Commission - Regular Meeting

Do we have Commissioner Cook on line? All right. We'll get started with the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice Good morning everyone and welcome to the Shawnee County Board of County Commissioners meeting. It is June 11th, 2026, 9 o'clock. On my far right is Jonathan Brizon. He's county councilor today. On my far left is Lisa Schmidt, who's our county clerk. On my immediate left is Commissioner Aaron Mays. He represents District 3. Commissioner Kevin Cook is on, he's on on the telephone he's listening in he'll be able to communicate too i believe thank you uh commissioner cook represents district two i'm bill ripon and i represent district one so got a full house tonight here today uh lisa what's first on our all right first item on the agenda is item three consent agenda I'm going to move that we approve the consent agenda. Second. Motion's been made by Commissioner Rippon, seconded by Commissioner Mayes. All in favor say aye. Those opposed, motion carries 3-0. Next item.

Next item is item four, new business. A, county clerk. One, consider all voucher payments.

This morning we have vouchers totaling $4,349,104.43. Three items to note on there. The first one is $156,140.46. That is the progress payment to WCI. That is for work completed on our bridge replacement on Calhoun Bluff. That would be paid from our bridge project fund. And then we've got $82,185.75 payment to Bartlett and West Engineers. That is for the design services on Northwest Rochester Road. That's paid for with infrastructure funds. And then the largest would be the $559,268.06. That is a progress payment to King's Construction. and that is for the Auburn Road project at 29th and K-4, and that is also paid for with infrastructure funds. So if there's not any questions or concerns with any of this, I would move for approval.

I'll second. Motion's been made by Commissioner Mayes, second by Commissioner Rippon. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries 3-0. Next item.

To consider correction orders.

I move that we approve the correction order. Second. Motion's been made by Commissioner Rippon, seconded by Commissioner Mayes. All in favor say aye. Those opposed? Motion carries 3-0. Next item.

B, land use and development. One, consider approval of a preliminary final plat for the Crow Hollow subdivision to create three lots to be located at 6010 Southwest Douglas Road. The property is zoned RA1 and located in Dover Township.

Good morning, commissioners. Joni Fedani, Director of Land Use and Development. This action item is Crow Hollow Subdivision. And just as a reminder, we do not hold public hearings on these matters. That was already done at the Planning Commission and does not need to occur again at the Board of County Commissioners for this plat. So today what we're doing is considering a preliminary and final plat where we are asking to divide one lot into three. It is located in Dover Township. The blue star here indicates where this is at in Shawnee County. So the proposal is to take just shy of 44 acre parcel of land and divide it into three lots. Lot one will consist of just over 15 acres and includes an existing home. Lot two will have 25 acres and at this point is just agricultural or trees and farm and hunting ground land. Lot three is going to be three acres and the purpose of lot three is actually multipurpose. It will either stay with lot two or could go to be sold with lot one. So the intent of the owner of this one is they didn't want the home, but they do want a chunk of the remainder of the ag land or hunting ground. And so they are asking to divide off the portion with the house so that they can sell that. They would keep lot two so that they can use it in association with area that they own around it. And then lot three, they divide it off because they felt like if the person who purchases the house wants it, they can have it. But if not, then they would keep it themselves. We do ask that there be a note on the plot that lot three is not a buildable lot because it has no frontage whatsoever. It's a landlocked parcel. Since the combined property does not meet the plat exemption, the frontage on this parcel was existing at 60 feet when they came into us. And so what we're doing is we're dividing that frontage to 30, 30, and there will be a shared drive that is located on that 60 foot of frontage. What you see here is a preliminary plat with the division of the land. And then the final plat looks just a tad bit different because some items do not occur on the final plat that we show on the preliminary plat. The Planning Commission did consider this at a public hearing on Monday, May 11. Planning staff recommended approval of the request and the Planning Commissioners recommended approval by a vote of seven to zero. I do have the recommendations listed here above. Ultimately, they just need to coordinate with AT&T to verify some cables. Utility easements need to be clearly identified and shown on the final plat, and then lot three shall be designated as a non-buildable lot. Other than that, I have nothing further unless you have questions, and then I ask that you consider and take action.

Any questions?

I did have a question, but it looks like you addressed it in that last slide. So I was going to ask about the lot three. But I feel like it's all in here now. I don't think there's any amendments or anything that need to be made, right?

No. No amendments need to be made.

Can you put up the plan again showing that lot three? I was a little confused as to why it's even divided out from one of the other two parts.

Well, again, the owner of it wasn't certain whether or not it would make it more marketable or less marketable to have that extra land. And so they decided to cut those three acres off. They really, I believe, want to keep those three acres. But if it makes the property more marketable and someone who buys that house wants it, then they would say, OK, it's fine. You can take those three acres. So they divided it out just for the sole purpose of being able to be flexible of it going with lot one or lot two. But it will never be owned independently because there will be no access to it.

All right.

I'll make a motion that we approve the plat. Second. Motion's been made by Commissioner Mayes, seconded by Commissioner Cook. All in favor, say aye. Those opposed? Motion carries 3-0. Next item.

Sue? Oh, sorry. I was going to jump in, but I'm not ready yet. You're ready.

Two, public hearing and consider approval of resolution R2026055, a conditional use permit to establish a public use facility on property zoned RA1 Rural Agriculture District located at Southeast 69th Street in Monmouth Township.

Good morning, commissioners. Joni Fedani, Director of Land Use and Development. So this is a conditional use permit being brought to us by Monmouth Township. What you may recall from some historical cases that we have, public use facilities for townships, fire districts, et cetera, require that they get a conditional use permit when they are being located in an area zoned RR or RA. In this case, Monmouth Township is building a new facility because they are taking over road maintenance starting as of January one. And so they now need to have a maintenance shop in an office that they did not previously need. So this is located, as indicated by the blue star. The proposed use would be beginning January 1. It will serve as the township operations facility. They are responsible or will be responsible for road repair and maintenance throughout Monmouth Township. So this will be their central hub for equipment, materials, and personnel deployment. I'm not going to go through all of the primary activities as you probably all well know what it is that a township road maintenance facility will do. They do have hours staffing between 7 a.m. and 4 p.m. and then they may have extended hours depending on projects and emergencies. They'll have some full-time staff dispatched from there daily and I assume that there will be some staffing that stays there on a day-to-day basis. They will also hold their monthly township board meetings there. um we've included the site plan of the property that shows the various buildings and shops and storage areas and then an example of the building plans and of course this will have to come back to the plan land use and development department for building plans to be issued or building permits to be issued the location of the vicinity We did send out letters to owners within 1,000 feet of the property, as is required by law. 10 letters were sent out, and we did not receive any responses back on this case. We did hold a public hearing on Monday, May 11. And other than the applicant, the only public input included one individual speaking in favor of the request. Planning staff did recommend approval of the request, and the commissioners voted to recommend approval 7 to 0. There are a litany of recommendations in regards to the conditions to this facility, and a number of those came from the Shawnee Heights Fire District when they did their review, and the Monmouth Township contractor and crew are all aware of those conditions and agree to those conditions. So at this time, if you have any questions, I stand for those questions, and if not, I'd ask that we enter into a public hearing.

Okay I'm going to move that we open this item up for public hearing. Second. Motion's been made by Commissioner Rippon, seconded by Commissioner Mayes. All in favor say aye. Those opposed? Motion carries 3-0. We are now in public hearing so I'm going to ask if there's anyone here would like to speak in favor of this project. Thank you. Come forward. your chance all right anyone opposed to this project all right seeing that I'm gonna move that we approve this resolution and close the hearing can we do both at the same time okay well second motion's been made by Commissioner Rippon seconded by Commissioner Mays all in favor say aye those opposed motion carries 3-0 next item

Three, public hearing and approval of home rule resolution HR2026003, text amendments to Shawnee County zoning regulations to zones RA1, RR1, I1, and I2 regarding utility structures, energy storage systems, and data centers.

Good morning, commissioners. Joni Thedani, Director of Land Use and Development. As the clerk read, we are here today in regards to a text amendment to our zoning regulations. In effect would be RA, RR, I1, and I2 zones. And in particular to those, we have a bunch of discussion that we can have. So first would be this is a home rule resolution, which is a little bit different than a normal resolution. As you are aware, a home rule resolution typically requires two readings. You'd have the first reading where we all come forward and it's presented, and then you would set another date where we would come back and do it again. As has been pretty typical with zoning regulation requests for changes, we've asked that you waive the second reading of this. We all are here today and we'll hold the public hearing today. And so I would ask that as a part of that, you waive the second reading. Okay, so the text amendment has several items that I'm asking for.

Just a second. I want to make a motion that we waive that second read. Okay. Second. Motion's been made by Commissioner Rippon, seconded by Commissioner Mays. All in favor say aye. Those opposed? Motion carries 3-0. So we're waiving that. Thank you.

