City Council - Regular Meeting

can then rely on the water from the ASR system instead why is it beneficial to use the aquifer as a storage system versus an above-ground reservoir Well, first of all, an aquifer storage system has minimal evaporation, whereas an above-ground reservoir can have significant water loss due to evaporation. There's really limited land acquisition and environmental disruption when using an ASR system because you're using the natural underground geology for storage. Whereas with the reservoir, that can include significant land acquisition and environmental disruption because you're using large portions of surface land in order to create surface water storage. ASR helps. I lost my presentation. ASR helps Temple make better use of water it already has access to. It helps us capture water during lower demand periods store that water underground for later use. It reduces our reliance on surface water availability. It creates a drought and peak demand reserve and it supports future growth needs within our community. For Temple, the concept for ASR includes using both our existing surface water rights as well as using reclaimed water that has been treated to drinking water standards. Water will be treated before injection. Again, the ASR in Synergy Park is a strategic location because the the geology of the naturally occurring aquifer in that location is ideal for this project. We can phase improvements over time and we can use existing infrastructure, including the synergy well, as well as the reclaimed water infrastructure in that area to maximize the benefit to our community and minimize cost. The first part of that program, as I've already mentioned, was the Synergy Well. As part of an economic development agreement with Rowan, Rowan paid for the construction of that well on behalf of the city of Temple. So Rowan has already taken a significant role in helping the city to advance our goals around ASR. That agreement included the obligations for construction of the well, but it did not grant Rowan the ownership of the well or the water or the aquifer or the water rights. Those things, those items are controlled through utility services agreements with Rowan, but Rowan made the capital investment on behalf of the city to get that project started. Additionally, Rowan has made an additional commitment to the water resiliency and water programming in the city of Temple. There is a significant capital project that the city of Temple has in its master plan, which is called the South Temple Water Infrastructure Capital Program. It's a series of 10 projects that will bring significant additional water capacity to the south and southeast portions of our community. The total cost for this program is $71.1 million in upgrades and improvements to our water system, and Rowan has committed to fund 45% of the total infrastructure cost of that program. Rowan's water use is granted expressly by city agreements. They have committed to using water-efficient controlled closed-loop cooling. They do not, their participation in infrastructure helps support the city's long-term water planning, but it does not grant them unlimited access to city water, does not grant them the right to exceed their contractually obligated limits, does not give them ownership in the city's infrastructure, and does not allow them to discharge to the aquifer, their wastewater to the aquifer. For these projects specifically, as I mentioned, these projects will all use a closed-loop cooling system. That is Rowan's plan, and that is also contractually required. These closed-loop cooling systems will include a 1.5 million gallon initial charge that's per building. This charge will be phased and planned with the city so that it's done at a time that that works well into our water operations and doesn't affect pressure or fire control in the area. Once that initial fill is done, that water recirculates in their system for a period of at least 10 years. And so that initial charge lasts for many, many years with that one time 1.5 million gallons initial charge. And then going forward on a daily use, the utility services agreements will have specific limits for domestic water use. For each phase, there will be a separate utility services agreement that provides the commitment for the water use. The water use for the three phases in total, the average daily use is 32,000 gallons. The peak day, which is the contractual maximum, is 78.2,000 gallons. To give you some scale or perspective for how that compares to other use within the city, the total campus will use less than 1% of the total daily water used by current City of Temple customers. Each building will use less than one typical restaurant, and each building will use less than a 150 lot residential subdivision. In terms of enforcement, the contract has strong enforcement provisions. Water use is required to be monitored through remote meters, and physical or automated controls can limit use to the approved amounts. The company cannot pay a fee or penalty to use more water than is allowed. Rowan's commitment to help fund infrastructure for the city allows the city to use a portion of the funds in our tax increment financing reinvestment zone to help support our overall planning for fire stations within our community. Revenue associated with data centers will help us fund the relocation of our fire station number seven. The city of Temple has adopted a 2027 business plan that is a six year plan. It includes this multi year staffing plan that the city council and the fire department have been working towards. There are a total of 56 additional firefighter positions within that plan, and those firefighters are largely associated with additional new fire stations that are planned within the community, and both the capital and operating side are supported by data center development within the community. Rowan has also made a commitment to help fund the Sammons Community Center. If the bond is approved by voters in November, Rowan has committed to $3 million towards the $15 million project cost. This will lower the tax rate impact of the bond issue. As we look in the phased-in revenue projections, During, at build out of the campus, during the abatement period, the Rowan's is projected, Rowan's project is projected to bring in at least $42 million per year to the city of Temple, $42 million annually to the city of Temple during the abatement period, which then phases into $56 million per year after the abatement period. That is in addition to the over $38 million in infrastructure and other project contributions that they have committed to, as well as the additional revenue to other taxing entities that also are covered by these projects, including Temple ISD, Rogers ISD, Bell County, and Temple College, among others. Additionally, the part of Rowan's original phase one area was located in an area that the city of Temple had identified as the only viable landfill expansion site for our community. Rowan had this property under contract and was prepared to buy it for a data center location. They were they agreed to work with the city and allowed the city to take over the purchase of that property from the private property owner. So the city of Temple purchased that property instead, which will be used for landfill expansion. This expansion will provide up to 50 years of additional landfill capacity for the city of Temple's program. So the city council has also included significant local protections in these development proposals. I do want to begin with a little bit of framing of what authority local communities have in development projects like these. The city of Temple, of course, is a political subdivision of the state of Texas, so we must operate within the authority provided by the Constitution and state law. State law authorizes home rule cities like Temple to operate under a city charter, which is approved by the voters of the city. City councils are elected to make decisions within the authority provided by the charter and state law, and our city council members in Temple are volunteer positions and receive no salary. One of the action items that you'll consider tonight is a voluntary annexation proposal for the Part B of Rowan's first phase. To talk a little bit about what annexation is, annexation brings property that is outside the city into the city limits. Once that occurs, the property then becomes subject to city taxes. zoning and development standards. In almost all cases in Texas, annexation has to be voluntary and at the request of the property owner. And Rowan is voluntarily annexing into the city of Temple and asking to be subject to the city of Temple zoning and development standards, as well as pay taxes to our community. Once a property is annexed, it comes in as a default land use category of agricultural, but that's just a holding category because outside the city limits, zoning doesn't exist. The state does not give counties the authority to zone, so there's no zoning classifications for land that's in the county. So land that comes into the city first comes in as agricultural zoning, and then the city council must take action to determine what's the appropriate zoning classification for that property. Zoning divides land into districts, and it regulates how property can be used. Zoning standards include setbacks, height, parking, landscaping, noise abatement, and traffic considerations. Zonings require public notices and hearings under state law. You can see there on the screen that state law sets out how notice requirements are done. They are required to be mailed to property owners within 200 feet of the boundary of the subject property. A newspaper notice is required, and then a public meeting agenda posting is also required. Cases are heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission before coming to the City Council. And annexation and zoning both require public hearings and two readings by city council. So the annexation and zoning for a portion of Rowan's projects are both on your agenda tonight for first reading. As a reminder, in Texas, we enjoy private property rights. All of the property that is subject to action tonight by Rowan is private property. It does not belong to the city. It is under ownership or control of the developer. The local government cities and counties cannot force a landowner to keep land in agricultural use or prevent lawful development But cities can regulate the impacts of that development through zoning development review noise standards traffic control drainage building code standards and utility agreements and important to note, as I've said, but I'll say it again, when property is outside the city, state law does not give the county those same development tools. So the county does not have zoning authority and does not have the authority to regulate those much of those other areas there that come with the development and zoning review. So again, without annexation, there's limited local regulations. Counties don't have that authority, so development can proceed by right if it meets the limited authority that they do have. Outside the city limits, city zoning and building permits and development standards do not apply. So annexation gives the city oversight, it gives the local community protections that can be enforced, and it provides, as we've already discussed, significant local revenue that supports the city services, including police, fire, streets, libraries, parks, and other important services that are provided by the city. Cities can generally, and Texas can use zoning authority, but it does have its limits. Cities can limit uses to specific zoning districts. So for example, can require industrial uses to be located in industrial park areas. We can apply development and operational standards. We can use planned developments and overlay districts. local regulation examples include setback requirements buffering or landscaping noise mitigation lighting controls traffic impact studies infrastructure requirements and water use limitations but a city cannot prohibit a lawful land use citywide and it cannot apply arbitrary or discriminatory standards or use regulations that are so restrictive that they function as a de facto ban So what have you done? Here in Temple you have introduced the following protections for data center developments. These data center developments specifically through planned development conditions for Rowan. And tonight you will hear a request from city staff to consider amending the unified development code to incorporate those same protections that already exist through the planned development conditions into the general base standards for light industrial and heavy industrial use for future potential regulation of data centers for land that is already appropriately zoned. Noise protections include requiring the projects to meet certain city decibel limits and nuisance standards. It requires the companies to both build and operate the facilities. to minimize noise nuisance to the greatest extent possible. It requires a noise mitigation plan be prepared by an acoustical engineer before building permit and that before occupancy of the facility that testing reoccurs and confirms that the company is in compliance with that plan. the city can require fixes, issue citations, and take further action if the property remains out of compliance. related to traffic and road impacts. Transportation improvements are developer funded. The developer must submit a traffic study and a full traffic impact analysis if required by the traffic study before platting. And that study covers construction, operations, access, and nearby road impacts. The developer must pay for improvements. If impacts or deficiencies are found in that study, the developer must fund or build those necessary transportation improvements and the buildings cannot receive certificates of occupancies until all of the required improvements are completed or financially guaranteed to the city's satisfaction. Environmental requirements include that the projects must comply with all city, state, and federal environmental standards. They must submit stormwater and erosion control plans before construction, address spills, waste, dust, drainage, and site cleanup, complete post-construction stormwater requirements before occupancy, and the city can require additional information or third-party review from experts when needed. So again, just in summary, the city of Temple has, through your actions at the city council, has worked to ensure responsible development through negotiating voluntary annexations that then bring these properties subject to zoning and development standards and provide long term local revenue for city services for many years to come. One question that I know you've been asked from time to time is why haven't data centers been put to a general vote of the public? That is not allowed by Texas law. Texas law does not give cities the ability to send a zoning case to public referendum or public vote. you have to follow the process that set out in state law for zoning decisions. And so data center zoning cases cannot be put to a vote of the community. So of course, all of these protections that we've talked about regarding annexation and zoning development standards and permitting, utility agreements traffic studies and associated required improvements noise standards and enforcement and other local ordinances and agreement provisions are part of the authority that the state has given the city and that we have enforced that is part of the local review that we have been participating in over the last year and that you continue with actions tonight This does not take the place of the part of review and part of data center project review that happens at the state level. The state level has authority for the electric grid. So ERCOT, the Public Utilities Commission, also has a standard set for review. You may have heard of some additional guidance that the governor has issued recently for additional audits and studies that are required by large load users like data centers. before connecting to the state grid so that's in addition to the local requirements that the city has this is not in conflict with we have responsibility for certain areas the state has responsibilities for certain areas and those two standards work together to maximize protection for the local community So as a summary of approval actions, as I mentioned, these projects have been proposed and going through the various public approval process for a year now. The first public action occurred in September of last year, where the first voluntary annexation for phase 1A took place. again that was the phase that originally included the landfill property where we asked the developer to let us buy that instead and and seek replacement property for being able to complete that full first phase so that is the portion of the action that is on your agenda tonight is the annexation and zoning for that that part two of phase one or part B of phase one that addresses the replacement property. You also have the planned development zoning for that on tonight's agenda. And then you have the amendment or the redesignation of the tax abatement reinvestment zone for phase one to include the area associated with the phase one B, the establishment of a tax abatement reinvestment zone for phase three. And then and September 17th, there'll be The second readings for all of those items, as well as readings for and votes on the amendment to the tax abatement agreement, the development agreement for the phase 1B project, the infrastructure agreement, and then the utility services agreements for each phase of the project. That is all I have prepared. Again, I just wanted to provide you an overview of the projects and the action items that you have on your plate tonight, and I will be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, ma'am. Counsel, anything for Ms. Myers? Okay, very good. Next item on the agenda is public comments. Citizens who desire to address the council in any matter may do so as long as you signed up prior to this meeting. As always, no discussion or final action will be taken by the city council. Also, please limit your comments to no more than three minutes. We have a number of speakers tonight, so I'm gonna be pretty strict around the three minutes. I've got the bell up here at about 25 seconds, maybe 15 seconds, I'll ring that. uh for those public commenters so you'll uh you'll know that your time is about up and we will kick it off tonight with uh pat jeter are you speaking you're up um on deck we have sarah royer if you'll go ahead and go to the you're up okay right there

