So one of the questions that was already answered with regards to clarity on potential interest in data centers. And I think your response was that there was no additional one since the last time this has sort of come up?

There are two that the Research Triangle Foundation made us aware of in a letter to the commissioners. We are not aware of anyone else who has either submitted an application or is considering submitting an application during the moratorium period all right so that doesn't mean that they're not out there okay we're just not aware of that but there's no there's no actual applications not that we've seen an actual application yeah the the only two that i have are that i believe the two that you had been previously referring to

And lastly, going back to the 100,000 square feet, could you just tell the public and give them an idea exactly how that number came to be as sort of a benchmark?

Sure. Well, based on our research, We felt 100,000 square feet would allow for the smaller data centers to move forward, the types of data centers that we already have in the Research Triangle Park, without allowing for hyperscale-sized data centers. Those data centers are a lot larger than the enterprise centers. Those are the ones that we were clear from our board and many in the community that we do not want in Durham County. We wanna figure out ways to ensure we don't have those in Durham County. And so that's why we came up with 100,000 square feet. Initially, we were talking about utilizing megawatts for that, but one, we're not 100% sure we have the statutory authority to do that. Plus, we don't have a way to monitor the megawattage and require folks to provide megawattage at this point based on state law.

All right, Commissioner Jacobs. Thank you.

I want to first address the issue that you brought up, Vice Chair Lum. I've been sitting on this board for 14 years, and When an issue comes up and people express their opinion, that is a very important part of what we do is we ask questions, especially during a work session when something comes up at the work session. It's an opportunity to have a conversation, to have a discussion. And that is what happened during our work session. People asked questions. They asked for additional information. They raised the issues that they were unsure about. There's a lot of complexity in a conversation like that. But in no time during the meeting was there clear direction given to staff saying, we want you to use the city's version of the moratorium language. That did not happen. And in this board, as you saw what happened earlier today when Commissioner Valentine asked for clarification exactly what are we asking our staff to do, it's really important. The relationship that we have with our staff, and I appreciate you doing that, because first of all, really cannot ask staff to do something we are a board we make decisions together that's the magic and the beauty of this being on a board and of our democracy and local government And we have to be very clear when we are giving direction to staff. It's not up to them to interpret, okay, what did they just say? What did they just talk about? And that didn't happen. And I also think it's very important that we never deprive commissioners of the ability to express their opinions when we're trying to learn about an issue. And, you know, that was our work session. We were first trying to learn about something. And honestly, this is when we have the debate because staff has brought back the finalized language. When we were talking about it during our work session, there was a big blank where it said how many square feet on the document. There was a blank. we talked about what staff was proposing so i just want to be clear um and now is the opportunity if we want to whatever changes that we might want to make to the proposed language that our staff is bringing to us we work in partnership with our staff they do the work they do the research they try to help us make the most informed decision possible we work in partnership with all of you we work for you We represent you, and we listen to all of the information that's out there. We try to be as well informed as we can. At the end of the day, we have to make a tough decision, and that's what it's all about. So that's my perspective. So I do have a few questions. Sarah, about the work that you all are doing, I'm really glad to hear you're working with central pines regional partners the environmental affairs board i was wondering also are you also consulting with the school of government because several of us went to a session last week and we have particular laws and restrictions that are very specific to north carolina so just wondering are you consulting with them as well

Yes, that has been part of the research that staff has been doing. And actually, I was just reading a Coats Cannon blog post about moratoria, refreshing myself on a few things. So they're a wealth of information. They've also been working on their own kind of set of best practices regarding data centers that we've been in tune to.

Okay. And also, this idea came from Commissioner Valentine, but what about the Nicholas School of the Environment? Is that another, because this is something they've been working on as well? Yes. Is that another possible resource?

Absolutely, yes.

Okay, great, thank you. So Deputy Manager Jones, I just wanted to just ask also some clarifying questions. about the proposed language from staff. So in section four that has the exemptions, and some people can call them loopholes, carve outs, you know, whatever. So here we're calling them exemptions. So I know B, you said that, and I hope everyone has been able to look at the proposed language. B is related to the state statute that we have to 160D-107C. C, if I'm not mistaken, is virtually identical to the exemption that the city of Durham included in their moratorium. Am I correct? That's correct. Okay. So I just want for the community to understand is that the city of Durham's moratorium also has an exemption. It's really important to know that. So we are including, in this draft language, the exemption that the city of Durham included, which is around basically office-scale server rooms, information technology equipment. That's clearly incidental for commercial, institutional, governmental use. Things like hospitals, medical facilities, financial institutions, offices, government institutions. educational institutions as long as such data processing activities are not conducted as a primary service to off-site users so basically if you want to look at this as a carve-out or a loophole there's already one in the city ordinance which is saying that all of the things that we all now depend on for our daily functioning in life, that they are allowed to happen. If you go up to the top floor of this building, it was funny because the day after our work session, I went up, I needed help from IT, and I look, I walk in and there's a big sign that says data center. So like the top floor of this building is a data center. So I just think it's really important to know that, you know, data centers, there are different kinds. And this is what in part C is just including what the city is doing. And I think we can talk more about part A and D, which are the ones that are the optional ones that we're considering those are really trying to specifically address some of the needs that we might have outside of what the city has because this the one unique part of durham that is not in the city is rtp so you know we can come back and circle back to that later in the conversation but um I just, there are a lot of the functions that happen, the businesses that function in RTP that are, may not be covered under Part C. And so I just, Maurice, just to clarify too, because in Section D undercovered uses, it lists like data centers, data processing facilities, crypto mining operations, artificial intelligence, intelligence computing facilities, and any other use associated with data processing facilities. The language that's here, can you clarify what this is limited to?

The focus there is on data centers for the exemption. It's not focused on cryptocurrency mining. That is still prohibited under this moratorium, for instance, but very specifically focused on data centers and, as we've discussed before, data centers under 100,000 square feet.

Okay, so just to clarify, like, under the proposed language, cryptocurrency mining, artificial intelligence, computing facilities, These will still not be allowed anywhere in Durham County, is that correct?

That's correct, during the period of the moratorium.

During the 90 days until we get... Yeah, the nine months. I'm sorry, nine months. Okay, all right. I just wanted to get clarification on that. Okay, thank you.

Okay, I want to limit your kind of back and forth, but I'll let you go and then I'll speak.

i did just want to respond to a comment i won't belabor it but i think it's important for us to all be very very factual and clear like if we're on this dais and where everyone can have their policy stances i hear you commissioner jacobs but with all due respect If my question at the end of the discussion was, I would like us to clarify next steps and asking every commissioner for where they're at on the issue, I don't see how that could be interpreted as anything other than giving direction to staff if it's asking for what is our next steps. So I think, yes, anyone can have their policy stances and ask questions, and I am never going to say no to asking questions. But if the question, and I clipped the end of that meeting and I sent it to everyone that it was, and then Commissioner Burton stated that she had made those comments. Commissioner Valentine, I hear that that wasn't your intention, but in that meeting you did state as it relates to the carve out related to square footage. I would be in favor of removing that carve out. And that was what was in that meeting. So I just wanted to clarify that I'm not trying to put words in anyone's mouths. I went and watched the video again myself and I shared it with everyone to also make sure that everyone, that I wasn't making anything up. But I did have additional questions for staff. Under Section 4A, so it says all three conditions must be met together. The under 100,000 square feet, the closed loop or equivalent cooling. So all three of those must be met, correct? It can't be that they meet just one, okay. And then in Section 4D, that exempts expansion of an existing facility up to 100,000 square feet. with no cooling or generator condition attached, while 4A requires both for a new facility of the same size. Is that correct?

That is correct. We have not included that in there.

And was that difference intentional? Because then anyone could expand to, during this moratorium period, an existing data center over 100,000 square feet. Up to 100,000 square feet. Up to 100,000 square feet, but not be regulated by the same, the cooling and generator conditions.

Yes, that is the way we have written it up to this point.

So somebody, if there are 45,000 square feet right now, they could expand within this moratorium to 99,999 square feet and not be required to have the generator conditions and then cooling conditions.

As it's written at this point, yes.

That's uncertain. What baseline was used to determine whether a cooling system achieves equivalent or greater reduction in water consumption under Section 4A?

I'm sorry, can you rephrase the question? I'm sorry.

Like when determining the closed loop system, what factors did staff use to determine what type of cooling system receives an exemption and how, whether the reduction in water consumption is equivalent or greater or less than i mean that that's similar language that we've seen in other moratorium and that's how we came up with that language so but as related to other more trends but it wasn't like okay we know for a fact this cooling system may use less water but it's going to be using more electricity and factoring is that greater electricity use it or sorry Yeah, if it's using less water, but the greater electricity usage makes it still more favorable in emissions.

So one of the things that we have started to see in our research is one of the emerging best practices is having a closed loop system because of the very large decline in water usage that that creates. I have not seen any research yet on the comparative analysis between what that does to energy consumption.

Yeah. And I think, yeah, for me, like again, I've stated again and again, like the moratorium is this period for us to do that research and to be able to have what is going to be in the UDO changes. And is anything in this moratorium language, would it prevent a development from being built as several buildings each under 100,000 square feet?

Yes, our intention is for the entirety of the development. So it doesn't allow for individual buildings to be built under the 100,000 square feet because then you could combine it and it would be well over what our intention is. So we were actually approached about doing that and we said no, we weren't going to do that.

And that would be if somebody was developing something on one parcel of land. Would that encompass if they own multiple parcels of land, or is that only if it was all in one?

It's the parcel that has been put forth as part of the application.

So if somebody has a parcel of land, and theoretically, if they bought the parcel of land next to it, they could submit an application for 50,000 square feet on one parcel of land and 50,000 on another parcel.

Well, I want Sarah to kind of respond to that if that's something that we've seen before.

so we have not seen that we we typically look at development sites right the entirety of the site often those sites may be multiple parcels and we still treat it as one development site so I would say kind of to elaborate it depends how the development is structured but we we do look at full development sites regardless of the number of parcels and what we'd be looking for is the total data center use So the total square footage devoted to that use, regardless of how many buildings or parcels it crosses over.

And so these exemptions, like exemption 4C, I don't think anyone on the board on this dais that I've heard is opposed to it. It's the same one that the city passed. My concern is around 4D and 4A, the carve-outs of... again like we haven't researched yes closed loop systems are better than the um other systems that we have but they also still emit you know pfas do we know what are we having any requirements around what type of regulations are going to be on the pfas that's going to be coming into our water how it's uh Like, what that impact is. It's just, we haven't researched it, we haven't regulated it, but we're allowing it and we're basically saying with these exemptions, we're okay with the drawbacks of these specific exemptions, even though we don't know what the full ramifications of them are.

I think if you take one of the things that we try to take into consideration is our current data centers that we have within Durham County and any negative impacts that we've seen thus far from those or complaints that we've received thus far and we have not received any. And so that's one of the reasons why we felt comfortable with providing these exemptions in response to the concerns that have been raised about the impact it would have on development within RTP.

But for, like, folks to have submitted complaints—sorry, that was my last question, I promise, Chair Lee—of how would they know, for the average person, I wouldn't personally know how to go and test my water to see if there's PFAS in it, so using that as a criteria of, well, we haven't received a concern related to those type of emissions, or I have asthma, I don't know though, if I'm standing next to a diesel generator, I'm not gonna feel the impacts of that maybe immediately, I'll feel it when I get home, when I'm wheezing, but I don't know. How is a person supposed to correlate that when, That's not what, like, I think an average person is standing around thinking, like, oh, this is definitely happening because I was next to a data center.

I was primarily referring to, like, noise and that type of thing, and we have not had that issue. We've not had complaints raised about these data centers in the past.

Thank you. All right. Thank you, Vice Chair Lum. All right, so with the city's moratorium, It does have those exceptions, but is there anything preventing the size of those exceptions? So like, could there be an expansion based on the cities that goes over 100,000 square feet?

the city's moratorium for what i'll refer to as standalone data centers so not associated with like you know hospital or government or some other institution there is no square footage so that means no data center applications in the city for standalone data centers are allowed during during their moratorium but expansions is there expansions would not be allowed okay all right very good um

Speaking specifically about the 100,000 square feet, you mentioned BCM Jones about the typical size of hyperscale data centers. You said 200,000, 400,000, well, 200,000 and up. Right. Where did that come from? Where did that definition come from?

There's a variety of sources that we did research on and found, on average, folks were saying that the hyperscales started around 200,000 square feet and obviously well beyond that, into the millions of square feet.

And going back, does that... Is that the data center use of a particular property, or is it the total center itself?

Primarily, if I remember correctly from our research, those were standalones that were separate, but I had to do a little more research on that, Chair.

Okay, very good. Okay. thank you i had the i was really uh my questions really were surrounding the uh i've been looking at the differences between the city and the county's version and um yeah that's what i needed to know there okay so do we have any more comments questions questions within the public hearing, okay?

All right, so I'll save my comments later. This was really a question period, so.

Okay, so I will move to the third part of the public hearing, which is public comment. We have... We have 63. um public comments and um at least right now nine of them are virtual i think there's there's actually eight that are that have shown up from we're going to do those first we'll do the virtual first and then we'll start calling people for the in-person public comments themselves uh commissioner jacobs she said you had a

I'll wait after the public comment for my questions.