Okay. Okay, so then the text amendment proposal first would be that I'm asking that we remove Section 20.02 , which is specifically private or public utility structures. I want to take that out of items that are a permitted use, which means allowed by right. They don't need any other oversight. and make that same topic private or public utility structures, a use that would be permitted by a conditional use permit. I'm going to go into detail on all of these a little bit in the future. Not right now. I'm just going to list out the proposal. The second one is that I would ask that we make changes to our a our our I1 and I2 by adding energy storage systems as a use permitted by conditional use permit. And then I would also ask that we add data centers as a use permitted by conditional use permit. And then the final change that I'm requesting is to add private or public utility structures as a use permitted by a conditional use permit. So in I-1, it is already listed as a permitted use, and we would ask that it be put in as a conditional use. In I-2, all uses allowed in I-1 are allowed in I-2, and so I want to specifically line item that this use would require a conditional use permit so it doesn't just be able to be done by right in I-2. Okay, so what does this mean? What is a text amendment? A text amendment is when we come in front of you, we look at the zoning regulations, which is what tells Shawnee County what it is that we can and can't do on a piece of land. It helps tell the landowners what they can and can't do, and it helps us direct businesses, individuals, property owners on what it is that they can do with their land. So what we're asking to do is, make some modifications to how public and private utility structures are currently allowed to be used, and then adding the specific names of energy storage systems and data centers into the regulations. It is not approving a specific case. We have no cases in front of us right now. We have not received any applications for either energy storage systems or data centers. So this is not approving a specific case. It would just be modifying the zoning regulations to ensure Shawnee County has the language that we need in case one of those applications comes to us, which I anticipate will happen in the next few months. Okay, so then the next thing is a background on zoning regulations. As a whole, our zoning regulations, they were written back in 1992. That's when these zoning regulations were approved. Over the years, we have had various text amendments. The most recent of those was for our solar regulations. We have 15 different zones in Shawnee County, 15. So that includes RA, RR, various office and institutional, commercial, industrial. We have 15 different zones. I'm asking to make modifications to four of those. So a modification to the I-2 heavy zoning. Well, let's take a step back. I-2 zoning or heavy industrial right now, the way that it reads in our zoning regulations, the intent of this district is to allow uses that are obnoxious or offensive by reason of odor, dust, smoke, gas, or noise. The extent and range of uses are highly intensive. All uses permitted in any other zone are allowed except for residential dwellings or those uses that require a conditional use permit. Also permitted, any other lawful use not in conflict with any other applicable resolution or ordinance. So what that means is pretty well any use can come into an I-2 zone with absolutely no oversight. So what is a private or public utility structure? It is a transmission, distribution, and or collection system. It could include substations, distribution stations, pump stations, reservoirs, towers, transmission equipment buildings, and other such uses. They are allowed with a conditional use permit in 13 out of 15 zones already. They are allowed by right in I-1 and I-2. So then what is an energy storage system or a data center? The current zoning regulations make no mention of either an energy storage system or data center specifically. But what does an energy storage system do? It collects energy produced, it stores it, and it distributes it. A data center stores, processes and distributes information required for cloud computing, streaming, artificial intelligence, online applications, many of the things that we do on a day-to-day basis. Now, what does that mean for us with energy storage systems or data centers? In my opinion, they are private or public utility structures. So what that means is right now, as it stands, an energy storage, an energy storage system and a data center are allowed by right in both I-1 and I-2 in Shawnee County with no oversight by the county commission. If these text amendments are not made, the county would have no control over an energy storage system or a data center coming into our industrial areas. If these text amendments are not made, there would be no oversight by the county other than the applicants needing to come into my office and obtain a building permit. I have concerns about that process and that's why we are here today because I want to ensure that the county has the ability to consider every one of these and to say no if they so choose. So what does passing these text amendments mean for us? It makes the regulations clear on where exactly energy storage systems and data centers fit in Shawnee County. It limits where energy storage systems or data centers can go. It puts conditions on the approval. It means that we would be able to have public hearings at both the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioner meetings, and each of these cases could be decided independently. It also means that you have the right to say no if it doesn't fit for Shawnee County. The Planning Commission did hear this on May 11th. No one was present to speak in favor of or against the text amendments. The Planning Commissioners did make public comments and ask questions of staff regarding the process, how we got where we were at in front of them, notice to the public, the amendments presented. A Planning Commissioner did make a motion to place a six-month moratorium on data centers. That motion died for lack of a second. At that point, Commissioner Gerhardt made a motion to approve the text amendments as presented by the staff and Commissioner Lynn Wetter seconded that motion. A roll call was taken and the motion passed six to one. We are here for a public hearing today. And so unless you have specific questions about my presentation, I would ask that we enter into public hearing.

Jody, I do have a couple of questions. With the conditional use permit, which is what we're voting on today, if we wanted to make the condition that, say, a data center was wanting to establish here, and we could make a condition that they have a closed cooling system, not just using water, helter-skelter, however they feel, but a closed system like you have a radiator on a car is a closed system. We could require that, is that right?

Correct. You could make any condition that you want on a situation where there's a conditional use permit.

And we could require that they pay for any utility extensions to their property. Correct. Okay. But we could put all kinds of different constraints to the project. Correct. Conditional use permit. Okay. Mr. Mays, do you have any?

No. I mean... I think that you summed it up really well. I mean, what we're not, what we're not doing today is approving or denying a data center. Uh, we are changing our regulations so that we can put more restrictions on data centers should one apply and it'd be considered on a case by case basis rather than, as you said right now, they can just get a permit and start building without any regard to their water consumption or energy usage. and so this is a way for us to kind of put restraints on that and so I think there's a lot of misinformation going around on social media right now about what we're doing today and so just wanted to be clear that we're not approving or denying a data center today because we don't have an application for a data center so correct I

You know there's a lot of misinformation about data centers. There's a lot of misinformation out there. There's a lot of misinformation out there, so a person needs to be careful. Social media isn't the pillar of accuracy. So if you're getting all your information from Facebook, you're probably not hearing all the truth. And some of the early data centers, there was problems. There was some issues. But they are much better than they used to be. But today, what we're doing is we're trying to be more transparent. We're opening this up to public hearings where people can come and make comments. Before, as Joni pointed out, they could have just came in, got a permit, start construction. So this is a good start, what we're doing today. We're being very open about this. Anyway, all right.

Commissioner Ricklund?

Yes, Commissioner Cook.

As stated, we are not approving a data center today, but just the regulations for the future data center, if or when one should come to county. So I do not have any questions regarding the presentation.

okay all right we're ready to go yeah i'll make a motion that we open the public hearing i will second uh motion's been made by commissioner may second by commissioner ripon all in favor say aye those opposed motion carries three zero we are now in public hearing uh so we will uh entertain uh people who'd like to speak i'm just going to go down the list here Thank you for printing your name. They don't look like prescriptions from my doctor. Heather Kroner. Well, yeah, it may be Connor, yeah. Heather?

Hello, commissioners. My name is Heather Connor, and I'm here today about the data centers, of course. I don't typically get involved in these types of things, so I consider this pretty serious for me. Kansas is known as the breadbasket of the U.S. and has long roots in being a farming state. Data centers would drastically affect this by drying up rivers and lakes just to keep the servers they house cool. According to the World Resources Institute, water consumption alone from a mid-sized facility is approximately 300,000 gallons in just one day. Larger facilities consume even more, as much as approximately 5 million gallons a day. There is also the matter of energy consumption and strain on the power grid. That is a concern. According to congress.gov, under data center energy consumption, they use approximately 176 terawatt hours, which is approximately 4.4% of the US annual electrical usage in just one facility. In places where there are active data centers in other states, residents have noticed a spike in their energy bills and the output of the data centers operating is also rather noisy. A data center could put anywhere from 50 to 90 decibels of sound and it is a consistent hum. According to the Environmental and Energy Institute, some residents living nearby already established centers are experiencing sleep disturbances, headaches, and general distress from the constant drone. I would like to address the issue of SB 98 as it allows for 20-year state and local tax exemption for permanent data center developments. This should have been voted on by the people. I also find it convenient that there is a MythBuster guide alongside it when myths have been proven true in other states and reported through entities like Environmental Energy Institute, the World Resources Institute, and Consumer Reports. My last remarks will be on the impact data centers can have on wildlife. Construction of data centers can disrupt the habitat of wildlife, some of which might be endangered or protected if an ecological survey has not been conducted prior to construction. I strongly believe in being a good steward and preserving what we have. That is all I have.

Please, no applause. We just want to hear people today. Is that like?

Is that Snyder?

No? Snyder? Darryl Snyder. Maybe Darryl Snyder? All right. When you come up, please state if you're a resident of Shawnee County, too.

I am a resident of Shawnee County. My name's Darcy Lewitsky-Snyder. I'm here about the data centers. You all would have received a email yesterday from Lucinda Evans stating her opposition to data centers, but she could not be here today. Thank you for assuming that none of us know what we're talking about and that we get all of our misinformation from Facebook. That is incorrect, but that's okay. We understand. We know you're not voting for a data center. It almost sounds like your minds are already made up that you want a data center, which is sad. That's very sad. We think that you seeing the opposition getting a data center in Shawnee County now, when one's not even on the table, you can imagine what would happen if one is on the table. That's what we want to prevent. We want you guys to say no. There's so much research out there that you can look at where the other towns that have had it, Virginia, Colorado, Indiana, that have built data centers, regret that they built the data centers. It's something we don't need here. We have the Frito Lay smell, which is the Frito Lay smell. We have the dog food smell, which is the dog food smell. We don't need things like data centers. We just don't need them in this town. You're not making any money. They're not putting any jobs out there. They're a waste of land, they're a waste of energy, and they're a waste of resources for Shawnee County. We don't need them. We absolutely don't need them here. And the saddest part is, is that you guys sit here and we elected you, some of us did, some of us didn't, elected you guys to the positions you have, and we thank you for that. We thank you for running. We thank you for being in the position. We thank you for showing up. But at the same time, you have to listen to what we say. don't don't be the rms of the kansas and not listen to what we're trying to tell you and we're trying to tell you with us being here today and taking our time out of our day also to tell you that this isn't what it was i have no chest because i had cancer I don't want someone else to get cancer from the data centers, and I don't want someone else to have migraines like I do. I was electrocuted when I worked for the police department, and I don't want someone to go through the headaches and migraines that I do, and that's what is proven that these things do to people. They give them migraines. They give the smells. They give the energy, the water. You don't need that. We don't need that. Your kids don't need that. Your grandkids don't need that. No one needs these data centers in their area. If somebody else wants to build a data center, let them build it. We are all using a data center right this minute. With our phones, with our computers, we all use data centers. We all have used data centers. But when you guys think about the massive amount they're asking for the data center, even the top guy for Acorite or whatever it's called, is saying that they need to stop and they need to be regulated and we need to slow down. And he's one of the top inventors of AI. And he's telling the government, slow the process down. We need more research, we need more answers, and we need to ask more questions. And please just listen to us. We don't want it, we don't need it. Thank you guys.

We're not going to do this applause thing. I just want to hear people out. We've got a lot of people who want to speak. Let's hold that down. Let's stop it, OK? Xavier?

