Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I'm going to ask before . Before we start the meeting, we do have blue sheets of paper. If you would like to fill them out, this is if you plan to speak or come to the Rostam to speak, we would prefer that you fill it out. It's not mandatory. But if you don't have one, we can easily get one to you. So if you plan to speak, it would help us out so we have a decent number so we know. OK? So the blue sheets should be on the table. If not, we can get one to you.

OK.

ACTUALLY, THEY'RE CALLED ADDRESS TO THE CITY COUNCIL, BUT WE USE THEM TOO. WE MAY HAVE TO. Okay, looks like we're set. Good evening. Welcome to the City of Paris Planning Commission meeting, September 16th, 2026. It's certainly a lot cooler now than it was about a week ago, I'll say that much. We appreciate you being here today and we're going to start this. Oh, people are still coming in.

Okay.

Again, if you plan to speak, we do have those blue sheets and we would appreciate it if you filled them out, just for our records keeping purpose, no other purpose. And essentially, you just need your name. To print your name clearly, we don't need the last name, we don't need the address, we don't need the phone call, we don't need any of that. If you want to put that, it's up to you. We just need your name so we can put it in the record, okay? Does everyone understand that? Okay. First item is the roll call and the pizza will do it for us.

606. Here. Commissioner Lopez.

Here.

Commissioner Jimenez here. Vice Chair Shively here. Chair Hammond here. With five yeses and zero noes, this motion passes.

Okay. At this time, item three is the Pledge of Allegiance. Commissioner Jimenez will lead it. Item four is presentations, and we have no presentations scheduled, so we move on to item five, consent calendar. Item A is approval of planning commission minutes of September 2nd, 2026 meeting. Were there any corrections, deletions, additions?

Okay.

Okay, seeing none, we open it up for public comment. Anyone wishing to comment on this item and this item only is welcome to come to the podium. And we're talking about consent calendar item A. If you have any public comment on the item, you're welcome to come to this. Seeing none, we close with public comment and we look for a motion to approve. Oh, did you have? On this item, did you have a public consent calendar? Okay, that's what I was wondering, okay. Yeah, I think so.

Okay, sorry.

Make a motion.

Moved by Commissioner Jimenez.

I'll second the motion.

And seconded by Commissioner Menez.

Okay.

Yeah, we'll voice for it, we'll voice it.

Commissioner Menes? Yes. Commissioner Lopez?

Yes.

Commissioner Jimenez? Yes. Vice Chair Shively?

Yes.

Chair Hammond?

Yes.

With five yeses and zero nos, this motion passes.

Thank you very much. OK. For our purposes of this item 6a, public hearing, we are going to limit the public hearing minutes to two minutes. There are a lot of people, and I am not sure who would be you don't have to have the blue card, so you are welcome to come, but it is going to be two minutes. So we can clearly get everyone a chance to speak and everyone a chance to voice their concerns or opinions. So two minutes. We are setting that out up front.

And it has been agreed to.

Unanimously. Item 6A, Pacific Plan Amendment 26-00002 and Zoning Code Text Amendment 26-00002, a city initiated proposal to amend Title 19 Zoning Code of the Paris Municipal Code and the Paris Valley Commerce Center Downtown Paris, Green Valley, Harvest Landing, New Paris, and River Glen Pacific plans to prohibit data centers citywide. The applicant is the City of Paris. Requested action is adopt resolution 26-17 recommended the City Council find zoning code text amendment 26-00002 is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act and alternatively that it is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 15061 common sense exemption As it can be seen with certainty, there is no possibility the proposed amendment would have a significant effect on the environment. In Section 15308, as an action taken by the City as a regulatory agency to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment and approve Zoning Code Tax Amendment 26-0002 to amend the City Paris Municipal Code to prohibit data center citywide and making findings related thereto. We have received a, for item 6A, comment letter one, comment letter two, comment letter three. Three individuals, we have those attached and we, for the record, they have been submitted to us. I don't know if I should name the poem, I may be saying Becerra, Jasmine Rodriguez and Shirley Carpenter. We have received them. They will go to our records for this meeting. I am going to reemphasize as we turn it over to the City that there are no projects before. I am not finished reading it yet, but I am just saying that before I read the other half of this resolution is that there are no projects currently before the City and the City is stating in this that it would be a prohibition. Adopt Resolution 26-18, recommended that the City Council find specific plan Amendment 26-0002 is not subject to California Environmental Equality Act. An alternative to that is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15061. As to be seen with certainty, there is no possibility the proposed amendment will have a significant effect on the environment and Section 5 as an action taken by the City as a regulatory agency to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement or protection of the environment and approve specific plan amendment 26-00002 to amend the Harvest Valley Commerce Center, Downtown Paris, Green Valley, Harvest Landing, New Paris and River Glen specific plans to prohibit data centers citywide and making findings related thereto. And I'm emphasizing that again. We turn it over to the city for their presentation, Mr. Rafael Garcia, thank you. Yeah, we could, okay. Okay, it should be on the sheet, yeah. Okay, okay. We do have an interpreter. If you need an interpreter, let us know. Raise your hand. If you need an interpreter, we have a person sitting in there in the room and will come out if necessary. So please let us know. Just raise your hand if you feel that you need an interpreter.

Okay?

And that's when we go to our public comment section. Thank you, sir.

Thank you. Good evening, all members of the Planning Commission. Good to be here before you tonight. As you indicated, we do have a zoning code tax amendment as well as a specific plan amendment pertaining to data centers before you tonight. As a reminder, some of the background on this project is on June 9th, 2026, city council directed staff to initiate a code amendment in order to consider prohibiting data centers citywide. Overall, during that meeting, City Council took in public testimony and directed staff to prepare an item, and that's why we're here before you tonight as part of this zoning code amendment and SPA. Staff's presentation tonight will provide an overview on how other jurisdictions within the state of California have regulated data centers and some of the potential impacts associated with this land use, including impacts associated with electricity demand, water consumption, noise and operational characteristics, as well as property tax revenue and living wage employment and the prospects of it. So overall, with regards to data centers, they typically consist of large, industrial-looking buildings that house servers, equipment, and other digital infrastructure supporting cloud computing, artificial intelligence, and online services, as well as data storage. They are generally defined as a facility that houses and operates computer system servers and related equipment for storage, processing, and transmission of data, typically for commercial, industrial, and government purposes. As part of our research, we reached out to different cities to see how they were, to see if they had any policies pertaining to this use. We found overall there was five cities that had recently dealt with data centers. For the most part, four out of the five permitted the use with a conditional use permit. There is one city, City of Monterey Park, that has outright banned, prohibited the use. AND WITH REGARDS TO THE CITIES OF SANTA CLARA, SAN JOSE, EL SEGUNDO AND THE CITY OF VERNON ALL ALLOW THEM WITH APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. THEY OUTLINE CERTAIN SPECIFIC RULES AND REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS AND FOR THE MOST PART, NOT EXCLUSIVELY, BUT FOR THE MOST PART THEY'RE LIMITED TO INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS WITHIN THE CITY. Now, with regards to impacts, as you all may know, with the artificial intelligence boom, there's been an increased dependence on this type of technology. Overall, the training and running of artificial intelligence requires a high amount of computing power. And along with that computing power, you need a tremendous amount of electricity. So typically these types of facilities have the potential of impacting a lot of the utility providers in that there's an increased demand specifically with regards to electricity as well as water. The first thing to keep in mind is that a large data center can consume anywhere from 20 to up to 100 megawatts of electricity compared to a similar size warehouse which may only take up about two to 10 megawatts. So typically the electricity demand for one of these facilities, because they operate largely on a wide variety of sophisticated equipment and servers, they typically require much higher electricity demand. This is important because during a rolling blackout maintaining power to the March Air Reserve Base could be prioritized due to its role in supporting military operations. This could increase the likelihood of power interruptions within the city of Paris as well as the surrounding community. These power disruptions could create public safety risk including loss of air conditioning during the caught climate as we all know here in the city. There's also an increase in electricity rates typically that impacts residents and members of the community. That's something that should also be taken into consideration. With regards to water demand, data centers can require approximately 200,000 up to several million gallons of water The reason for that is because typically there's a lot of the systems that are used to keep and cool a lot of the network infrastructure that a lot of these facilities have requires a tremendous amount of water. There are recycling systems to try to account for that, but nevertheless there is typically an increased demand for water. the ability to serve the project or any future data center may not align with the city's long-term land use goals in that large data center demands could compete with planned residential commercial industrial and as well as public uses furthermore large data centers typically have an increase when it comes to infrastructure costs this service may may be costly in that a lot of these system extensions storage and capacity will have an impact on the community. Now with regards to noise, typically there is noise that's associated with these types of facilities. Data centers operate continuously requiring ongoing cooling, air handing, and electrical equipment. They operate throughout the day. A lot of these sounds are typically especially noticeable during the nighttime quiet hours when you don't have a lot of traffic noise and when a lot of that noise tends to travel longer and further distances. Backup power generators are periodically tested as well. They can be quite noisy and they are operated in order to maintain the infrastructure on site. This has the ability to create an additional noise source on the property. They can also produce persistent low frequency noise unlike intermittent truck and loading activity associated with warehouses. So the nature of the land use with regards to noise is slightly different. The combined effect of multiple mechanical sources may affect nearby residents and sensitive receptors since they are susceptible to this noise, again, especially during the nighttime hours. Site design and conditions of approval, these things do have the potential of reducing impacts onto the neighboring community, but it does not completely eliminate them over the life of a facility. With regards to revenue, large-scale data centers generate substantially high property tax revenue because of their assessed values include a lot of the network system and that infrastructure that typically goes along with a lot of these facilities. As an example, an 800,000 square foot warehouse in Paris was assessed at approximately 187 million. At an approximately 1% property tax rate with roughly 10% allocation towards the city, the warehouse could generate approximately $187,000 annually in base property tax revenue. Now, if you compare that to a data center, an equivalent size data center that were to be assessed at six times the warehouse value, its assessed value overall would be approximately 1.12 billion, which would be substantially higher. Under these same assumptions, the data center could generate approximately 1.12 million annually in base property tax revenue, mainly associated with a lot of that equipment that goes inside of the facility. So that would also get factored into the property tax revenue that gets generated. Now when it comes to salaries and jobs, this was one of the items that was also brought up. Data centers typically employ fewer workers for a similar size warehouse. So a data center may employ 50 to 100 workers, while a similar warehouse may employ hundreds up to over 1,000 employees, especially since there's multiple shifts. Many data center positions require specialized technical expertise, and they may offer higher salaries. This also means that companies may recruit from established technology markets and may limit local employment opportunities. Now overall, when you take all these things into consideration, the important thing to keep in mind here is that while data centers may provide additional property investment, property tax revenue, and living wages, those benefits do not outweigh the city's responsibility to maintain adequate and reliable services, which would be jeopardized due to the infrastructure capacity strains related to electricity as well as water demand that would be required by the data centers. The need for a balanced mix of uses contemplated by the general plan and applicable specific plans. Now what we have before you is staff is recommending a prohibition as was directed by the city council. But we'd like to go over a few things of why this is the optimal policy at this point. The first is to protect public health, safety, and the general welfare. This would be done by prohibiting data centers throughout the city. The second would be in order to manage the high and the continuous resource demands that's associated with a lot of these data centers. Typically electricity as well as water usage as well as a lot of the noise that's generated 24-7 would be definitely a potential impact. There would also be potential offsite infrastructure needs associated with a lot of these facilities and that they tend to have impact on the utility providers. The next thing the prohibition would accomplish is that it would address impacts beyond the project site, including utility capacity, infrastructure, noise, environmental impacts, and emergency reliability. The prohibition also recognizes the fact that while we have certain zoning tools, such as a conditional use approval, A lot of these project-specific conditions cannot completely eliminate the underlying resource demand or the cumulative impact of increased demand associated with the utilities. It would also advance the general plan in that in order to preserve infrastructure capacity and support land use consistency, environmental justice, and noise compatibility, as well as the balance of mix of uses, prohibiting the use would be the optimal policy. It would also establish a clear policy directive in order to provide a consistent and predictable approach before major private investment or infrastructure commitments occur. Now in order to accomplish this, staff amended the zoning code as well as six total specific plans. First thing that staff did was amend chapter 1908, which is the definition section in order to include a definition of what a data center is. Data center will be defined as any facility used primarily for housing of large-scale computer network, data storage servers, and ancillary equipment typically characterized by high electricity consumption, continuous mechanical cooling requirements, and minimal onsite employment relative to building size. This definition excludes traditional telephone switching facilities, telecommunication antennas, and standard server rooms that are necessary to a permitted principal office use. It would also amend chapters 1936 and 1938 to include data centers as a prohibited use. And it would amend chapters 1944 to include data centers as a prohibited use as part of the land use table. And chapter 1944 is the chapter that regulates a lot of the land uses associated with our industrial districts here throughout the city. Now in order to bring the specific plans, the very specific plans that we have currently and throughout the city, we would also be proposing tonight a total of several amendments to six specific plans in order to make these specific plans consistent with the policy that's being implemented as part of the zoning code. The first would be to amend the Paris Valley Commerce Center Specific Plan, the Downtown Paris, Green Valley, Harvest Landing, New Paris, and River Glance Specific Plans. The amendments would be simply to bring these documents in consistency with the balance of the zoning code. Now, with all this in mind, the proposed amendment has been determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Section 15061 , as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed amendment will have significant effect on the environment, as well as Section 15308 as an action taken by the City as a regulatory agency to assure maintenance, restoration, enhancements, or protection of the environment. Now staff is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt Resolutions 2617 as well as 2618, recommending that the City Council find that the project before you tonight is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Section 15061 , section 15 308 and approves zoning code text amendment 26-0 0 0 2 and specific plan amendment 26-0 0 0 2 to amend the zoning code as well as the Paris Municipal Code the Paris Valley Commerce Center's specific plan downtown Paris Green Valley harvest landing new Paris and River Glen specific plans to prohibit data centers citywide based on the findings contained herein. As a reminder, this item is being brought to you for consideration. The next step would be to take a recommendation before the city council, most likely next month, and to, if they decide, they would adopt the code amendment and potentially process the second reading thereafter. That concludes the presentation. As a reminder, we did receive three comment letters, emails prior to this meeting. Those emails have been forwarded over to the Planning Commission for review. And that concludes our presentation. Staff will be able to answer any questions that members of the community may have pertaining to this, as well as members of the Commission. Thank you for your time. And thank you for the presentation.