How are y'all doing? I'm Pat Jeter. I just wondered why, you know, you said that we had no right to vote, anything. Why this is all just crammed down everybody's throat, you know? The traffic where I live on pit three is ridiculous. The trucks are running through downtown as fast as they can run. You know, there's just a lot of things going on that I don't understand. And to just say, well, you know, We didn't have nothing to do with it. They can come in here if they want to. I don't understand. Who is rowing? That's all I got. I just have a lot of problems with what I live at on 53. I've seen some near fatal crashes because of truck traffic and the way they're running out there and I've already called Chief Brown, and I've talked to him about it, and it's ridiculous out there. Is there any answers?

Well, it's not, this is, as I stated earlier, it's not something we can discuss in open forum, but I will tell you... This hasn't been crammed down anybody's throat. Ms. Myers went over the timeline, and this started over a year ago.

So this isn't crammed down. I mean, I've been seeing it going on out there for the last few months. and uh i mean it's just hard as you can run 80 90 miles an hour up and down 53 we have no left turn lane to get to our house i've had some near missed crashes right up coming right up to my pickup you know it's they're running as hard as they can run and i know they're probably getting paid by the load but you know you've already lost one life out there on 36 i know of And, you know, I'm just wondering, this is really a hurried, push it down their throat deal, kind of like the insurance we went through a few years ago.

Those trucks, believe it or not, are not part of the rowing development. Those trucks are going out into Milam County to another development.

Well, I understand that.

Also, it doesn't have anything to do with this one. Thank you. Sarah Royer, and then Joe Royer, you're on deck.

This has been going on, hi, good evening, Mayor, members of City Council, I'm Sarah Royer. I'm standing here tonight to confront a complete breakdown of fiscal sanity and ethical leadership in Temple. And this has been going on a lot longer than a year. In fiscal year 2019, our city's total debt was 321 million. Today, under your watch, the number has exploded to 818 million, a staggering 154,000% increase in six years. It's crazy. Temple certificates of obligation debt per capita sits at $4,075 per every citizen. That's 3.7 times higher than any peer group median. You have saddled this town with more debt than our children will be able to pay off in a generation, and no amount of revenue promised from data centers in 2031 is going to bail us out of the hole you dug today. This isn't just bad math, it is deliberate. Look at the culture you have built and the people you brought in to manage our money and municipal oversight. When leadership relies on individuals with histories of personal bankruptcies, and past ethical baggage from neighboring cities, it sends a clear message that competence and integrity are secondary to loyalty and compliance. You treat this administration like an exclusive clique, a group of insiders handing out massive contracts, subsidizing developer friends, and insulating corporate giants with tax breaks. You gave away the tax base. You granted Rowan a 50% tax abatement and Mehta a 75% tax abatement, ensuring our largest income industrial taxpayers pay a fraction of their share while we have to service the $818 million debt for their infrastructure. And you're masking these losses. Siphoning $18 million out of TERS funds to cover that municipal service cost isn't a strategy. It's a shell game to hide the fact that this growth is bleeding the general fund dry. Being part of this insider group isn't something to brag about, y'all. It's something to be ashamed of. You have run this town on empty promises, backroom deals, and unchecked borrowing to enrich a network of cronies and developers. Growth is supposed to pay for growth. Instead, you've turned this city treasury into a private checkbook, and we demand an immediate independent audit of every contract, abatement, and debt instrument before you raise taxes on people.

Mr. Royer, you're up. CJ, you're on deck.

Hello, I'm Joe Royer. I live in District 2. There's just, I mean, so much. It's so much. like where to even begin. We saw this presentation from Ms. Myers today and there's a lot of interesting highlights that keep coming up. The ASR well again, when we first uncovered the ASR well, we saw the city council and we saw Rowan go into full on panic mode. trying to get private meetings with people for months now, and all of a sudden people want to talk to us and say, oh, no, no, no, ASR is not a big deal. Like, this is a serious, dangerous proposition. This is the sort of thing the Texas Water Development Board considers a last resort. TWDB is saying we should be expanding Lake Belton before we even consider a dangerous project like an ASR well. There are so many ways this can go wrong. There are so many ways this can accidentally contaminate the aquifer. And given the panic reaction that we saw, I have to ask, is our aquifer already contaminated? Is that why everyone's freaking out when we said the words ASR? And I know I'm not going to get an answer on this. You talked again about how Rowan paid for the city well, but didn't we reimburse them? And we reimbursed them more than they paid. So basically they gave us a high-interest loan for the well.

No, that's not what happened.