Shawnee County resident, Javier Garcia. I don't usually talk either, but I do want to circle back to SB 98 and I'm wondering if data centers do come to Shawnee County, how's it going to generate money? Because SB 98 lays out that a 20 year tax exemption. So aside from the maybe few jobs that happen during the construction, After that, it says that the sales tax exemption is valid for 20 years regardless of investment, as long as they provide 20 jobs. And how, I mean, who's going to be in charge of enforcing that? As far as the water usage and the discharge of said used water, will there be any testing of that discharge and who will be doing that? How often will that be doing that? Will that be considered in any conditional use permits? article in the Guardian that came out yesterday. In Seattle, where Microsoft and Amazon are headquarters, who are giants in this AI boom for these data centers, they've created a one-year moratorium on data centers so that they can create ordinances and laws for their city because there's not enough research on these new technologies. As far as remediation if any of these proposed limits on water usage, who's going to be in charge of enforcing that and is there going to be a specific task force or how often will those regulations be enforced or looked at? As far as the ecological impacts, has there been a survey just to see what impact this will have? Some studies have shown that a data center added to a community can raise the surrounding area by temperatures of three degrees, if not more. As far as the investment of the $250 million that they would need according to SB 98, where's that money going to be spent? Is it going to be spent on infrastructure related to the data center or will it be distributed to the community and in what ways? Who will be responsible for the maintenance of the infrastructure? Will the data center, will that be part of the conditional use permit or will it be public money funding this data center's construction? Because that's going to be a lot of wear and tear because these things don't pop up overnight. Again, will that be public money that's going to be fixing all those things? How much water will these things use if and when a proposed data center is offered to Shawnee County? Will a comprehensive plan be given to you guys and will that be made public in any way? And I guess, how will this impact utility rates when it comes to residents of Shawnee County? Over the last year, Evergy and the Water Department have both raised rates, coincidentally, as you guys are proposing, a data center. Is that related in any way, shape or form? It seems very convenient, but these are the concerns I have as a resident and I wonder if, I would hope that you would consider these and then say no if and when something is brought to your desk. But that's all I have, thank you.

Don Lewis.

This is only supposed to pertain to the data center at this time of the conference.

Oh, yes. No. Well, if, yeah, this is all data center. Our regular public comment would be at the end of the meeting. OK.

I'm sorry. We'll try to catch you here at the end. All right. Colleen Campbell?

Hi, my name is Colleen Campbell, and I'm a resident of Shawnee County. I'm not just representing myself today. Last night, we put together a petition, and over 300 people across Shawnee County have participated in that since 5 o'clock last night. The names are here with the addresses, and I have a copy for each of you. If you look at this map, it's all over Shawnee County, where these participants are. So it's not just one group of people who are talking about this. I'm an environmental scientist and I would like to talk about the implications of having a data center in Shawnee County. There are many environmental hazards involving data centers including negative water quality changes, over consumption of water and electricity, and hazardous noise. The data center used too much water to facilitate the cooling of the servers. Kansas already has drought-like conditions and the aquifer is being depleted. Water is already on the mind of Kansans and people of Shawnee County as this water is depleted. It means that agriculture, which is the literal and economic life of kansas will die additionally the water can become contaminated with infrastructure runoff chemical spills from corrosion inhibitors and even just the heated water discharge has limited dissolved oxygen promoting harmful algal blooms that can devastate our local water systems Hazardous noise can come from the data centers the noise can be both loud and subsonic Which we cannot hear but still affect our bodies noise pollution is a real hazard It affects people and animals alike not just with annoying sounds but also causing health issues like vertigo nausea and anxiety and surrounding communities and While a data center may seem like a boost to the economy, it is not. Often those who are building them use outside resources and personnel who disappear once the project is completed, leaving us with a problem and them with the profits. The rise in water and electricity in an already difficult economy will cripple Shawnee County. Today, we have talked about a conditional use permit. Well, I understand that is a method to bring some oversight to the building of the data center, and I do appreciate that. However, that can give some measure of tacit approval if there's not people coming every single time there's a building that's being presented for any company who wants to follow the guidelines. I would call for a total ban on data centers within the county and that's what this petition called for as well. This is not unprecedented, at least eight other states have counties that have a total ban on building of data centers. Most importantly, and I think you will appreciate this as elected officials, Kansans and people of Shawnee County seem to be united on something. No one wants it. I usually can find in any news article or comments from both sides of an issue, everyone I talk to in person, usually I can find at least people having both sides, everyone is united on this that I have talked to and seen on public comments on Facebook and other places. Putting this up to a vote, and I appreciate having this public time, so for you all to consider a ban on all data centers. Thank you.

Thank you. Tyler Brindley.

Hello, my name is Tyler Brinley. I am a resident of Shawnee County, District 3, since about July 2022. I think a lot of what has my points have already been said, so I'm going to keep it a little short. But I am going to touch back on the recently passed Senate bill. Can you speak up a little? Sorry, yes. Oh, can you all hear me now? All right. To repeat, my name is Tyler Brindley. I'm resident of Shawnee County District 3 since 2022. Most of my points have already been made by others, so I'm going to keep it a little bit short, but I am going to touch on Senate Bill 98 passed in April of last year. With that creating a sales tax exemption over 20 years for data centers, I believe that they really won't create a good economic windfall for the county. that sales tax exemption applies to construction, maintenance, labor costs. So I really feel like there's a lot of tax base being taken out here. In regarding to the conditional use permits themselves, I would like to see some sort of ability for enforcement of them needing create like economic electrical and environmental reports that are available to the public for us to be able to judge and that so we can give comment back if we want these projects canceled if we don't think they are living up to the their what they are saying they are going to be able to do for the county. And that is all thank you for your time. Thank you very much.

Leslie.

My name is Leslie Prentice.

Can you hear me?

I live at 4020 Southeast 37th Street in Topeka, Kansas, which is just outside the city limits of Topeka. I have to say, first of all, thank you to the people for being here because we need to work together on things like this. I have some things to say that other people may not say, and one is I thank Rich Eckert for having a media presentation, and I think he did address some issues in that. The problem with that is they're not in regulations. They're not in a conditional use permit. That was just what he stated to the media, and the public wasn't invited. So we heard it from the media. There's no transcript. I would have liked to have had that so I could share it with people, because people couldn't hear it on your recording. And even though there was an AI transcript, it disappeared. But I want to say this, too. Use AI. I like AI. I do a lot of research on AI. You have to be careful with it. But you use it and develop a set of regulations now, the best, the best that AI can find for our size of community and, you know, that says you have to use the inner cooling, you know, system in this data center. And another thing you mentioned, but water usage, for water usage. I mean, we have farmland out by the Ogallala Aquifer. We're really worried about water. We're gonna die if we don't have water. So we need a clear statement of how these data centers are not gonna use water. Use AI. Hire an expert, an expert at AI. I mean, I talked to a young man that he said they had some regulations that were the best. Now, I can't reveal where he works or anything, but hire an expert at using AI. the the county counselors don't have time to develop this this is huge this is just it's happening like this but the good thing is it's happened a lot of places and you can have someone research all those places what have the impacts been we hear that they've been bad but honestly i've read a lot of things about a lot of different places and california there's one city in california the only place that has banned this so far But I'd like to see a moratorium. I'd like to see an expert on it. I'd like you to use AI. I'd like you to have the information, and then give it to the public. And maybe we won't be looking at misinformation. Maybe we won't be scared about that. That's what I say. Good luck. Thank you for what you've done, and get the information to us. Maybe we'll go along. Maybe we'll work together. We didn't work together on solar, and here we are standing together on this.

Thank you for coming.

Thank you. Mark Massey.

Hello. My name is Mark Massey. I'm a Shawnee County resident. Just for the record, I have been an IT professional for 12 years. So if you need any enlightenment on the research and data that's being already found day after day, I can help you find that. Good morning, chairperson, commissioners, and members of the community. My name is Mark Massey. I am a resident of Shawnee County. I appreciate the opportunity to speak today regarding proposals to build AI-focused data centers in our county. I know this meeting is about a text and verbiage amendment. That is flag. That's a red flag to trying to get ready for a possibility of AI data centers. That also tells me that you guys want them. Anybody that wants to make money off them wants them. So I am here to urge local officials to reject these projects, or at the very least, impose a moratorium until the public has had a meaningful opportunity to evaluate their full impact. This issue is not about being anti-technology. I'm in the field. Technology can bring many benefits to society. Rather, this is about protecting our community, our natural resources, our infrastructure, and our local quality of life from developments that may offer far fewer benefits than their promoters claim. All AI data centers require enormous amounts of electricity and, in many cases, substantial quantities of water for cooling systems. We'll stop right there. You mentioned the closed loop. It does help, but that water is dead after it's been used, and then it gets dumped with heavy metals, which kills soil, everything. These facilities can place a significant strain on local power grids, increase demand for new transmission infrastructure, and compete for resources that residents, farmers, schools, local businesses depend on. Before approving any project of this scale, we should ask whether our county's resources should be dedicated to supporting the growth of multinational technology corporations. We must also carefully examine the economic promises being made. While developers often highlight Large investment numbers, data centers generally create relatively few permanent jobs and increased costs for home energy consumers compared to the amount of land, energy, and public resources they consume. Construction jobs are temporary and long-term staffing levels are often minimal. Our community deserves a clear and honest cost-benefit analysis rather than optimistic projections. Additionally, residents deserve transparency regarding tax incentives, abatements, infrastructure subsidies, and public expenditures associated with these projects. If taxpayers are being asked to support private development through public resources, they have a right to know exactly what they are receiving in return. There is also legitimate environmental concerns. Large industrial facilities can alter landscapes, increase noise light levels, air water pollution, and chemical exposure. Pose significant health risks to nearby communities, affect wildlife habitats. and contribute to greater energy consumption. Even where renewable energy is promised, questions remain about grid reliability, backup power systems, and cumulative impacts of multiple facilities over time. Another important concern is local control. Once these facilities are approved and built, their impact can last for decades. Future expansions may be difficult to prevent. Decisions made today will shape our local county for generations. Residents should not be asked to accept long-term consequences without comprehensive environmental reviews, independent studies, and extensive public participation. I respectfully request that county officials reject any proposal for AI data centers until independent studies are completed, require full disclosure of projected water usage, electricity demand, environmental impacts, and public subsidies, conduct comprehensive public hearings before any zone changes or permits are approved, protect agricultural land, residential areas, and natural resources from industrial scale development, place the interest of current residents above the interest of above outside corporations seeking to profit from our community resources. I also submitted you all emails last night. Take a look at that sign and those children They will we won't be here in 2039 no drinking water Jolene