All right, with that, our public comment period, since we have, what did we say, 63? 63, we're gonna do a minute each. That's gonna put us a little over an hour for public comment. So we'll do a minute each. And the order that we have, we have for virtual, remember we're starting virtual first. Usually we don't show me on camera like that. We have Katie Ross, Pam Andrews, Donald Steinbeck, and then Wanda Allen. Those are the first four that are virtual. So we'll start with Katie Ross.

Hello? Yes, we can hear you.

Can you hear me?

We can hear you. Okay, thanks. Okay, so I live up in North Durham County in Bahama, where we are far more vulnerable to the invasion of data centers because of more open space. We also have potential more damage. The city just doesn't have the space. So I would ask, A, what is the limit on the number of smaller data centers that could be built out of these carve outs, because my research shows that multiple smaller data centers can have the same destructive impact as one hyper scale data center. Secondly, I haven't heard anybody bring up the fact that these data centers almost always require I did a little research on Google AI so it can rat itself out. And it says it is very likely that controlled rock blasting will be required during the mass grading of a day deer center of any significant size in rural North Durham County due to the shallow, hard bedrock common in the Piedmont.

that can cause all kinds of problems i'm just going to go to the well well which so many of us are on well thank you thank you miss ross that was uh that was the time uh the next item next is pam andrews good evening can you hear me yes ma'am thank you good evening before more data centers are built there needs to be responsible planning transparency and scientific data collected and analyzed The cumulative impact of these facilities needs to be understood. Air pollution. Thermal filters show pollution from jet engine turbines generating electricity producing greenhouse effects and air pollution. Air pollutants don't go up in the air and disappear. They emit volatile organic compounds, which is detrimental to our health. Water issues. Durham already has plans for an algae scrubber to remove nitrogen and phosphorus from our lakes, requiring millions of gallons of water per day. Data centers also require large quantities of water. This is extremely alarming in this current drought and climate change. Communities need to know basic information. How much water is used per day? Where is it coming from? What happens to the wastewater leaving the site? Everyone deserves clean water. Wastewater discharge from treatment centers could contain heavy metals, PFAS, and biocides. If treatment centers don't remove these particles, then it goes to our rivers. Clean water is life. Please say no. Say no.

Thank you, Ms. Andrews. We have Wanda Allen, then Tina Motley-Pearson, then Ava Pearson.

Yes, this is Wanda Allen. Can you hear me?

Yes. Yes, ma'am, we can.

Okay, before Durham commits to a data center, I strongly urge you to conduct a very thorough study. I have participated in construction of a data center under 100,000 square feet, and I can speak firsthand experience. Our facility that we built included a 300 solar panel and it was presented as a benefit of the project, but it did not come close to meeting the facility's overall strategy energy needs. Also, I'd like to address the concern about water. We have been in severe droughts, And I'd like for the study to talk to us about how you plan to handle the water that would be used and what infrastructure would be required. How much will it cost and who will ultimately pay for it? A study. Please study a small investment compared to making a decision that would affect Durham's water, energy, and infrastructure, and the taxpayers. Thank you.

Thank you so much. I actually missed Donna Steinbeck, so I apologize. So I'm going to go to Donna Steinbeck, and then we'll continue on with Tina Motley-Pearson. My apologies, Donna.

Okay, can you hear me now?

Yes, yes we can.

Okay, I support a one year moratorium on all the data centers for Durham County. I think 100,000 square feet is too large. Carve Out, they talk about 5,000 to 20,000 square feet as being a medium size. So jumping up to 100,000 is is just too high and with what we need to know. I'm not going to talk about other items that folks have. My concern is that there is information regarding the impact to animals and insects. And this is especially around the EMI and RF electromagnetic interference and radio frequency radiation. Now the honeybees are already showing significant impact to EMI radiation.

Thank you very much, Ms. Stanback. Thank you so much. So we will go to Tina Motley Pearson and then Ava Pearson.

Good evening. My name is Tina Motley Pearson. I am asking you to pass a moratorium on data centers. And it's not because we're opposed to technology or economic development, but because data centers clearly have negative impacts. Data centers require enormous amounts of electricity and water and even small scale data centers have a big impact. I'm going to echo the sentiment of people over profits. Thank you very much. And I'll say Ava is my daughter, but she's unable to come to the microphone. So I'll just let you know, but thank you.

Okay, thank you very much and please tell Ava thank you for signing up. I would suspect that she was youth and I would love to hear from youth, I'd love to do that. We have Jennifer Robinson and then Mary, oh, Mary Molina, Mary Molina. So that's virtual. So Jennifer Robinson.

Yes, hi, we have the benefit of learning from communities that are already dealing with rapid data center development. Just six days ago, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro signed an executive order establishing significant new requirements for data centers. This is especially noteworthy because Pennsylvania has actively courted this industry, including billions of dollars in planned investment. Yet in Pennsylvania now has removed data centers from its fast track permitting program. They've also prohibited state agencies from entering into non-disclosure agreements with data center developers. In Virginia, researchers found that many localities with existing approved or proposed data centers had entered into these agreements. In other places, projects have been proposed under unfamiliar LLCs or project names. Making it difficult for residents to even know who is behind them. I'm asking for you to approve this moratorium for all new pending and expanding data centers without exemptions because exemptions require research. They cannot be arbitrary. They need to be evidence-based.

Thank you. And then Mary Molina, which is the last virtual one we had that was actually verified here.

Yes, I'm Mary Molina, and I'm urging you to enact a clean data center moratorium without loopholes or carve outs. These loopholes and carve outs benefit developers and data centers, not citizens and not our limited resources. The current exceptions completely undermine the purpose of a moratorium, which is to pause development and craft the right ordinances for Durham. Looking at the draft, the main question is, why are we drafting a permanent ordinance right now and calling it a temporary moratorium? We need a moratorium without loopholes. We need to understand the cumulative impacts of this industry. We need a complete pause on all approvals. Please give the county a clean slate that it needs to protect our community and our resources. Adopt the same moratorium as the city passed unanimously. Give the county the clean slate to protect our community. Thank you.

Thank you. okay so we'll start the in-person public comment i'm going to call four up at a time i ask that you go ahead you line up here and then we'll just kind of keep going when we get close to the end of the four i'll call for more and we'll keep going there okay we have 53. Here, so we'll start with Stephanie Turner, Eva Paige Banuck, Astrid Carol Doyle, sorry, I'm sorry.

I'm very sorry.

Astrid, yeah, that's third. Then Leslie St. Dre.

Good evening, my name is Stephanie Turner and I'm a proud Durham County resident. As elected officials, I invite you to look around this very room this evening. The people in this room and who have been with us this evening are only a fraction of Durham County citizens who are urging you to preserve our finite water resources, our precious soil, and the delicate electric grid that more than 347,000 citizens rely on in our daily lives. I also ask you to stand by our responsibility as inhabitants of this earth to protect those finite resources, not just for the people, but for our wildlife neighbors as well. Creatures who struggle to survive as our already rapid development threatens their very existence. Passing a data center moratorium with no excessive exceptions is the single best decision you, as elected officials, can do to protect the long-term health, well-being, and livelihood of every being and everyone who calls Durham County home. Thank you very much.

Hi, we have a long history of paying the price for environment destroying decisions that can't easily be undone. The US knew the dangers of lead exposure, yet they put it in gasoline, paint and water pipes because the Lead Industries Association wanted the profit. The 2021 Infrastructure Act rightfully appropriated 15 billion in taxpayer money to remediate lead service lines. In 2009, researchers found that controlling lead paint in the 1 million worst-case housing units would cost up to $11 billion, but without remediation, we could expect $181 to $269 billion in social costs like increased crime rates and healthcare needs funded by taxpayers. We don't know what asbestos removal has cost us, because that price is usually borne by individuals, but the EPA estimated in 1992 that it would cost at least $3.1 billion to get our schools into compliance. Over the span of 20 years, the EPA Superfund used over $21 billion in taxpayer money to clean sites polluted mostly by companies. Some of you claim we can't afford to implement the city's moratorium to thoroughly research the true impacts of data centers at every size, but how much will it cost to remediate data centers?

Hello. Hi, good evening. My name is Astrid Cookdale. I am the vice chair of the Durham City County Environmental Affairs Board. Tonight I am speaking solely in my personal capacity as a concerned county resident to ask our county commissioners to vote no on the proposed moratorium tonight. and to bring forth a moratorium without carve-outs. I'm not here to highlight the numerous environmental harms state centers cause and the reasons a moratorium is necessary. Other speakers are much more technically knowledgeable than myself on this subject, and so I want to lift up their expertise. However, as a county resident who was appointed to the Environmental Affairs Board by the Board of County Commissioners, and who currently contributes many volunteer hours, toward furthering the board's duties to both advise the city and county on environmental policy and to address community environmental concerns, I want to emphasize the Durham community's call for a straightforward moratorium. And when you hear these calls for a moratorium, we are not saying we want a moratorium but, we are saying we want a moratorium period. It is essential that there is an unequivocal pause on approval of data center projects to allow Durham County to collaborate with the city and create a set of guidelines that ensures the protection of our land and our people for all city and county residents. Vote no.

Thank you. Leslie, one second, one second. The next speakers will be Heidi Grable. Randy Coley, and Victoria Peterson.

Hi, I'm Leslie St. Dre. I'm a Durham resident here with Community Land and Power and the Stop Data Centers in Durham Coalition, which is now 31 member org strong. We demand a moratorium without loopholes. Chair Lee did express 100,000 square foot loophole on August 3rd. That was a directive that was accepted by the staff and it is written into the current draft. We need no loopholes. Loopholes defeat the entire purpose. Every data center, big and small, must be regulated. There's no research stating smaller ones don't still use excessive dirty energy, water, and toxic chemicals. IBM identifies 100,000 square feet as being capable of consuming 100 megawatts of energy. That's enough to power up to 100,000 homes. Stop catering to the 1%. The people of Durham are the biggest stakeholders. Protect us all from data center harms.

It was Heidi Grable and then Randy Coley.

Thank you to everyone in this room tonight for coming together to do work for the responsible growth for Durham County. Please vote to approve a complete moratorium on making data center acceptance at least as long as the City of Durham has set, preferably many months longer, just as Wake, Chatham, and Orange County have done recently. Most of the citizens I have asked about this topic have said to me, what is a data center? What you see tonight is a good but not full representation of how Durham citizens feel or believe about data centers because they truthfully do not know the pros and cons to consider. Can you make and take the time for the citizens who elected you and trust you to make the informed decisions for them? Mayor Leonardo Williams says the city of Durham is on the top of many of the best cities in the country lists. Let's help him keep that status by representing those who voted for you by voting to take the time for Durham. Please vote for the complete moratorium with no carve-outs, and in this, voting for our environment, property values, citizen health, and our reputation as a county and community.

Thank you. Okay, so Randy Coley, then we have Victoria Peterson, Christian Sykes, then Robin Lacy. Is Ms. Peterson here? Oh, she had to leave, okay. I'm sorry, Randy Coley.

okay uh christian sykes and then robin lacey good evening commissioners my name is christian i'm a long time durham resident and a member of triangle dsa let's be clear the recent massive demand for data centers is driven entirely by the ai industry The basic functionality of the internet does not require anything like the craze for compute we are seeing. And what is this industry after? Sam Altman has said, my job is to help people destroy jobs. And I think AI will probably like, most likely sort of lead to the end of the world. But in the meantime, there will be great companies created. It is an anti-human project to its core with shocking disregard for the immediate harms. a project that deifies hyperscale regression models and callously diminishes the wonder and potential of collective humanity, making the absurd claim that maybe our own minds are merely next token predictors too. I ask the board tonight to stand with the citizens of Durham County who want our home and our future to serve us, not tech oligarchs. Pass the strongest data center moratorium possible.

Thank you. We have Robin Lacey and then Shanice Rene.

Good evening. Thank you, Board, for hearing me. My name is Robin Lacey. I live here in Durham. And I just want to share that I live in the Parkwood area. I'm very concerned about the data centers. I oppose it one million percent. everything about it um i actually live probably between 1.5 and 2 miles from our rgp area and so i've just heard gotten word through i don't know where but that they were trying to put it there um and i just want to say i ask you to vote no considering all of the environmental problems that it causes the uh excessive water usage the excessive electricity usage, and then the property value is going to go down. It is not something to take lightly, so please vote no.

Okay, and

Hi, thank you for the extension. Hi, my name is Shanice Rene. I'm here tonight as part of the Community Land and Power Coalition to request a 12-month data center moratorium. Like we have in the city, delete the loopholes, make it mandatory to get community input on this, and we really need it for longer, but once again, we are here asking for the bare minimum from a council that claims to prioritize the health and well-being of this community, but when we speak up and share the harms that the data centers deepen, for community. We basically have county commissioners basically talking about, if it ain't about my money. And we can't do that. You say that you work for community, but we don't fulfill the embodiment of that at all. It seems like you all, it's all about you. You, and forget about community, because you're rocking with AI, but don't care if the effects make nature and the community die. And so many ways and so many levels. So I really hope that you all move with care, for real, and vote for at least a 12-month um that that is in a more more moratorium because because just like y'all y'all y'all y'all can get good to vote and do do your thing um we we as in individuals we also also have voting power and and we're going to use the real real soon shout shout shout out to 2020 2028 uh because because the real real power is with who the the people the the people the the people thank you

Okay, the next four, Camille Leonard, Ashley Daniels, Tia Hunt, and Wiley Coimblunt. Okay, so Camille Leonard.