Also, I can't help noticing that 32 divided by 6 is not 4. We've been told time and time again that Rowan's limited to 4,000 gallons a day, and now we're hearing that 6 buildings is capped at 32,000 gallons. That math doesn't add up. And again, we bring up the landfill extortion. The Temple Daily Telegram published the actual documents on the landfill deal. Rowan was under contract to buy that land at higher than market value. And they agreed to sell the city the contract, not the land. They agreed to sell us the obligation to buy this land at an above market price, but only on the stipulation that we guarantee them a development agreement for phase one and phase two. This is published in the newspaper. That is extortion, plain and simple. And yet we keep bragging about it, how we're victims of extortion and how this is a great thing and Rowan's helping us out. And then I believe on the next city council meetings coming up in a couple of weeks, we're going to look at given Rowan, the ability to convert their diesel generators into a diesel power plant, something this city council does not even have the authority to do that has to go through the EPA and the EPA has never approved an industrial or a, a utility scale power plant running on diesel because the fumes of that would be lethal to anyone with respiratory issues within three miles. I mean, that's basically consenting to conspiracy to commit murder. But we'll talk about that next time.

Mr. Is it Zier? Z-E-E-R? You're on deck. CJ?

All right. That was a great Rowan commercial we heard earlier, but let me clear away a myth that's doing real damage in council chambers across the state. That myth is that the city is powerless here. Our county probably is. Texas counties are a creature of statute with no general police power and no zoning authority. Hill County passed a one-year data center moratorium in May. A developer sued in federal court for $100 million. Three weeks later, they rescinded it. One of them said, unfortunately, we tried. But the city is a different animal. Home rule cities have broad police power and full zoning authority under Chapter 211. San Marcos proved it in June when it defined data centers in its code and made them ineligible in every district and town. That ordinance is still on the books right now. So the question is not whether you have authority. You do. The question is how do you use it in a way that survives a well-funded plaintiff? The answer is this. Regulate the impact, not the industry. You zone by threshold, not by name. Do not write data center into the operative standard. Write connected electrical load above a stated megawatt figure. on-site standby generation above a stated capacity daily water demand above a stated volume that catches a chip fab a crypto operation a hyperscale campus alike and the neutrality is your defense then make the use conditional rather than by right so every project comes with a hearing and written findings fix the noise ordinance this is the sharpest tool we have in our box as a city and almost nobody uses it these facilities do not make loud noise they make low frequency noise constantly forever. A campus can pass a standard A-weighted ordinance at the property line while making the nearest bedroom unlivable at 2 in the morning. Add C-weighted limits, octave band limits, a tonal penalty, a stricter nighttime standard, measurement at the receiving property line, and independent acoustic modeling at the applicant's expense. Remember, you're also a utility. You are under no obligation uh you're under no general obligation to extend water capacity to a new industrial user just because it bought land inside your limits require a water availability termination before platting you didn't do that already require closed we've already done that and then finally stop paying them to come here chapter 380 and 312 agreements are entirely discretionary by this city council declining to underwrite a project is the fastest lawful break you have to these Your ordinance is only as good as your minutes, so build a record about water and noise, not about keeping people out, and these are private landowners with real property rights, so obviously we've got to make sure that we do follow the legal limits, but there are ways to do that, and there are ways to do that legally and do what the people want you to do.

Thank you. Zier? Is that right? I don't know. Is the air downstairs? OK. If so, let me know and I'll bring him back up. Emmanuel Perez? Check on Emmanuel Perez while you're down there, please. Whitney Theriault?

Emmanuel Perez is here, sir.

OK. Right up here, sir.

Okay, do any of the esteemed council members reside in the area of impact to these proposed data centers? Will you be subject to the same heat islands we will, the same disruptions in water quality and availability that we'll, the same sound frequencies that will affect animals and our pets and livestocks? And who will bear the responsibility for these impacts on infrastructure? We do not consent to this. We are very limited in scope in what we can say or do based on the laws and limitations you cited. Same goes with the issue of flock cameras that are popping up everywhere. And also inherently linked to this issue because where do we store this surveillance data? Data centers. And do we know what these data centers are gonna be used for? Has that been fully stated, fully contracted? Or are we just waiting to see what happens? You also mentioned erosion plans. Do these include using native grasses, trees, and shrubs that root deeper into our black clay soil to help reduce erosion? You pray to bless this land and act with integrity, allowing data centers and flock hammers to plague our city, spit in the face of that request you made of the Abrahamic God. Thank you.

Thank you. Is Zier here?

Zier?

I don't know. You stepped in. I thought maybe that was you.

No, I saw him. I came by to present Temple's champion, whose name is Zier. Hi, my name is Roscoe Marquez. This is Zaheer Darks. So I'm here to present Temple's sixth time junior Olympic champion. And as many of you don't know, even though the Royers and I have also pitched in to help send him off to Iowa, to go to the Junior Olympics. It was local 529, Plumbers and Pipefitters Union, that dropped $1,800 to make sure that he went out there and won two-time champion at the, was it national champion? At the Junior Olympics in Iowa just recently in August.

What events? What events?

The 100, 200, and the 400. Go ahead.

Tell them more, mijo. So you're fat.

You can hear all that hardware.

I got first in the 100, first in the 200, and fourth in the 400. Way to go.

So one thing that I would like to say up here is that this is a kid who's got very unique abilities, and this is, in fact, one of Temple's champions. and it would be very wonderful if the entire city could get behind him and continue to push to make sure that he continues to win, or he'll make sure he continues to win, but he's gotta get to those events. Sponsorships are important to get there, and if the city can help out in any way, shape, or form, businesses, anybody, even as individuals, Let's stand behind our champion.

I know we're a little over time. Hold on, Zier. I know we're a little over time, but this is a fun one. So let's do it. So this is all in track. Yes, sir. How old are you?

I'm 12.

What everyone here wants to know is how fast are you with a football under your arm? Or can you catch it? We love track, but we also love football. So congratulations. We're proud of you.

Thank you. Tell them how fast you are on the 100. I run 11 seconds in the 100, 24 seconds in the 200, and 54 seconds in the 400. Now you're bragging. Yeah.

And just to be clear, that's only a few seconds away from Usain Bolt's world champion.

Nice.

Go get them. Congratulations.

Way to go. Thank you.

Ms. Theriault. And then Eve, you're on deck.

Whitney, how fast is your 100?

I mean, I did run a sub-four marathon, but that was when I was 23. I will take it. 100 what? 80 pounds heavier now. Anyway, well, good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Whitney Theriault. I am a resident of Temple. I also have the privilege of being the President of the Temple Chamber of Commerce. I have worked in the chamber industry for nearly a dozen years, and much of what we do is centered around telling the story of our community. We have somewhat a notorious retired tagline that touts Temple as a place to live, work, and play. Many of you have heard that. And we celebrate our successes as a community. We champion the people, we champion the businesses that make our community special. And I believe in those things very deeply. Over the past several months, I have found myself thinking less about what makes a community great when things are going well and more about what makes a community strong when things are hard. At times, what has transpired over the past few months has been difficult to wrestle with. Not because there is disagreement. Disagreement is not failure. It's part of the healthy process and the beauty of living in a free society. People should ask hard questions. They really should. They should advocate for what they believe. Leaders should listen. They should weigh competing priorities. But they have to ultimately make decisions. There's another responsibility, but that belongs to all of us. And it's how we treat one another while we do it. I've come to believe that one of the true measures of a strong community isn't whether we can avoid difficult disagreements, it's whether we can move through them without diminishing one another's dignity. Tonight may be another test of that. Some will leave pleased with decisions made, others will leave disappointed, it's inevitable. Being heard doesn't always mean getting the outcome we hoped for. And disagreement with a decision doesn't mean the process failed. Because after the meeting ends, the votes are taken, and the decisions are made, we still have to live here together We run businesses. We raise families. Our children go to school together. We worship, volunteer, shop, and stand beside one another in grocery lines. Temple is a remarkable community, and it didn't become that way by accident. It was built by generations of people who chose to invest, serve, lead, and show up just like you guys do. How we choose to show up now, particularly when it's difficult, will help us determine what kind of community we leave to those who come next. I hope we choose to be that kind of community. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Theriault. Ms. Frazier, you're on deck. You're next.