It was very well done. Okay. We're going to reserve our questions until after we hear from public comment. There's quite a few people. So we're just changing the order IT. There's a blue sheet. Is that blue sheet filled out? No, it may run right there. Okay. Okay. Okay. Thanks. Just want to make sure. Somebody might have put it there. I didn't know. Okay. At this time we're going to open it up for a public comment on this agenda item and this agenda item only. And we had stated it would be two minutes. What we're going to do is procedurally we're going to ask Peter to give us at least four names of people we would like you to come and sit in these four chairs or up front so we can move this pretty quickly because we would like to hear as many people as possible. So once she calls your name, if you're physically able, please come up to the front and we'll just do it in order so we can get through everyone, okay?

J.C. Franco, Daniel Harrington, Nancy Rainey, and Angel Escobar.

Did everyone hear those names? Okay. DeFranco, you can come on up, and the others where you can, yeah, follow by. It just makes it easier. Then we'll call another four and come behind you. Okay. Cal, all yours.

Everybody hear me? Oh, yeah. Good evening, Planning Commission, City of Paris staff. Thank you so much for this opportunity to speak today. We do not want this here, period. Full stop. We need an outright ban. The community deserves an outright ban of data centers. from start to finish. I'm glad the City Council put this motion forward and I'm glad City Council puts it before us. And I think it's now the onus of the Planning Commission to tighten up the language, even more so than what we saw before. We've clearly seen that a parcel hub, which is a very, very big facility that has a lot of traffic, has found a way to skirt its definition away from being called a warehouse. And in fact, it looks and, you know, if it quacks like a duck and it walks like a duck, it's a duck. parcel hubs or warehouses, data centers, edge data centers, cloud computing centers. We need to make sure that the Planning Commission here today is going to ensure that none of that gets by. We do not want this. Our community doesn't want this. People are struggling to pay their bills. And the idea that there could potentially be a project that comes forward that you know, rises our water costs, our electricity costs, that is not a non-negotiable item here. People deserve to be defended and that's what I'm here to do. Thank you.

Thank you. Next. Yes, come on, sir.

Just state your name for us. Yes, my name is Angel Escobar. I'm a resident here in Paris and I'm here to express my support for the proposed city ban on data centers. I don't believe that the data centers are the right type of development for our community. I am concerned about the resources and infrastructure these facilities require and the impact they could have on our residents. I would like to see the city prioritize development that provides clear benefits to the people who live here. I respectfully ask that the Planning Commission to support the proposed amendment. Thank you.

Thank you very much, sir.

Next.

Good evening. Daniel Hannigan, a 16-year resident here in Paris. I'm also concerned about a data center going in, not just for our own well-being, but I live by the lake. And the fairgrounds there and the campgrounds in the back, although they are state-run, what can we do to keep them from going over our head? Can we prevent this from actually happening? With the campground, people trying to sleep 24-7, you've got this humming and vibrating going on. Environmental protections of wildlife in the area, what would that present and cause problems for? I'm not sure if those have been addressed or thought of, but something also a concern of mine. Thank you.

Thank you very much, sir. Take your time. Take your time.

Good evening. My name is Nancy Rainey. I live on Rider Street here in Paris. I've lived there for 30 years. And I've seen people jump in and out of all our politics in this. And I'm thinking of the seniors and the water, I was under the impression that they're gonna take water from the lake. The lake has enough problems with keeping it full and we're not catching fish. But I'm looking at, you're raising electricity and we have so much traffic out there on Rider with all the trucks and all the cars going to schools because there's not enough places for people to drop their kids off. And we asked a long time ago when they started building houses out there that you made it convenient for everybody to get in and out on our streets. But for some reason, nobody's listening to us. And I've been there for 30 years. And it's sad that we're trying to get into something. I think it's over our head. We don't need something like that. We want to live. Some of us have country homes. And that's where we've been for many, many years. And with all the traffic and the parents that don't know how to drive back and forth on the road and the trucks. I'm surprised there's not more children getting hit by cars out there. But this is not just our area, it's all over. You guys put warehouses in, and I know most of the warehouses where we're at are Riverside County, not Paris, but it's in Paris. A lot of people don't understand that you can't do certain things in county and in the city of Paris. So we're really having a lot of problems out with, and this came up today to me, and I'm shocked that they're even thinking about doing anything like that. We like bees. We like our fruit trees. We like our gardens. We like to grow our own vegetables. What is this going to do to it?

Thank you very much.

Lizbeth, Franco Pacheco, Vanessa Lopez, Santiago Osuna.

That's good, four people.

Hello, my name is Franco Pacheco with Inland Valley Alliance and a resident here, a longtime resident in Paris and Mid Valley. Yeah, just ban all data centers in Paris before they come here. We already see GlobalStack doing an agreement with the fairgrounds, which is state-ran land. So I recommend everybody here go to that meeting as well, which is on the 23rd of this month at 4 p.m. at the fairgrounds. And... Also, when we talk about the tax revenue that they bring in, we know that the city is not going to see it. We got the same spiel when warehouses came here. And by that logic, we should be a more successful city. Also, when we're talking about the tax revenue that comes in, these data centers are getting big tax breaks. So that's going to take a big chunk out of it right there. They're bad for the environment. They have noise pollution, water pollution. funds ai surveillance also like to ask the planning Commission to put in there, make sure that. Those other terms for data centers doesn't get put in there, such as fusion centers, which is a data Center that focus primarily on surveillance and you know big brother. Yeah. And for the people who came out here, I want to thank everybody for coming out here and supporting the ban for data centers in Paris. And just for more information, I heard a gentle lady speak about the zoning in Riverside County in Paris and and the differences between it and also on the 23rd in September. There's going to be a warehouse boundary map that's going to rezone all the land next to Mott Reserve, which is right there on Rider where she was talking about. It's going to be over 138 million square feet of land that's at risk of being rezoning by Jose Medina. So please, if you guys can come out to that as well, it'll help us out. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Hi, everyone. Good afternoon. My name is Lizbeth. I'm actually a resident from Menifee. But once I heard that they want to do an AI data center, I said no. I'm going to get up here and talk. Where should I start? We all say no to the proposed data center. Let's do the right thing to counsel them. When the last tree is cut down, the last fish is eaten, and the last stream poisoned, we will realize you cannot eat money. OK? People are sick and tired, as you all that are sitting down on the podium as well.

We have to do something about it, right?

I'm asking the council to reject this AI data center. Because the current record does not adequately establish that the project can operate without unacceptable impacts on the water.

paris lake they're gonna remove the water and put it in the ai data center what does that tell you what does that tell you okay we don't want big tech in our cities we don't what happened with the warehouses

what's gonna happen next with the ai it's gonna be everywhere just like the um like the warehouses okay it's not all about money we have to wake up if this generation doesn't wake up the other generation is going to be cooked thank you very much my kids your kids your grandkids thank you very much

Yeah, just state your name for us.

Hello, my name is Santiago Osuna, and I'm a senior in Orange Vista High School, and I say no to data centers. Why say no to data centers? I did research about data centers across the state. I saw Utah is trying to make a massive data center, which is huge, that's going to require water and electricity. And I also saw in Texas where this old lady had her fossil all the way up, and no water was coming out. She had to reserve her water just to shower, just to drink it. And because of this, I want no data centers in our city. I don't want my mom and dad to struggle with their electricity bill going up, them struggling with the noise what these data centers makes. I want my mom and dad to rest after their long day at work making food for me and my brother to have a nice day. And because of this, that's why I don't want data centers. And that's all I have to say.

Thank you very much.