My name is Camille Leonard and I am a citizen of Durham. And I just want to point out there's data centers and there's AI data centers. They're not the same. There's a data center at the top of this building, it's not what we're talking about. We're talking about AI. Stephen Hawking warned us, warned us about this. AI is not a good thing for our community or for the future of our children. This will take away their future. They will not be educated because they'll have AI doing everything for them. I'm like, I look at all these young people. This is their future that you are jeopardizing if you vote. against or you vote for this it's just their their future i'm really really concerned about that and i'm sorry i got a little emotional but i really think there's a difference between the ai and data centers and people want to insult our intelligence and say a data center is just a data center no it's not it's an ai data center it's huge it is unnecessary

My name is Ashley Daniels, speaking a message from JT Davis in Loudoun County, Virginia. For the past couple decades, data center developers were able to apply for new construction through a zoning loophole that allowed data centers to be treated as standard office buildings. This unprecedented growth has strained the electrical grid to a crippling degree. Since just 2018, the amount of electrical use in Loudoun County data centers has quadrupled. And the data centers here use about 25% of Dominion Electric's energy in the state of Virginia. If there is a power surge at one data center in Ashburn, the effects can be felt across several states. When considering new data center construction, it's not just the physical building to be considered. It's also the electrical grid, the new substations, and the transmission lines that will eventually be required to accommodate it. Pass the complete moratorium with no loopholes. Honor your constituents.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Tia Hunt, and I'm a citizen of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina. I'm really frustrated that we started tonight with a land acknowledgement proclaiming that we want to move forward with justice for all who inhabit this land, and then we're having this conversation that we're having tonight, a moratorium that's giving loopholes for, we already know two data centers want to come in to the county, but there's no clear understanding of how these will affect our people. We heard tonight that we don't have the regulations to regulate these data centers. We don't even have the definitions within the county ordinances. So this is just fully selling out the people of Durham, allowing these data centers to come in, and not knowing exactly what the impact will be. A moratorium will give the county more time to think about this and research, and so I don't see what the issue is awaiting. We know that the technology is rapidly adapting, and we have no control over that, but we can wait, listen, do research, and figure out a way forward. So no moratorium without, or a moratorium without, or a moratorium with exemptions is not a moratorium, and we don't need that. So thank you.

Thank you. We have Wiley Cornblush Blunt. Wiley? Okay. Okay. Is it V? From the, I think it's VE, from Local 100 North Carolina Public Service Workers. Yeah, I'm sorry. Yeah, just says VE here. You're speaking next. Then Dr. Reyna Massari. Then we have Alan Fryer and Sandra Smith Nonini. I hope I said that right.

First of all, good evening to everyone, the commissioners, the county manager, the attorney, Durham residents, and the other organizations that are represented here. My name is Darion Smith, I'm a member and speak on behalf of UE Local 150, the North Carolina Public Service Workers Union. In June, the Stop Data Centers and Durham Coalition won a vital year-long citywide moratorium on data centers. Now, Durham County must do the exact same thing and do it right. We need a county moratorium that is just as strong or stronger than the city's, with zero loopholes or size exemptions. Big Tech wants us to believe that only massive facilities matter, but every data center drains our water, drives up our electricity bills, and pollutes our air. Worse yet, the unchecked rise of AI data centers threatens working people. AI is used to squeeze labor, cut jobs, and automate our livelihoods into oblivion, while padding the pockets of tech billionaires. Oh, snap. That was a quick minute, wasn't it? I just got a few more lines.

Just a couple seconds.

QE Local 150 calls on Durham County Commissioners to pass a strict data center moratorium matching the city's 12-month pause. All data centers bring heavy environmental and economic burdens. We must pause all development without loopholes to protect our community and secure real safeguards for workers against AI exploitation. We deserve full protection by our permanent rules of written. Do not leave our county vulnerable to unregulated greed. Pass a robust data center moratorium now. Thank you. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Daniel Masry co-director of the North Carolina environmental justice network. I ask you to pass a clear, rational moratorium to protect our communities, therefore without exceptions. A simple Google search will reveal that 100,000 square feet of a data center can use 20 to 100 megawatts. 20 to 100 megawatts. A simple Google search also reveals that a hyperscale data center uses 20 to 100 megawatts. A simple Google search also reveals that the average data center in the United States as of August of this year is 100,000 square feet. Yes, there are larger ones, but this is the average size. So simple research reveals that closed-loop systems increase energy usage and may increase PFAS contamination. With these exemptions, this is not a moratorium but a path of continued data center development. I ask you to reject it as it stands. I also say that as the North Carolina Environmental Justice Network, we are here to support research since this simple Google research seemed not to be available to your staff.

Good evening, Chairman Lee, Vice Chairman Alam, distinguished members of the commission. Thank you for listening to us tonight. My name is Alan Fryer. I'm on the board of the Durham People's Alliance. The Durham People's Alliance urges you strongly to adopt the city ordinance. I'm also here as executive director of Good Jobs First. We're a national research and policy organization that advises communities all across the country on economic development and data center fights just like this one. We have analyzed the legislation. I appreciate staff's effort in putting it together. We do have significant concerns about sections 4A and 4D, the exemptions there. In particular, we're concerned that it's not quite going to do what you want it to do. I appreciate the effort to try to ban hyperscale data centers, but when you add together just the two projects currently in the pipeline that are apparently 100,000 square feet apiece, that already gets you to 200,000, which staff tells us is the minimum for what a hyperscale data center is so we're already there with what's in the pipeline uh and so the second thing i would say i know loudon county has come up as an example a couple times as uh an example of how you can generate lots of property taxes with these data centers they they have a very special tax on uh the data chips that go into the to the servers that we can't have here because our legislature of course preempted it so we won't get that property tax if we do it thank you thank you

Hi, I'm, I'm Sandy Smith Nonini. I'm a Durham citizen and an anthropologist who just finished a book on energy crises at UN. Uh, I'm affiliated with UNC. I, uh, the current rush to hyperscale data center infrastructure poses a serious risk to reliability of the North Carolina electric grid. A one megawatt data center, a small one consumes as much as 600 to 1000 homes. It also wipes out essential progress and phasing out planet faith, heating, fossil fuels on the grid at a time when North Carolina faces an existential threat as droughts get longer and water supplies diminish. Is this the future you want for your kids? The current, uh, current research by Bloomberg shows that plan data center build-offs will increase greenhouse gas emissions from the electric sector. by at least 20% and perhaps as much as one-third. Data center hype is driven by a spike.

You can finish your sentence.

A spike in AI-related stock values, which is driving this urgency as a perverse drive for higher unemployment in the general population that will produce extra profits for wealthy tech corporations and billionaires. Think about it.

Okay, I don't know what the first name is, but it's Campos, Campos. Then it is Prenu Williams. The last name is Williams, starts with a P. Is it Prince? Is that Prince Williams? Okay, I'm sorry. Aidan Powell. Aidan Powell.

Good evening, everybody. My name is Dulce. I'm a proud member and organizer with the Party for Socialism and Liberation. Most importantly, I'm also a proud community member of Durham and a Durham Public Schools K-12 alum. I strongly encourage and demand this body to pass a loophole-free, no-carb moratorium. Parks across Durham are already poisoned with lead, toxic chemicals, and carcinogens, a place where our children go seeking fun. Data centers add to our already poisoned environments with our runoff water, seeping PFAS chemicals, forever chemicals, used in their cooling systems to kill our communities further. I've heard this excuse time and time again that things aren't as black and white as they seem. But I see this excuse as a way to cop out of your responsibilities. To the community who is to suffer the consequences of your choices, the decision is simple. You either align yourself with people that you serve and think of them over money, greed, and the needs of corporations, or you show us that the health and well-being of everybody in here is not of your concern. It's not black and white. There is either a right or wrong choice, and I hope for your health and well-being and ours, you make the right choice.

My name is Prince Williams. I'm a resident of Durham. I'm also a proud member of the Party for Socialism and Liberation. I want to remind this body that Durham City and Durham County is a historically black region. And it's historically black neighborhoods that are far too often used as construction sites for pollution and cancer causing facilities. Without strong guards to how, when, and where these data centers are built, it will be the black community who suffers the most, and black families will be pushed out of Durham City and Durham County. Black children are nearly four and a half times more likely to die from asthma than other children. Black adults are disproportionately diagnosed with heart disease and high blood pressure. And the list goes on. The disproportionate effects of health outcomes of black people in this country and all these health conditions can be exacerbated by the pollutants of data centers. It is not an understatement to say that is a matter of life and death for black residents in Durham County. We support a total moratorium without exception as the only way forward.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Aiden. I'm a Durham native, and I'm a proud member of Triangle DSA. I'm here speaking in favor of the strong loophole-free moratorium we need to protect Durham from the undemocratic imposition of data centers by corporations. In DSA, we strongly believe in worker-led political and economic democracy. The broad coalition of organizations here with us today demonstrate that Those people are in favor of a strong moratorium. So I urge you, govern for the working people of Durham, not for a minority of tech elites. We've made it clear what we want. We want these loopholes removed, and we want the time to write a strong ordinance regulating all data centers. I know many of you have worked hard to serve this community for years and even decades. Make the right choice today. Right or wrong, it will be remembered. Thank you.

Okay, so we have, I'm going to say Alysall Hyman. I think it's A.J. and Alysall Hyman. Yes, please. Then Megan Honig. And Edgar Anita. Then Victoria Plant.

thank you for your patience um hi hi everybody my name is aj and i'm with sunrise triangle and it's hard to believe that in this year of 2026 humanity is still putting its head in the sand while climate change wreaks havoc on the globe, hitting the most vulnerable and least culprit, the hardest. Where I'm from, a statewide drought has become the unfortunate norm. I've had multiple relatives lose their homes to wildfires. The summer before my freshman year, I watched the hills behind my high school be engulfed in flames, not knowing whether or not my high school would still be standing come the first day of class. Knowing how much water data centers consume while watching billionaire CEOs and elected officials bend over backwards to sacrifice our fresh water during a worsening drought makes me sick. There's always a price to pay, and there seems to be a pattern on who's left with the bill. It's the working class, the youth, and the houseless. All while the richer get rich, often aided by self-interested elected officials. Commissioners, if you're better than that, step up and prove it. Protect our land, our communities, our futures. Vote to pass an AI data center moratorium, no loopholes, no carve outs. We're counting on you.

Good evening. My name is Megan Honig, and I've been a resident of Durham County for the past 11 years. I work in the tech industry as a software developer. The kinds of AI tools enabled by the data centers we're here to discuss tonight are becoming standard in my field of work. So you might think it's against my own interests to come here as I do, in support of the strongest possible moratorium against data centers in Durham County. But I am not just a tech worker. I am also a human being who depends on the air and water in Durham County. And I am a neighbor of some 300,000 other humans who do the same. It is in this capacity that I call upon the county commissioners to enact the strongest possible moratorium with no carve-outs, no loopholes. Thank you.

Good evening, board and county members. My name is Edgar Arrieta, and I'm a member for the Party of Socialism and Liberation, as well as a resident of our dear Durham. However, I grew up not too far from here in Warren County, an hour and some change away, in the birthplace of the international environmental justice movement. And this was sparked by, you know, greedy, careless corporations dumping toxic cancer-causing PCBs along North Carolina's roadways. And then the state chose to build the designated landfill in a rural, low-income, and predominantly black county. And following failed legal challenges, residents and civil rights leaders launching a seven-week nonviolent protest in 1982. Some of you may even remember that. And over 500 demonstrators who laid down in the path of dump trucks full of toxic soil were arrested. And I grew up hearing stories from these courageous individuals, and I cannot help but see that history does not have a way of repeating but rhyming because we are at a similar crossroads, and this time it's affecting rural and non-rural communities alike. A similar environmental crisis, a similar capitalist system putting profit and self-interest over the people and the planet that we actually live here. I am here in support of the strongest possible moratorium, 32 months as of now, loophole free. Please do the right thing. I implore you to do the right thing. Thank you.

Thank you. Victoria, one second, one second, one second. We'll have Samantha Krupp, then we'll go to Molly Crabb, then Clark Thomas, then Elizabeth Thomas. Sorry, go ahead.

Good evening, commissioners. I'm here tonight because I'm a young person concerned about climate change and scared for my future. Tonight, I'd like to appeal to your sense of reason, not yell at you, and say yes, this is a nuanced issue. Not all data centers are the same. Not all of them are AI or hyperscalers. They all require different regulations. However, we must study them first, and that's the whole point of this moratorium. I think those two companies will be fine not building their another data center in the next nine months and i'm not really sure why we need these carve outs so let's have that messy regulations conversation later but for now please amend the ordinance and pass a loophole free moratorium thank you

Thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Samantha Kropp. I work as the Neuse Riverkeeper and Director of Advocacy for a local water quality nonprofit. And I'm also a brand new mom who is concerned about our collective future. As a water person, I want to talk about water and I want to address the myth that closed loop cooling systems are somehow environmentally friendly alternatives. Closed-loop does not mean zero waste. It does not mean zero water use or zero pollution. According to an article from the National Institute of Health, in closed-loop systems, loss of 25% of system volume per month is not uncommon due to issues like leaks in seals. And even when functioning properly, closed-loop systems require high-quality water and often use chemicals to prevent corrosion and bacterial growth. When that water is flushed or discharged, it can carry biocides, corrosion inhibitors, heavy metals, and potentially PFAS, which we know are forever chemicals. And these go to our wastewater treatment plants, which aren't always designed to remove all of these contaminants. And so what happens is they get discharged directly into our rivers, our streams, and ultimately our drinking water. Please pass a strong moratorium for all new data center development until we have the science, safeguards, and sideboards necessary to protect our water security and communities. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Krause.