Good evening, Temple City Council. My name is Eve Raine. I said to someone earlier today that I'm smart about what I'm smart about, and I'm not smart about what I'm not smart about. And this hyperscale issue and its complexities is kind of outside my reign of understanding. But what I have grasped, I have a passion about, and my thoughts are just a layman's thoughts. So forgive me where I can be proven wrong or inaccurate or inapplicable. The Holy Spirit dropped a thought into my mind several months ago. I was reading a friend's post expressing opposition to what I call these gargantuan, water-sucking, power-draining, environment-destroying, peace-stealing giants in our land. namely hyperscale and colocation data centers. I heard his small voice, his still small voice. This is a David versus Goliath battle. All you need, Eve, is a slingshot and five smooth stones. From 1 Samuel 1740, then he took his staff in his hand and He chose five smooth stones from the stream, put them in the pouch of his shepherd's bag, and with his sling in his hand approached the Philistine giant. My takeaways, pray, pick up five smooth stones, and for this evening's purpose, five tiny little marbles. Go with God, face the giant, take aim, let go, and let God. The slingshot, my voice. The five smooth stones, my five points. Stone number one, withhold. You have the power to approve or deny lucrative tax abatement agreements. Withholding these financial breaks from developers might make building these mega-scale data centers economically unviable. Stone number two, pause. You could vote to pass at least a temporary one year freeze on the construction of any more new hyperscale centers or related industrial zoning to allow yourselves and residents more time to study the infrastructure impact before granting any further permits. Stone number three, stop. Temple City Council, you could, you can find legal, albeit creative, ways to limit or halt any more hyperscale and co-location data centers in our city. Stone number four, establish. You could establish environmental safeguards. You could issue regulations for both the construction phases and operational tenure of hyperscalers. For example, you could ban the use of high volume open loop evaporative cooling systems And you can impose and enforce restrictions on the highly touted closed-looped evaporative cooling systems that require use of harmful chemicals for periodic draining, a process that Cannon indeed already has injected toxins into soil and land. Just ask Louisiana, Georgia, Oregon, and Wyoming. The lawsuits are on file.

Ms. Rang, you've got about 15 more seconds.

Stone five in force. You can enforce strict decibel limits so that, and also the dark sky lighting ordinances so that developers will build farther away from ranch houses, farm houses, our land, our livestock, our pets. You could, will you? Here's a David aiming five stones at a Goliath, praying that one or more of these five stones found its mark. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Margie, you're up. And then Mr. Martinez.

Hard to follow good speakers. Margie Frazier, Temple, Texas. I wanted to ask one thing. What are the city decibel limits on the data centers and the nuisance standards? And I'm going to read a reminder from Governor Abbott on his announcements on data centers. will comply with the standards and guidelines he established for data centers. He established clear guard rails to ensure data centers protect our electric grid, conserve our water, respect our neighborhoods, and pay their own way. They must not pass costs onto Texas family families interfere with their quality of life. So with tax abatements, they're passing it on to the Texas families here. So how does that data center build from Rowan all the way up to a new subdivision? I mean, if you go drive over there, it's all the way up to the new subdivision, changing that neighborhood's quality of life. It seems to me like somebody's not listening. He directed the Public Utilities Commission of Texas, PUCT, and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, ERCOT, to ensure data centers pay for their electric infrastructures instead of shifting costs onto Texas families and small business. reuse their own water, reduce the cost of electricity for Texans, do not disrupt residential neighborhoods to preserve Texas' quality of life, pay their own way, eliminate reliance on outdated taxpayer-funded incentives, no tax abatements, and pay for their destruction of the neighborhoods, water loss, et cetera. In addition, the PUCT and ERCOT will determine each data center project and how they will pay. So they're supposed to be taking care of this. They're supposed to pay their own way by disclosing all taxpayer-funded incentives, grants, abatements, and other public financial assistance tied to the project. provide their own power by detailing projected electricity demand and plans for onsite generation or other measures to reduce reliance on the ERCOT grid, protect Texas water resources by identifying the water resources, projected water use, water reuse procedures and water efficient cooling technologies, technologies outline measures to reduce impacts on neighboring property owners and communities that includes noise mitigation which i'm not seeing light control setbacks traffic improvements emergency response coordination and other community protect measures and i can tell you the other day when i was on that highway i was coming back i just come past that data center and I was going down that highway and I look in my rear view mirror and if I didn't have a piece of property to get off onto on the side of the road that vehicle behind me was gonna whack me good and I tell you what I'd have learned evasive maneuver and I got out of his way he flashed by stepping on his brakes at the same time I don't know if he was out to get me or what

Margie, your time's up.

I know it is.

Well, then you need to step aside for Mr. Martinez.

P-U-C-T said they are not aware of receiving any of your information. So they'd like to know where it is.

Mr. Martinez, you're up. And then John Hammond.

Does this stuff belong to somebody up here?

I have a quick question. From what I understood is that and I think we might still be in that three minute general comment time, right? Your time's running right now. What I mean is it's not on the hearing, right? That's separate. Correct. Correct. Yes, correct. Okay.

You're in the three minute zone right now.

Yeah, okay. Anyway, one thing that I noticed, and I think everybody here might have noticed, is that when she called for questions about that long presentation and all the details, You were like bumps in a log. Not a single question from you about it or anything else. I want to point out, though, real quickly, that last meeting, and that's why I was asking as to what this was about in terms of general points. At the last meeting, you violated the Open Meetings Act by deleting me and another individual in the video. You pretend that the Pledge of Allegiance is important while you deleted that to spite me. I had been discussing examples of sexist and racist approaches by the mayor. Just three years ago, by the way, practically all the department heads were white. Your erroneous point that you made at that time was that they were all qualified. It lies what qualifications amount to, which mainly has to do with most getting their jobs from who they know, not what they know. And that is why that in the cities, commissions, and boards, the folks that are selected, and many of you might not know this, they are selected without much so-called qualifications. Hence, all are white, practically, for the most part. Boards and commissions here in Temple, keep that in mind. Thank you.

CHRIS RODGERS. Thank you, sir. John Hammond? And then after Mr. Hammond will be, is it Christopher Bosch? Bost? Christopher?

Is Christopher here? Okay. Good evening City Council leadership and Temple residents. I am John Hammond. I am working on the Rowan Form 5 project as a senior MEP superintendent with Suffolk Construction. I live here in Temple and have for the last four years. I've been a Bell County resident for nearly 10 years. I've been married for 32 years and have three daughters and three grandkids, all living here in Bell County. My youngest daughter just graduated from Blake Belton High School this past May, and she's worked for the city of Temple for the last two or three years as a lifeguard. I'll tell you straight. I'm a blue collar guy and have worked hard for everything I have just like all of you do. And with that, I'll share even a little more honesty with you. I've never once attended these city council meetings. I won't make excuses, I'm gone a lot. I've worked out on the road. I shy away from politics and I'm fairly plain spoken. To give an example of how my life has went, in the last 32 years I've been married, And when you add it up, I've been gone 20 years of that, working, building America. I joined Suffolk Construction 14 months ago, and my first assignment was handling a very large project in Iowa. I don't watch the news very much, but fast forward to this year, I learned of Rowan and their investment in our community. I didn't think much of it at the time, but I knew this project means more growth for our community. A few months later, this past spring, I learned of the pure coincidence that the Boston-based company that I keep in Suffolk Construction is involved here as a partner to Rowan and Temple, and in that, I'm very proud to call Temple my hometown, and I know a great match was made. I kept quiet about it, not even telling my wife the potential chance of me working here at home. Because I'm a little superstitious that way. Didn't want to jinx it. Anyway, eventually my oldest daughter saw the Suffolk construction sign on the 363 loop this past May as she worked at the Moore company across the road at the time. She told me about the sign and of course I began seeing some dispirited commentary about data centers and various media feeds here locally. I understand there are many questions raised, and I do believe Rowan has done a great job in their absolute best to not only answer them, but more importantly, be a great neighbor and partner to the community we call home. Even at this early stage, this is one of the cleanest projects I've ever been on, and I know the team will keep it that way, as perception is reality. Rowan's day-to-day actions with the community thus far, and I've personally seen speak louder than words from the community catalyst program, all the volunteer work, the assistance to East Bell Youth Boosters, helping the 4-H and FFA, the Temple Rotary Club, being a sponsor at the Boots and Bandanas Fundraiser, Ronald McDonald House, and others.

Mr. Hammond, I've rung the bell. You're three, over here, up here. I've rung the bell. Okay. Am I done? I don't think you are. I don't think you're through your script. I'm not. Thank you. I'm out of time. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Thank you for your time. Belinda Lara. What about Christopher? I called Christopher earlier. He's here. Oh, okay.

All right.

Good evening.

No, no, you're fine. He's arranging something.

You're up. Good evening, Mayor, Council Members. Good to see you again.

You bet. Okay.