Good morning. I'm Jolyn Grable. I live in the Collins Park neighborhood of Topeka, which is in Shawnee County. I appreciate the opportunity to speak today. And I want to be the first person to admit that I don't know everything about a data center or the data center industry in general. But I do have to wonder why the push all of a sudden, not by you all, but by the industry to expand at such a rapid pace. I've been trying just to identify the number of data centers existing in Kansas, the number proposed, and really it's hard to get hard numbers on all of that. I do know there have been multiple communities who have considered this, and I think maybe only one has, a couple maybe have done moratoriums, But I think because we don't have all the information is exactly the reason why I want to encourage caution and only measured action. And I want to say today that I am glad that the commission and the planning commission recommended and the commission I expect will adopt a regulation, a first attempt to regulate how and when and under what conditions data centers might exist in Shawnee County, but I hope it is not the only step you take to look at the possibility of regulating that industry. You know, one of the questions I have in addition to why the push in Kansas, which makes me feel like maybe there are people in more urban areas that think, oh, that's just farmland. We can do whatever we want out there and we aren't going to affect, in fact, that's kind of a slip, isn't it? Affect as many people in Kansas as we would in other parts of the country. That has happened in other industries and I want say that we are not here for the nation's ability to do dangerous things. We want a quality of life to be maintained here and we expect you to do your civic duty and as our elected representatives, work to maintain that quality of life for us. And I know that the economic development forces of the state are one of the reasons that we do have some people interested in industries, interested in Kansas, and I understand wanting to work with that partnership. What I want to again caution you is that is not the only issue at stake here, and I think you're hearing that from everyone. We want you to look at the full breadth of the issues involved in data centers, which many people have discussed and put before us. I just think, I know the CUP is a step forward in regulating. I am not certain, because I've never gone through a CUP process, so I don't know how broad an interpretation can be done, whether it can consider water use, electrical rates. Or is it just land use? You can do all those things? Okay, good. I hope you will if you get to that point. The other thing I want to share is just a statistic that I've seen. You can't find consistent numbers, but the relationships of data centers in the United States versus other countries was a question I had because I assume part of this push by the industry is to make sure we're ahead of China and some of the other nations. But America has like some of the charts I've, maps I've seen say like 4,000 some, some say 5,000, and China has only 300. I think we're far enough ahead that we can take a moment to stop and ask the questions that need to be asked to protect the public. Thank you.

Aaron Turvey.

Good morning, my name's Erin Turvey. I am a resident of Shawnee County. Thank you, chair and commissioners. So this might be rambling, it might be confusing. Generally, I just feel that if there's, So the energy storage systems, the data centers, yes, I want them to have regulations. I want to have language set up. I don't think that it should be lumped in the same with utility structures that serve our communities. water, electric needs just on a day-to-day basis. I feel that there's so much information out there about how detrimental the data centers have been to communities where they are. I think it's happening so fast and everything's so new. And now that there is a culture of people questioning even data that's been presented because they ask, well, who put the data together? What was their purpose? What was their end goal? Can we even trust it? And so even as you're sharing information about detrimental impact or positive impact, it becomes undermined by all of these conversations. I just, hope that things would slow down and that every small little step that is taken for Oregon's data centers is open as open and as public as possible and that each little step along the line is considered and that the responses from the community are heard and considered because I think there's been a long history of there's the appearance of public input being considered because we're here and we're audibly being heard. But then as decisions are made, all of the comments are disregarded. And it is simply those who are voting and who they think will keep them in their positions. And even here in Kansas, we've seen various companies that have grown very powerful, very large, and they pump tons of money into Kansas and into the United States, largely into the political system so that laws and regulations can be written in a way that create less red tape for them. And as their projects move through, the largest benefit is to the ones at the top who continue to make money, continue to make amounts of money that they drown in and don't even know how to spend, while the citizens and the residents in the areas where their projects are deal with the dumping. are, when you have enough money and enough resources, you can sidestep any regulations that are put in place. So that is the concern, that we can do that to the ends of the earth. But once they're in place, it's so hard to track. It's much easier to just prevent them being put in. Thank you.

RICHARD J. Richard Johnson. You have once again won the penmanship award for printing. Thank you. I appreciate it.

RICHARD JOHNSON. I'm on a roll. Thank you very much. My name is Richard Johnson. I live at 3536 Huxman Road, Silver Lake, Kansas. Now that the cat is out of the bag, this is going to make more sense. The data center has been the goal for over a decade since Evergy bought out the public utility companies and became a monopoly. At this time, they recruited the electric co-ops to be their foot soldiers under the umbrella of being non-profit.

We have a policy after we've been meeting for an hour, we stand for a few minutes.

This happened to me again.

Jesus.

Do I keep going or what here? Keep going.

You're on.

OK, thank you. Man, I'll tell you, I got the lottery on that. OK, the electric co-ops to be the foot soldiers under the umbrella of being non-profit. Ideally, a 100 megawatt data center needs 1,400 acre solar farm, which includes a battery backup to ensure no interruptions in energy. On its own, it was too costly unless they could get the public and subsidies to pay for it, while still making a profit. Evergy is a for-profit company, and their annual reports show that they make a lot of money. Along comes COVID, CO2 propaganda, climate change scares, which gives the opportunity for them to exploit the people to push for solar farms. After Kansas shut down from COVID, people in Western Kansas were financially hurting, so solar carpetbaggers rushed out there and secured thousands of acres. Many landowners didn't know what the fine print read. Solar farms popped up in areas not even close to transmission lines, but they had a plan, invest enough in solar and it will pressure the state to improve and approve transmission lines. Energy companies made money on solar, then again on transmission lines. If you've ever looked at a solar site, many of them have a blank patch within a secured area. They knew long before solar alone is not reliable, which was a problem, so the cure was to have space for a battery bank. Again, more profit. As the clean energy fad grew, over 40% of the U.S. coal plants were shut down, which made us more dependent on green energy. It helped push through more and more solar farms to Evergy's advantage. Evergy and electric co-ops put a lot of effort into this and of course the rates continued to raise. Once the battery banks were added, all framework for the data centers were in place. They had sites that could manage 100 megawatt data center at little to no cost for Evergy. This is why we are seeing data center push happen overnight. They want us to make hasty decisions. Data centers are not environmentally friendly, and the energy companies have kicked the clean energy people to the curb because they're no longer needed. Shawnee County would not have had this problem if two of the zoning board members hadn't sabotaged the last meeting prior to going to the commissioner meeting. That was Terry Robinson and Myron Winaveto, if that's how it's pronounced, who should have recused themselves in voting, pushed to increase the solar acreage to 1,000 acres from what was going to be 240. That's in the minutes if you need to check it. 640 acres was the final decision. We're not going to get a 100 megawatt data center, but any size is a win for them and more profit for us. If the data center is approved, there will be water issues, environmental light and noise issues, but Evergy will have a solution and it will cost us even more money. Thank you.

Vicki Arnett.

Thank you.

Can you hear me okay? Yes. My name is Vicki Arnett. I live at 1110 Southwest Medford in Topeka. I'm co-chair of the League of Women Voters Topeka Shawnee County Climate Committee. The Climate Committee supports the development of clean energy. Although we do not have a position supporting or opposing data centers, our core values encourage public participation in decisions which impact our community. Today, we are asking the Board of Commissioners to put in place a one-year moratorium on data centers. Return this amendment back to the Planning Commission to write regulations and put guardrails on future development of data centers. The Shawnee County Planning Commission passed this amendment on May 11 without clear, proper notice to the public. If passed, the conditional use permitting notice requirement is limited to notifying homeowners within 1,000 feet of the development, including a 20-day public notice. Public meetings held in response to a conditional use permit will be about the entire development proposal on a data center as it's negotiated between Go Topeka, Evergy, and Project Deep Blue. Sending this amendment back to the Planning Commission with a moratorium in place is an opportunity to restore public trust and protect our community. Thank you.

Thank you.

Diane Denham, and I am not a resident of the county, but I live very, very close to the county line. I am here in support of the residents of this county and because, you know, we're all in this together. And this does not end in the county line. What happens here affects other counties and other people. So hopefully you can listen to what I have to say. I do agree 100% with the text amendments. Those need to be approved if possible. Our county, where I live, currently has a moratorium. and is working on a ban for data centers. So we're asking you to please establish at least a one-year moratorium to allow time to research and create regulations for or ban of hyperscale AI data centers and battery energy storage systems, as there are many health hazards and safety issues in addition to skyrocketing electric rates and the excessive water use. The developers will tell you they do not use much water, and your electric rates won't increase. But that is just a playbook they all use, and they convince the elected officials to believe them. We the people know better. Here are some regulations that should be required if they are not banned. So require independent third party studies not paid for by the developer. Environmental impact studies, land use and ecological studies, biological and cultural resource studies to protect wildlife, wetlands, and historical sites. impacts from light pollution and that destroys sleep cycles in humans and animals and increases cortisol levels. Property values, you won't be able to sell nearby homes and farmland is destroyed. The aquifer study, Kansas is already in a drought watch, require them to use only water collected from rainwater, not wells, aquifers, lakes, or local water supplies, and ban used contaminated water called blow down. Impacts of the water could be low water pressure and poor quality drinking water, possible water rationing, it can destroy wells, aquifers, and lakes, there might not be enough water left over for firefighters, and the wastewater is contaminated with PFAS. You'll need to have weekly tests and reporting of the PM 2.5 emissions from generators. The impacts of that, it contaminates soil, creates lung problems, heart attacks, cardiovascular disease, and increased dementia. Children and elderly are especially vulnerable. Constant monitoring and reporting levels of total noise or infrasound and establish limits and require weekly testing and reporting. And here's some impacts that you may not know about of infrasound. It has been used as a military torture tactic in addition to migraines and vertigo in animals that cannot reproduce and dairy production is reduced in cattle. It's been advised in several places that setbacks of a minimum of 5 to 10 miles from residents for health and safety and then require a huge decommissioning plan. There's many reasons why at least a one-year moratorium is needed and even a ban. when everyone discovers how destructive these things are to our rights and to our rights to peacefully enjoy our property and way of life. And thank you for listening.

Megan Ryan.