Hi, my name is Molly Crab. I'm a Durham resident, a social worker, and a proud member of the Party for Socialism and Liberation. I'm here to urge you to pass a strong loophole-free data center moratorium tonight. The rapid invasion of data centers happening nationwide is the latest way that corporations are maximizing profits through artificial intelligence with working class people bearing the costs. There are over 90 data centers in North Carolina alone and over a dozen more being proposed. Those costs include polluting our waterways and land, poisoning people with forever chemicals and constant noise pollution, and jacking up already skyrocketing utility bills. These costs are regardless of the data center size. And thanks to that loophole, big tech can run rampant with unregulated electricity usage in our county. And as you heard, we don't even know the impact of this usage. County commissioners, tonight you have a choice, stand with the people of Durham or stand with corporate interests.

pass a strong loophole free moratorium protect our health health in our future thank you good evening chair commissioners appreciate your service my name is Clark Thomas I'm a longtime resident of Durham County and I'm asking you to impose a moratorium with no carve outs or loopholes um one of the things i did want to talk to you about with respect to what this industry is being driven by is ai which is a bubble and what's going to happen when that bubble burst and all this infrastructure has been put in place and who's going to pay the bill for those extensions of services to these centers that are no longer in service that's going to be passed on to us and so there are secondary effects not just cumulative effects. So thank you for your vote and your time tonight.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Elizabeth Thomas, longtime resident of Durham County. I'm here tonight to talk to you and ask you please to vote yes on the moratorium, a complete moratorium, not a carve out, not loopholes. You represent us, the citizens, not big tech. We are asking you to put a pause on data centers. There's so much we don't know about them, but the things we do know are not good. One of the things I saw on this chart was data centers create very few permanent positions. Most are temporary construction jobs. They produce 100 times fewer jobs per unit of energy than other industries. Every $1.95 million in subsidies yields one permanent job. Think of the future of our children and of the people that cannot be here to speak tonight. Our children are not here. The animals cannot speak for themselves. Please give us a good vote tonight.

Thank you.

Okay, we have... Is it Mutch Carter or Meech? Meech. Meech Carter. We have Jen... Jen Wiesen, Wiesen, Emily Sutton, and then Kayla, Igoe, last name, Kayla, Kayla.

Great, thanks. My name is Miesh Carter. I am a member of the Durham City County Environmental Affairs Board, but I'm here today in my personal capacity. First, I'd like to know who the county is met with from the Environmental Affairs Board and what was substantively discussed. I'm a liaison for the EAB's Data Center Regulations Working Group, And we were approached to have a conversation. To be clear, that conversation has not been had. I have the email receipts to prove it. This moratorium certainly was not brought to our board in any kind of capacity. We would have loved to advise that I personally, as a member, support a moratorium longer than nine months. And I specifically oppose the carve out for 100,000 square foot facilities. I work in energy. Data centers of all sizes are often accompanied by fossil fuel generation, and non-diesel could easily mean methane gas. We are seeing the exact same thing in Richmond County right now, where there are 650 diesel generators being proposed at an Amazon site. When that diesel is removed, methane gas will be flowing through those generators, powering that data center in Richmond County. I also want to mention passing a moratorium is very necessary for us, and I encourage you to support it. Thank you. Thank you.

good evening commissioners my name is jen and i'm here today as a durham resident triangle dsa member and a person who simply cares about my community commissioners it is not just us from the public who need to be concerned about ai and data centers taking our jobs we are saying nationally that elected officials are hurting their own job security uh with their actions supporting unregulated data center development as there have been 33 recall efforts in the first six months of 2026 related to data center development not to mention uh the toll on re-election chances you all can see the turnout today as well as from the emails that i'm sure you have been receiving on how durham county residents want a strong data center moratorium without loopholes we need to pause these data center build outs so we can first make laws that protect our jobs our electricity bills our waterways and our communities at large from the cost of rushed poorly planned and often and oftentimes purposeless data centers. Us residents are aware of the problems with these data centers. Please use your votes today to side with us. Thank you.

Good evening. I'm a small farmer in North Durham. I'm not good at public speaking, so I'm doing my best right now. I want to say thank you to Durham County because you all saved my farm this year. Durham County funded Cistern, which enabled us to save a thousand gallons of water in addition to our well, which eventually got so dry with the drought this year and i'm asking you to save our farm again i want a strong moratorium i want 32 months because we need to do lots of research and the research isn't there yet We need to see longer term effects. I'm really concerned about water. I'm really concerned about water. I need water to grow food. We have, I don't know how many recalls, I don't know how many new people are coming to my small farm and asking for food because they don't feel safe buying food in the grocery store. And Durham County has the opportunity to enhance the support you have for small farmers by making sure our water is clean and we can grow food for our residents. And I don't want to compete with data centers for land. And I don't want the young farmers to either. It's already too expensive. Thank you.

One moment, Kayla. One moment. We have Stephanie Gans. Mustafa. Mustafa. Mustafa. Then Sharla Rios. Yeah, that's what we'll do. Sharla Rios.

Chair Lee, Commissioner Jacobs, this is what an AI data center sounds like 24-7, 365.

Thank you.

Would you want to live next to that?

Hi, my name is Stephanie Gans. I'm a Durham resident and executive director of a nonprofit called Clean Water for North Carolina. I just want to share a little bit of what we're seeing across North Carolina right now, which is that data centers have to wait a long time to get the transmission infrastructure that they need in order to run. So 100 megawatt data center, we're starting to see that data centers are asking to run 24 seven on generators. There's nothing in this moratorium that says that it's almost like there's an expectation that it would connect to the grid. And that is not what we're seeing in other communities. We're seeing folks try to get that through, and DEQ is not stopping them. You guys are the brakes. In terms of our electric bills, the NC Utilities Commission has heard testimony from our impartial public staff that we need a one-year pause on new data center contracts. 100 megawatts is one-thirteenth of a new Duke Energy methane gas power plant. That is a real contribution to our high electric bills that we are all paying. This exemption that could allow a 100 megawatt facility through is letting down all of the folks in Durham facing high bills and power shutoffs. Please pass a moratorium without that exemption. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Mustafa Alhmeida. And much like everyone in this room, I am a Durham resident. You know who is not a Durham resident? The owners of these tech companies that own billions and billions of dollars. These carve-outs are the only people that will be assisting. I want to remind everyone in this room about what's going on in Lake Tahoe right now. Lake Tahoe is currently slated to lose their current power company, NV Energy, Nevada Energy, by May of next year. So if you are not concerned with water usage or emissions noise pollution you should be concerned with that because that's something that's going to directly impact your guys's jobs as well as everybody else in Durham politics and possibly even state politics as well thank you guys for letting me speak I advocate for the strongest moratorium that you could possibly release

Good evening. My name is Charlie Rios and I am giving voice to a letter from Loudoun County. I came to Northern Virginia for work in 2022. I'm a graduate from Appalachian State University and an electrical engineer who works in tech. I don't have to speculate about what the effects of data centers are because my neighborhood is already filled with them. To get to the bike trail from my house, I have to ride past several Amazon data centers that total 400,000 square feet. This is only the beginning. The data centers are towering, humming gray boxes surrounded on all sides by spiked security fences with barbed wire. At night, the perimeter is lit up with spotlights. The newer ones have false windows to make them look more like ordinary office buildings to hide the fact that once built, they typically employ less than a dozen people. In the winter, I can stand on the sidewalk and feel the heat coming off the buildings. Every time I ride or walk by them, I wonder what I'm breathing in and if I'd be better, it'd be better for my health just to stay inside. This is what's coming to Durham and everywhere else big tech can manage. Whatever Microsoft or Google or Amazon is peddling to you about economic benefits and technological innovation in cloud computing and AI, this is the actual

physical future of what they want to build in neighborhoods thank you thank you now we have jana sims lindsay savelli scott levitan then beth bruch

Hello, my name is Jaina Sims. I'm a resident of Durham County, a member of Southerners on New Ground and a former IBM employee. The tech world has a motto of move forward and break it. I don't want the tech world to destroy my neighborhood and my community. Reading from IBM's website on how IBM defines a hyperscale data center, it says, the facility should contain at least 5,000 servers and occupy at least 10,000 square feet of physical space, energy draw over 100 megawatts. From this, we can infer that IBM believes it's possible to do a mega-scale data center on just 10,000 square feet, and we're trying to allow in 100,000 square feet. What does that open up? Today, the Washington Post reported that in Texas, some Republican voters are starting to organize around the name BreakRank to vote for a Democratic governor on a single issue, the Republicans' wholesale welcoming of data centers into Texas. Pass a strong moratorium with no loopholes and at least 32 months. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Lindsay Savelli. I'm a Durham County resident. And as part of my work, I test people's private wells and across multiple counties. The worst part of my job is having to call people and tell them that they have any sort of water contaminant and especially PFAS. And we know that these data centers emit PFAS and they're contaminating our water. The EPA is currently proposing rollbacks on the very few PFAS protections that they had implemented under the Biden administration. And there are no federal regulations for private well water quality. So when private well users find out that they have contamination, there's virtually no support to help them remediate those harms. I'm begging you to please pass an exemption proof 32-month moratorium to protect our water, to protect our health, and to help heal the earth and repair the harms that we have already caused by allowing these massive industries to move forward without any restraint. Please, please, please pass a full proof, an exemption-proof moratorium. Thank you for your time this evening.

Hello, commissioners. My name is Scott Levitan. I'm president of Research Triangle Foundation. I know my comments won't be popular tonight, and I appreciate the respect of everyone in the room. RTP is a research and development community. It relies on technology infrastructure like enterprise-scale data centers to operate and continue to attract businesses. We've had a 66-year partnership with Durham County, and both RTP, Durham County, and Durham City have benefited greatly from the success, from our mutual success. On behalf of the 55,000 employees, 400 companies that operate in RTP, I ask that the moratorium be passed as written. Thank you for listening to me.

Please, we're not going to do that.

Hi, my name is Beth Brook. I'm a Durham County resident for the past, 50 years, I guess. I'm getting old. Please pass the moratorium. No loopholes. I think we've heard enough tonight to know that as much research as we've done, there's so much more to do. We don't know how our wastewater is going to get cleaned. We just don't know how we're going to get the PFAS out of the system. There's so much that we don't have in place. I just the drought this summer really emphasized to me the importance of water i'm up here past my bedtime as a durham public school teacher who cares about the young people who i'm going to be seeing for the next 179 days and um and then some not that we're counting but I went without water during Hurricane Fran, and then I went without water a bunch of times this summer when our steward's mains broke. So water matters, water's life.

So now we have, it just says Coco here, and we have Rafael Diaz. and Samantha Boyd, Samantha Boyd, and then Andrea Casales, sorry.

Good evening. My name's Coco, and I'm a proud resident of Durham County. My neighbors have done an amazing job of speaking of the environmental impacts that will come from these data centers. So I'm here to speak from personal experience about how these have affected my friends and family who work in technology. I received my MBA from Duke University nine years ago. Thankfully, I changed careers. I'm very happy with my career change, but I hear every day from my coworkers and my classmates about what's happening inside of the companies that are in RTP. Many large tech companies like to use the Trojan horse of jobs to bring data centers into communities. The reality is some jobs are created. Construction jobs are created temporarily. People have to run the data centers, but it's only about a dozen people. And then on the other end of things, those who are college educated, who have master's degrees, who are working in these companies are being forced to train AI models to replace them. I have had friends who've had to lay off all of those who report to them because AI has been used instead. It is not okay and it is not safe for jobs and for our environment and for our community. Please pass a data center moratorium that is at least 12 months long with zero loopholes for the sake of your constituents and this county that you call home. Thank you.

Hello, commissioners. My name is Rafael. I'm a member of the DSA and a resident of Durham County. Like many others in the area, I came here because of the abundance of job opportunities for tech workers. As many of us are aware, the Research Triangle Park has contributed tremendously to the economic growth of this city. However, we cannot solely attribute this growth to the companies within RTP. The real source of this economic power lies with the workers creating surplus value through their labor. With that in mind, How could a data center support this growth with only a handful of workers? Data centers are largely self-governing, needing only four employees per acre of land. I myself have worked on AI and machine learning algorithms. While never said explicitly, I know that the end goal is to train an AI to replace me. Let's not kid ourselves into thinking a data center would be good for workers. If even people in tech can be replaced, then what does that mean for the thousands of people that RTP employs? We lose our jobs and have nowhere to go. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Samantha Boyd. I'm just going to tell you the experience. I took my granddaughter out this weekend. We went riding around. And with all the construction, she say, trees are gonna be disappear. We ain't gonna see no trees. This is what my granddaughter has to look forward to the future. Do I have to add water too? That we ain't gonna have no clean water for them? And also, I didn't hear a clear answer about that being radioactive. There wasn't a clear answer. We hate to have it built and then find out the answers.

Oh yeah, it's radioactive.

How are we gonna clean it up? Please vote no. Thanks.