My name's Belinda Lara and I'm here in District 2. I thought I knew what I was gonna say and I'm gonna change it a little bit because of the new information. But basically, technology is a valuable tool but with great power comes great responsibility. City of Temple must recognize operational limits to wholesale data center developments before they severely destroy our city. Everything has already shifted with Greg Abbott's new directives. It's pivoting in the right direction, but we still need to do more. We need to address the pollution from water, air, light, and noise. I was told by you, Mayor, to pass by the Meta Data Center. So I did see the lights are a problem. So that's as much as I was able to see. But they do need to work on that. Local and state regulations must align. Rowan Digital Infrastructure currently does not have a tenant. Do they have a tenant or not? So they cannot provide accurate figures of the water consumption or electricity. I would like community involvement in writing the UDC codes. We talk about and we list everything, but we're not going into detail in addressing the remedies for this. I would like dynamic state alignment with water code compliance, anti-grandfathering, occupants must waive all vested rights under Chapter 245, mandatory emergency grid and water containment if there is an emergency who is the first to be shut down it should be the data centers they're using with the well is that gifted back to the city how are we going to know if it's not contaminated that that's a dangerous thing to have water pollution rules on all projects Local families and small businesses must be the first to have, sorry, I'm going in repeat. Tenant disclosure and closed-loop transparency. Final occupancy and utility connection permits must be legally withheld when an actual tenant is signed. Tenant must return to council to publicly disclose audited blueprints specifying exactly how the closed-loop system is flushed, what chemical contaminants are present in the wastewater, how are they gonna discharge it. light air pollution and noise mitigation. The structural humps, the low frequency, you need to mandate for them to construct a floating concrete slab isolated from the local bedrock for heavy duty steel springs or elastomeric pads. Emergency backup generators must be equipped with tier final emission scrubbers. Ecosystem preservation and canopy requirements. They should have big trees, mature trees to mitigate the heat island effect.

Ms. Lara, did you hear the bell?

Yes. Can I say one more last thing, please? Next generation chip incentives root cause hardware solution. We're focusing on the things. Rather, they need to come up with a better chip so we won't even have to have these discussions. We need to push them to update their hardware silicone.

Thank you. Mr., is it Bosch, Bost?

Oh, it's Bost.

B-O-S-T. Got it.

Like Boston without the O-N. Got it.

Said that for years.

I've heard it many, pronounced many different ways, and none of them are interesting.

Becky Garth. Becky Garth, you're on deck. Chris, do you see the equipment there? Yeah, yes, ma'am. You were at the last meeting. Yes, sir. And we didn't let you speak. Yes, sir. Glad you're here. Thank you.

I hope you have the seat belts buckled up because I've got one or two things to say.

Well, do it in three minutes.

Oh, I'll try. It may be a little intense. So I have some follow-up comments from the special city council meeting, I believe last week, August 27th. And during that meeting, The proposed agreed order from TCQ, the 2026 agreed order was discussed for settlement. I don't know if you know this, but I'm actually ex-TCQ. I've worked there for almost 14 years. and worked in different capacities, including a wastewater inspector, also wastewater enforcement, water quality enforcement, and also worked with our criminal department several times over. So at least to say that made me start asking some questions and digging deeper. So one thing in my research that I found is the city has an old agreed order from 2022, I can give the docket number if needed, but Essentially, the agreed order was against the city of Temple and Belton's wastewater treatment plant. And the agreed order has several similar, it was actually the same violations, effluent violations, from those in the proposed 126 agreed order reviewed during the previous meeting. This establishes a pattern of chronic noncompliance with the issued TCQ wastewater permit. Once I found that order, I did some additional digging, including into the City of Temple's Doshier Farms wastewater treatment plant. During my research, I found the following non-compliances between January 2022 and June 2026 from the EPA's ECHO database, which is publicly available. There were approximately 31 evident violations between January 2022 and June 2026 that were reported. There were too many violations to summarize, so I just picked out the more heinous of the group. The first one is from January of 2022. It was a pneumonia nitrogen daily average concentration violation that was 85% over the limit. In February 22, another ammonia daily average concentration exceedance occurred, which was 146% over. In March 22, another ammonia daily average concentration exceedance occurred, which was 171% over. In October of 25, a TSS daily max concentration exceedance occurred, which was 235% over the limit. Also in October of 25, there was an ammonium daily average concentration exceedance, which is 199% over in November of 25. There's another ammonia exceedance, which was 124% over. Um, I also saw that there was still a flow violation in June of 2026. So the plan is back out of compliance. Um, Mr. Boss over here.

Okay. Wrap it up, please.

Okay. All right. So on top of that, I'm going to go a little faster.

Mr. Foster, you're out of time. At some point, there is a possibility to do what's called a public appearance, which that would be probably a more appropriate time for you to present this information. Same format, still right to the public, but it gives you a little bit more time, a little more leeway. You're able to get your information in. to be able to present. I think that might be a more useful time for you to present the information that you want to.

Okay. Okie doke. Okay. All right. I will say, though, real quick, though, that for the Doshier Farms Waste Water Treatment Plant, between January of 22 and June of 26, there are 23 effluent violations. Okay.

Thank you. You bet. Next up, Ms. Garth. which those are some examples. There you are. Go ahead and come forward. And then Carly Bird will be next. Thank you.

I hope you all can see me. It's a little, I need a step stool, I think. I'm looking out here at this wonderful audience and thank you for doing this. How many of you guys are working on the construction projects that are going to be involved? Okay. We appreciate you being here and spending your money. Thank you. and your time. I'm a little concerned. I've lived here all my life. My name is Becky Garth. I've been here from the time that Lake Belton was built. I remember that drought. I remembered several other severe droughts. So I'm concerned about the water usage. I want to make sure that my children and grandchildren, and now my new grandson, will have clean water to drink. That's a real concern. And I have done enough research of what's happened at other data centers that there has been major issues to the public water system. I'm worried. I'm assuming from my research that glycol is used to cool these systems. I'm concerned about any kind of leakage. Pipes don't last forever. What the mitigation is going to be for those kinds of, I mean, that's super poisonous to everything. So, you know, I'm just a normal citizen, and I'm worried about the water. I'm worried about the electricity. I'm worried about our bills, which have gone up already with all the... water infrastructure that's going on in temple um my last bill was over 200 for water and i watered twice so uh up to 22 000 gallons after 6 700 gallons um that just seems impossible to believe and i can't imagine that a lot of our citizens are going to be able to afford that sort of bill Anyway, I just wanted to come and say, I hope that the city council, um, that the temple economic development council looks for industry that will provide not temporary jobs, but more permanent jobs for our city that, um, we'll be looking for things that are going to enhance more things rather than just the money that's being invested. It's easy to spend money, but it's hard to get money. We realize that, and we are in debt. So I just ask you all to be careful in your considerations. I'm not sure why we're being here to approve more rules for data centers, but maybe y'all can answer that. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Horacio Marquez, who was up here with the young man earlier, I don't know if ratio you're on deck. If you want to speak tonight. Yes, ma'am.

Hi, I'm Carly bird, uh, four separate items on tonight's agenda touch data center development. And I want to name the pattern before you vote on any of them individually. First, several amendments to the unified development code related to data centers. Second, a new chapter 38 water ordinance requiring utility service agreements for industrial and special utility projects. Third, voluntary annexation and zoning for Rowan's Phase 1B project lasso. Fourth, first reading of the redesignation of TARs 47 and the new designation of TARs 50 tied directly to the Rowan Temple Amendment. This council will vote on September 17. Individually, each of these looks procedural. Together, they are infrastructure for expanding Rowan's footprint in the city, moving in the same month on a compressed timeline with residents asked to absorb each piece separately so no one sees the whole picture at once. I have one separate question for tonight's TARS items. The amendment to Rowan's abatement agreement requires the company to connect a permanent grid service within three years of using temporary on-site power or lose that phase's abatement. But Rowan is now confirmed in ERCOT's batch zero interconnection queue, and ERCOT's own framework does not guarantee full transmission capacity until year six of that process with binding allocations not even finalized until spring of next year. ERCOT itself is building bring your own generation options into its rules because it's Known large loads may need to self-supply power for years while the grid catches up. So before this council locks in TARS 4750 tonight, I'm asking, has anyone checked whether Temple's three-year clock is even physically achievable given ERCOT's own timeline? If Rowan can't get full grid capacity in three years because ERCOT hasn't built the transmission to deliver it, does this amendment penalize Rowan for a delay that isn't Rowan's fault, or does the city lose leverage it thinks it has? I'm also asking whether the new chapter 38 water ordinance and the UDC amendments were written with Rowan's existing projects in mind or whether they'll apply retroactively because if they don't, residents deserve to know that tonight's change has governed the next data center, not only already reshaping this city, These are first readings. That means there is still time to get the answers before final approval. I'm asking you to get them and to be transparent with citizens of Temple. I also want to bring up, there was a video, a City of Temple video in March where it was mentioned that we are years away from an ASR well. But then there was an agreement the year before with them. So I'm trying to understand that. I'm trying to understand why that was said when there was already an agreement in place. Also, Rowan and Encore, they invest in the Texas Economic Development Corporation. Just look into that. That's an interesting 501 that everybody should look into. So that's all.