Good morning. Thank you esteemed commissioners for letting us speak today and thank you all to the Shawnee County constituents for showing up. We represent the heartland here in Kansas and I know that our decisions here are all good faith that we are trying to do what's best for our communities. We understand that you're trying to bring some money in here but we simply want to keep our drinking water potable. And so we understand that we're not talking about allowing a data center at this moment. We understand that we have outdated terminology on the books. But we're asking for at least a one-year moratorium so that we can take a look and dig deeper. We are also looking to ideally have an outright ban on AI and data centers here in Kansas. Recently, Edgerton, Kansas, I believe yesterday, was successful in stepping up against that. And guess who owned that one? Who was trying to own that? The United Arab Emirates? are trying to buy our land here in Kansas for cheap. We're trying to sell the soul of our nation, our limited farmland, our very scarce resource of drinking water as our Ogallala aquifer is drying up, as we face droughts across the country, as our climate is worsening. This week has been miserable with climate change, right? And we all know that these AI and data centers are heating up Somebody said three degrees in the area. We're also just wasting resources and it's ultimately just not going to be bringing in the type of jobs and economic future that Kansas deserves. We have better alternatives. We have a better future that we can build. We're not against technology here. I know here in Topeka we're the leaders, you know, here in the state, of course. We're the state capital. And so that is why it is our duty to protect and speak up against these billionaire technocrats trying to buy and sell the soul of America. I understand, again, that we're needing to update these regulations. I understand that we're poo-pooing social media, which is ultimately, again, who's building these AI data centers, right? Meta, Google, random countries overseas. That's not Kansas. That's not Kansan companies, right? That's not us building and really establishing a better future for Kansas. So I just want to remind everyone that it is always the right time to do the right thing. to think of these children, to think of the future of this country. Because as a long line of farmers here in the Midwest that I come from, and military veterans as well, that I am here speaking on behalf of my friends and family that could not make it on this random work day. And again, thank you all for taking off work this morning. I know that's a little tough. Things are tough. Economics are tough. Things are going to get worse in the coming months. We have an oil crisis. Everything is expensive. Now just imagine when Evergy raises those prices, when we the people are competing against this giant data farm that does not benefit us, that does not care about the American citizens, that does not care about Kansas. All right, so here we are. Please, I mean, the resolution, sure, but ultimately we need to stand up against AI. These billionaire technocrats are not gonna give a crap about these regulations. Money can buy anything, and right now it's buying our souls. So commissioners, please take this into consideration. Think about the future. Oh, and again, I am a constituent of Shawnee County, third district. And so we'll be around, we're here to fight. So thank you so much for your time. And thank you again to Kansans for stepping up for what's right and reminding our legislators to represent us.

Yeah. Kendra. Kendra Angeli.

I'm a bit taller than Megan. Sorry. All right. So I want to thank you all for your time today. My name is Kendra Ansley. I have been a resident of Topeka and Shawnee County for the last 19 years. My husband and I both live and work here. We have two beautiful children and we pay state and local taxes. So we've chosen to raise our family here in Topeka because not only do we love this community, but we appreciate its affordability. I'm deeply invested in our community. Not only do I choose to live here, but I also volunteer at our local schools. I volunteer for Junior Achievement. I volunteer for Meals on Wheels. I really care about my fellow community members, and I believe that's why each of you have chosen to serve on our county commission as well. I understand that today's measure was taken, and on its face it was done to create more oversight, and without a law degree and the time to understand the true impact of this measure, I can only hope that that is the case, and I appreciate your effort. However, my concern is that no one here is truly an expert in this space and doesn't really understand the true impact of what was done or what may be done. So I'd like to urge each of you to take caution, to invest in research, and to take thoughtful consideration about the long-term impact of the decisions now allowed based on these contextual changes made. Based on Ms. Thadani's comments, and I'm sorry if I mispronounced your last name, about the anticipated receipt of a proposal for a data center and the assumption that the waiver of the second reading was taken to clear a quicker path for a data center, I'd like to share a few thoughts. We already know that data centers create a massive resource demand. We know that data grid strain and increased electricity costs are certain to come as well. We know that it causes extreme water usage that impacts local communities. We know there will be noise and landscape disruption. And we often know that there's promises of economic boons that do not come, and that tax loopholes are often not really helpful to communities. And so those dollars that are promised just are not found in local communities. And so I'm not an expert in data centers. I'm not an expert in landscape disruption, noise pollution. But what I do know is that this community needs to be cared for and that we have elected each of you to help us take care of our community. And so I hope that you'll take the words of my fellow community members and myself, you'll look at the three beautiful children who remind me of my own, and you'll really consider the decisions that you're making, that you'll really take the time to think about the long-term impacts. I think everyone up here has asked for a moratorium and I think that's a really good idea. We don't know what the future holds. We don't know what these data centers are going to do, but we have a pretty good idea so far that it's not good. We don't have to be the guinea pigs. We can wait and see. I think technology is improving, but not fast enough for Shawnee County to be the breeding ground for all that can go wrong. I appreciate your time. I hope that you will take all of us into consideration. And thank you again.

Hi. Good morning, commissioners. My name is Evelyn Davis, and I live in the Waukarusa area and have for most of my life, which is a part of Shawnee County. I'm not going to take your time today reiterating all the kinds of things that other folks have already said. I think most of you've gotten the message. We don't want the data center. We appreciate, or I do appreciate, what the Planning Commission is working on. But I think you today can take the initiative and say, we need to step back, take our time, send this project to the Planning Commission to do the data research. with actual knowledgeable people to find out what all the issues are. And they obviously are numerous. So thank you for listening to us, having this format. With the conditional use permit, however, that's limited. The knowledge of that project that comes up and goes before the Planning Commission only goes to a very small group of people. who live within, I think it's 1,000 feet of the proposed project. That doesn't give the rest of the county, which will be impacted, a chance to know about that unless you're closely monitoring the Planning Commission. So thank you for your time today and please give this due consideration.

Thank you. Rachel Allen.

Hello, my name is Rachel Allen. I'm a resident of Shawnee County. I'm probably going to repeat what others have said, but sometimes things need to be heard multiple times. Regulations will not solve the important issues that data centers cause. Let's say data centers are asked to use renewable energy to power the center. By one estimate, 100 megawatt data center would require about 1,446 acres of solar panels were powered by solar power alone. Getting enough land to install the solar panels necessary to power even a small data centers would be difficult without robbing wildlife of land, which would cause a new set of issues. Let's say data centers have to have a closed water cooling system to save on water. Closed water cooling systems require more electricity to run the heavy duty industrial fans and chillers, taking even more power from surrounding residential areas and businesses compared to open loop or traditional cooling systems. Let's say data centers have to have noise kept at a certain level. That'd be difficult with the running heavy duty industrial fans that have a closed loop cooling system. Let's say data centers have to employ local companies to build the centers. Okay, but once it's built, the centers are basically unmanned. That doesn't create jobs. There still would not be good solutions to the noise pollution, decreased property values, a barrage of unforeseen issues, nor health issues that the data centers will cause to those constantly exposed to the noise. I'm not asking for regulations right now. I'm asking for a complete ban for the time being until data centers can prove they can address the issues they can cause. I'm also one of the people who have chronic migraines and I know a lot of people also suffer from migraines. medication that I'm on and I have I do the Botox injections and I still have to have other medications as well to help manage my migraines. I work at Stormont so I cannot be calling out at work because I have a migraine because of these data centers. And remember, you work for us, us the people. So don't let self-serving issues or self-serving ideas affect us all. Thank you.

All right, Jan Davis.

Thank you for letting me speak today. My name's Jan Davis. I live at 11756 South Topeka Boulevard, 7 tenths of a mile outside Shawnee County. But when I'm at the end of my driveway, the lights from Walmart Distribution Center block my view of the north sky. A lot of light pollution, that's five miles away. And I'll probably touch on some of Rich Eckert's points that he made for Evergy the other day in his press conference, where he said, well, the lights on the data center will be pointed down. Well, the lights on Walmart are pointed down. but it is a glow from five miles away and also would be with the data center. But mainly I want to talk about something some people have just kind of hit on, which is infrasound. I first became aware of what infrasound was and what it does to people in 2020 when I was researching wind turbines, where you could put a bowl of water on a kitchen table and look out the window and see a wind turbine two miles away. But you could see a ripple in the water every time that turbine made of rotation. That's infrasound, below 20 hertz. A dog whistle is a real high frequency that we can't hear. Infrasound is below 20 hertz, low frequency. And that's the issue nobody talks about. You can't hear it. Regular decibel meters do not measure it. Infrasound low frequency sound waves below the 20 hertz human hearing threshold has emerged as a major point of contention near data centers. And I will say that there's over 50 lawsuits across the United States and almost all of them are pressing infrasound and the medical conditions that come along with it. There's actually a medical condition called wind turbine syndrome from the infrasound from those Generated by cooling systems ventilation fans and power turbines these inaudible vibrations travel long distances and easily penetrate walls causing physical discomfort sleep disruption migraine headaches and anxiety for nearby residents and those vibrations travel five to six miles that's coming into my yard I'm not even in your County and then I just want to go over some some real quick I look at things that have happened and what other cities have had to contend with. I know there's a number of counties in the area that are currently writing regulations for data centers that have a moratorium and a ban to or ban for data centers because they don't belong in industrial. They're not the same as a regular industry. The building is there, but the noise and the resources and the infrasound do not belong. Dowagic, Michigan residents are suing over a one-year-old data center over all the noise and health complaints. They said it sounds like a vacuum cleaner 24-7. Madison, Indiana is closing this month. Big Oaks National Refuge to be bulldozed for a data center. Nashville Zoo. Lake Mead is at 30% capacity where it can't produce electricity. Hoover Dam. So it just... Oh, Jones County, Iowa had to drop a road agreement with the data center to remove the county's tax burden as the increase in air temperature and humidity from the data center is prematurely icing the roads and creating problems around the data center. So there's so much, so much.

The information is too fast, coming out too fast.

Please stop and look at it. Thank you.

All right, Travis Heslop? Travis? All right. Brandon Cornage? Yeah, I think that's it.