Hello, my name is Vanessa Lopez. I come to you guys pleading that you guys do not accept the AI Center here in Paris. He's correct about the alien and the guy and everyone that's come up here has talked about how it's going to affect our water supply, our bills, our electricity bill's going to go up, the water's going to disappear eventually, and you guys, we have a small reservoir as it is, and you guys pump it to Lake Matthews, you pump it to Menifee, that direction. You have Mead Valley, you have Menifee, you have Reno Valley here, you have Paris here, you have people from Riverside here. And they don't even live in Paris. This tells you a lot. We're not the only ones fighting this. I've been here for 33 years. And this is the first time I've seen the warehouses and this data AI coming to the fairgrounds. What do you think is going to happen to the animals that live there? There's a school across the street. For goodness sake, those kids are going to be affected on their health. The people that live there are going to be affected by their health. The farmers on Ramona Expressway, you don't think so? I've been watching videos. Farmers from back east where they have all that stuff, their animals, their calves are coming out stillborn. The vibration of the humming, their water supply being nasty and poisoned. What do you think is going to happen to the farmers out there? What's going to happen to our crops out here, the people that have their own businesses that they farm? a lot's going to happen you're not just going to ruin paris but you're going to run other communities around it as it is i just ask you guys to please do not accept this i will be at the 23rd i hope you're all there and you guys support it thank you very much kevin kevin garter yolanda arena caesar salgado ivan soto

Hello? You guys hear me? I'm Kevin Gardea.

Once more, can we hear you? Hello?

Yeah. Thank you guys for your time today. I'm not an individual that usually is very politically motivated, but I come here today as a call to action for an appeal to your guys' character and humanity to please reject any and all data centers. Like over the years, the more I keep hearing about data centers and from what I've seen, it's just nothing good. I like clean drinking water. I care about my family. I do not want our electricity bills to go up. I have seen farmers and their calves, their baby cows just die because the constant noise If we allow data centers to be built in Paris, it's going to be a domino effect. It's just going to be this constant toxin that's poisoning our community, poisoning our wildlife, poisoning our families, poisoning our souls. Everyone here is coming from different parts. People are coming here from Menifee, Temecula, Riverside. We're all trying to communicate, please reject the data center. Thank you for your time.

Thank you very much. Okay, we're gonna take a break and I'm gonna explain something a second time so we have total clarity about what's going on here. Number one, Lake Paris Fairgrounds is not the city of Paris. We are not in their jurisdiction. Any projects or proposals would come under their jurisdiction. I believe it's the Department of Water Resources. So they are nothing before the City of Paris. So I'm just clarifying that anything that the Department of Water Resources, the State Fairgrounds does, is state concern. As far as any meetings, as far as any of that, we're not gonna discuss it here. That's something you guys can pass, but it is not the jurisdiction of the City of Paris. It's called Lake Paris, but it is not within our jurisdiction. We have no control over the state. We have no control over the county. So I was gonna make that clear that if you go to their meetings, that's fine, but we just wanna state that there's no proposals before us. We are not aware of anything beyond the city of Paris. And our proposal tonight is what we've already talked about on paper, is that they are coming from the city council, okay? So we're just stating that it's not something that's within our jurisdiction. Yes, ma'am.

If I can add to your clarification, Mr. Chairman, the item before you tonight does not involve any projects. The item before you tonight is to add provisions in the zoning code and the city's specific plans to prohibit data centers citywide. There's no project that we are that we're considering tonight. So I just want to make that clarification.

Thank you. So just want to be transparent here and clear, okay? Next person.

Hello, my name is Yolanda Urena, and thank you for listening. I understand you're talking about jurisdiction, and thank you for clarifying that. But the reality is that we live adjacent to the lake. the heat that is produced from the data center. You have to think, is it chemical? Is there friction? There's something invisible going on here that we're not understanding, that we need water to cool this off. I mean, it goes down to the cellular level. These things, they combine. and there are tiny explosions that is happening. So you don't look into that. the water people are trying to invest into these areas as if there's unlimited water ask yourselves why is that we're in california you know for years and years and years we're told that you know we have to limit our water use don't wash your cars don't this don't that and for decades And now you guys are considering this. It is in our area. And even though it's not your jurisdiction, I have no power over what in the end of the day you guys do. But I'm here representing the community at a lower level. So hopefully, even though it's out of your jurisdiction, at a lower level, Bring that up. We're the ones that live here. Bring that up to the state, please. And be a good neighbor with all of our communities, Menifee, Meade Valley, all of us. Come on, let's work together. This isn't something that a normal Californian would sit by and watch.

Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you.

Um, hello, my name is Ivan Soto. I've been a resident of Mead Valley for quite a while now. And I know you guys said this is outside of your jurisdiction. The whole Lake Paris thing doesn't sit right with me considering this isn't a particularly a particular area that isn't heavily dealing with droughts already. And that aside, I just don't like the short-term model of profit that AI data centers try to convince themselves they are. Which they are. They are short-term. But what we need is a long-term solution for all of these infrastructure projects that aren't just AI data centers. What we need is a complete prohibition of data centers, if anything. I need my parents' bills to be lower, all right? We're struggling right now. And an AI data center would not make that go any lower. It would make them rise only, it would make them skyrocket, basically. That's all I wanna say. I'm in complete support of the prohibition on AI data centers.

Okay, thank you very much.

Good evening, my name is Jesus Salgado and I am a resident of Mead Valley, but I'm also a frequent visitor of the Paris area. I'm here to voice my support of a complete prohibition of all data all AI data centers and adjacent large-scale computing infrastructure. I need not mention all the previously mentioned downsides such as water usage and electricity usage, but would also like to comment that even with the potential revenue presented through building a data center would be a risk considering that the AI bubble is further showing itself to be popping soon with companies such as OpenAI receiving diminished returns each year that get worse and worse. So I would just like to say if the passion of the people who want to protect the land and its residents aren't enough, let it be considered that this potential money is standing on frail legs and would be considered a fool's errand for all those involved. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Alex Mesa, Jose O, Marsoles, Melanie Hernandez.

Anyone who'd like to go first? OK.

Hello, everyone. I am Marcellus. I just came to amplify all of their voices. I have the same concerns. I know Lake Paris isn't in your jurisdiction, but you can show up as members of the community with your title as planning commission. And it will mean a lot more to the board of the 46th Congressional Agricultural District. We've heard that it's going to be five acres, which is approximately four football fields. And I don't think it's in line with the intended use of the fairgrounds. So I just came here to amplify that, as well as the shady business practices that GlobalStack is practicing. They have alarming family ties. The father didn't disclose that his daughter works for the company. She says she doesn't work for the company, but she speaks for the company. So there's a conflict of interest. I'd also like to point out that we have the environmental concerns, the electromagnetic fields that these centers hold harms not only humans but wildlife. It affects their breeding patterns. Please do your due diligence to look closer into the impacts it has on animals because we have to represent them as well. And yeah, I thank you for being here and listening to us and getting this ban on AI data centers, as well as they use another name, which is edge computing centers. So we need to get that in the language as well. So there's no loopholes. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Good afternoon, Planning Commission. My name is Jose Osunete-Zanella. I've been a resident for 12 years, and I want to thank you guys for pushing this band. But I do want to talk a little bit more about the water usage of these facilities, and so I'm going to go on a rant right now. On planet Earth, only 3% of our water is considered fresh water, and only about 0.5% is safe to drink. Water is a finite resource, and the replenishment rate of it changes due to reasons like climate change, decreasing snow caps, contamination of our water supplies, and other reasons alike. I mention this because globally we are in a climate crisis which directly impacts water. As the United Nations predict that in the next few years the Earth will reach a point of no return past the 1.5 degrees Celsius threshold, we will have less readily available water. At the current rate, the United Nations now want policymakers to, quote, prepare and navigate for our future. Building data centers are not how we prepare for the future, as it will help to propel towards human extinction. In the U.S., in 2021 alone, data centers consumed more than 449 million gallons of water daily. And around the country, local communities have suffered from water droughts, water contamination, and their price of energy going up. But humans cannot live without water. I do want to briefly mention that current data centers are not like that of the past. They become dangerous, and that temporary construction jobs should not come at the expense of building and helping to develop machines that want to replace us in the forsaken future. For the sake of us residents and humanity, please move forward with the ban against data centers to the city council, and thank you.

Thank you very much, sir.

My name is Alex Mesa. Good evening, everybody. Because of time limits, I just want to start where many people here are sort of forced to leave off. First off, the tax revenue of warehouses is currently being addressed on an electoral level already, so that could be expected to increase pretty soon. The valuation of the data centers is predicated on a tremendous bubble of market value, and the only way that bubble never pops is if the data centers enforce their own validity forever and ever. And that implies pure evil, which I will get to in a moment regarding what exceptions we need in the ordinance explicitly worded there to reflect the people's demands here tonight. Let's see, we've mentioned noise here. I want you all to know that the kind of sound waves in question here do cause stillbirths in mammals because of the unending stress to the fetus. You can hear from May Ranch, I mean, you can hear the monster trucks when they're doing stuff at the fairgrounds. So the idea that you wouldn't hear the data center constantly, I mean, it would kind of ruin people's half million dollar investments, their 30 year fixed, you know, kind of ruin people's lives here. So that's one thing to consider. Now, We do not want exceptions for smaller data centers just because they started out so massive in the public understanding. There's still a waste of land, water, and a source of devastation to our remaining natural and archaeological resources. Nothing can justify them to us, not even saying that it will somehow save us from ourselves. Leading to point two, people do not want exceptions made for public safety, national security, or any other excuse I could put in air quotes right now. Smaller type data centers cloud this and that, like the one proposed for the Lake of Paris Fairgrounds, which we want to ban for the city overall here. are only really suited to managing nearby surveillance tech. We've already seen how these flock cameras process so much more than a damned license plate. That is a bold-faced lie. The more computing power that you localize nearby, the more you can automate things like the facial recognition, the thermal recognition, and it just never ends after that. It's an occupation. Thank you very much.

Good evening, Planning Commission. I'm Melanie Hernandez, and today I'm speaking as a public health worker and a Paris resident. The same argument that Rob's meaningful futures has been pushed for data centers and warehouses alike, that these projects benefit communities like ours by creating new jobs and boosting local economic development. This is typically supported with increased tax revenue, future business opportunities, but as we have seen the development of warehouse progress, I beg to differ. The quality of life and health available to our community has obviously declined, and I care about the quality of life of my community. And that encompasses their health, their happiness, and their well-being, which, in my humble opinion, will not arise from an industrial atmosphere. Protective factors that would facilitate this would be diversification of the job market, environmental justice initiatives, and an increase in third spaces, and of course, accessible health care, which we are seeing federal attacks. So please take these into consideration for this ban and city planning in the future. Planning Commission, I strongly would like to push the support for the proposed ban on data centers. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Tatiana Flores, Cassandra Vasquez, Carla Cervantes, Grace Yip,

Yes, I can go. Hello, my name is Cassandra Vasquez, and today I'm speaking as a wildlife biologist and longtime resident of Paris, California. I was born and raised in Paris in May Ranch, and I have seen the landscape change from open coastal sage scrub chaparral, grassland, and riparian areas that are home to much of Paris' biodiversity, and I've seen a lot of that habitat destroyed by warehouses, and now it's being threatened by data centers, which I know you said is out of your jurisdiction, but still want to plead with you that you move forward with a ban of data centers in Paris just because clean water habitable land clean air all of which are things that the residents of Paris have a right to and all things that affect the biodiversity of the region are not infinitely available or renewable and we need to protect those things and that starts with stopping any further detrimental development that doesn't directly improve the lives of the residents of Paris. So that's all I have to say on that.

Thank you very much.