Thank you. Mr. Marquez? And then the last person up, I can't, I'm having difficulty reading this name. Is it C-E-L-E-S Seles, maybe? I can't read the first or the last name. B-A-R, if you signed up to speak tonight and your name has not been called, you're on deck. Take it away.

Uh, hi, my name is Marquez. Um, and so about Rowan and what it has done for, uh, the community here is provided a lot of work for electricians, plumbers, pipe fitters, all different trades, safety, graduating engineers is, uh, allowed them an opportunity to, uh, hone in on their skills. Not only that, you still gotta worry about, there's safety. Safety is huge on those jobs, on all data center jobs. So that we still have a whole group of people that are trying to keep the working men and women of this community and every other community safe. They even have an incentive program to help pick up ways to prevent people from getting hurt on jobs. It has changed the lives of many apprentices and pre-apprentices that have never seen that kind of money, that are finally being able to set foot out of their family's home or their parents' home to go out on their own. This is what we should strive for. This is the kind of thing that Rowan does for, or I would say Rowan specific, but they subcontract for those trades to be able to learn how to do the things that we need for everybody else's homes, such as you still need plumbers, still need somebody to clean your, do your plumbing, your electricity goes out, who do you think you're calling? Somebody for temporary work, right? Your HVAC goes out, yeah, you're gonna be calling them up too at some point in time, okay? So yeah, Rowan, I believe that this job does bring a lot of work even if people think it's temporary. Even this building was temporary. A McDonald's that was built was temporary. Every building is temporary, but that is where we get our bread and butter is through temporary work constantly. But then again, we also got to think about the people that are leaving the skilled trades that are dying out or retiring. Who's going to fill in those shoes? Well, There's an opportunity for people in this community to get up off their butts and go to work. That's a good opportunity. That is what Rowan has provided here in Temple, is an opportunity. And if nobody's willing to step up and grab that opportunity, that is their fault that they missed out on. But there is a lot of good work here. And I do believe in this, and I do believe we need to move forward with passing it. That's what I have to say. Thank you, sir.

Okay, last call. There you are.

Hi there, y'all. My name is Caleb Birch. I am a resident of Temple, Texas, and I am 27 years old. So whenever it comes to this type of stuff, I don't get to come to these often because I'm so busy with work, but I had to come to this one. I saw it. I wanted to come out here. I wanted to make my voice heard.

Glad you're here.

Thank you. Thank you. I'm glad I'm here, too. Now, what I do for a living is I do digital marketing, and I work with AI all the time. And these data centers, they do great things for increasing our progress in technology, but we don't know enough about them yet. We really don't. We don't know the long-term effects. And what I'm scared about is although progress is great, progress should not come above people. And we do not have all the information yet. So what I would ask if any of you guys who are voting on this, think about the future.

Thank you. Thank you, sir. Okay. That was, um, lots of comments tonight. We appreciate all of them. Sometimes this can be a little frustrating to me up here. And I think sometimes I show my frustration and for that, I apologize, but Many of the things that were said simply were said because, I shouldn't say because, they were said out of a lack of understanding about the process. Glycol was mentioned. These systems do use glycol, but that water mixed with glycol ends up being trucked in and trucked out. So it's not connected to our wastewater system. So yes, they use them. Will it get in our wastewater system? Absolutely not. That infrastructure doesn't exist for there to even be an accidental discharge into our system. There's information, a couple of folks mentioned the ASR and a panic reaction, landfill extortion, et cetera. It was determined that the city of Temple, let's talk about landfill, the city of Temple, as Rowan was coming to town, had put a contract in on a piece of land, the city of Temple simultaneously was doing a landfill study and it realized that the city of Temple would run out of landfill space in 23 years now I've been on the council since 2013 we did a landfill study and an expansion about 2015 At that time in 2015, the expansion said that based upon the landfill, at the rate that it was being filled, that the landfill, that we had 50 years of life left in the landfill. And this was in 2015. Fast forward 11 years, and now we're down to 23 years of life left in the landfill. We're basically using up two years of capacity each year. so uh rowan was gracious enough to allow the city of temple to um to have the contract assigned to them and the city of temples purchased that land it wasn't extortion it wasn't based upon a promise it wasn't based upon anything i have looked at uh what it because if we don't expand our current landfill at that current site and we have to now put in a transfer station somewhere else, basically haul the trash out somewhere else, have it cubed up and haul it and drop it in somebody else's landfill, the cost of waste will go up 3x. So I don't think anybody wants to face that. The tax rate that we just adopted last week, will provide about $80 million worth of property tax to the city of Temple, which is about roughly a third of the budget. $80 million of property tax. Rowan alone will pay $40 million worth of property tax. At abatement, this is in the conversation, at abatement, it'll provide $56 million a year when the abatements have rolled off. So there's some concern, and by the way, Tracy, what's the City of Temple's financial rating? A double A. So there is some debt, but the debt is managed and it's managed well. This money will help us manage debt, but it will also allow us to do new infrastructure projects. Rowan is contributing outside of the $700 million per phase that they are contractually obligated to provide. They are also providing, Ms. Myers, 60, what's the overall community benefit and the infrastructure? another $38 million on top of the $700 million. So it's interesting to me how there are conversations and complaints about the tax rate being too high, about you being in debt, about all of these things that we normally complain about, and then you turn, we, some people, turn around and complain about an opportunity to knock a home run when it comes to fortifying our tax base. It's just interesting how we manufacture complaints around things that we just simply don't like. It was mentioned earlier that after the presentation and there were questions asked that not one of the five of us had any questions for Ms. Myers. It's because we've been doing this for two years. We know the answers. This isn't new. There's nothing new here. This council has been working through this process. We've been working through this process sometimes with Rowan, sometimes, most of the time, without Rowan. And I think that if we brought the Rowan representatives up today and asked them how they feel like the negotiations went with the city of Temple, I think that they would tell you that there was not one damn thing given to them. that land that sits out there right now that everyone talks about corporate giveaway, take some time, get on Belcad, go out there and you figure out two years ago how much ad valorem tax was paid on those properties. I promise you it was less than $30,000. Add up all those properties when it was either in the county or when it was brought into the city with an ag designation and add that up. And you tell me if $42 million is a corporate giveaway. I bet Rowan doesn't feel like it. This council works hard. This council cares. And for the ridiculous accusations that have come up, I'm sorry if you don't understand what we're doing up here. We have educated, we have done everything under the law that's required when it comes to noticing, when it comes to taking care of our community. I've got children here, I've got grandchildren here. I care just as much about this community as anybody else up here. And I'm making this decision to vote yes tonight. Because what we're doing matters. What we're doing matters. It's interesting to hear people talk about enhancements, and then when the enhancements are in place, gripe about the enhancements. This is baffling to me. There simply is not a better opportunity anywhere in the United States to add value to a community and their tax base than data centers right now. There simply is not. Data centers have worked very hard to put parameters around their operation to be sure that they're safe for our communities. We had a phone call earlier this week with the local school district and two Rowan buildings are gonna be located in their school boundaries Those two buildings alone are going to double the tax base for that school district. What do you think that means to that school district? We know what we're doing. We are capable. And believe it or not, we're not all, we're pretty bright. And we've spent a lot of time on this. We know what we're doing. If you don't like it, that's okay. You don't have to like it. If you don't like it, run for election. But right now, this is the group up here that's making the decisions, and this is how we're going to move forward. Thank you. All right, next item. is our consent agenda. All items that are listed under this section are to be considered routine by the city council will be enacted in one motion. If discussion is desired by any council member, that item may be removed from the consent agenda at the request of any council member and will be considered separately. Council, as discussed earlier, I know that we're pulling a couple of items for voting purposes, but other than that, on the consent, is there anything else that needs to be pulled? All right. We will be pulling item 5H and 5I for separate consideration. So council, I'll entertain a motion on the consent agenda, which is item 5A through 5O, less item 5H and I. I move to approve the consent agenda.

It's 5A through 5O minus 5H and 5I. H and I, yeah.

We have a motion by Councilmember Pilkington. We have a second by Mayor Pro Tem Walker. Council, please cast your vote. I think I'm the one holding things up up here, Janet. She says, yes, you are. I vote aye. Consent agenda minus items H and I passes five votes to zero. I think it's probably operator error. Moving on to item H, I'll read it in separately. Item H is to consider adopting a resolution authorizing a construction contract with Bell Contractors Inc. of Belton for the construction of airport utility bore project in the estimated amount of $247,845. Council, I'll entertain a motion on item H. I'll make a motion to approve item H. Second. We have a motion by Mayor Pro Tem Walker. We have a second by Council Member Grant. Council, thank you. Council, please cast your vote. Item H passes four votes yes, zero votes no, one abstention. Moving on to item I is to consider adopting a resolution authorizing change order number two to the construction contract with Bell Contractors of Belton for additional costs associated with relocating electric lines and installing a 20 inch casing to existing drainage pipe related to the Ira Young storm sewer project in the estimated amount of $44,000. I'm sorry, $45,477.60. Council, entertain a motion.