Good morning everyone. I'm Braden Crowick. I am a resident of Shawnee County and I like to try and touch on things that others don't. First of all, let me say I do fully understand that this is about a regulation where the perspective is we don't currently have one at all and something does sound better than nothing. I do, with the limited knowledge possible, I do have some possible concerns if the conditional use permit may both be better than nothing, but simultaneously may the risk of it turning maladaptive in the future. So I do understand that this is not necessarily a vote to outright ban. AI data centers here and now, but clearly this is what many everyday people would like to be considered for the future at the very least. I'd like to touch on the perspective of, let's say these data centers were just outright powered by magic. It was done with free energy. It was done without any concerns to the water or the noise, the light, etc. There would still be major concerns of these data centers. And we all know that most of these data centers are in ties to artificial intelligence. Now, this is something that is causing huge concerns on our schools, with many teachers noting that it is kind of ruining the classrooms, particularly teenagers and college students. Additionally, it is creating a huge shortage on everyday computer resources, such as RAM. So I do see that we have some kids here. I don't know who here wants to be the villain and tell these kids that, sorry, we can't afford a Nintendo Switch, a PlayStation, or an Xbox because those all are going up in prices. And there's reports that the next gen systems are going to be over $1,000. And furthermore, a lot of artificial intelligence is some social media creating concerns of being used against minors in very inappropriate ways I will not delve into and I will say that I don't like to talk about this but I have had one of my loved ones personally harassed by a Again, trying not to say in front of kids harassed by artificial intelligence videos that will not talk about in front of kids and As politicians, we are also starting to see huge concerns about AI being used for political slander campaigns. This is something that affects me as a candidate, something that's going to affect every candidate sitting and in the future as another major concern. as well as concerns from psychologists that were initially very supportive of AI but started to learn and see data that even in healthy adults, prolonged exposure to artificial intelligence chatbots is creating mental health concerns. So that is all to say very quickly anyone saying we gotta compete with china i would echo president jfk's remarks that if we want to compete with soviet russia or china we instead invest the money into our teachers and our schools thank you tc levi

Hi. I am a resident of Shawnee County, Kansas. And I'm not any kind of expert on AI or data centers. But I did go to college for a computer science degree that did specialize in AI and cybersecurity. So I can assure you that when I move to speak on matters pertaining to it, it is not informed by my engagement or lack thereof with social media. I'm not going to reiterate what's already been said, the ecological impacts, the impact that AI use has psychologically, especially on people who are young, or the water use, or the extravagant energy use. These have all been spoken on, and what I do want to point out that I am very surprised, and delightfully so, at the turnout to this, because we all understand that this is a matter of regulating the data centers and defining them, but This is the beginning of something. We are deliberately going out of our way, many of us taking time off work, to complain about this early and complain about it often, and we will likely continue to do so because when we start regulating and defining these data centers, then it's the start of a much longer process that's going to lead to what we are all here being concerned about. To borrow some of the language from the resolution, I do understand that the maintenance of effective and efficient and unambiguous regulations with respect to the use of our land and the critical issues to address, especially as emerging technologies create new challenges for governing bodies of all levels, I do not find it appropriate or necessary to just define these things so that they can be included. If we are going to apply these conditional uses, those conditions need to be informed by strong research about what the impacts of having those data centers is going to be. We can say that this is just, we're defining the data centers and we're trying to figure out what their place is in our community, and that this is about updating the language so that we have a stronger understanding of how this is applied, but to us that feels like a smoke screen, like we're going through the motions to make sure we're doing this carefully, but the reason it's happening now and the reasoning it's happening at this pace has more to do with who would want to be using those policies and that's where our concerns arise. There are going to be people who and maybe they're already in your ear, who, once these policies are in place, we're defining the data centers, we are creating the conditions for their use, and there are going to be people in your ear trying to convince you that their data centers are going to be good for the community, that they're going to create jobs and support the economy. But going back to something that you rightfully brought up about relying too much on social media when you shouldn't, The quality of the information that you receive matters. It doesn't matter if you get information from social media or from your neighbor or from a constituent or from someone trying to build a data center. I think I implore you, all of you, no matter where you are getting your information, ask yourself, Why is this information being given to me? Who is giving it to me? And why is it so important that I listen to what they have to say? I'm very confident that everyone here is pretty much unanimous that we are opposed to data center regulation that is in favor of them, which again, that's not what this is. But we've already explained why we have that position. And I only ask that people on the other side of that argument do the exact same and that you understand why they are telling you what they're telling you. Thank you.

Robert Riley.

My name is Robert Riley. I'm a Shawnee County resident. Once again, I'm happy at least that the CUP process is at bare minimum being considered here. But like many others, I really think we need a moratorium here to allow the county to come up with the proper constraint limits and requirements that you spoke of at the beginning. If we already have these ideas about, well, they can use closed loop or they can do this, why not codify that? And a lot of people have asked for a year. And frankly, I don't know if that's enough time. I mean, I think we should consider a two or three year moratorium here. We were at a point that with solar and wind, we thought, you know, these things are much better known and they have less impact. And we thought it was important to take two to three years on those issues. And so this one being a lot more unknowns, a lot heavier and graver concerns, I think deserves that. And these issues need addressed beforehand, not after the fact. These are grave concerns. These aren't minor things. And it puts a huge responsibility on the Land Use and Development Department and the Planning Commission, which are all very busy but to have them continually with each one not have a set of guidelines and regulations to go on is I think an undue burden for them. Some people have mentioned it, but I really want to point out the diverse group of individuals out here today. That's age, that's race, that's socioeconomic, but it's also a political divide. I look out here and I see people that I have disagreed with and made counterpoints to over the years in some of these meetings. And we're here locked in arms, united on this. I haven't heard anybody come up here and express that they want you to act faster or not put a CUP process in. No, every single person has asked you to please slow down. So we can, please don't, it's not a part of Robert's rules of order. Sorry, just. Even if you support me, please don't do that. So I'd really earnestly like the commissioners to reflect on their duty. You have a duty to represent your constituents. We're here today and we're saying please slow down for all of our sakes, okay? What is the short-term rush benefits to economic development? Like why is that outweighing slowing down and just doing it carefully and considerately? I've seen this body deliberate and get things right before and I would just like to see that happen again so we can have a community conversation about it and what we want our County these I just really think we deserve an opportunity to consider the limits I made it through my points quicker than I thought so thank you all you my time thank you Justine

Hello. My name is Justine Grieve. I'm a Shawnee County resident. I'll keep it short. The CUP process is a good step. We absolutely need to get something on the books. I think we all agree on that. However, the conditional use permit process alone does not do enough to stop slow down the construction of a data center. And it's also just not the most efficient place to start. rather than devoting staff time to reviewing individual proposals it will be more efficient to take the time to consider the issue broadly create regulations and come up with specific restrictions that can apply to anything a company wants to propose creating those regulations will keep everyone from companies submitting proposals to the public to staff to all of you from wasting their time considering individual proposals that are not right for our county A moratorium on data centers would help slow things down and give us time to get this issue right. It's what we did with the issue of solar development, and there's no reason that data centers should not warrant at least as much caution, research, and scrutiny. Requiring a conditional use permit, like I said, is a good step. It's the least you can do. Please consider a moratorium so our community has more time to think this through and create regulations that can apply to a wide array of proposals. Thank you.

Amy Gillette.

Hello there. My name is Amy Gillette. I am a resident of Shawnee County, District 3. And I am right squarely in the area where some of these sites that have been talked about in various news stories, like the Walmart distribution center, around the Target distribution center, this is about two or three miles from where I live. So this is very, very personal for me. Unfortunately, I can see sometimes the sun coming up over the Frito-Lay factory. That's where I'm at. I've lived all over the country. I've lived in New York, LA, and I love being here in Topeka because of this, that people are coming out, that they're speaking their mind, and that for this one thing, everyone seems to be united. So there's something really to take from that. So I'm going to echo what a lot of other people have said and ask for some sort of moratorium. whether it's a year, whether it's two or three years, that happened for solar power. This deserves more consideration even than that, I would hope. I come to you as an academic, a media professor who ended up studying a lot about artificial intelligence for better or worse. A lot of what I talk about in my classes is the only thing that constrains the behavior of companies, ultimately, when they get large enough, is regulation. And that is what is being put in front of all of you and is your real responsibility. And so when we're talking about this in the same category as a public utility, The big thing about a public utility is it has to serve in the public interest. So certain regulations we have for the internet, section 230, come from the fact that power, water, electricity, all of these are in the same bucket of utility. I don't feel that these centers belong in that same bucket. They should be something that's considered separately. And while this conditional use permit is a good first step, there needs to be concerns specifically for data centers not treating them in this category, something like electricity. This isn't about misinformation. This is about actual academic studies that are being done currently that have been done. I sent an email yesterday with just one of these studies about air pollution around a Virginia site, the amount of particulate matter from their diesel generators, and no two emissions go up considerably so it's something that is not misinformation it's effects that people are really experiencing from this and that's why everyone's here that's why everyone's really really concerned about it so everyone's touched on all of the effects a few other things um property values As few people have noted, those of us who are around this, no one wants to live near a data center. That much is clear. How are we going to be compensated for the fact that our property is basically going to be turned almost worthless? That's really concerning. There are these long-term public costs that are being thrown around for very short-term gain. As some have noted, the jobs are only in construction. There's very few long-term jobs that are involved with these sorts. of operations so going forward i think what we're really asking for other than hopefully a moratorium is more transparency in scouring all the news articles i did find things about various sites that are being planned and various people saying yes our site's being planned No, there are sites not being planned. So transparency is a lot of what we want. Only informing residents a thousand feet from the site in a condition like this is insufficient. The effects go far further than that. And so this needs to be something that is brought to a much larger audience and that is truly studied in the way that it needs to be before any sort of regulations are put into place. Thank you very much. Thank you for listening to us.

Shayla Saunders.

Hi, my name is Mikala Saunders and I've been a resident of District 1 since 2011. Most of what I wanted to share with you today has already been expressed, so I'm going to do my best to keep this short. And I just want to point out that you all asked us to stand up for one minute as a wellness break. Right? You care enough about our wellness that you don't want us to be chair potatoes in this meeting. Yes? So I'm just going to echo that in the spirit of caring about our wellness as a community, the task before you if all you do is change this language and like miss jamie said then a permit comes an application comes in the next few months what happens we're not ready for that our ducks are running all around the barnyard right now we need to get them in a row right and in order to do that it's going to take at least as much time as the solar regulations do So I would echo the call for a moratorium and send this back to the planning commission and others like many have suggested outside research firms and et cetera, to help us understand what the real implications are as we move forward. I do appreciate the context that was provided regarding the development of these zoning codes from 1992 when none of us could even imagine that data centers were ever going to be necessary. So I completely appreciate the need to make sure that policy is keeping up with real life. So does regulation need to keep up with reality. And we're not there. We're not there. So I would just implore you to help us make sure that we're taking reasonable steps in data-informed ways. And we can't do that without some regulation. So I would just echo the call for a moratorium. I think five years would be hopefully enough. We don't want to be 1.0 on data centers. in our community right maybe by the time there's a 3.0 version the things that have been expressed in terms of the harm that is done that we can't always see right away will be better understood and better able to be mitigated but like so many have already said these sites require decommissioning right this is more like radioactive facility stuff than it is like a utility, right? This is not the internet. This is way different than that in terms of what's happening to the resources involved and the levels of contamination that's happening. So I appreciate you following the law and opening this hearing today. And thank you to everyone who's here and who has spoken. I appreciate it.