My name is Andrea Casales and I wanna thank to the officials that are actually looking at the speakers. I want to remind everyone that local officials work for us and we have the right to ask for more, including doing more than the city and looking at us while we speak. And what you can do is, number one, not say that upstairs is a data center, and number two, amend the proposed moratorium with no loopholes. Right now, you have the opportunity to set guardrails by delivering a strong and expansive moratorium. This does not allow for loopholes. And if my doctorate in nursing research has afforded me anything, it is that evidence-based research that is not self-funded by billion and trillion dollar big tech companies is needed so that we aren't paying a bigger price down the line, not just environmentally, financially, but in lives. And that takes time. The people of Durham cannot shoulder any more of that cost. My patients cannot shoulder any more of that cost. I cannot shoulder any more of that cost. They cannot privatize the profits while socializing the cost. I mean, we are the city of medicine and the second smartest city in the US. So we're being told that if we don't accept this, that we are driving away being employers, revenue, progress, our future, when reality, the only thing we may be driving away is a parasitic relationship. Do better.

Thank you, Dr. Gonzalez.

Okay, we have Pablo Friedman.

We have Isaac Hessel Robinson, Annie Dokun, Doran, Ryder Sammons,

All right. So a couple things. I thought what came out of city council was a compromise. Some of us wanted a two-year moratorium. Surry County, a much more MAGA county, has a two-year moratorium, and one year was the compromise. And additionally, there was some language put in to sort of benefit some sort of corporate interests here in Durham, and some of us weren't aligned with that. So long story short is what the city council passed was actually a compromise. And so to come here tonight to see these exemptions put in sort of a little bit of a slap in the face, those of us who already compromised with the city council when they had their vote. Now, you all can do what you want tonight. Mr. Levinson, thank you for coming up tonight. In the strongest traditions of our democracy, I find your comments a little bit disrespectful to the residents of Durham, The state legislature gives you sales tax exemptions. Duke Energy is burdening the residential rate payer with a large rate increase to fund data centers in this state. Additionally, you all have special taxing privileges from the state. So for you to come up here tonight and say that you want this without prying anything for the rank and file people of Durham, do better. Do better. Do a fair deal. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Isaac. I'm a Durham County voter and tech worker. And I would like to just remind you all what these AI data centers are being used for. They're being used to create convincing scams that can mimic anyone's voice. They're being used to create deep fake porn of real people that is almost indistinguishable from real photos including vast amounts of child pornography. And let me remind you, Minnesota recently passed a ban on AI-generated child porn, and Elon Musk's ex-Twitter, formerly Twitter, which runs the Grok AI, believed it was a large enough part of their business model, this child pornography, to sue to block a ban on, again, AI-generated child pornography. Flock cameras that are seemingly overwhelmingly being used by cops to stalk their exes or their potential partners. They are being used to eliminate jobs to boost tech CEOs margins at a time when tech CEOs are all the, some of the richest people in the history of our planet. They are not being used to create economic development because almost every single AI, uh, 95% of AI startups are failing. There is less, revenue in the entire market, and then one company needs to sustain its profits. AI is an anti-human grift. We should not suffer permanent.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Robinson. Just a little, looks like a little person there.

Hi, my name is Annie Doran and I want to pose a few questions to this council. How is the county going to guarantee more forever chemicals won't make their way from data centers into our drinking water surrounding communities? How can the county set an enforceable standard on how much water these data centers will be able to use? If the county intends to support the broader goal of helping the community of Durham reach net zero emissions by 2050 at the latest, how can we reach those goals if we're allowing new data centers with no renewable requirements? How can the county keep the development of these data centers from affecting individuals, electric, and water bills? How many will be allowed to be built? If the answer to any of these questions is I don't know, then that is why Durham County needs a strong moratorium without exceptions for new data centers. Thank you.

Okay, we have Ryder Sammons. Okay, is Dan, I think something with an R, Dan Rutt? Dan Rutt? Anyone named Dan? Okay. All right, Kimberly Lamb. We have Jen Alexander. Ramsey Ritchie? Ramsey Ritchie. Patrick Alexander.

Hello, my name is Kimberly Lamb. I am a member of the American Association of University Professors at Duke University. I just want to stress how much educators are against AI. From what I heard at the meeting on August 3rd here, it seemed as though there's a sentiment that the technology is inevitable. I really don't think it is. AI is making education harder, and it's an impediment to education and its goals, and I just don't think there's any other way around it by any means. The other point I want to make is, and many people have spoken about this with more specificity than I can bring, but I really want to emphasize environmental risks of these data centers. There was a lot of discussion last time about the importance of business. We don't have business if we don't have a planet. My mother was recently diagnosed with Parkinson's, which is linked to forever chemicals. I would really like to know what the what the relationship between forever chemicals and a disease like Parkinson's is. So thank you.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Jen Alexander. I'm in support of a complete moratorium on new and expanding data centers. I don't believe we should be granting exemptions when the proposed moratorium is only nine months and when we have no regulations even for small data centers to follow. While we can be reasonably sure that an enterprise data center will have less of an impact than a hyperscale data center, they still have no data center specific regulations or requirements that apply to them. And it's unacceptable to allow expansions and new builds in this scenario. I'm also concerned that with a nine-month moratorium, you're not leaving yourself enough time to adequately research the policy and regulations of other areas, nor the impact existing data centers have had, and how it's differed from the promises made by the companies. It sounds like the staff have already done a lot of research, so you may already be well on your way, but I ask that the board add milestones for the regulation development, and if the milestones aren't being met, that the moratorium be automatically extended. Thank you.

Good evening, Chair Lee, Vice Chair Lum, members of commission, the public. Thank you all for being here. My name is Ramsey Ritchie. I'm a Durham resident. I love this town. I also lead public policy and strategic initiatives for the Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber supports a moratorium on hyperscale data centers in Durham County because without proper regulation, they're an inefficient use of valuable land and resources. And we applaud the county's work to hold them to high environmental and community impact standards. We also support modest exceptions to that moratorium. Unlike neighboring counties that have passed sweeping bans on all data center activity, Durham is home to some of the most technologically advanced companies in the country, and those companies are the beating heart of the state's economy. Data centers have played an important role in keeping that heart beating for over 40 years. They're not a new technology. We're right to guard against the negative impacts of massive data centers in their most extreme forms. We do not want to be Loudoun County. that doesn't mean that every data center presents the same risk we can draw a line between the projects that we need to scrutinize most closely and those that can meet reasonable interim standards the exceptions built in this moratorium draw that line conservatively by restricting data centers i think that was a minute thank you yes that was a minute thank you mr okay

Good evening, everyone. Thank you for having us. My name is Patrick Alexander, and I retired from the military, from the Army, after almost 30 years of service. And in that time, I recognized that all I wanted after we were done, my wife, my children, our dogs and cats, a little slice of peace and quiet. We found it, built it, now we're living it, and now we have to deal with this. But it's not just our peace and quiet. It's everybody's peace and quiet here. Okay, we can see the stars at night, we've got the wild animals, we love it. I saw a lot of bad things in 30 years, and I live to tell about it. And I live because I can see and identify the BS. Everybody here can see and identify it. We don't need any of this, okay? So, no exceptions, no loopholes. Just pass the moratorium, please, so that we can all enjoy this wonderful place. Thank you.

Okay, and so that brings us to the end of the public comment period of the public meeting. So I will close the public meeting, and now we'll have comments let's take a short recess bio break and then we'll come back and do the commissioner comments yeah is that okay with you all okay we'll take a very short recess let's do five minutes we'll be back at 10 15. Let's start finding our seats, please. Can we start finding our seats, please? Can we start finding our seats, please? All right, we're coming back. Can I have your attention, please? We're coming back. Thank you. It is 10.15 and we will resume. We're on? Yeah, okay. Okay, we're back. Thank you all for your patience. That was a long public comment period. but it's important that we got through them all. So we're at the point where the public meeting has been closed. I want to, there was a lot of public comment, there was a lot of things said. and so i want to ask the board are there any clarifying questions based on what we heard in public comment that we'd like the staff to to answer so so i'll open up a period before we go into statements just for any clarifying questions let's please keep it the clarifying questions and then we will have time for statements later. So DCM Jones, it may be questions for you here. These are just clarifying questions from what we were hearing, okay? All right, Commissioner Burton.

Thank you, Chair Lee. I had wrote this question down earlier, and we know that right now in Durham County, there are about 14, data centers, enterprise data centers, right? And I think the question I had was do we know about their energy usage, how much water they use, and then also with two of those enterprise data centers, and I'm clearly saying enterprise because they're not AI data centers, Two of them are over 400,000 square feet. Do we know what they're used for? So that was the question I had.

So one of those 400,000 square foot ones is, to my understanding, just a commercial data center. It's not associated with a particular use. I don't have information on the other one, so I can't answer about that one. in terms of water consumption we have reached out to the water management department to try and get to see if they have data they can share with us about the water usage of these facilities and we have not received that data yet and one more question um sarah i believe you said i know your team is doing research right now with regards to the um

ordinance that we're going to approve later on. You said how soon will you be completed with it or to present it to both bodies?

We are hoping to be complete with our research and have a preliminary draft prepared by December. Thank you so much.

Vice Chair Lum, did you have any clarifying questions?

I ask my questions.

Okay. Commissioner Jacobs.

Thank you. Yeah, I wanted to try to, I have a few questions and I wanted to try to follow up on some of the concerns that we heard from residents. So following up on what Commissioner Burton said, because we received a list of about existing data centers in RTP, and they range in size from 450,000 square feet to the smallest being, I think it was 10,000 square feet. Some of them are basically 40 years old, 1987, all the way up to, I think the most recent was 2013. Again, I was just wondering how much you know about them or I might need to refer to Mr. Levitan who might know more. But again, what are these all, what kind of data centers would you describe them as in terms of what their function is?

So I have to be real honest and say that we don't know. When someone submits, for instance, a site plan approval for a data center, they do not have to tell us what the intended usage of that data center is. A lot of these sites that have been previously approved did not even come in as data centers because that's not a use category in the ordinance. So they may have been processed as industrial light uses, as flex office flex warehouse so we I think on file when I looked we had probably half a dozen max site plans that have come through as data centers listed as the use so it is very hard for staff to determine what what the data centers are being used for some of them we don't need we didn't even have records that they had been turned into data centers okay

And in terms of what the process is for currently for data centers, a site plan or a permit, now that we have RTP 3.0 zoning, which was recently approved, it's a new zoning for RTP that has different stricter requirements than we have in our current zoning ordinance for different things. I'm wondering, what would the process be like at this point? Would they first have to go through the RTP 3.0 zoning, or how does that work? And again, maybe, I don't know if Mr. Levitan has to answer that, but just wondering, since it just recently was approved.

Sure, and I'll defer to Mr. Levitan if he would like to talk about their process, what may or may not happen before or after it comes through the planning approval process, but A site plan is required to depict what the development is going to be and demonstrate that it meets all ordinance requirements. At this point, again, because we have no specific classification that is data centers as a use, they're just classified as a general industrial light use, and there are very few standards related to that use.

Are you able to answer that, how the process is currently going to work?

I just asked. Please, please, please. Please.

I'm asking an informational question about how a new zoning ordinance works.

Please let me. Wendy, let's not, let's not. So I totally understand your objections, but I ask that you don't interrupt the meeting, all right? I was just saying, let me handle it. I don't need you yelling out in the meeting. We're not gonna do that in here, okay?

Continue on. Thank you. So do we deputy deputy manager um jones do we know um in terms of the information that we did because one of my follow-up questions from our last meeting was just to try to understand what the impact will be to rtp because basically with the city's moratorium that there are only three areas of the county that pertain to durham county So we have the unincorporated areas, which is mostly northern Durham. And then we have RTP and Trayburn. Those are our only jurisdictions. Um, everything else in Durham is covered by the city of Durham. Um, so I just want to clarify, um, and you, you could confirm this Sarah that, um, because I heard a lot of concerns from people in Northern Durham. We had a farmer speak, um, and we had some residents speak from Northern Durham, uh, and And I want to personally say I am against AI data centers, hyperscale data centers, but also the importance of protecting our watershed, which is in northern Durham, our farmland, and also the rural residential development that we do have there. But could you just confirm, Sarah, that... with the current city moratorium because any data center would need to be annexed into the city of Durham would require water and sewer from the city that we basically at this point for all intents and purpose The unincorporated areas of the county are protected. Can you just confirm that?

That is correct.

Okay. I just think it's really important for people. I hear the fear about a lot of issues related to AI data centers and hyperscale data centers, and I share that, and I just want to, just so people can understand, feel rest assured that that is protected, that unincorporated parts of the county are protected. We're not going to have AI data centers in rural areas of the county just i just think it's important for people to know that um so that leaves us with trayburn and rtp so i'm just have some follow-up questions about that um related to trayburn have we heard about any ai i mean any data centers in trayburn we have not Okay, and that's where we have a lot of our big manufacturing facilities like Corning and AW North Carolina, Merck. So that's where we have a lot of big manufacturing facilities. So related to RTP, Tell us about what you heard from RTP in terms of why, and stakeholders, we got a lot of emails and letters and things. But could you go over what staff heard related to the reason for allowing these enterprise and edge data centers in terms of the current functioning of RTP, where that recommendation came from.

yeah i think rtf has um explained that they're they have concerns about losing a competitive advantage that the research triangle park has been um has been working on for 60 plus years um if they were to to lose out on on this opportunity in the near term and that would be that has been their argument um once this issue came to the forefront

Okay, thank you. And then Sarah, related to what, because again, heard a lot of different concerns about things related to data centers, related to the water, energy usage, noise. In terms of what we can do in North Carolina, can you talk about that? Because in the session that we were in with UNC School of Government, they said there are normal types of things that we can do in North Carolina, things like setbacks, the size of buildings, the scale, screening. We can look at light. We can look at noise. We can't look at electricity because we don't control that. What about things like, I know this includes the closed-loop system and no generators. What kind of things, realistically, are we going to be able to address?