Second.

We have a motion by Council Member Grant. We have a second by Council Member Immons. Council, please cast your vote. That item passes four votes yes, zero votes no, one abstention. Both of those contracts went to Councilmember Pilkington. And the reason why Councilmember Pilkington got that contract was because he was low bidder. Moving on to the irregular agenda is the first reading in a public hearing to consider adopting an ordinance. I'm in amending chapter 38 of code of ordinance relating to public utilities to require utility service agreements for certain developments in certain zoning districts and making non-substantive formatting updates.

Good evening, mayor and council. Yes. Um, I am going to be presenting on the behalf of Mr. Bandas. but that doesn't negate the work that he put into bringing this before you today. Utility service agreements are not new. The city has used them many times in the past to regulate commercial customers of the public utility system. We're proposing this amendment to clarify the process by which utility services agreements are developed and executed, set standards that will trigger mandatory utility service agreements, and provide examples but not an exhaustive list of restrictions that may be imposed by the city. We're also requesting that council consider delegating the authority for negotiating and executing these utility service agreements to the city manager. The section will become effective upon adoption but is not retroactive. However, almost all of our industrial users are already covered by utility service agreements. This ordinance is proposed to ensure that future future industrial and special projects are addressed in a consistent manner. What is the utility service agreement? It's a contract, um, for the provision of water and wastewater service. Its primary purpose is to confirm that a certain level of service can be met by the city's utility system and impose reasonable and necessary terms and conditions on the provisions and use of the public utility services. What it does not do, it's not a sale or a grant of water rights. It does not give a user priority over other utility customers and parties to these agreements will still be subject to the city's adopted drought contingency plan and all other applicable local state and federal laws, rules, and regulations. What land uses are proposed to be covered by utility service agreements, uh, through enactment of this amendment to this ordinance. all properties that are zoned or rezoned as light industrial or heavy industrial, any other land use development or property activity that meets the definition of a special utility project. Staff will be bringing a resolution to you at your next meeting defining special utility projects so that the adoption is concurrent with the second reading and proposed adoption of this ordinance. Special utility projects shall mean any land use development or other activities seeking to utilize the city's water or wastewater utility that has a peak potable water requirement that causes the system's dynamic pressure to fall below 45 PSI at any moment as an instantaneous potable water draw exceeding 500 gallons per minute as a daily potable water requirement of 50,000 gallons or more has a daily wastewater requirement of 25,000 gallons or more. Discharges wastewater at such a volume that causes the downstream pipes to flow over two-thirds of their designed capacity. Produces wastewater with characteristics or composition requiring special handling or processing. Requires water or wastewater service that degrades the performance or overwhelms the capacity of a city pump or lift stations. Has any service requirements below the foregoing thresholds, but that in combination and in the city's sole discretion necessitate reasonable and necessary terms and conditions to manage the provision and use of service or for any reason at the city's sole discretion requires reasonable and necessary terms and conditions for the provision and use of water or wastewater service. The terms and conditions of these agreements will be unique for each project, be project specific. They must be non-discriminatory, reasonable and equitable as compared to other substantially similar projects that come into existence after adoption of this ordinance. Examples of some of these terms include but are not limited to restrictions on the volume of service on a cumulative or peak basis, restrictions on the disposal of certain wastewater into the city's wastewater system, the requirement of mechanical limiting devices, the applicant financing the necessary improvements to extend or expand the service, requirements regarding installation of remote monitoring equipment, or any other reasonable or necessary term or condition reasonably related to water or wastewater services. These agreements are binding contracts, so they are enforceable just as any contract would be. Each contract will be unique, but general enforceability terms can include, but are not limited to daily penalties for noncompliance, liquidated damages, the ability to terminate services, and bringing a lawsuit to enforce the agreement or recover additional damages. I'll be happy to answer any questions you might have.

Thank you. Council, any questions for Ms. Thomas? Item six is subject to a public hearing. Anyone who wishes to speak on that may do so. We ask that you step to the podium and state your name for the record.

I hope y'all can hear me. Marcy Goodfleish, I live in Temple. And thank you, Mr. Mayor and council members for the opportunity to speak and to listen to what you've been telling us. Regarding item six, this basically takes away, appears to take away public input. And I think the sensitive issue and the very contested issue about data centers, of all things, requires that we have public involvement and public input on any decision that has a magnitude that could affect even an area of the city, much less the whole city. I'd rather just make.

Do you have comments specifically about the utility services agreement? That's what this public hearing is for.

That is what I just said.

No, ma'am, you're talking about public input, and we're talking about contracts.

And I'm saying that under this, it puts it in the hands of the city manager, and it doesn't mention that there's public input.

Which is standard. The city manager and the city attorney's office are the ones that negotiate these contracts.

Well, maybe I should sit down right now, but before that, I want to express my disappointment that you basically said we are uneducated, And you basically said no matter what we're trying to help with here, you've already decided your vote. You actually scolded us for being here.

That's not true.

Oh, we have a recording of it.

Well then, then you'll find that that's not true.

You mocked us for being here and for caring.

No, ma'am. That's not what happened.

Yes, jobs are good, but the jobs have to be for good reasons.

Thank you. Anybody else like to speak in this public hearing?

Good evening again, Joe Royer. I live in district two. Um, I think perhaps what Marcy was getting at is in some ways, this is an improvement over what we have now, cuz our, the current policy is not very consistent. Um, sometimes, you know, it comes before city council and sometimes the public hears about it and sometimes we don't, but this is a huge step backwards for a council that claims to care about transparency. Because instead of sometimes hearing about it, now we will never hear about it because you're advocating your authority entirely to the city manager's office and letting them negotiate the agreements as they will. As it's written, it's never even going to come before you. You're just trusting the city managers to do this. which also means the public is going to be far less likely to hear about the terms of these specific agreements. I like the fact that you're now requiring these for light industrial projects. There's a lot of good things here, especially utility projects for one-time demand, but I think transparency is important, and you guys have even agreed that transparency is important, and this is not that. This is... One thing in particular that really bothers me, and this is an issue we brought up before, is it does not have any, oh, and there's not really a lot of teeth to this either, right? This is all recommendations for what these agreements should look like. There's no rules saying the agreement should have these guidelines. It's just like, oh, you know, here's some examples that we recommend, you know, not an exhaustive list. Like, there's no real teeth in this. But my main concern is who pays for this. And this is an issue we've raised several times. If I'm a rural property owner and I want to get annexed, I have to pay for my own water line extension. But we've seen the city pay for utility extensions for large corporate customers. We've seen tens of millions of dollars go into this so far. And this policy, again, leaves that up in the air for who pays for it. It's like, we'll let someone in the city manager's office decide this. We need more transparency than this.

Thank you. You bet.

Good evening. I'm out in Fowler and, um, in the temple area. Um, want to speak on item seven. Um, so tagging on a little bit to what Joe was saying, um, the UDC changes for data centers.

Do you want to speak on six or seven? Seven. Okay. That, that will be next. This is the, this is the public hearing for item six. Okay. You bet. No problem. It won't. It may be long, I don't know. Anybody else wanna speak on this topic? Item six? Okay, with that, sorry, I thought I saw someone get up back there. With that, I will close the public hearing on item six and council entertain a motion.

Mayor, I move to approve item six. Second.