Thank you. I'm at the bottom of the list here. Is there anyone else who would like to speak? Got a couple more here, it looks like. Give me your name.

My name is Matthew Marish. I'm a resident of Shawnee County. Prior to today, I didn't really know anything about what you guys did. Some of the things I've learned today, I've learned you guys help make sure our bridges get funding. You make sure we get their fire station or whatever we're talking about for the that other township, you guys do things that help make a difference for our communities. And I think that's one of the most important things. Also learned that Bill does not like applause. I was unaware of that, but something I learned. So, you know, those are a couple of things I've learned today. One of the other things I learned is, you know, I came here to say no, whatever, whatever we're talking about, it's no today, right? The data centers, it's no. But what I've really learned is it's yes. Yes, we do need to regulate these data centers when they come in. And that's what we're trying to do is adding that language so we can do that, right? And so, yes, yes, we need to add that language so we can do that. One of the other comments Bill had made was, by doing this, that means we could say that they need this certain system, that we could say that they don't get different energy rates. People have talked about a moratorium. I don't think that's the answer. I think the answer is we make a permit, where these data centers are like, we should go somewhere else. We don't want to do this in Shawnee County. You know, the rules they have for this permit for us to be here. They're not worth our time. Like, it's not worth it for us to try to do this here because, you know, we're going to make sure we're taking care of our community. We're going to make sure we're doing the things we need to. And I think that's, you know, the important part of this is your guys' role is to help create that permit. And that permit should be one where when these data centers are looking at it, they're like, some other place, some other sucker county is going to give us what we want in exactly the way we want and not sacrifice the health and safety of our people here. And so I think that's really the big takeaway for me. You know, like I said before, this is a meeting to add the word data center to a permit, right? This isn't about a specific data center coming here. These people came here for the words data center on a permit that's that's what we're talking about today and this is what we have here right now if we were if if now we're talking about an actual approval of a permit you're going to need a bigger room i mean this is the nine o'clock crowd like imagine you know when all their friends are now here too bill there's going to be a lot more applause like we got to stop that from happening um and that's that's all i have to say there so thank you

Hello, name's Chris Willer, Southwest Shawnee County resident. We absolutely need to have regulation on this. We've all talked about moratoriums, all of that. I agree with the no. We have a beautiful landscape in the state of Kansas. Kansas has been a long tradition in the part of America where we have made the right decision to dissuade nations. And saying no to these data centers to come in here and ruin our landscape, ruin our agriculture, and cause all sorts of medical issues is absolutely unacceptable. Secondly, everybody's touched on everything. This is a no period. So with us at the 9 a.m. crowd like we just talked about, you will get more pushback. We need to not have this by any means. It is going to be nothing but problems. And I'll wrap my time short because we've had some very good speeches about this. Thank you.

Anyone else? Good.

My name is Greg Stevenson. I'm a resident of Shawnee County. I didn't understand exactly what was going on here. We now understand that this is about forming regulation for data centers. And I think that's a good thing. That's what we need to do. We've had examples of in Topeka where tech has outran regulations. I think we all remember bird scooters, don't we? That was not good. We want to make sure that our regulation is outpaces the technology so that we when a data center does try to come here, we have the regulation to make sure that its impacts are minimized or they don't like he said, they don't even want to waste their time coming here. We want to make sure that the regulations are in place. And I know a lot of people talk about the Target DC, the Walmart DC, the Home Depot DC. The benefits to those of the community is that they actually brought jobs to the area. We're a data center. A study put out by the state of Virginia showed that about 1,000 square feet produces one job. So 100,000 square foot data center, that's about 100 jobs. And that's everything from janitors to security to people that actually work on it. Not all of those jobs are good paying jobs. They're not jobs that we really probably need that outweigh the environmental impacts. So I'm here for the regulation. We seem to make sure that regulation is strong and that it does not, that tech does not outpace our regulation. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Anna Walker. I own property and reside at 900 SE 35th Terrace here in town. I am splitting my time between my home here in Kansas and caring for my mother in Iowa as dementia steals her day by day. I happen to be in town this week because I had engagements with my family here. I'm calling it a God thing that I was here so that I could open my big mouth to y'all. First thing I want to address is we Kansans are used to folks from the big cities. We're used to folks from the cool states thinking that we're just nothing but a bunch of dumb hicks here in Kansas. These people are not dumb hicks. These people are your employers. You work for us. And don't you ever condescend to us again. Not ever. The problem with the data centers is that technology has moved far too fast for us to keep up with it. We don't want a data center here because we already know what it will do to the environment, to the properties, to the ability to have water to drink for our kids. And we know all about politicians and big companies being able to say one thing and then the reality is completely different. Am I right? So don't blow smoke up us because we're not taking it and you've got a fight on your hands. And we will be here every step of the way. Yes, the text change is a step in the right direction, but it is not far enough. It is not far enough to stop this decimation of our home. And you owe us your allegiance to protecting our homes. Thank you.

Anyone else? All right. So. I guess we could close. I'm going to move that we close the public hearing. Second. Motion's been made by Commissioner Rippon, second by Commissioner Mayes. All in favor say aye. Those opposed? Aye. Motion carries 3-0. Okay we're going to take a vote on the resolution. Do you have any more comments or questions?

I mean, I think that a lot of what was said is impactful. I think this is something that we definitely need to look at long term. I think, yeah, technology has changed a lot. And so I went to the National Association of Counties Conference in February. Pretty much the entire conference was about AI and data centers. I sat through a panel and actually on a committee right now with a county commissioner from Lawton County, Virginia, which has over 200 data centers in it. It's right outside of Washington, DC. And the theme there was not all data centers are created equal. They've got some very bad actors in the space and they've got some that are just fine as well based on what they said. But the theme of that panel discussion was data centers are coming for your communities whether you want them or not. the best thing to do is to create policies that make them ask permission and so that's what we're doing today we're putting a well I mean assuming that that the vote goes in favor of this home resolution but but we're putting regulations in place so that well I guess a policy in place so that we could make regulations in the future. And I think it is different from the wind and solar conversation. You know, there was a time when those were lumped together, the moratorium we put in place for solar because we felt like wind power was the more immediate need at the time and we wanted to separate the two into different conversations. and it worked. We were able to have a robust conversation for wind energy, we were able to have a robust conversation for solar energy, and they weren't lumped together. I think that When we're looking at the size of these projects, you know, you hear kind of mind-boggling numbers of these things. I mean, you hear, oh, this is a $200 million data center. This is a $10 billion data center. You hear all sorts of different things. But if a $10 billion data center wants to come here, I think it needs to be heard on a case-by-case basis. And I don't think the same policy for the data center that has existed for a long time over at BNSF right up the street, I don't think it's the same policy for that as it would be for a $10 billion facility. I think we need to address these on a case-by-case basis. And the way for us to do that is through the conditional use permit process. And so I think right now, where I sit is that we need to pass this home rule resolution because as I said earlier, if we don't, if a data center applies tomorrow, they can come in and build an industrial zone without any rules at all. And we certainly don't want that to happen. And so I think this is a necessary step, and I think it couldn't come any sooner. I think this is something that has to be done before it's too late. So that's where I'm at on it. And I don't know if you guys have anything else you'd like to add.

I would agree I we we need this resolution now like you say they come in start building and this is the first step for regulating not with the moratorium you could do a moratorium but but this this is this is a step we need whether we have a moratorium or not this is a step we need we need to be able to say If they build something, these are the regulations. We need something that says, maybe we don't even want it. You can do that in a conditional use permit. You don't have to prove it. But this gives you control over it. And we need this today.

So I'll address moratoriums. I think that in a lot of cases, moratoriums are used so that elected officials don't have to make decisions. I think that we see that when you see other communities that are putting a 100-year moratorium on wind energy. It just doesn't make sense. I mean, at that point, just ban it, right? And the other thing is that a moratorium is only a delay until we say it's not. Same thing with a ban. We have a prohibition on wind energy in Shawnee County, but You know, Commissioner Rivon's not running for office again. The person that comes in next term might try and lift that. You know, I mean, there are future elected officials that can change anything that we do. You know, I just think a moratorium in this case, like I said earlier, I don't think we want blanket regulations that apply to all data centers. I think they need to be considered on a case by case basis. And the only purpose of a moratorium would be to work on blanket regulations. And I don't think it's a one size fits all solution to these things. I think it needs to be studied more independently.

Mr. Cook?

Yes, I just want to say I want to thank everybody for coming out today. Your comments are impactful. Your actions are impactful. I have been listening to all the comments and we take these things apart. The amount of social engagement that we've had with the public on this issue is meaningful. And so this is not something that's just going to go away. And we will continue to make sure the public is aware of any developments when it comes to not just data centers, but also battery storage or any other things that come. The commission has the final say on what actions are taken in our counties.

this is the next big thing data centers they are the the next desktop computer the next smart phone that we all have this is not an open meeting at this point we're not in a hearing right now or we close the hearing so I think this is a good first step and I'm going to I'm going to move that we approve the home rule resolution.

Second.

OK. Motion's been made by Commissioner Rippon, second by Commissioner Mayes. All in favor say aye. Those opposed? Aye. Thank you. Motion carries 3-0. All right. Next item.

Can we take a break?

Oh, yeah, let's take a break. And if any of you would like to leave now, you don't want to hang around for the rest of our exciting meeting. We're going to resume business here. So, Lisa, what's next on the agenda?

Next on the agenda is C, Public Works 1, acknowledge contract C-202609A1, covering change order number one to original contract C-2932024 with Kings Construction Company Incorporated of Oskaloosa, Kansas. This change order reflects as bid versus as constructed quantities for the Southwest Auburn Road Reconstruction Project.