I will say that on the city side, because the city controls its municipal water system, the city can impose additional restrictions related to the water system usage and specifications related to that. um and as you mentioned because facilities would have to be annexed into the city to get access to that water right you can't have a certainly not a hyperscale center on well and septic right you need municipal water the city would be able to enact changes to their city code to regulate that further so that's one of the things that's being explored okay um any anything else that comes to mind that beyond the normal kind of land use zoning that we normally are able to do yeah we can also uh one of the things that's kind of land use adjacent that we often deal with is noise although that is typically housed in both county code and city code but we can put additional provisions in place to further address the elements that generate additional noise

Okay, and do we currently have technology to remove? I know there are a lot of concerns about what is in the water, even with a closed loop system. Do we have the technology that addresses that?

My understanding, and we are still doing research with particularly water management, is that that is not something that can be easily attributed to specific users, because that would require point testing at the discharge point of a site, and we don't have the authority to require that.

Okay, so that's not something that we will be able to address, okay. And then related to electricity, maybe Maurice, you could talk about where the electricity comes from in RTP. I mean, even though we can't, the Utilities Commission controls that. I know there are concerns about, we heard Loudoun County, things like that. But could you talk about where the power is within RTP?

I mean, I think it's primarily provided by Duke Energy. And they would fall under the same regulations that Duke has in place for the rest of the state. So that's something that we'd obviously have to continue to research and look for opportunities in which we might be able to investigate whether or not that's something that we can require. Once again, as Sarah mentioned, right now there's not a lot that we can require per state law. when it comes to the the oversight and regulation of these data centers and maybe over the course of the next three six months or so things will change but we'll have to work within the laws that are currently in place in the state of north carolina so i guess the question about things like supplementing with renewable energy or anything is that i mean those are the types of things that we would investigate as part of the research that our folks are doing And then from a legal standpoint, whether or not that's something that we can put into place as part of a larger ordinance.

I mean, it's my understanding that we actually have Duke Energy's already built for substations in RTP actually to serve. research and development there. So we would, you know, just for folks to know that the energy source is there already. I know there was concern about situations like Loudoun County of having to create new sources.

One of the things to remember about Loudoun County is they have over 250 data centers in Loudoun County. I believe the average data center is about 200,000 square feet. if you took all of the square footage and divided that.

Okay, thank you.

Were those your questions? Was that it?

Okay.

Any other? Go ahead.

Vice Chair Alon. Thank you. I know I said I didn't have questions, but one came up with Commissioner Jacobs' comments when she was asking about if we know what type of data centers exist, like what their uses are. You mentioned that since we don't have the current use case, we don't know what, which even of these facilities have become data centers because they didn't apply for it. Is there anything in this moratorium that protects from those instances going forward during this nine-month period that somebody could apply for permit for a warehouse or another industrial usage and then two or three months down the line, after it's already built, they don't need to come back to us if we don't have the use cases defined, they could change it to us?

so one of the things that we implemented after the city passed their moratorium is we changed our administrative applications to require a disclosure about whether it the property will be used as a data center through this approval now granted you know people could still fib or leave that conveniently out but we are asking for that information upfront If someone were to convert something to a data center, there is the possibility of an enforcement action in the future, depending on what the regulations are, depending on whether when their approval came, the permit choice statutes. It's not a cut-and-dry answer. It is very situational, but there is potential for enforcement action.

Okay. Commissioner Jacobs.

Yeah, and just to follow up on something that Commissioner Long raised before, in A, we are the exemption which allows a maximum size of 100,000 square feet of a data center with a closed loop system or other cooling technology and also it goes into the detail but also the non-diesel backup generation could we also require that with the exempt d which is about expansion of an existing data center

Please. Please. Excuse me. Would you please sit? Would you please sit? Would you please sit? I'm gonna ask you to leave. I will ask you to leave. I'll ask you to leave. Okay, let's have her move. Let's go. Please leave.

To answer your question, there is no reason why we couldn't incorporate that language into D as well. We could incorporate that.

Okay. And also, just following up, I think somebody may have asked this already, but just to clarify, with the 20 data centers that we've had ranging in size and also how long, so you're saying, Sarah, have you had complaints just about the existing ones related to any issue?

I'm sorry, have we had complaints?

The existing data centers that are the list that we got, to your knowledge, have we had any complaints about any issues? No. Okay, thank you.

Okay. All right, so now we're gonna move the comments and then after that we'll do the vote. So I'm gonna go Commissioner Burton, Vice Chair Lum, Commissioner Valentine, Commissioner Jacobs, and then myself. I'm gonna ask you all to make sure you have your complete comments. I don't wanna go back and forth. I don't wanna so and so said this, I'm gonna respond to this and so forth. Please do your full comments when it's your time to speak. Now, we are approaching 1040. I would imagine this is gonna last past 11 o'clock. And so per policy, we will need to vote to extend our meeting until the first level is gonna be till midnight. So I'll need a motion to extend our session to midnight.

So moved. Second.

It's been moved and probably seconded that we extend our session until midnight. Any further discussion? All in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed, please use the same sign. Now, if we happen to be approaching midnight, we'll have to do another motion, okay? But I'm hoping that we can go ahead and wrap this up. I have to drive a bus in the morning. All right. So, Commissioner Burton.

Thank you, Chair Lee. And I knew this was going to be a very... interesting session, and I'm glad that we're having this discussion. Like I said earlier on August 3rd, which was our work session, I was really thinking, okay, we get this, we're doing a UDO, or we're doing an ordinance around this, around data centers, specifically hyperscale AI data centers, so we can have this regulation, because they're not regulated. And by training, I'm a librarian, specifically at the elementary level, and what I did with children for 30 years is to teach them how to synthesize, evaluate information, right? So in this role, I've been doing this around this data center thing because I knew my knowledge was limited. And one of the things that I'm finding interesting with this whole debate, as I see many of the people in this room, young adults and ourselves, I'm seeing people type on their phones. I see people you know, using the videos, I'm seeing people, you know, I've seen some of the social media posts, right? And in order for us to do that, that requires data centers, right? Right, just let me finish, whoa, whoa, whoa, let me finish.

Hey, we're not gonna do that. Hold on, Commissioner Burton. I will clear the audience. Okay, we sat here for over an hour and heard public comment. Okay, please remove. You're being asked to leave. Go ahead and leave. Okay, if we continue to have interruptions, I'll have to clear the audience, okay? If we continue to have interruptions. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Continue, Commissioner Burton.

So yes, all this technology that we use now requires data centers. So what I was wanting to say is it's important that we're clear with our language, that we are focusing on these hyperscale, AI generative data centers. That's what we're focusing on. That's what I wanted to say. Because when we lump everything into one thing and we're putting these messages out, it does confuse people. We have gotten several emails today where they have said, no data centers in Durham. No data centers. We don't want data centers in Durham. Don't build data centers in Durham, right? But we just told you we have about 14 enterprise data centers in Durham and about 20 in the Research Triangle Park area. So I want us to be really clear about what we're talking about. That's number one. Number two, the other thing I wanna mention, and this is, I'm giving clear direction to staff around how much water, one of the concerns that I read in a lot of the emails, what I've heard tonight, people are really concerned about the water. The water, the energy usage, things of that nature. And they're concerned about it with regards to even enterprise data centers. It's clear that we haven't done those studies, right? And it's going to be important that staff, as we're doing this research, that we find out with the data centers that are presently here, that we do our research around that, because we wanna make sure our communities are safe. And then also, finally, I've heard a lot of comments about we, us, on this board, from many of you, how we're feeding into these corporate interests and things like that. I can only speak for myself. I don't do that. I really listen to people, and I really, really try to take to heart as to what the people want. So again, and I do my homework. So I went out to RTP. I looked at some of the data centers that are out there to see how big they are. I drove to Person County to see the one that's being built in Person County by Microsoft. I am very, very clear that I do not want, and I think all of us up here on this dais, we do not want these hyperscale, mega-sized data centers in Durham County. I am very, very clear on that. But I am concerned when we put, we have these two binary things, what I call binary data centers, and they're all bad and they're not good. And like I said, I've read some of your posts. I'm very concerned about that because the city, in all honesty, they don't have, when they wrote their moratorium, they did not have to consider the Research Triangle Park at all. when they wrote their moratorium they did not have to consider it as the county we do so i just want to put that out there um that these are the things that we have to discuss think about when we make these decisions so that's all i want to say thank you uh vice chair along