Good evening, sorry Planning Commission, thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. My name is Tatiana Flores and I am a resident of Moreno Valley just near the border of Paris, so I am one of your neighbors. I am here today to express my support for a data center ban in Paris and urge the city to be an example for what our surrounding cities and communities should be pushing for in their respective areas. Paris and the 215 region, including Moval, Riverside, and Mead Valley, already face poor air quality due to the over-industrialization and inundation of warehousing. We are facing warming temperatures and more regularity of fires in our region. We have seen Lake Paris catch on fire recently. I think Mead Valley has had two fires recently as well. This would do... allowing data centers to come to the city would do nothing else but contribute to this issue the city has been somewhat of a leader in the county in terms of environmental policy including the passing of the warehouse moratorium and the extension of it this therefore should be a given and an easy decision for you all today this is the most i have seen young people actually attend some of these city council or planning commission meetings So if that doesn't speak volumes, then I don't know what will. They've been pretty loud and clear about not wanting data centers in the region. So let's go ahead and listen, you know. In addition, various studies and community testimonies highlight the significant amount of water and energy that AI data centers require to cool down. And only 50 to 100 jobs that would be offered with some of these projects just to affect the entire city and surrounding areas just doesn't seem like a good deal or a good exchange. Thanks.

Thank you very much.

Good evening, Planning Commission. I'm sure this is as full as you guys have probably ever seen it without union carpenters here. My name is Carla Cervantes. I am so proud of the community for showing up, and I do want to give you guys your flowers as a Planning Commission. There is some misinformation happening. And I've been one of the people here to yell at you guys before. So I do think that there's a lot of passion regarding this, which is good. And I hope that you guys will formulate the language without any loopholes or things like that so that we can ban these things outright. Paris has been a leader when it comes to having positive effects in the region. We have some of the strongest good neighbor guidelines when it comes to warehouses now. I do believe it has a lot to do with having a stronger planning commissioner, having a stronger city council now. I will say that for the people who are here, there's gonna be a ton of meetings. If you guys saw the flyers, that's Inland Valley Alliance. I'm so proud of every single person for coming out. Please continue to put pressure on your local municipalities, because this is how change happens. Warehouses are doing just as much damage to your air quality. Data centers will only continue that. So I want to thank you guys for bringing this up and voting this. I hope the city council will not mess with the language to allow any loopholes in these things, as they do sometimes do. As far as the Lake Paris, there are two vacancies, I believe, on that committee. So if you guys want to have one of us up there to make sure that the community is informed, because they didn't inform, that committee didn't inform any city or county or anyone in the entire region. And so we had to find out through someone else, which is really, really embarrassing. But please continue to come out. Sign up with us if you can. We'll keep you guys informed. At this time, I'm gonna take a picture of all the community members. If that's okay, please raise up your signs to show the region that we do not want this stuff in our area. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Hi, my name is Grace Yip, and I'm a long-time Monterey Park resident, and I'm with UCI EcoGovLab, currently completing both a biochemistry and anthropology bachelor's degree. And I want to use my time tonight to advocate for the proposed ban on data centers in Paris. The outcome of the June 9, 2026 city council meeting initiated a code amendment to consider prohibiting data centers citywide after a 5-0 unanimous vote, and this is a great start. As the city of Monterey Park was the first city in California to adopt ordinances to prohibit data centers, their model would be appropriate to follow. Though GlobalStack, the infrastructure company of focus, only plans to implement small scale computing data center facilities, this will likely lead to these structures reciting over 70 fairgrounds. And in fact, an article by Choi et al. 2026 found that initial data center development may be correlated with increased data center development due to shared infrastructure and related economies. So clearly, this has many negative social, environmental, and economic implications for the local area. And additionally, compliance with Title 19 may look like the following. So one, referencing California locations such as Monterey Park, Santa Clara, San Jose, et cetera, as they were pioneers in adopting ordinances to prohibit data centers. So therefore, their model would be appropriate to follow. Two, banning data centers to reduce city-wide electricity demand. Average-sized data centers consume 20 to 100 megawatts of electricity, while similarly-sized warehouses consume only two to 10 megawatts. And so this is of concern for available land usage and has the potential to increase costs of housing, businesses, and public facilities in Paris. Relatedly, this would take away critical resources away from the March air reserve base. the residents of paris deserve social environmental and economical conditions similar to california cities that have proactively worked to ban data centers early on thank you for your thank you very much thank you very much jennifer salas anthony c ken ledford connie devine

Hi, my name is Jennifer Salas, and I'm a local Paris resident, and I'm with UCI EcoGovLab, and I've just graduated with both a quantitative economics and sociology bachelor's degree from UC Irvine. I'm here in support of the proposed ban on data centers in Paris, and I want to use my time tonight to advocate for increased and stricter zoning policies in Paris to combat the implementation of data centers. THE FOLLOWING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WILL ADDRESS THESE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND ANTICIPATED DETRIMENTAL CONDITIONS THROUGH THE USAGE OF PERSPECTIVE LAND USE PLANNING AS OPPOSED TO LESS RIGOROUS SITE SPECIFIC REVIEW. ONE UNCONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OR CUP WILL ENSURE CONSISTENT AND PREDICTABLE APPROACH TO ADDRESS CITY AND COMMUNITY CONCERNS BEFORE SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT AND OR INFRASTRUCTURE ENSUES. Relatedly, this will ensure that the preservation of land and reliability of infrastructure is adequate for Paris communities. Two, modifications to the general zoning code will facilitate inclusion of data centers as a prohibited use in related provisions. And three, the following will prohibit data centers within the area outlined by the specific plan. A, Paris Valley Commerce Center specific plan. B, Downtown Paris specific plan. C, Green Valley specific plan. And D, Harvest Landing specific plan. E, new Paris specific plan, and last D, River Glen specific plan. Through my work with the UCI EcoGov Lab, I have worked with the Cornerstone Community Neighborhood in Santa Ana to advocate for environmental justice and greater protections for historically underrepresented communities. Santa Ana's proposed zoning updates involve provisions addressing data centers, including restrictions on where they may be developed. Drawing from this experience, I encourage the city of Paris to consider similar proactive zoning measures to protect residents, infrastructure, and environmental resources from the potential impacts of data center development. The residents of Paris deserve social, environmental, and economical conditions that will not be exacerbated by the construction of data centers, and a good initial step is the implementation of more rigorous zoning laws. Thank you for your attention.

Thank you very much.

Hello, my name is Connie Devine. Raise the mic.

Oh, thanks.

Hello, my name is Connie Devine, and I am requesting a permanent ban on all data centers, please. City Council members, I am here today because I believe in my heart and in my soul that each one of you will choose to make your decision from a place of love and in honor of humanity. I trust that each one of you wants to protect our land for it is our home. I believe that each one of you will want to do your part in helping people to be able to live a beautiful, healthy life. I believe that you will make a difference today. I believe that you will choose to bring people hope during these dark times. I believe that you will do right by the people and for the people and for the beautiful place we call home, our Mother Earth. Please help to bring love and light to this world by saying no to data centers. Also, seeing people come together today for this cause is inspiring. Making connections and building community is key to bringing about change in this world. Keep making connections, using your voice, and standing up for what is right. And please remember to find joy during these times because joy in itself is an act of rebellion. Thank you.

Thank you very much My name is Ken Ledford and I've been uh been around this area for a lot of years and I got a lot of concerns. I support everybody's comments tonight and I They all have valid points on water usage and electricity uses. Two years ago, you all remember, we were having rolling blackouts all over the place. This area is going out, this area is going out. Electricity use is too high. You might not have any jurisdiction over that. However, the water usage, okay, it seems like it's some definite concerns with the people here tonight. Last month, I believe it was Bureau of Reclamation for Lake Powell said that they were going to start cutting back on the water for Arizona, California, and Nevada, that they were going to be restricting on how much water they get. You guys should all be well aware of that. It was just announced last month. I'm sure you can research it. So anyway, with that in mind, why would we want to put something in place that could use the water that he's talking about that could, it's just an astronomical amount of water. So, you know, like I said, we've all been through it before. Oh, you can't water your lawn, or we don't want you to wash your cars, or you have to go to the car wash to do it, and this and that. Anyway, I'd like to protect our water supply for the people and not for a data center. Thank you, Council, for hearing me.

Thank you very much.

Good evening, Commission. My name is Anthony Cruz. I'm a local resident here for roughly eight years. I do want to talk over here to give an expansive overview about what this data center really means. And I do encourage every city member of the Commission to vote in proposal of data centers and to create a ban. Now, what I mean by an expansive overview, I wanted to look nationally, statewide, and locally. A gentleman just came up here talking about the conservation policy, whereas prohibiting California, Arizona, Nevada, and so on from using water in order to conserve because of the drying basin. And another gentle lady also came up here to talk about how SoCal in the specific South Basin is also the number one ranking nationally of worst air quality. Now proposing a data center here will also marginalized and also create an expansive issue here in Paris, but also in the county as well. Not only would it cost hundreds of and billions of dollars to even maintain data centers proposing cause of electricity and water usage, but it also caused artificial drought. It also caused artificial harm to the soil and also caused many, many hardships when it comes to economic development. mainly because property values devalue, including houses that may even be nautical miles away. But also, I want to also highlight that Proposing this is proactive. And I congratulate you guys all for also proposing this and being able to talk about this. But I want us to also focus on other matters. We can invest in renewable energy, sustainability matters. We can do more while also highlighting these issues. But I don't want us to keep going back about proposing development as going to be a purse so that's a warehouse. We need to also be proactive. And I want to hold you guys accountable on that. Thank you.

Thank you very much, sir.

Okay.

And as always, with the Planning Commission, if you didn't turn in the blue slip, we're not going to stop you. If you have anyone else who would like to make a comment, please make it quickly because we want to open it up to everyone. If not... Okay. This is the time. If you would like to make a comment... You already did, sir. Didn't you already? Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah, just state your full name since we hadn't heard you.

Good evening. Thank you for having me. My name is Miguel Fonseca. I recently got married, moving over here from Las Vegas. And I'm in total support of this amendment to ban all AI daily centers. Living in Vegas, even though I work overseas, Nine months out of the year, if you don't know, Lake Mead is drying up. Big thing is that Las Vegas went big with these data centers, and the residents in Vegas, my family that's there, are definitely paying for it. They're trying to decrease water usage for families' homes. and et cetera. And then I used to go swimming in Lake Mead. I used to go kayaking in the river of Lake Colorado. And they're basically going to cut off the amount of water going to Lake Mead. And then they're going to have their own problems regarding blackouts once they have to shut down the dam that's providing the generators for most of Southwest California, Arizona, as well as Nevada. Yes, I'm totally supportive of the language to ban any and all of the AI data centers. Thank you for your time.

Hold on, sir. Did you get your last name spelled? Just spell your last name.

Last name, Fonseca. F-O-N-S-E-C-A.

Thank you. Thank you. If that's it. Okay, we'll close. All right. I see a hand, but if you need to come up now. No? Okay. I thought they were cheering me on, I don't know. Okay, thank you. We'll close the public comment portion and we still have a, Any questions of city staff? Where is he going? Okay, if you have questions of city staff, would you come on at this time? Thank you very much for your participation. It's lively. But that's the whole point of a public hearing, right? Is to hear the public. Okay, any questions for, I know it's been a while, so any questions for city staff?