Good morning, commissioners. Curtney House, director of Public Works. It is still morning, I believe. the project here was kind of unique in that it didn't have the normal gestation period that we have with our usual road projects we were notified by a school district they were going to build a middle school at 29th and auburn and so we scrambled to build a project around it I'm pleased to say that work was completed here about four weeks ago. And our last order of business is to make final payments and to have you acknowledge what the project cost, whether construction costs were actually higher than let. And I'm pleased to say that they were only $11,000 higher. But nevertheless, the project budget came in quite a bit less than what we had anticipated. So with that, I look forward to any questions that you might have about the project itself or about its cost.

I don't have any.

Curt, I think you're underselling it. When you say it came in under the project budget, it's almost $4.5 million less. Like that's a little bit different. I mean, the $10,000 or $11,000 change order is pretty minuscule considering that we were able to get this project done in one year less than probably what it should have done. and also four and a half million dollars cheaper than what we thought it was gonna cost. I mean, we did, you and your department did an excellent job on this. I really appreciate it. I think it's also one of the only times that I have seen four different taxing entities come together and fund a project. So between the city of Topeka the school district, KDOT and Shawnee County. Everyone contributed. And and I appreciate the work that your team did and taking the lead on it to get this done as fast as possible, because if any of those other entities had done it on their own, I don't think it would happen that fast. So I think I think this is great. And this is the final payment, I believe. Right. So so yeah, congratulations on it. It looks great.

If you remember, and we were in a meeting at the the administrative building, we first started talking about the middle school, I remember thinking, oh my gosh, how am I gonna get a project done this quickly? But we were able to do it and I think the end result is really a nice project.

Yeah.

Is that a motion too?

Yeah, I'll make a motion that we acknowledge the contract for the change order.

I'll second. Motion's been made by Commissioner May, second by Commissioner Rippon. All in favor say aye. Motion carries 3-0. Thank you, and thank you for all your work on that project. Turned out very nice. Next item.

D, Department of Corrections. One, request approval to accept bid from Lippert Mechanical Service for work on replacing HVAC coils for a roofing unit at the Adult Detention Center at a cost of $23,355 to be paid from the department's building maintenance fund.

Good morning, Commissioners. Tim Phelps, Department of Corrections. This is an item that was put out on RFP back in April. and we got bids back and we spent a lot of time examining the bids so we could make sure that this lowest bid we received would be sufficiently competent. We've done that work and we want to please proceed with the work with that low bid and it is substantially lower than what we estimated the cost would be. I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Any questions? If not, I will move for approval.

Second.

Motion's been made by Commissioner Rippon, seconded by Commissioner Mayes. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries 3-0.

next item to consider approval of an emergency purchase contract c202610 with samco plumbing heating and ac to repair a broken drain line in the adult adult detention kitchen facility at a cost of nineteen thousand five hundred seventy five dollars to be paid from the fiscal year 2026 contingency fund uh tim phelps department of corrections uh

this is an unexpected event it's going to require us to do some extra planning so that the food service process can go on uninterrupted while we repair the ruptured drain but we've got that figured out and we're ready to go we just wanted to get this matter resolved and i'll be happy to answer any questions you have

Could you briefly describe what exactly they're doing? I mean, I feel like I have a pretty good idea, but I'd like to hear what they're planning.

So we have in the, I think it's the southwest corner of the kitchen unit that was constructed in 2015. All of the materials that get generated in that kitchen, grease and other foods, drain out to the southwest corner of the building into a big pit. And so there's a lot of piping going through there. And one of the larger six-inch drain pipes, the thing ruptured and graveled it, collected up into it, so nothing can drain out. So essentially what they have to do is cut the concrete, go in and repair that, and then restore the structure, including the cement and the floor covering. So that's the essence of the work.

Do we know why exactly it ruptured? I mean, was it cast iron that rusted through, or is it clay tile that got busted by tree roots?

From the best we can tell, it is cast iron, which is a concern for that particular location. When we go back in, we'll use newer materials. So the only thing we can tell is that it clearly had a bend, ruptured. And so it may have just been some kind of settling, but whatever the cause, it clearly broke that. We looked at everything else around it, and it's all in good shape. We put cameras through it all. So this is the only location where we're seeing a problem.

Okay, so they're just repairing the area where the break was, not the entire line?

Correct. Yeah, we're just going to fix that bend where it ruptured. there's a number of lines going out right there. And so it would be significantly more expensive to replace all of that.

Okay. Just so we don't have to, like, come back and do it again a year from now. So no more questions for me.

Commissioner Cook, any questions?

No questions.

Then I'd move for approval. second motion has been made by Commissioner Rippon second by Commissioner Cook all in favor say aye opposed motion carries 3-0 Thank you. Next item.

E, information technology. One, consider approval of contract C2026211 for renewal of an annual maintenance contract with Central Square Technologies for the county's OneSolution software at an annual cost of $98,299.19.

Morning commissioners mark price information technology. This is just our annual renewal of the central square one solution finance enterprise software. This is used by I think every department in the county. It's our general ledger. It does our payroll accounts payable. And I think Jennifer would be really sad if it was not working. But if I can answer any questions, I would be happy to questions.

I would then move for approval second motion has been made by Commissioner Rippon second by Commissioner May all in favor say aye opposed motion carries 3-0 thank you next item F human resources one consider approval of HSA funding for the 2027 benefits plan employee only $500 and employee family $1000

morning commissioners angela lewis director of administrative services as a clerk just mentioned we are asking to continue our seating at the same level as it was in 2026 500 for employee only and a thousand for employee family that includes employee child and employee spouse The IRS has also set the following contribution limits for 2027. They're $405,000 for employee only, $9,000 for employee family, and a catch-up contribution of $1,000 for those who are 55 or older and want to contribute to their FSA or HSA. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.

No changes from last year, actually.

No changes on this from last year besides the IRS contribution limits.

Any other questions? No. I would move for approval. I'll second. Motion's been made by Commissioner Rippon, seconded by Commissioner Mays. All in favor say aye. Those opposed? Motion carries 3-0.

Thank you.

Thank you. Next item.

Item five, public comment.

Ron, I think. Thank you for being patient.

Glad to do it. Spent a lot of time at city council meetings, so I know the drill. I am here today on behalf of Employer Support of the Garden Reserve to make a presentation to Commissioner Rippon on behalf of the Department of War and the ESDR. Commissioner Rippon for many years has supported not only Guard and Reserve members, but veterans in the area, working on memorials at Gage Park. He even was so kind as to present me a rendering of a new memorial for the Topeka Police Department during the time we were working on that. Unfortunately, we weren't able to move forward with that, but we appreciate that effort too. but your continued work on behalf of veterans allowed me the opportunity to go to national and request a seven seals award and i'd like to present that to you now for your tremendous support of the garden reserve kansas veterans and all the work that you've done over the years in that regard so

I'm gonna do a photo for you too.

Stephanie, around. Thank you so much.

So on behalf of, as a state chair for the state of Kansas, for the fourth part of our reserve, I present to you a Seven Seals Award for your tremendous work and effort on our behalf.

Thank you, Ron. It's been an honor to work with all the veterans over the years. I look forward to even working with them more after I'm out of this job. We have one more time, probably.

All right, thank you. Thank you for the opportunity.

Our other person that wanted to speak, they're done.

Oh, you have someone else signed up? Don Lewis. Oh, that's right. Don Lewis. I don't think he's here. I think he left. So anyone else wishing to speak? Okay.

Hi, I'm Colleen Campbell. I talked earlier about the data centers. I just wanted to follow up and thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I think congratulations on your award. I think what Commissioner Mays stated about not all data centers being the same is accurate, and I appreciate that option. Oh, sorry, I get so nervous. And I appreciate that we have the opportunity to make regulations on the large data centers and what they need to do to come into the county. As you've heard the concerns of everyone today, there are a lot of concerns. I think people would like to be involved in making those regulations and what those regulations would be. I know that sometimes those things can just be as they come in, the permit comes in, and then it's a regular public planning meeting. I think that moving towards maybe differentiating those types of data centers might be a part of that regulation and what those might need to meet. would be a good step and I think that the public should be involved in seeing what those regulations coming in would be because as you heard there are quite a few people who are educated on this and that would like to be involved in that and I would just love to hear how that works I don't know how any of that works I've never spoken here before I don't know any of these things And so as a person who just wants to understand how the process works, I'd love to hear how that happens. Thanks.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak? If not, next item.

Item six, administrative communications.

Commissioner Mayes?

Well, I'll just address how that process works. We have a planning commission that we've got people on there. They're typically experts in a field. We've got builders. We've got realtors. I mean, there's a lot of different types of folks on there in terms of occupation. Most of them are pretty well versed in the laws. We do, Joni and her department does a good amount of work with them to make sure they understand the process. I believe our solar regulations took over a year of public feedback. They had industry experts that came in and spoke with them about trends and things like that. And so they do the work to make sure that we get accurate information and you know a few comments were made earlier about how only people within a thousand feet would be notified and and while it's true that those people within a thousand feet are going to get a mailer i think any i mean you saw it today we didn't mail anything out on this meeting but yet we had a lot of people show up and so word travels pretty fast these days uh public feedback is something that you know we take seriously I feel like we're all of our meetings are open. Our budget hearings are all open to the public and notified out in the Metro News, which is the county newspaper, official newspaper. And so, I mean, we want public feedback. We had surveys that we sent out for wind energy, for solar energy when we did those. And I say those because those are probably the most recent big issues that have come before the Planning Commission. And so whether it's a dog food plant or a food manufacturing or a metal fabricating business or something, I mean, all of these things happen for all of those. And so I think public feedback is something that we'll be taking a lot of if that application is ever received from a data center. But if it doesn't come, then we won't need to have any of that. So I mean, I think it's just right now it's kind of a wait and see. And then once an application is received, which as Joni said, we presume will happen eventually, then we'll start that process. so i hope that answers your question um and then you know obviously it could take months um could take a year or who knows so sorry all right that's all i got commissioner cook i don't have anything to add thank you for letting me participate uh okay well thank you for calling in today um

I just wanted to add that next Monday, we're going to have Grace Med's annual report at our work session. So Dr. Julie Elder will be, she's the executive chief officer. She will be zooming in on the meeting. So that will be a little different. And that's all I have. So with that, we do not have a need for executive session. We do not. We do not. So we're adjourned.