Thank you. I'm going to talk fast because I do have like six pages of notes, so I will try to get through it fast to save everyone's time. So I'm going to start off with what I do not oppose, which is 4B, which as our attorney mentioned, is what's required by state law. I'm going to touch it. And then section 4C, which is also the exemption, which is in the cities, which is the office server room provisions, blah, blah, because we know that hospital servers are not the concern that we are having here and what's bringing folks in the community out in objection to these carve-outs. My objections are explicitly sections 4A and 4D, because when we're talking about what an exemption is, we're basically defining the very thing that... this time of the moratorium is supposed to be spent researching. We're saying in this moratorium that a facility using closed-loop cooling system is exempt. By saying that, we're saying that using closed-loop cooling resolves all our problems and resolves the concerns that are being raised. And when we exempt facilities relying on non-diesel backup, we are finding that any remaining or alternate emissions would be acceptable. and when we exempt anything under 100,000 square feet, we're saying that a building that size does not raise the problems that have been brought to us here, and we are also mentioning ourselves in the memo. but we haven't done any of the research. As you said, we've heard from staff that they're conducting the research now and that we don't know. We don't even have a way to collect the data around the PFAS. So section six of this ordinance lists the studies that we haven't even done yet. So I just don't see how we can say in one document that we need nine months to answer these questions, but then in another document say that we already know the answers by putting in these exemptions. And then looking at our own text, section 3-2 tells the public that the moratorium works by preventing vesting of development rights under outdated regulations that do not address the impacts of covered uses. and that is statutorily justified. But then section four then allows a class of covered uses to vest under precisely the same outdated regulations. So the ordinance is contradicting itself, the moratorium is contradicting itself within four sections of each other. And that matters because we know that if there's any sort of action or concern that residents bring to us or that somebody wants to challenge the moratorium, under General Statute 160D-107F, which constitutes moratoriums, It says a challenge to a moratorium receives expedited review and the county would bear the burden of showing compliance. And I don't know how we would show compliance when we're contradicting ourselves within our own moratorium. And then also in our memo it says that we found that these facilities present substantial electricity consumption, water consumption, noise pollution, air emissions, hazardous material storage. All of those, we have these eight categories in our own findings. But then Section 4A only screens two of them. And when we screen just two of them in this moratorium, which is what we're supposed to be doing this time, these nine months, to be... defining them for the actual UDO changes, and ignoring the other issues, we're basically building a gate that only checks two concerns, and is allowing things in that still have all the six other concerns. that we have. We know, again, we're talking about the closed loop systems. I know that that is a better system than what these centers use right now, but we don't know, we don't have an answer, because we are still researching of is it the best option that could exist? And it may well be, but we haven't done that research. And the thing is, though, these things, these closed loops cooling systems save water, but they're using more electricity because the chillers are doing the work that evaporation was doing for free. And so and electricity consumption was another one of our listed concerns that we had. in our own memo. So we're saying that we have a concern of electricity consumption, but we are okay with this other method because it uses less water, but it uses more electricity. And so I just want us to be very clear about how we're putting, we're defining all of these things that the UDO changes are meant to, and all the research is supposed to be bringing this information to us before we've done any of that work. And then Section 4D, that's the one I raised before, and Commissioner Jacobs brought up in her comments, really confuses me the most that the fact that a new facility under 100,000 square feet has these two exemptions apply to it, about they have to use the water-saving cooling and the non-diesel, but any expansion doesn't have to follow those rules. And so if there are meaningful conditions for new buildings, they need to be for existing building expansions as well. And also, going back to the concerns that were listed, square footage was not one of the eight concerns that were listed. It was essentially, as staff mentioned, it was the megawatt and the electricity threshold, which we know we can't regulate because it is Duke Energy, and the county doesn't have the authority, and I understand that constraint. But what I don't understand and follow is how we came to the conclusion that, well, if we can't do megawatt restrictions, square footage because they're not equivalent to each other. We know that when we talk about the floor area of these data centers, just a few years ago, a conventional server rack, like a conventional server system would use roughly like five to 15 kilowatts. But technology adapts, and we know that, that now that same footprint, the technology that exists today is roughly 10 times the load that it carried just a few years ago. And so when we set this exemption for 100,000 square feet, that's static, that's not gonna change. but the technology is changing. So if we're accepting a 100,000 square foot facility, and they're less than 100 megawatts, say they're 50 megawatts, but in two years, new technology may be coming in that they start replacing their components within there, that they're actually in the same square footage area, able to fit in more servers, because they take up less space, and using more electricity. So none of that is gonna change, like that square footage threshold that we're setting now is gonna stay static. Also, sorry, I'm trying to fast. So... The standards that we're spending the next nine months writing is never going to reach these companies that may potentially come in during this moratorium period because we're already allowing them to come in at 100,000 square feet. They can expand and grow within themselves above the concerns that we actually have around electricity usage within that same square footage area. But what isn't going to reverse in this nine months and not going to stay static is, or in nine years, is what's getting built. Because I've talked about, I mean, I speak very often about, like, my kids. I have, alias, just turned four on Friday of those two. The water that they drink, that they breathe, that all of us breathe, and the power bills that their generations are going to inherit are set by what we do now. And that timeline is going to far outlast this nine-month moratorium and far outlast any of us sitting up here. And so we have to consider what a building approved during this moratorium, the decades of impact that it's going to have. And I understand and I support innovation and companies coming to Durham and creating jobs and all of those things. But again, we're talking about a nine-month period that For me, in my perspective, that a delay for a company of nine months, it's monetary. But the impact on folks' health and well-being and financial stability is going to last a lifetime by what we approve. And then if we're also talking about water. The drought map, I looked at the City of Durham's drought map before this. They last released one on August 20th. It currently says that North Carolina has now been in a drought for a year, and the flat river gauge at Bahama and in Durham County is still at a record low. And our water reservoirs that we use for drinking water, Lake Michie, is down six and a half feet, and Little River Reservoir is down 12 feet below normal. and we're in the middle of a drought, and we're talking about these systems that use vast amounts of water, and we have the state that's telling consumers that they have to conserve water, telling folks they have to do full loads of laundry, hold off on washing your car, watering your lawns, but then we're gonna be okay with these facilities that are still gonna be consuming significantly more amounts of water than an average consumer is. And going into the exemptions, A moratorium has a specific job, which is to hold things still while we do the work of the research of what UDO changes we want. And the UDO changes is where we will set the definitions, the thresholds, and exemptions. Those all belong in the UDO ordinance amendment. where we study them before we define them. And we have the planning commission that steps in and provides it, and a real public process that we bring together stakeholders that I want to see our community partners, our business partners, everyone come together to have that conversation, but we haven't done that. So putting them in the moratorium does the opposite of what a moratorium is supposed to be for. And we already have very limited powers by our state government here in North Carolina. County governments can't regulate a lot of things. So why are we putting ourselves into a tighter box by putting in these exemptions that are gonna be dictating us that we're gonna allow any of these hundred square foot data centers that we still don't know the impacts of? I'm skipping some parts. And we already know that the state, I'm going to just summarize the section I was going to go into about how the state right now already has so many tax exemptions for these data centers. And we know that... In Loudoun County, one of the things that they really, that elected officials and policy officials who support the data centers constantly tout is how much revenue is generated from sales tax and their revenue. We don't have those powers in North Carolina to generate the same amount of like the $2 billion that Loudoun County has because they're exempt. And we even have Republicans within our own General Assembly saying that we do need to reverse those. So this is a bipartisan issue that Republicans are saying are coming out against these data centers and creating exemptions for them as well as tax breaks. Now, and also, I mean, we know we had a really tough budget cycle this year. Our own tax administrator told us, not tax administrator, budget director told us just a few weeks ago that we can anticipate over the next four years, at minimum, probably having to have a four cent property tax rate increase to keep up with our debt that we have. And then we're gonna be inviting in these companies that are just, we're not gonna be generating as much revenue from them that would balance that off, but we are gonna be having more capacity needs for them at the same time. And all of these policy decisions, they don't happen by accident. They happen because somebody made the decision to allow it to happen, whether indirectly or directly. And we see what the lobbying industry, and I'm not saying that this is what's happening here, but it's just overall in the tech industry and the oil industry, the pharma industry, we have lobbyists that spend millions and billions of dollars, millions and hundreds of millions of dollars lobbying for their specific policy stances to avoid regulations. Because in a capitalist society, what we get is these oligarchs and systems that care about their bottom line and what profit they're going to make, and they do so at whatever expense there is to others as long as they are shielded. And we, when we're writing this moratorium and this UDO change, we have the opportunity to say that we're not okay with that anymore, related to data centers. I want us to have a little bit of a thought exercise, because I was thinking about this. I spoke to the Duke Ethics staff retreat last week, and they were asking questions about data centers and policy. Somebody was asking, well, AI is going to be inevitable. We're going to be using it. So how do you oppose something and oppose these data centers when it's something that likely the county and yourself are going to be using one day or another? And I compared it to the fast fashion industry. All of us need to wear clothes. We all have. to cover ourselves but that doesn't mean i condone the fast fashion industry and the sweatshops that exist in bangladesh and other countries where they pay folks 20 cents a day to produce 100 garments a day but it is But if I had the opportunity to go back before the fast fashion industry began booming, I would have been advocating for stricter regulations on that. And that's just the same as if we think about going back to even here in this country, back to 2008. If we think about it, before the financial crash, people were warning us that mortgage underwriting had collapsed, that leverage in the system was untenable, and that, you know, these derivatives were vague and that they were vague by design. They were met with pushback and told that they didn't understand the market and that regulation was going to strangle innovation and hurt ordinary homeowners and hurt people from being able to buy homes. But I think any of us, I hope, would say if we look back at that time period, that we would have said, no, we should have had stricter regulations on lending standards and caps on financial leverage and all of those things to have prevented an economic collapse the way that we saw in 2008. So if we see history repeating itself in industries that were unregulated and we allowed them to go unregulated for so long and waited to change them after there was a collapse after we have drastic impacts that, I mean, we lost, people lost lives after the economic crash. They lost their homes, they're unhoused. We shouldn't have to wait until the data center issue becomes a Loudoun County situation of 250 data centers. We shouldn't have to wait till every child is being born with forever chemicals already in their bloodstream or every child is born with asthma Because we already learned our lesson from 2008. Even if it's a different industry, the lesson we should be learning is about regulation and how we as policy officials have that power. I almost didn't promise. And I'm not trying to say in any way whatsoever that the folks who work at these companies are evil or bad or anything. My dad, he worked in IT, in RTP for over 30 years. The IT space is what actually brought my family and I here to this country. So our entire livelihood has depended on IT. But the issue is that these corporations, they're going to do whatever they can to maximize their returns. We see this even with wind and solar. We know wind and solar is cheaper to produce. It's cheaper to put up farms and everything, and it's better for our environment. But the oil industry and lobby is never going to want us to move towards that because they're going to lose their financial capital. They could shift to become solar farmers and wind farmers, but they want it easy for them. and that's going to be the same with this industry with the tech industry they could tech industry could be doing research of how okay if they have closed loop systems how to make them without pfas but that only way they're going to do that is if they're pressured to because no one is going to be allowing them to build while they emit toxic chemicals into our water while they emit toxic fumes into our air. The only way they're going to do that is if they're forced to. And this is one of the very limited powers that we have within Durham County as a county government in North Carolina is our land use. So whatever we decide today, it is going to be a choice that is going to have a lasting impact. It's not going to be just a nine month impact. And that's why I hope that we have The understanding that this nine months should be, it's not a total ban on any data center forever and ever. It is nine months that we actually research what regulations, how we define it, actually put a use case in our UDO related to data centers and come back with staff for the UDO changes that the city and county will put together. And I did have a motion I wanted to present for amendments to it, but I don't know if you wanted to wait. Should I wait until after comments? Yes. That was...

Commissioner Valentine.

Yes, thank you, Chair. So let me just acknowledge the comments made by my esteemed colleagues thus far on what I consider to be a very complex and nuanced issue for our community. And say thank you to the community for coming out and expressing themselves in the marketplace of ideas. we've had an opportunity over the last several months quite frankly to hear from many of our residents and I want you to know that I've taken very very much care in reading through what some of the concerns are in our community I hear fear and uncertainty about data centers in general and what that invokes in individuals in our community particularly at a time when our resources are being strained and stretched as a result of our growth and those who know me and have followed me know that i take very seriously issues particularly as they deal with our water and our waterways pollution and in the instance of data centers generally noise and other environmental concerns and so i take all of those considerations into the decisions that i make and about growth in general in our community it has always been my position that we need to be smart in how we move forward great deal about this discussion which I think that was alluded to by at least one of the County Commissioners thus far dates back to a decision in November of 2005 when this board voted unanimously to open up RTP for RTP 3.0 for both residential and mixed-use development so people had a vision in back in 1959 that led to exponential growth in in our state over seven seven decades and we made a commitment to open it in a park again I'll reiterate unanimously and I don't want to be in a position not to honor that commitment because RTP has been the economic driver for our community, for our state, and for our nation. And that means a lot. In fact, that is a contributing factor in the standard of living that we now enjoy here in Durham County. Now overall, I believe that there is a consensus in our community that in fact, this is not Loudoun County. And I will fight to ensure that this will never be Loudoun County. But the discussion here today is about excluding hyperscale data centers, ones that are AI focused, ones that are considered to be mega data centers. It's clear, and I think everyone agrees, that's not consistent with the values of our community. And when we had staff go to do the homework and come up with an exemption or several exemptions, I believe it was in the spirit of ensuring that we did not impact on our ability to attract business to Research Triangle Park. And I believe that the spirit of those exemptions capsulizes that. Now I've spoken from this dias before. and expressed a concern about what that 100,000 square foot exemption actually means in light of how fast technology is moving. But it's my understanding today with regards to guardrails, that represents one of the only guardrails that we potentially have during the period when we come up with a permanent solution for this issue for our community. it's not my intent to be long-winded in my presentation here this evening but to the extent that amendments are opposed I would be in favor of looking at the language from 4a being integrated into 4d and also that we consider whether or not 100,000 square feet should actually be the guardrail and so to the extent that there's some some other uh considerations around that i'd be willing to entertain that in light of the fact that the county is different we have considerations that are different from the city rtp trayburn and other incorporated areas but again this is not loudon county and i will continue to fight with everything within me that these hyperscale data centers not come to Durham County. Chair, I yield.

Commissioner Jacobs.

Thank you. I just first want to say I appreciate all the comments of my amazing colleagues. And I really appreciate everyone who's been here tonight. This is a very emotional issue. I can feel it in every single speaker who got up here tonight. People fear very deeply about this issue, and it really touches a lot of things, a lot of things that we don't have any control over, like the role of AI in our society today and, you know, where we're headed. in many realms. And so that obviously is not something that we can control. We can control, though, whether we do have the hyperscale and AI data centers in our community. And again, to echo everyone, that they are very frightening. And I share people's fears about their impact on communities and our environment. But again, I appreciate, I've read every email, people who have shared information with me. I've read every article that's been sent to me because I, again, think it's important that I have a responsibility So I did go to a forum in New Orleans last month that was a national forum session on data centers last week. We have one here, and I also participated in a webinar that the League of Municipalities provided. I will continue to try to learn as much and ask as many questions as I can I've always felt like my job as a County Commissioner is to listen to everyone and try to make the most informed decision that I can in the best interest of

So I do want to note that the

As I did my research, so Person County, which Commissioner Burton went to, is being built by Microsoft on 1,350 acres. In other rural counties, There is a 1.3 million square feet metacampus in Rutherford County, an 800 acre Amazon campus in Richmond County, and a 1 million square foot Apple maiden campus in Catawba County. I think it is really important, though, that we ground this discussion in the realities in Durham. So that's why I tried to say before, right now, what we have, even in the proposed language, there's not going to be this type of development in Durham. And again, as I was trying to ask in my questioning, I think it is important to understand that we have to consider the Research Triangle Park in our decision making. As other commissioners have noted that this is not just unique to Durham, but actually North Carolina and very few places in the United States have research and development parks like we do and it is the source of a lot of the revenue sales tax revenue property tax revenue that basically funds Durham County government so and We have Duke is our major employer in Durham, but also we have 400 companies in RTP. And they're not just all big companies. There are a lot of small companies. If you've ever been out to the frontier, there are a lot of startups. There are a lot of small companies and businesses. They are entrepreneurs. And there are life science companies, pharmaceutical. There are companies doing electric vehicle manufacturing and technology. It's a whole range of things. And a lot of things that are about making our world better related to diseases and again, green technology. But one of the things that for me is most important is that there are a lot of really good jobs in RTP. Durham County, since I've been a county commissioner, has been very focused on how do we get Durham residents into these jobs. So the county, we have been investing in programs like the Bowles Academy with Made in Durham, where we are specifically targeting young people of color, a lot of them who didn't graduate from high school, and helping them get the certification so they can go into these life science jobs. And I went to their recent graduation and met a young person who just got a job at United Therapeutics, another who's been offered jobs in RTP. I say all this to say that for me, I do have to be grounded in thinking about impacts to rtp and from my understanding is that what we are looking at is and what we've heard from stakeholders in rtp is that what we need to pay attention to around unintended consequences is the enterprise and the edge data centers that are helping just the day-to-day functioning a lot of these companies. They don't have their own data centers, but they will use whatever data centers that are close to them for storage and processing of information. So this is, again, what I feel like I have to take into consideration. Our congressional district has lost more federal funding than anywhere else in the United States. So we've had hits to EPA, NIH, RTI, FHI. It's estimated that we've lost over 6,000 jobs under the Trump administration. So it's real. And so for me, I'm looking for what makes sense in terms of having some realistic, reasonable – because what we're hearing from some of these companies is that they want to renovate their data centers within the next nine months. And just making renovations to actually make them more energy efficient or anything, they would not be able to do it. under a blanket moratorium and then also we also had heard that there was plans for building again one of these enterprise edge centers on some land that you know anyway the overall impact that we've heard is about a half a billion dollars if we don't allow anything to happen at all in RTP over the next nine months. I think it's important to understand that there is not no impact. And I also don't want to overpromise, and that's why I was trying to ask the questions about what can we or cannot we not do, even after nine months. I don't want to overpromise on us being able to address some of the really valid issues for instance around the water I'm really concerned about that that whether we're even going to be able to address that in our final ordinance so these are you know some of the things that I'm thinking about and I do appreciate the staff bringing us something that would provide some way for some of the economic activity to continue. RTP is trying to pivot. RTP 3.0 is about trying to make RTP a live, work, play environment. And the county has been really invested in it. We've spent $20 million. on the hub as first model. But the idea is that there will be 40,000 people eventually living there and The reason I was asking about the RTB 3.0 is because it's my understanding that anybody who came forward with a site plan would actually have to go under some rigorous requirements that we actually can't provide ourself under our current zoning ordinance. One of the things I learned in the session from the school of government is that we're unfortunately going to be impacted and i should have asked you this earlier sarah but the down zoning or statute that's in place right now it's statute uh 160d-601 that is now restricting counties from doing any type of down zoning. And this is actually could be a very serious issue when we look at what we can do with a data center ordinance. I think for me, one of the hopes is that the fact that we have the RTP 3.0, we may actually have more authority in RTP to have more control. And Pablo, I do want to address what you said about the special tax district. So just so you know, they are using that money to build a multimodal hub in RTP, so we have transit. They're using it to help build a triangle bikeway so people can bike to work. And they're helping the county out with that money too, because they're paying for a space for the sheriff's deputies. i just think it's important for folks to know that that's how they are they're actually helping pay for things that we don't have to pay for um out of our budget um anyway i i just think it's important for me that i i have to weigh all of these things and i take very seriously all the issues that everyone has raised again i We will not be allowing hyperscale data centers if we do these exemptions. But I want to make sure we don't have unintended consequences of the reality of the jobs that people depend on in our community being able to continue moving forward. Thank you.