Hey, good evening, Rafa. Thank you for the information you provided earlier. I have one quick question in regards to the amendments that we're doing to the specific plans. So I saw that there's six specific plans that we're focusing on. I was just wondering why these six and not all of the specific plans that the city has?

it's a good question the other specific plans are for the most part exclusively residential so what we did is we focus on the specific plans that have either commercial or industrial uh zone property and that's why those six are before you tonight uh the ones for instance as an example park west is not uh is not before you the reason is because That's exclusively residential for the most part. So there would be nowhere to put them because data centers would not be allowed in a residential district.

Got you. So these six were the ones that were vulnerable of having...

They were the only areas where potentially somebody could propose it.

Got you, thank you so much.

Similarly, the zoning code, we didn't amend every portion of the code. We amended the portion where data centers could potentially be allowed. So that's the reason for that.

That makes sense, thank you so much. And I wanted to ask a question to Ben. I wanted to include some, add some language to the prohibition of the data centers. And I was just wondering if this is better suit for each chapter, chapter 19.36, 38, and 44? The sentence I want to add is to prohibit a use meeting the definition of a data center shall not be permitted under another name, classification, or land use category.

Or are you saying you want to make sure that the definition kind of encompasses everything? Exactly.

So I basically want to include that no matter what the proposed project is being classified as, as long as it still has the characteristics of a data center, it's still prohibited.

OK, so we can look at the definition of data center and make sure we can add language that's more similar characteristics, that sort of thing.

I think we can come up with something under chapter 1908 where the definition is included. So we're defining that. I think we can include something that addresses that. The other thing also is this wouldn't be limited to just AI data centers. It could be a data center that's not AI related as well. So the purpose was to be all inclusive and to address any characteristics that obviously would be harmful to the community.

Okay, so you're suggesting the definition should be...

The definition should be the thing, because when you go to the zoning code, for instance, if you were to go to Chapter 1936, it's only going to say data center.

Okay.

That data center definition gets referenced back to 1908. So ultimately, that's really the item that's before you tonight, is to really kind of assess 1908 and see, are you comfortable with the definition? But if you want to tweak it, I think that would be appropriate. I would suggest that if you have any suggestions, we would be happy to take them into consideration.

All right, perfect. Thank you so much.

Maybe I can add on to that because I had the same concern of adding or editing the language to say something to the effect of any future technological variations of facilities which would perform those duties because I know that we already have a growing list of projects that are going under different names and in other jurisdictions that it is really important that we encompass everything so maybe just I don't know just seconding like to add into that language however we can to make it as broad as possible because this is a very This it's a it's a an industry and its infancy and it's already rapidly morphing and changing so.

Yeah, because the technology is constantly evolving, there's a chance that they could come back and maybe now the characteristics of a data center change. Exactly. But we want to make sure that we're accounting for the impacts, obviously, right? And so we can try to take that commentary and maybe amplify the definition a little bit. But if there's any specific wording and definitions that you would like to include, that's one of the main reasons why this item is before you tonight.

To that effect, I do have a couple specific questions. So I have the definition in front of me.

Commissioner Jimenez, would it be helpful if we can bring up the definition on the screen so everybody can see the definition? Yeah, that would be wonderful.

It's 19.08.

Can you please assist with bringing the definition? Thank you so much.

So within that first line of the definition, it says any facility is primarily for housing a large-scale computer network. Do we have anything that quantifies what large-scale really means?

Not a specific square footage, no.

So I was thinking square footage, but also somewhere else in the... the document that we received, it explained how the square footage does not necessarily correlate with the energy and water usage. So I think maybe rather than putting a cap or referencing large scale in terms of square footage, maybe we can reference scale in terms of water and power usage to really make sure that just because something has a smaller physical footprint, it's still very, very intensive. So maybe we can

I think one of the reasons we included the, if you look at the second part of that, it's just typically characterized by high electricity consumption. So that was part of the, if you want something in addition, we can include it. And continuous mechanical cooling requirements. So I didn't focus simply on water. I focused on the function, which I mean, that is a potential change, but if there's anything in addition to that, we can definitely include it. That was one of the reasons why we wanted to make sure that we included that so that it accounts for, you know, basically the impacts that they generate, not just the specific, you know, not just a whole large, it could be, you know, it could be a, somebody could interpret it, oh, this is a small scale. Right. But if it's having impacts on electricity demand or mechanical cooling or anything like that, obviously we want to include it as part of the definition.

And I think we're on the same page where that's what I want to get ahead of, say in the future. baseline levels of how much energy a data center consumes, changes, and relative to that baseline, one specific data center doesn't necessarily feel that it's large scale. And I just want to, I guess I just want to remove some of that ambiguity and maybe add some concrete, a concrete scale that would really quantify what constitutes large scale. That way there's no ambiguity in the future.

Would it be helpful to remove the large scale part of it as opposed to just leave it housing a computer network?

That was one of my concerns. I think that that would be helpful. We can remove it. Yeah, I think I would appreciate that.

If I can jump in real fast. I think removing large scale is not going to fix the problem. I think it might be something that's more has more definition into it where it's either size related um what's the difference between a large scale computer network for a 100 000 square foot data center versus a 500 or million square foot data center they're both going to fall into his definition even though it's a hundred thousand square feet or maybe it's only 50 000 square feet it falls within his definition because of the continuous cooling, the water usage and all that stuff. Are we trying to limit all computer networks, data centers, or are we okay with a small 20,000 square foot one?

I think so.

I think she's on the right track. I think she's trying to pinpoint the scale of and the magnitude of what we want to see and what we don't want to see.

I think I want to add, too, based on that, I feel like technology evolves so quickly. When we do this, we're limiting. So when we're saying no warehouses, but then a parcel hub squeezes in, like I want something that's going to encompass what it is now and the potential of what they can identify as in the future, regardless of size. Like back in the day, it was one whole room or building for a computer. Now we're carrying them in our pockets, but the impact is still the same. So I want to make sure that whatever we're writing now will hold us over to prevent any loopholes from happening. And we're not limiting to large scale because there's... Ambiguity, like to me something large might be something like a large soda today is very different from what a large soda was in the 1950s. So I want to make sure that when we put something like sizing and we don't identify exactly what it is, we are opening ourselves up for the loopholes. So if we're going to be clear and concise, we're clear and concise or we say all regardless of size, regardless of use. Same thing with high electricity consumption. That's also Variable that's something that can be interpreted in very many ways depending on who you're asking I Don't know if it would be fair to say anything that has an impact but then again like I want to make sure that our wording is so tight that there are absolutely no Loopholes because it is unfair to say if a store is coming in like when Target came in Yeah, there was more electricity use there was more water consumption, but I want to make sure that when we're referring to data centers, and there's so many words and so many ways that they identify. I did a quick search of other things that Incident can pass, and I know we can't identify any, but we can add something along the lines or anything that provides the same kind of services, because I found digital infrastructure facilities, IT environments, computing and storage facilities, information processing hubs, So these are hubs where they can have stuff, and that's where they're keeping all the work, phone calls and everything, or processing is happening somewhere else. So not just a function or the building, but really the overall, all of it. I think that's what we're all trying to get at, to make sure.

I think essentially it's not the physical footprint, it's the carbon footprint. If we can quantify a number that we say, if your building... is over this much electricity and water usage or whatever,

And that would be hard because like industrial has some, houses have some.

The problem that creates is all of a sudden it creates a situation where somebody may design a facility. That can make it work. That could be right under that threshold. Yes. The purpose of this to a certain extent is to keep it broad, as you were saying, so that ultimately the definition is broad enough to hopefully capture all facilities that would be analogous to this. oftentimes these may evolve and they may change and maybe if that was to occur in the future then the city would have to reevaluate it and maybe make those changes at that time based on this definition that was written this was one of the main things that we really looked at I think that removing the term large scale I think is a good idea we can definitely remove that and I think that that I think would go a long way in addressing a lot of the commission's concerns. But if there's any specific at this point, my suggestion is let's be very specific with wording and not concepts because it's going to be very difficult, at least for staff. I've looked at this for a couple months now. This is the one where I went back and forth with Ben, too, told him, hey, let's, I reworked this definition several times to kind of get, hone it in. So if there's something that You would like to add as far as specific wording? My suggestion is to be specific verbatim, just so that we can capture the intent of the Planning Commission's recommendation.

And the, oh my God, I went blank on the city that was the first to prohibit all uses in all areas. What was it? Monterey. Monterey. What wording do they have on theirs? Did we, I would have liked to see it, what wording they have.

Mayor Mrakas, As far as how they define the definition, yes, I don't have that information, unfortunately, but I attempted to create something that captured the community's concerns, so this is ultimately a derivative some of the comments that we heard during. Mayor Mrakas, The original City Council meeting and some of their comments and then I relied on my research to capture something that was appropriate for our city, not just deferring to another city's judgment, but that was the intent.

yeah and even like I know what we're saying, but continuous mechanical cooling requirements, they may come a time where it doesn't have to be continuous and they can say, but it's not continuous we only cool it down during the day and at night we don't so I want to make sure, those are not. opportunities and Ben i'm going to ask you from a legal standpoint if. These are loopholes potentially. I guess I'm trying to like tighten something up to where there are no loopholes or they can't come back and say, well, this I'm proposing a computer network room. It's not continuous. It only cools down eight hours out of the day, but I'm using a lot of electricity during that time. So just to make sure we, have a leg to stand on in case we have to push back on one or deny one or say, I want to be able to use this as a reason to not move a project forward without having to debate too much.

Yeah, we're definitely looking to craft something with no loopholes. We don't feel there are any loopholes currently, but I found the definition of Data centers in the Monterey park ordinance so it's data Center means a building dedicated space within a building. or group of structures used to house a large group of networked computer systems used for data storage and processing for off site and on site users to be used for the remote storage processing or distribution of large amounts of data. Such facilities may also include air handlers, power generators, water cooling and storage facilities, utility substations, backup batteries, fire suppression systems, enhanced security features, and other associated utility infrastructure to support operations. So it seems like any definition, I looked at another definition as well, that they all reference holding large amounts of data. but they don't reference a large-scale computer network. So I think it makes sense to remove the phrase large-scale and possibly refer to networked computer systems.

And relative to building size too, because I like how they define where it was like multiple buildings, like they're covering a lot of different ways. It can be a room within a building. It can be multiple buildings. I liked that definition where it doesn't necessarily have to be All of it could be part of the overall development because they can come in and have a commercial use and they're going to have one room that's going to be for this type of use. And now they just. So it can be housed within another development. It can be a secondary small building within another development. So I like the definition they used to to make sure that those different scenarios are also excluded.

I also want to add, maybe we should remove the word continuous to make it say any facility with mechanical cooling requirements. Just to tighten it up even more.

Well, keep in mind that that's in the clause that starts with typically characterized by. So that it's not necessarily the case it's typically characterized by continuous need to cool, but not necessarily so it's really we're looking at the first clause before before. It says typically characterize that's like the most important part, the first part before it says typically characterized because the typically characterizes kind of like examples yeah.

Can I also ask how are we calculating minimal onsite employment relative to building size?

Well, all of this is within the discretion of the director.

City Council Chambers, it's the director, who applies the definition to specific projects that come in initially for the initial land use characterization. City Council Chambers, Of course, if it has to go to planning Commissioner city council, they can weigh in but generally the director and staff is the first line of Defense in terms of interpreting the definitions that are in the code and applying them to a project submittal that comes in.

So remind me, according to our specific plan, I know we have a maximum, and that's why we can only approve industrial in certain areas because we can have a density of a certain amount of employees per whatever. What is our most limiting one within what we have already?