all right thank you commissioner jacobs and i'm not going to talk long i was not expecting to be talking from this diet at 11 30 at night um i really appreciate the public comment all the public comment and we we've got a lot of emails and there's nothing surprising that we heard here tonight But what I found interesting is, and I actually said this the last meeting we had, is everyone here on this side of the dais, on that side of the dais, agrees with the AI data centers. That's a given that we all support, not even just a moratorium, but if we had the opportunity, we would ban hyperscale AI use data centers. I'm no different from that. I absolutely agree with that. I think the challenge and some of the threads I heard through tonight is there may be confusion about what this moratorium actually is. I heard a person say that they were told that a data center was gonna be built, that we're voting on building a data center near their home or something like that. And this person said that that made her worry, which is why they came down here to speak, right? We heard someone, a few people say, you know, not all data centers are the same. but we need to ban the AI data centers, which are all of them. And that's a challenge as well. The reason I bring that up is because that is the, that not all data centers are the same, is the root of the question that I started with when I started meeting with people and organizations about this is how are we defining that because they're they're not all AI use data centers and that was my simple question was is you know what are we defining here what are we trying to stop from that point it was a disagreement a different difference of opinion the disagreement Some want total stoppage of anything related to a data center, and some don't. I don't necessarily think that all data centers are AI use. I just don't. And that's what this moratorium represents. Now I want to clarify something, because it was brought up in public comment. I did not come up with 100,000 square feet. The first time I heard it was in the meeting. And I said, oh, you know, that may be a good in between measure. I even asked, what does that mean? What are the sizes? What does that mean? So no, I did not come up with that. And it magically showed up in this. I ask questions about it. So I think, as I mentioned last time as well, we don't have the luxury of just going without oversight in what actually the outcomes of decisions that we make. what those outcomes are. We don't have the luxury of not thinking about that. And so we have to take the time to do that. And I understand that's essentially what the moratorium is for, but the more immediate needs as well, we have to think about that as well. And that's why my position hasn't changed on the need to make sure that we're structuring Durham against AI data centers AI-based or AI-use data centers, even the large data centers, while also allowing the flexibility to make sure that we're not handicapping the the small companies, American Underground, the small companies that don't use AI data centers, that don't build or use those AI data centers, they use data retrieval. We had a couple developers come up here today and speak in favor of a moratorium without exceptions. And that's fair. But those developers, by nature of today's development, and that's what I used to do when I was at IBM as well, those developers use data. That data is stored somewhere. Somewhere. Depending on what company that they work for, it's probably at the building or near the campus in which they work. If they work from home, wherever their company is located. but they use data. And a loosely written moratorium could prevent those individuals from continuing to innovate from their jobs as developers. Every single company here, no matter where you work, no matter what you do, You work in a restaurant, you work on a farm, you work at a school, you work at a parks and rec, wherever, inside, outside. That company somewhere uses data retrieval of some sort. If it's transactions, if it is customer data, if it is plant data, whatever it may be. You use it if you work in manufacturing, you obviously understand data and machinery is used. That's the only thing I wanna make sure that we're not handicapping during this period. Vice Chair Lum, you make very good points about some of the parts of the moratorium. And along with Commissioner Valentine, I'm okay with us kind of reviewing what that actually means and making sure that we are not speaking double or we're not handicapping with 100,000, whatever that is. But I wanna be clear that we have the responsibility to limit, as Commissioner Jacobs said, the unintended consequences of anything that we do. Not just this, not just this decision. We have to make sure that we're limiting that. And I think this moratorium, the way that it's written, helps us to do that for these nine months. Now, regardless of what happens with this moratorium today, this is only temporary. And the wording and the regulation and things are gonna be in the UDL, and it's gonna be a lot more complicated than just deciding what level in which we try to minimize the challenges. That's gonna be a bigger problem. I support this moratorium, the way it is written. However, I am open, like Attorney Williams said, I'm open to us making adjustments because it was written that way. Making adjustments, making sure that we resolve some of these inconsistencies that have been identified. I'm okay with doing that. But the spirit of what we have here satisfies what it is that I want to make sure that we're preventing. It keeps... AI hyperscale out while also allowing regular use data retrieval type data centers to make sure that we're actually making, we have balance in what we're doing. Okay? the comments being completed there was so there's i guess there's requests for motions uh motions to be put forward okay well there'll be a motion to be put forward now commissioner alum initially says she had a motion to put forward i'll allow her to make her motion

Well, I have a couple, but I'm going to start at the top. My first motion would be that I would move to amend the proposed ordinance by removing section 4A and 4D, retaining section 4B and 4C, and by updating section 3 as necessary to match, so that the statutory statements match that amended scope.

Okay. Is there a second for Commissioner Long's motion? Hearing none, the motion fails.

My next motion would be then to, I move to amend Section 4D to apply the same cooling and backup generation conditions required under Section 4A.

So moved. So could you repeat the motion?

I move to amend section 4D to apply the same cooling and backup generation conditions required for section 4A.

Okay, so there's been a motion. It's been properly seconded. I'll open for discussion. Is there any discussion?

Commissioner Burton?

No? Commissioner Valentine? No? Commissioner Jacobs, any discussion? No, I agree. Okay. Yeah. All right, so we'll place a vote. All in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed, please use the same sign. All right, the motion to amend 4D with the same cooling and

diesel the backup generators backup generators that's for a expansion versus new construction differentiation okay that motion passes I had some more motions okay all right I moved to amend section 4 to provide that Correct me if I'm wrong, Maurice. Is this one already, would it be covered from the clarifying question? I'm moving to amend section four to provide that separate buildings or phases on the same parcel of land under common ownership shall be aggregated into that. Okay, so that's, then I would move to amend section 4A to require as a condition of exemption that an applicant certify in writing that it's expected connected electrical, writing it's expected connected electrical load, it's cooling system type and working fluid, and it's backup generation fuel, and that we have that be as a public record.

Can we require that? Can you?

Are you talking about making sure that smaller buildings do not?

No, that was the first one that Maury's Deputy County Manager Jones said that that's already in the language. So that one is next. But the next one was that as a condition of exemption that the applicant has to certify what their expected electrical load is, since that's not something we can measure, but we can ask them. what their expected electrical load is, as well as what type of cooling system type they'll use and the fluid that they'll be using in that cooling system, as well as what is their backup generation fuel.

And just. Is that for new construction?

That would be for any.

Or for any, okay. What, let me, before we get into discussion, we need to see if there's a second. Well, you know what, let's do a discussion and see if we can get a second out of it.

Yeah, I just have a question. So is the purpose just to be able to attain that information? Is that the goal? To actually get, start understanding and getting that information?

And to be able to make sure that they are complying with whatever, what the exemptions are that are created, that they, we have in writing from them what type of cooling system they're using, their backup generation, and then the electric, connected electrical load is not necessarily related to one of these exemptions, but it'll help us in the research process for the UDO changes.

Okay, second. Okay, we have a motion. A motion on the floor has been properly seconded. Any further discussion?

Yes, Chair, can we do that? Can we place that restriction on an applicant? Well, I'm going to, I'll let,

I don't think it's for like an approval or anything like that. I think it's for us to collect information about what they're doing. Okay. I think if it had to do with approval, that's something that would be in the legal stands, but I'm not a lawyer.

The way that I named it was that it would be a condition of qualifying for the exemption.

So that is approval. Okay.

So I think that we can ask for the information, but I think logistically we would have a problem, particularly with the electrical load, in making sure that they're actually using the amount that they are certifying, because I don't know how we would enforce that, particularly since we have no enforcement powers over the electrical usage. I'm not the expert in that field. but I think that that would be our biggest issue because if they certify that their electrical usage is a certain level and then it's not, then what? So I see that as being the bigger problem there. I don't know if Sarah, that's right, okay, thank you, Sarah, yeah, I see that as the problem.

So, but if we had the condition that they have to certify in writing that that's what they're expected is, We may not be able to regulate it, but we get in writing what they're expecting, because then that also provides transparency for us and for the community of when this data center comes in, what their expected electricity load is, and then as we continue to define and do the research, we can use that information about, well, this is the size of a data center that's come to Durham, their square footage, and this is what they have expected.

I would say, though, that since we will be using it as a condition, then that's where it starts to become a little more difficult.

The condition is them providing that certification, putting it in writing.

Right. But what happens if they're telling you what they expect, but then what happens if it's above what they've told us? What would be the next step there?

Well for the electrical load piece I think we know that we don't have a way of measuring it but to have them certifying that that's what they expect to use at least gives us one data point.

Well not to you know belabor but I guess my question would be then they could pretty much tell us anything. I mean they could tell you what they expect and that may very well be what they expect, but maybe not. Maybe they're lowering it just to make it sound better, but they know that it'll be more, and there's really nothing we can do after that. But just my thought.

Yeah, no, no, no. I understand that I hear that. I think, for me, the reason I brought it forward is because there isn't a way for us to get that information any other way. Something is better than nothing to get this data from them.

i actually i actually support that i support that even though there's not really an enforcement mechanism but um a data point like you said if they're now the community knows now we know like what their what their starting point is as far as their expected usage i actually actually support you know, requesting that or requiring that to continue forward, but knowing that there's not really an enforcement mechanism right now, right now. All right, so there's a motion on the floor. It's been probably seconded. Any further discussion? All right, all in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. All opposed, same sign? I pose. Okay. And it passes 4-1. Okay.

And my last motion is moving that the plan of action that's in section six that we more like definitively express, including a study of relationship between facility floor area and electrical load. The water and energy trade offs of closed loop and other cooling technologies, including the disclosure of the fluids that they're using. and the emission profiles of non-diesel backup generators, and an aggregation of phasing standards that data centers may use, and that the staff report to the board on these items before we have our UDO language presented to us.

Okay, that's kind of a lot in a motion, so. I just asked a clarifying question.

Maybe Sarah, if you could come up, if you feel like that's all stuff that you all can do.

All right, so let's, we're heading towards midnight, let's try to wrap it up, because I don't want another motion.

All right, I just don't want to, the staff are the ones who are going to have to do this, so I want to make sure that it makes sense to them, that's all.

i think we can certainly research those just understand that we will be limited by whatever data we may or may not be able to get so maybe some of the answers to that to some of those might be not as robust as we would like okay and my purpose of that motion is to have it more explicitly written the direction to staff about the research we want to get back second

It has been properly moved and seconded, a very long motion. We'll have to go back on the...

I'll send it to Clerk Wallace.

We'll have to listen to that again on video to get all of it. Any further discussion? All right, all in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed, please use the same sign. Passes unanimously. Okay. Was that it? Okay. We got through our motions. Okay. So those were adjustments to the moratorium. All right. Thank you for those motions. All right. So that's it? No, that's it for the public hearing, right? Okay. All right. So we've gotten through that. The next item on agenda is the... boards and commissions I think the overall moratorium needs to be voted on as amended as amended okay all right okay so I'll accept the motion to approve the moratorium to include the amended pieces from the motions we just voted on from the votes that we just took with all of the remaining provisions as presented. Okay? All right, I'll accept the motion.

Second. Wait, we need a first.

I asked for a motion. Oh, and you know what, we need a so moved.

Okay.

Second.

All right, so we can move and second it that we approve the moratorium. with the voted on changes, keeping in place the remaining provisions. Any further discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, please use the same sign.

Aye.

You oppose? Okay, all right. Okay, it passes four to one. Okay, all right. Interesting. All right, so now we move on. And then it's the boards and commissions. Please, please leave. Please leave.

all right let's see the boards and commissions okay so we have the Durham Wake County's research and production service district advisory committee we had three vacant positions the board has selected Gina Anderson Randy Salls, and Sarah Gaskill for those positions. We have the Opioid Settlement Advisory Committee. We had one vacant position, and the board has selected Elijah Bazemore for that position. Congratulations to all that were appointed.

All right, thank you very much. Last item on our agenda is adjournment. I'll accept a motion to adjourn.

So moved. Second.

Has been moved, probably seconded. We adjourn. All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed? We are adjourned. Thank you.