I think you're referring to the zones for the airport plans. Yes. I want to say the C1 zone, maybe one of the more restrictive ones, and then it goes into the B zone. That's as you get closer to the runway of the airport. Okay. But going back to the minimal on-site employment relative to building size, like Ben explained, keeping it more general, it gives the flexibility to make those interpretations if you say, five or six related to a building size this big, it could hurt more than help because there could be an opportunity for a development to try to find a loophole. Right, right, exactly, exactly. So I think keeping it general, it gives the director the flexibility to make an interpretation to benefit the community.

but we can't guarantee you're always gonna be the director and do what we think is right. It's what I'm struggling with, because just like there isn't a loophole this way, if we change a director, they can read this and... Right.

I think that's like the other thing to remember is if there's any new construction for a large building, it's going to come back to the planning commission. It's not something that it's going to be where it's going to have. It's going to be approved administratively. So data centers, as as recommended by staff tonight, is to be prohibited citywide. If for any reason somebody comes up with a project or a concept that tries to find a loophole in the definition of data center, that would be something that would be brought back to the Planning Commission. It's not something that could be done administratively.

i guess that's what i'm asking i want to make sure that if we have a different director who would take this and interpret it differently it would trigger that it comes to the planning commission for review and recommendations and i think i mean you've been here for like i won't say how long a very long time we would stay on and be able to say no when we created this this was the intent just to also go that way where if anything falls within this or they're trying to find a loophole, it triggers that it comes to us, which I think is having a full ban is good, but I feel like sometimes like an additional CUP or something where it automatically triggers.

Yeah, the conditional use permit would allow data centers to, let's put it this way, if instead of banning data centers and allowing them with the conditional use permit, it would open that door for the uses to come to the city because there is a due process and we would have to accept the application for a data center. And go through all the background work and go through all this. Whereas if we are prohibiting data centers as recommended tonight, there is no opportunity for that door to be open for anybody to submit an application for a data center. But I support your recommendations for the additional information or additional language to be added to the definition because that would clarify the type of facilities that would be considered to be data centers as it was included in the definition for the Monterey Park.

Yeah, I think I also like the way they included including but not limited to these different terms that they use because I'll change my name like let me tell you tomorrow I won't be a data center I'm going to be like a Chisme processing center like anything that will fall within that but has the same function regardless of what they want to identify as. So I liked how they had including these other uses but not limited to. We can certainly add that to our definition. I think that would make me feel better.

I do like the fact that there's that safeguard in there and I do have the full faith of your backing in your strengths, Patricia, but you're a very ambitious person and you might, you know, have other goals, but the next person in line may not be as a AS CONSOLING WITH YOUR INTERPRETATION AS YOU ARE, I LIKE THE FACT THAT IT'S PRETTY DEAD END. IT'S A COMPLETE BAN. AND THERE'S REALLY NO LOOPHOLES THAT CAN REALLY GO, CAN BE CONCEIVED, EXCEPT THE ONES THAT ARE FOUND HAS TO COME THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION. we do our research and reviews pretty extensively. And we, I think we can weed out individuals or companies that want to backdoor the situations. So I was gonna add, see if we can add an inclusion in there, but I think it's already safeguarded in there because it's, doing interpretation is like trying to interpret the US Constitution, where there's always a loophole somewhere. So I think I'm pretty satisfied that that back door is closed and has a safeguard.

Okay. Last but not least, I hope. I am going to look at this objectively. I am not going to be easy, but I never have been in 24 years on this Commission. I think I have earned the right. One thing I will say that the staff did an excellent job. It is not an easy job. Let us remind everyone in this room, I don't care about anything else, is that the City Council initiated the prohibition, give credit where credit is due. We are asked to agree and submit this, so all the discussion to me is okay, but it starts from the top. I've worked in city government 37 years. I'm an expert on city government. I know who controls city government. I've worked for the City of LA, the toughest city in the nation to work for because they're the most bureaucratic, and they would not even hear any of this stuff you're talking about, I'm here to tell you now. The point is, Paris is very proactive. So all I'm going to say in the discussion is the only thing I would look at and say, the definition is fine. I think they did bring up some good points about terms I hadn't heard before. I think it was edge computer systems. Those are things could be put in parentheses next to data center. So we include that. Those are possibilities. I think that may be something you can put in there. Fusion I hadn't heard of. But the edge computer, those are easy ones that could be added. to this definition i think one of the things you would have to do now you have a choice you can get very specific and i'm used to contracts guys you can go up to the prior thing that talked about conversion factors but see this is a nuance so there's no way to know how many gallons of water to say what's max what's minimum so if you put that in there data centers will be changing other counties other cities are going to be doing this irrespective of what we do, they may be doing it next door in Menifee. They may be doing it in the county. So they're going to affect us if they do it. So if there's specificity in this city, you would have to have some, but you don't want to overdo it because the numbers could change, the water could change, the whole thing in 2030, and I probably won't be here, could change. So you want to codify this to make sure that if any council commission tries to change in the future, you have to change all of these specific plan amendments, you have to go through a whole process, and that's a major thing. We could be out of office. I'm not a young person anymore. You could have council people change, which is what they said. So you want to codify it to make sure that if you're going to put it here and be very specific, you're going to have to have CEQA, you're going to have to have environmental, and they're going to be tough guys. Noise in those three are going to be tough to get by. I'm here to tell you. So either way, the city is prohibiting it. That's why I'm not getting that excited. It's down. I have no problem with what they stated. Now, whether we agree with or not, the point is it's coming from the city council. And they initiated this. And there's a reason they initiated it, because they understand the public. They're your constituents. And so they're listening to the constituency. All we're doing is saying the great job they did was put it in each specific plan so there are no loopholes. We didn't put it in the Green Valley, it's in the Green Valley. You didn't put it in the downtown, it's in the downtown. You have to do that as a process. If you don't, a smart lawyer is going to destroy the city of Paris. And I've dealt with city attorneys. They will find every loophole under the ground, on the table, they'll do it. I work with a city attorney in LA. You have not worked with that kind of person.

You have to pay them to talk to them.

You have not dealt with that. But I'm saying you have to understand everything needs to be codified. So it may come down to some, and not getting too specific, but say water, Electricity, in terms of what means to be large-scale computer network, is kind of generic for a reason. But it may come down to like we did with the 325,900 gallons, one acre per foot, kinds of the conversion factor. It may need to be that this much water constitutes a large-scale facility. This constitutes a minimal sales facility, blah, blah, blah. So you make sure any future ones are going to have to meet a standard. So the more difficult you make the standard, the more difficult it's going to be to get through. So when you start saying, okay, this is what we mean by mechanical equipment, cooling, what does it mean by noise? Is it 80 decibels, 90 decibels, 100 decibels? What constitutes a noise factor? You can't just say noise. What does noise mean? Oh, if you're 100 decibels away and 100, that's specifics. What kind of teaching have you been doing this a long time? So the more specific you get, the more difficult you get. So we can get and it's going to mean nothing legally. So you specify certain things. Distances from residents cannot be within 2,000 feet. Even if we never do in this city at all, you want to make sure that future ones have to come accountability, and that's why you threw things in right. That's my only statement. I think it's a great job. Specificity, in terms of that, that's fine with me, taking it at large scale, because you can question what does large scale mean. So you've got to watch getting overly, but then you don't want to be too general. The staff is smart, engineering is smart, Michael Brown, who should be here too, is also smart, but that may be the direction you want to go to be specific as much as we can to identify what is a large-scale or a scale computer network. Does that mean frontier? We have frontier in the city, guys. Yeah, excluding, but frontier, hey, we got computers in here. So that's why I like excluding telephone switching facilities. Otherwise, you'll never have anything here. AT&T is gone. So you've got to be careful about definitions. And having done contracts, I know how specific you have to be, but not overly do it. So it's a balancing act. He knows legally of the balancing act, whether it's Southgate, whether it's Carson. They're all going to get these attorneys that are going to come before you and say, well, everything is spelled out here. And the more specific we can be, the better. And it makes Paris the forefront, not the back burner. We stand at the forefront because they're going to look at ours and say, man, these guys were so specific. wow, detail, this and this and this and this, if I do it, I gotta be, maybe he has to think about it. You wanna be, not saying we're denying it, I'm just saying detail is key. And so I would take what's here, and I like to, I was gonna point out this definition, this is a good one, you did a lot of work, I know how much work it takes. Because it's not something that's really all over the place, and there's not a whole lot of cities in California. And if you're doing it, you're going to have a water issue. Electricity makes noise, so you've got to put that in there to determine what noise decibel. Well, if it goes to this level, that's going to take research. What are some of these areas in terms of research, in terms of what is consistent? We have standards for noise in the city of Paris. 65 decibels across the Lake Paris and all that fairground. What would be the decibel level that's reasonable here? And that's going to take EIRs and CEQAs, right? So you've got to do studies to determine what would be reasonable, whether we do it or not, because we're prohibiting it. But I'm saying, I'm thinking future council people, future planning commissioners, They may not be as tough as we are, guys, okay? But I'm thinking future, and I'm saying, if I ain't here, what's gonna happen? And they'll say, that's nice, but that's the previous commission.

So Commissioner Hammond, I have a concern with getting numbers specific. Well, that's what I just said. Specific water number, electric number, or decibel number is all based off of scientific data, which is not always accurate. Exactly. In a calculation, they can be, I got my architect hat on now. So they can be manipulated to house the data that you want. So you gotta be very cautious in putting numbers together like that. To massage a number to get under a threshold, and in reality, after it's built, it exceeds the threshold, is my concern.

Well, it's more like when we talk about warehouses. If you're 1,000 feet away, you do a sensitive receptor. And if you're so many feet away, there's 65. It's a guaranteed absolute scientific thing that if you have the sensitive receptor across from Lake Paris in the fairgrounds, the acceptable is 65 decibels. Right? So you have an acceptable level of sound. It doesn't necessarily mean it could change. But trucks, the trucks have a decibel level, and where you drive so many trucks around residential, Avalon, they're driving on, you look at it and say, what are the decibel levels that's acceptable? Well, the sensitive receptors in that house, and it's 100 decibels. Is that acceptable? Those things that could be measurable. I'm not saying we have to put it here, but I'm just saying that's the problem is balancing numbers with reality. So if you're going to say you're not going to have these things and someone in the future says, well, what constitutes large scale computer network? What does it mean large scale? I have 90,000 square feet. I have 200,000. So it's one of the things, if it's going to be put later on in the DPR or something like that, that's something, but we're prohibiting it. So it's kind of a general statement of prohibition. That's why I'm not that concerned with that now, because it's an overall prohibition. That's why I don't get...

it's the concern is that there's the loophole gap is closed because it comes to the commissioners afterwards yeah yeah if it does bypass um our flamboyant uh director our director our powerful director that it has another line of defense yes

And that's my only kind. It's not easy. It's not easy. Because I'm not a scientist. But I'm just saying, how do you do that? And that's a balancing act. And that's going to be hard to figure out what constitutes this level for future. Because the recommendations are prohibited. So I'm thinking down the line.

And I do have another question.

Remind me, and I know you talked about it, why we didn't include residential.

Because this type of use will not be allowed. The residential is basically only limited to single or multifamily residential. So typically this is something that would be allowed either in commercial or industrial zoning districts. So that would be it. But basically this definition, along with the zoning code, we've prohibited them throughout any of the areas where you would typically see these facilities.

Got a quick question about what concentrated computer network at a small scale. Bitcoin mining. It uses more electricity. It falls within the data and everything else. That's a small scale. But it also is a computer network. Just putting a thought into that.

I agree. I think we need to be careful not to have a definition that would essentially prohibit the computer room in your house. That's the point.

Well, it says that are accessory to a permitted principal office use. So it does exclude that, the very last line. And standard server rooms that are accessory to a permitted principal office use.

We could also exclude single family residences.

Yeah.

Yeah.

That's what I was trying to get at. So exclude office use and residential uses? I want to ask my fellow commissioners what they feel about that just because with ADUs and all, I can potentially rent it out to somebody and they can have a

I personally wouldn't like if it's able to be added I don't see a problem with it, I just wonder if it would be better added like that language would be better added to. I don't know.

Or just putting it in there, it also applies to residential.

I think with the residency, you're limited to what the power company is going to give you. Yes, okay. 200 amp service, 300 amp service, 100 amp service. So that is limiting to what- It limits it already.

Okay. Yeah, that makes sense.

I had a couple of non-definition questions, just to enlighten me. I did, in this meantime, Google. The Monterey Park ban, that was a voter decision. If we wanted to make any possible repeal or removal of this ban to be a voter decision, we would have first had to have the... initiation of the ban be a voter decision, correct? So in the future, if this were, if there's a different council, different commission, things have changed, we want to look into possibly allowing data centers and repealing the ban, that would be what process?

I'll defer to our legal counsel.

It would be at the direction of the city council.

So it would be a similar process to what is happening right now. Correct. And if we wanted that to be a voter-approved decision, so if we say in the future if we want to repeal it, it'd have to go to the voters, it would have had to first go to them for the initial creation. Is that correct?

That's why Monterey Park sent it to the voters so that to undo it, it also has to go to the voters.

OK, understood. And then kind of following along that line, and I think maybe touching on what was the conversation right here, should the ban fail tonight or in the future be repealed, Would data centers, their design standards or just general building guidelines, would they be subject to their own standards or would they fall under warehouse design guidelines, good neighbor guidelines, or is that just unchartered territory?

They would be subject to the underlying zoning district which they would be proposed.

Okay. And then if we wanted to preemptively initiate stricter guidelines or initiate good neighbor guidelines, we wouldn't be able to do that.

I would not recommend that.

No?

No. Okay. That would be internally inconsistent. Okay. So the document would be saying you're prohibited, but here are the rules for these things. That wouldn't make any sense. That would create a lot of confusion internally.

Okay. That's understood. That's it for questions for me. Thank you.

okay that's uh just questions and let's say staff had any comments um very good I think we put some suggestions there and um we went out of order because since we had the public comment first so we've had discussion so at this point um we're going to move to do you have any disc you know statements I should say the usual so we just flipped it out of order so we're coming back to our

I just want to start off by saying thank you to city staff for drafting up this proposal and this amendment it's very well detailed and I feel like this is something very good that we could work with I also want to say thank you to the residents that came out tonight I could tell this is something that you guys are very passionate about you guys came with information you guys came with research and you guys came in numbers so this is something that that you guys are very vocal about and we we hear you um so in in regards to the definition of the daddy center i agree with my fellow commissioners i uh i like the um the idea of removing large-scale computer network um just to make it more broad to cover more bases and i also like the inclusion of um of the phrase uh including but not limited to and then go off with the definition so just those two suggestions as far as the definition And I also wanna say thank you to city council for bringing this up. This is a very big issue and it's important for us to be proactive and just get ahead of these type of developments. Other than that, no further comments.

I also wanted to thank city staff. You could tell there's been a lot of blood, sweat, and tears put into this, and it shows, and it's appreciated. I wanna thank the community for showing up and showing out. I don't think a single person spoke opposition to banning data centers and I think that speaks loudly as to where our community stands and and how much the community has had to shoulder burden with similar industries within our city I think we've had our fair share of burden that we've had to hold and I just don't think that this this industry is ready I don't know if it ever will be, to work properly in a community like Paris. It just doesn't necessarily seem like the right place for it. I do want to say I would very much like to remove the phrasing of large scale and then adding the including but not limited to language I think would help With those umbrella terms, it's not often that we are able to preemptively get in front of such a contentious issue. And it was really wonderful to see the community come out in hordes. So thank you.

I'll follow with the affiliate measures on the inclusion and exclusions in the definition of data center. I'd love to throw out a little bit of information is that each time you do a search on for data or a search for on computer how much energy it actually uses each single search can use the amount of electricity as a LED light bulb for two minutes so one single search so In in all of us are our victims of doing it Unfortunately more and more people are doing it to write their papers and reports Plagiarize them So We're all we're all victims of doing that so um very much i wanted i thank the city council for bringing this forward and initiating it alfredo did a great job putting it together my apologies rafael so but i appreciate your efforts thank you

I also want to commend city council. It's wonderful when you live in a city and you serve in a city where your city council really listens to those, their constituents, where all their constituents, we all live in the city as well, and really find ways to be proactive. And I want to give a super special... praise to Rafa because being proactive in something that is fairly new, is coming, can develop, can change, is so difficult. The amount of research that this must have taken, hopefully he didn't use AI for his research, is commendable because when you are trying to avoid something that isn't fully defined yet is, I think, more challenging than preventing something that is already defined has been happening. And I think to be what the fit six city in California to set up these kinds of bands or local and really make sure that there's no conditional use permits, there's no ways to get around it, is something that makes me really happy. You know, before I even knew, I kind of knew what AI was, you start doing research, and my daughters were like, water, and I was like, I don't know what you're saying. I hear water usage, but I didn't know the impact of it or why water usage was a concern. So on that note, I really want to commend our community for coming out, especially our younger community. We see sometimes my age community members, but to see the youth here and really be passionate about it and worry about their parents And most of them spoke about their parents being able to pay their bills, being able to still have a place to live and have a comfortable lifestyle speaks volumes. They weren't worried about their future. They were worried about their family. They're worried about themselves. And that, to me, touches my heart because, yeah, they're worried about their future generations, but they really right now are worried about the situations that they see their parents in. grandparents in and that was beautiful to me so i love that we had community members from each of the generations come in and speak to it from different angles but really at the end of the day we all have the same message and i think that really speaks to the view of our community the sentiments of our community and where we really want to see our city we all i always speak about the pride that we take as a city that still has a small town feel. And that really showed tonight because we really come together when we have to. We've seen this many people for some of the industrial. Haven't really happened since we had the, what is it called? The moratorium. This is the next one that was coming up. And I appreciate that you all are paying attention. Those organizations that are out there recruiting young people, And sharing information, connecting, listening is what will continue to make an impact. So all the young people out here, this is going to be you all in the future to come and make these differences, have this impact. So I hope we didn't bore you too much and you still want to come up here and do this.

Thank you and a lot to commend on for staff. I always thank staff because I've worked with the City of Paris staff for several years, too many to mention. Being the oldest one up here and I'm not going to say how old, I enjoy the energy and the passion. The one thing I will say before I take my statement is that it was very professionally done and it was very done in a dignified manner tonight. And whether people agree or whether they don't, it's coming up and being dignified and being mistaken in your statement what you have to do, and it comes across very well. Because we represent the community. Remember, we are from the community too. And so we have been, some of us, a long time. But we wouldn't be doing this if we didn't love our community. We wouldn't be sitting under city council if we didn't love our community. We wouldn't be taking some of the heat I've taken in 25 years if I didn't love my community. And that means some statements that you wouldn't believe. But you love the community, and that's passion. and passion I still have. And so you have passion. You've stated your passion. All I can say is that I do appreciate the City Council for being ahead of the game. There are many of them that I'm not even going to tell you the cities that are wrestling with this now and they're like saying maybe, maybe not. They didn't even have that issue here. So your City Council stood up front. Some are still waiting and some are going to say yes. but we can't control what happens in other cities, or we can be concerned about what happens within our borders, and we're gonna stop it. I can't help the county, I can't help the state, so I'm gonna do some very stupid things, but that's the state and that's the county, right? But we're representing the city of Paris, and so we're gonna fight, and we're gonna fight very hard for the city of Paris. You have a very good commission. I think the best in Riverside County you're sitting and looking at. the most active, the most fun. There's some dead commissions out there, guys, that you wouldn't put your dog in on. But we are very, we're very active up here. We're very much fun, but we take what we do seriously, but we don't take ourselves so seriously. That's the difference. So you listen to people, you take it with heart, You make your opinions known, but you always have to listen to the public. That's the key. And we want everybody to listen. We hope we gave enough time. Normally we go a minute and a half, we went two minutes. We want everyone to say what they could say. I think ultimately some of the changes that were talked about are minor changes. I think one of the things I would just say with staff can work with that because you can't get a lot of specificity into the numbers, but some of the changes that they have talked about can be incorporated. And I think it mainly would do with the definitions. And it's really the definitions that we're really talking about. The other stuff, they included all the specific plans. And I don't think we really want to do anything with the residential. But I think what was mentioned there, I think it's what we can do because it has industrial and general use things mentioned. So you want to make sure an industrial area, this would be an industrial. project so we're really talking future stuff future so as far as i'm concerned i have no problem with the recommendations from the city council at this point um it's pretty easy with minor changes and they don't really have anything major unless you guys said something else but i'm pretty much yes sir request like a recap clarification on the changes we're gonna yeah i'm gonna let them since they mentioned it i'll let them

I can suggest a few things and let me know. OK.

It really comes out of the definitions.

Yeah, just for the definition of data center. So for the first part, where it says any facility, we could change that, as we were looking at in the Monterey Park Ordinance, to any building or designated portion of a building or group of structures. And then the next part, where it says used primarily for housing a large-scale computer network data storage servers and ancillary equipment. We may also want to add a group of networked computer systems to that list. So it's any of those along with the ancillary equipment. And then also in the second sentence that you see on the screen where it says this definition excludes and it lists things that are excluded, we would also say residential computer rooms, essentially, just in personal residences. And then we would add a sentence at the end, similar to the Monterey Park ordinance, where it says such facilities may also include air handlers, power generators, water cooling and storage facilities, utility substations, backup batteries, fire suppression systems, enhanced security features, and other associated utility infrastructure to support operations. And the last thing I would suggest is adding that this definition includes edge data centers. And edge data centers is defined as a small decentralized computing facility located close to end users and devices to process data locally and reduce lag. So that to clarify that that's part of the data center definition.

Yeah, and I think there was a portion, too, that said they're known as or kind of different titles, because I know we wanted it to encompass, because edge, but there was also a few others. Fusion or something.

Yeah, and then the problem is you kind of have to define what that is. Yeah, edge is pretty. I don't know about fusion, but we could add a sentence that says data center, as used in this definition of data center, includes... an edge data center, which is a small decentralized computing facility located close to end user devices to process data locally and reduce lag. Because otherwise it could be, that could be seen as something, traditionally that's seen as something different than the traditional massive centralized data center.

Can we say included but not limited to just in case they change names in the future?

so we'll work on the minutiae of the wording but we'll include all of those okay okay I believe it also entailed to remove large-scale exactly yeah oh yeah we got to remove large-scale probably before computer network okay I think that was it I didn't catch anything else okay okay okay

I'm going to go back. I know. I'm only going to read portions of what's requested action, but essentially requested action is adopt resolution 26-17, recommended the city council find zoning code text amendment 26-60002 is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. and it's exempt from CEQA. Endowment Preservation 26-18 recommended the City Council find specific plan amendment 26-00002 is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act and that it's exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA guidelines 15061 and can be certain there is no positive proposal that will have a significant effect on the environment. And the other is there in specific. The idea is that to amend the Paris Valley Commerce Center, Downtown Paris Green Valley, Harvest Landing, New Paris, River Glen specific plans to prohibit data centers citywide and making findings related to Tier 2 and to the amendments as they were afford to stated, which I won't say again. So, in essence, without reading the whole thing, we are making the findings related to that these would be prohibited, data centers. So if we're going to make a motion, we make a motion to affirm that prohibition as proposed by the City Council. Who would like to make that move?

I'll make a motion.

Moved by Vice Chair Shively. And I'll second. Seconded by Commissioner Jimenez.

Commissioner Menes? Yes. Commissioner Lopez? Yes. Commissioner Jimenez? Yes. Vice Chair Shively?

Yes.

Chair Hammond?

Yes. I can't. I can't hear you. It's not a part.

Huh?

Yeah. Oh, okay. I thought I said it.

Okay.

I didn't hear you. I'm sorry. The public hearing was closed. I couldn't hear you. We'll discuss it. We'll discuss it afterwards because we can't. We'd have to reopen it. Yeah. I just didn't hear. Okay. 5-0. I'm sorry.

With five yeses and zero noes, this motion passes.

Thank you very much, and thank you very much. And you're welcome to approach the staff afterwards, right afterwards. You can approach the staff right after, with questions. At this time, We move to item seven, public comments. Anyone wishing to address the planning commission regarding items not on the agenda may do so at this time and you're free to walk up to the podium and wait for the chairperson to recognize you, speak clearly, give your name and don't need anything else but name and spell your name. Don't need address, don't need anything else. And you will be given three minutes should you choose to address the planning commission. So this is public comment on items not on the agenda. You're welcome to come at this time. Okay, just state your full name, just for the record.

Hello, Alex Massa, yes, of course. Good evening again, everyone. It was very simple. Commissioner Jimenez mentioned I was not in the room when you held the vote just now. Commissioner Jimenez was mentioning something earlier about a, potentially exception for that which is zoned office. Did that go through or was that included in this? Because I didn't hear any further discussion of that aspect. I heard about things like computer sort of networks in residential homes and so forth, but I never heard anything more about the offices. So was that off the table or is that something you're moving forward with?

We'll allow the staff afterwards. You can go right over to the staff and they'll give you the specifics.

Not a problem. No problem. Stick around. I just wanted to know because I have to go.

We're going to close in a second. All right. Thank you very much, sir. Unless staff wants to answer now. One second. She's going to come answer. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? OK. Just state your full name for us and spell your last name.

Hello, Marcela Castro, CASTRO, resident of Paris. I just wanted to make a comment about the Paris drain. Is it going to complete done, like the biking trail?

I'LL LET THE CITY ENGINEER ANSWER THAT AFTERWARDS.

OKAY. BECAUSE I WENT THROUGH THAT TRAIL RECENTLY AND IT LEADS TO NOWHERE.

OKAY. HE WAS GOING TO TALK TO YOU RIGHT AFTERWARDS. OKAY.

THANK YOU.

Hi, Carla Cervantes here. What a night. So recently we did have a meeting with South Coast Air Quality Management District, and they said that they would like to do different workshops in the area. We do have some of those slides available just on there. They're seeking a bunch of public input to abide by SB 415. So like different areas that are, you know, being harmed or should I say, projects that are out of compliance with their rule are where they're trying to figure out how they're going to allocate the money that projects have to pay into this like where sort of thing. So I just wanted to put it out there in a comment that they are accepting comments right now or suggestions because, you know, we believe that the places that are being overburdened by the pollution should get the funding and not that funding being allocated for areas that are not experiencing a huge increase in warehouses and air pollution. So they are going to be having different information sessions, and I hope that they can have one in the city of Paris just because we are in a warehouse concentration region. But yeah, hopefully at the next meeting that we have will be November 14th. We're looking for different speakers. Hopefully some of our supervisors at the county can come and make some statements. And we're going to have updates on the AB 98 truck routes that we're seeing. And maybe we can invite you guys and you guys can come on down. So I'm going to be on a Saturday. I know, so exciting, right? Truck routes. But if you guys want to come in down, like have a sandwich with us, we'd love to have you. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Hello, my name is Franco pacheco, thank you for moving the data Center ordinance forward. i'd like to request that the city of Paris planning, whichever I think this falls under your guys department. Comment on the warehouse boundary map that's going in District 1 next week for the County Riverside. I know the City of Paris in the past has sued the City of Menifee for a smaller warehouse project. This is going to be over, I think, 43 million square feet of warehousing that's going to be proposed for District 1. It's located right off of Cajalco. It's called the Mid-Valley Industrial Plan. So if you guys can comment on that. As a stakeholder, please, and then also the the Paris fairgrounds. Ai data sunny study with a global stack to if you guys can request comment for updates on that as CEO of Paris is right next to it. Thank you.

Thank you very much, sir. Anyone else. Okay. Okay, we'll close the public comment portion. Okay, thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. At this time, we close the public comment portion. There are no business items unless I do. Okay, unless you want to make a special presentation. So we close item eight and move on to item nine, commission updates and announcements. Any commissioner?

I have no announcements. I just want to thank everyone again for coming out and speaking and I wish everybody a good night.

No announcements here. Just wanted to say thank you to all the public commenters and get home safe.

I think my only comment was that I wanted to recognize that on September 11, both Lakeside and Rancho Verde had ceremonies to commemorate 9-11.

I cried maybe more than a little.

It was a very, very beautiful ceremony. They started right at 846 with a beautiful announcement. The band was there, the choir was there, and it was just, It's one of those things that when I think about it, I can't believe I was part of that part of history. And more and more, there's younger generations that were not part of that. And I especially appreciate that there are people still committed to having those ceremonies and those acknowledgements and continuing that to push that forward. So I know they do it every year. I don't know if they reach out to... say i think i've seen the mayor there a few times at the at the rancho one but just i want to say that that was just beautiful to to be part of that and to commemorate such a meaningful event in our history. But other than that, I just also wanted to thank staff for always listening. I wanted to recognize and shout out to the development that did stop doing the crossing of the vehicle. So I do want to acknowledge that because I am quick to come up here and be put them on blast. But I also want to be the first to come up here and acknowledge that they have held to their commitment and I have not seen them cross I see them getting ready they're there but they have not stopped traffic so I do want to recognize and acknowledge that they're doing that and it has been a smoother ride traffic has been a lot better safety has been better you haven't seen people trying to crossover so i know brett's not here so i'll tell them afterwards but i wanted to put that on record for the developer as well to acknowledge that we appreciate being heard and them following through on their commitment to make sure that everybody's safe and and not have a negative impact on our on our community i got uh no announcements

I can make one.

Not playing chess?

Well, I'll just say if you want something. My last chess tournament, I won my category. All right. Five and a half out of six points. Wow.

Was it over $50 you won? You better report it. What's the matter with you? Oh, $1,000. yeah FEC no I am I I do appreciate Steph I know and I know how difficult it was to deal with that I can relate really I can relate but it was an excellent job I really appreciate the way the residents come through and it was dignified it wasn't you know off the wall but at least they you know you have that's what you do you listen to residents Get it off their chest so we know it was prohibited. I appreciate it. But you still have to listen. You're supposed to listen. It's a public agency. I only have one recommendation. I have no announcement. And this is related to those projects similar to things like data centers. You may not be familiar with this agency. It's called WRCOG. And they are the Western Regional Association of Governments. and one of the things would be nice to have a presentation and say what's going on Riverside County because these things will affect us in Riverside County so right across the street of Meriden is the county they could say good we're gonna build six thousand million square feet and then what are you gonna do about it so you can't stop it so I think it's a county issue it's not just the city of Paris IS A COUNTY ISSUE AND THEY ARE REPRESENTATIVES IN THIS AREA. THEY GIVE US, I THINK THEY'RE THE ONES WITH THE DIFFERENT TUMP FEES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT ALL THIS IS RELATED AND WE NEED TO JUST FIND OUT WHERE DO THEY STAND, WHAT ARE THEIR THOUGHTS ABOUT THESE ISSUES, AND I THINK IT WOULD BE A NICE THING TO COME AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S UP TO THE CITY COUNCIL. THEY DON'T WANT TO DO IT, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO START GETTING THEIR INPUT ON WHAT they are thinking, because I know they've got to be in India too, because it's San Bernardino, I think it's San Bernardino, but it's Riverside County, it's all western. Riverside County, that's us. So, you know, these plants and these big giant things may start coming to areas that are going to say yes. I'm just warning you guys. I didn't tell them. They're going to say yes, because there's money. So I'm kind of concerned that it could spill over our joining communities and all these things we can't control. But maybe we can find out from them what is their thoughts. And maybe they may want to convene the meeting at some point in time. And so I said, what's the issues? And really finding out that what our residents really don't want. So I think I'm just taking it beyond just the borders here. Things like Lake Paris, we have no control, but that's still in our area. If they're doing something like that, what's the impact? It's going to reach that level. And the good thing is I'm told that the repairs will be coming for the 215. And I'm saying, oh, you've got to be kidding. I had so many people inundate me on Next Door Neighborhood. I say, please stop. Because I think it may be planned for 2027. I'm not there. But that's long overdue. I mean, it's like driving on a country road. And the country road might be better, actually. She was thanking you, Brad, about the over there on remote express and taking the, what was it, the guards off? Okay. Yeah, yeah. Amazing, yeah. Thank you. I just wanted to give them a shout out. Yeah, yeah. It's your influence, Brad. You'll get the check tomorrow, okay. Okay, with that, we turn it over to the planning manager update, our wonderful planning manager and announcements.

Thank you. Thank you. I hear you about bringing WRCOG to do a quick presentation. It's a separate agency, so I will extend the invitation. I know the commission also asked for a presentation from our new economic development director and also code enforcement. So we are in the works on doing something for the commission. um just give us a little bit of time on that um as far as upcoming meetings uh for the october 7th we have um another zoning code amendment and this time is to add locational standards for vehicle fuel stations and alfredo sorry rafa that was intentional

I wasn't sure if that's intentional or if it was just a slip of the tongue.

He will be doing the presentation for you. And that's all I have to report. Thank you.

You're going to change your name. That's all I have to say. Thank you, Lupita, for filling in. She's doing it so smoothly.

The good thing is if he gets in trouble, he can say, yeah, I'm afraid of it.

Exactly.

Smart, smart, smart.

No, but thank you, too. And appreciate it, Seth. Thank you, sir. And it went well tonight. We got to move it on. and we didn't get out at 1 30 in the morning so i know those i.t people look you know it's not 1 30 so be quiet okay but anyway with that we have adjournment anyone can adjourn i can move to adjourn anyone so we all agreement and adjournment it's 100 and literally you can put any name down it doesn't matter and with that thank you our audience and thank you for those who are watching and thank you to staff and with that good night and thank you for the cooler weather