We have a motion by Councilmember Grant. We have a second by Councilmember Pilkington. Council, please cast your vote. Item six passes five votes to zero. Item six, I'm sorry, item seven is a first reading in a public hearing to consider adopting an ordinance authorizing amendments to ordinance number 2010-4413, City of Temple Unified Development Code as follows. Section 5.1, table of uses, remove data center large and data center small and add data center and data center accessory use. Item B is section 5.2, which is specific use standards. It adds limitations for data center and data center accessory use. Item C is section 7.5.4.B, parking standards. Amend data center large and small to data center. In item D, section 11.2, definitions to remove data center large and data center small, add data center and data center accessory use. Ms. Smith.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. So we are recommending, as the mayor stated, proposed UDC amendment as it relates to data centers. The Planning and Zoning Commission did consider this amendment on August 17th, and this is the first reading of the ordinance. The purpose of this amendment is to establish clearer, more comprehensive regulatory framework for data centers. The amendment addresses three primary questions. What type of use is it? where should it be located, and what standards should apply. It also establishes clear land use classifications and where those uses should be located. It also requires A conditional use permit or a CUP is referred to that as for principal data centers and establishes minimum development standards. Those are just minimum standards. The CFP process would allow for the city to evaluate an individual project and impose additional conditions when those are warranted by the site or proposed development. So overall, the intent is to ensure that future data center development is appropriately located, evaluated, and mitigated. So why is the UDC being amended? Well, right now our current UDC, um, does regulate data centers, but the existing framework does not fully address the scale and operational characteristics of the facilities that we are seeing today. Those current regulations do not distinguish between data center. That is an accessory use that primarily supports another use versus a standalone facility where a data center is the principal use. Principal data centers also do not currently have comprehensive supplemental development standards. And this proposed develop amendment will replace those existing size based classifications with separate accessory and principal use classifications. It will also limit, uh, principal data centers to industrial zoning districts and require a conditional use permit. It will establish minimum standards that will address residential compatibility, noise, traffic, roadway impacts, lighting, and glare. landscaping and screening and water efficient cooling. The conditional use permit process then will provide the ability for us to establish additional conditions based on the particular site and the development proposal. So when we had the planning and zoning commission meeting, uh, on August 17th, it was requested that we provide what our current, uh, UDC has. So as you can see, we currently have data center, small and data center large. The primary distinction between the two of those is that a small data center is less than 10,000 square feet, and a large data center is more than 10,000 square feet. But otherwise, the general nature of the use is the same. The digital information is processed, transferred, or stored with majority of the space occupied by computers, servers, telecommunications, and supporting equipment. So what we are proposing is two separate definitions, one for data center accessory use that would support the principal commercial or industrial use On that property, it would provide localized computing, processing, or data storage functions associated with the principal use only. It is really important to note, though, with an accessory use, it cannot operate as a standalone data center. Versus the principal data center, that's very different. That's the processing, storage, management, or distribution of data is the primary use of the property. Um, it could also be used for, uh, supporting offices, maintenance areas, utility infrastructure, security facilities, and energy backup systems. So as you can see, this proposed framework would focus on function and relationship of the use rather primarily on the square footage. Principal data centers will also be subject to a conditional use permit review and enhanced development standards. So looking at the current versus proposed, uh, zoning framework, um, as you can see, A small data center is allowed with a conditional use permit in our general retail zoning district and is permitted by right in commercial, light industrial, and heavy industrial. That's current. For large data centers over 10,000 square feet, it requires a conditional use permit in the commercial zoning district and permitted by right in light industrial and heavy industrial. What we are proposing is for data center accessory uses. Um, those would be subject to limitations in the commercial light industrial and heavy industrial zoning districts and data centers, uh, would no longer be permitted by right and light industrial and heavy industrial. Those would require a conditional use permit. So talking a little bit more about the conditional use permit review and conditions, that is a really important framework within our UDC amendment. Those will have the minimum standards for every principal data center must meet. And not every site really will have the same impact. So the CUP process will really allow the city to evaluate those specific development proposal and site and impose any additional conditions that we may see fit. Those additional conditions could include specific phasing and construction sequencing infrastructure improvements roadways utilities drainage right-of-way and easements and certificate of occupancy requirements it will also be associated with a binding site development plan that will provide you all with greater certainty and how that will develop this will also give the city the ability to address any issues as a part of the land use approval and the overall process in general will provide a lot of predictability through those minimum UDC requirements Moving on to location site design and, uh, residential protection. Um, one thing that we really wanted to look at is the standards for compatibility with surrounding residential areas. As I said, principal data centers would be limited to light industrial and heavy industrial zoning districts, and they would be required to have direct access to arterial or higher classified roadway with the primary truck traffic directed away from local residential streets. It also would provide for a minimum 200 foot setback from single family residential property and any loading areas, generators, cooling equipment, substations, transformers and service areas would need to be located to maximize separation and buffering from residential areas. The building orientation would also need to be designed to minimize visible impacts. Any existing site features such as drainage corridors, floodplains, tree lines, and significant vegetation would need to be incorporated into the site design where they would provide any additional buffering between the residential and the industrial use. As I mentioned, the 200 foot buffer, it is a minimum. You can impose additional setbacks through the CUP. In regard to noise protection and verification, um, that development would need to comply with the city's existing UDC maximum sound levels, as well as our nuisance noise provisions in chapter 24. Uh, before a building permit is issued, the applicant would need to provide the city with a noise mitigation plan for pot prepared by a acoustical engineer. That analysis would look at, uh, equipment, noise, low frequency and tonal noise. continuous and nighttime operations, generator testing, and cumulative operational noise. The mitigation plan would need to identify any measures that are necessary for the facility to comply with that. We're not relying solely on any modeling performed. Post-construction acoustical testing would be required for each phase before they can occupy. Any testing must also demonstrate compliance with the UDC standards and that approved noise mitigation plan. Also compliance will continue after the structure is occupied. Uh, if the facility creates a non-compliant or a nuisance use, they would need to, uh, put in corrective measures and approved mitigation would need to be maintained through that entire life of the facility that will give us the ability to evaluate before construction, before occupancy and continue a client compliance after occupancy. Data centers can have very different traffic impacts during construction versus normal operations So those these proposed standards would operate both So every principal data center would need to begin with a preliminary traffic study that traffic study would evaluate construction traffic operational and employee traffic trucks and deliveries emergency access internal circulation site access and impacts to nearby intersections and roadways and A full TIA would need to be required when the project is a hundred or more peak hour trips, a thousand or more daily trips, or when a significant arterial access impacts are identified. So this amendment would require transportation improvements as well associated with the development. Those required improvements would need to be constructed, funded, and financially guaranteed before issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The development would also need to comply with the city's future thoroughfare plan and our trails master plan. This allows us to evaluate the project in the context of our overall transportation network and long range roadway network. The standards for lighting, landscaping, screening are shown here. Uh, those standards are intended to address any visual impacts and compatibility, um, where you have a large industrial development. Um, the lighting would need to be fully cut off or fully shielded fixtures and directed downward. The amount of lighting would need to be limited to what is only necessary for the safety and security of the site, and the standards would also specifically address light trespass, glare, sky glow, and prohibit any direct illumination to any adjacent residential properties. You would also need to submit a photometric plan to demonstrate compliance with that, and landscaping and screening are required between data centers and residential areas. If they have any generators, transformers, substations, mechanical equipment, loading areas, and service areas, those would also need to be screened. Screening, you can do this in a multitude of ways. It could include evergreen landscaping, berms, masonry walls, OPEC fencing, preserved vegetation, enhanced setbacks, or a combination, all of those. As with the other development standards, you can also require additional buffering through the CUP. For data centers would also be required to utilize water efficient cooling technology. Cooling systems would need to be at least as efficient as an equivalent closed loop cooling system that is appropriate for that facility. It's also important to distinguish that there, as you saw in the earlier presentation, what's regulated through the UDC and Chapter 38, which addresses the items that you saw previously. But this would allow the city to evaluate the actual utility demands and infrastructure requirements associated with each development. Uh, the amendment also establishes clear requirements and must be satisfied before a certificate of occupancy can be issued. So the project would need to comply with any UDC requirements, all the CUP conditions, the approved site development plan, and any other applicable city requirements. If there's a phase project, each phase would need to independently satisfy all those requirements. Um, if they're, uh, given, you know, the requirement to submit a lot of those plans, um, we have also included an independent third party review in here. Um, that would be give the city the ability to hire a technical independent technical review. Um, and then applicant would be responsible for those review costs. So we sent out a notice of public hearing that was published in the temple daily telegram on August 7th in accordance with state law and local ordinance requirements. Uh, we also mailed, uh, the property owner. You can see their cloth, Texas LLC. That is an existing data center property owner that could be perfected by the proposed amendment. All other existing data centers within the city are currently zoned as planned development. Um, and those would be remained subject to those plan development conditions that are in place. So, um, as I mentioned at the August 17th meeting, the planning and zoning commission considered a recommendation. Um, they recommended approval of a vote of six to zero with one modification. Um, they requested to require. a conditional use permit for data center accessory uses in commercial light industrial and heavy industrial zoning districts. We want to maintain, the staff maintains their original recommendation that those would be subject to limitations. We've really based that on the distinction between an accessory use is really something that supports a primary industrial or commercial use versus a standalone data center where processing and storage is the principal use. So for that reason, we do not believe a CEP is necessary for every data center use. And so we're local, you know, moving toward recommending that in the light industrial and heavy industrial for primary data centers. And I'll be happy to answer any questions you have.

Thank you, ma'am. This basically is to me, just seems to be sort of a cleanup and, uh, uh, a redef a tighter, uh, defining of data centers and uses. Yes. Is that a fair?

Yes. Yes. What we're seeing today versus just relying on the square footage of what we currently have defined. And then also, um, putting in those conditional use permit, uh, requirements for site development.

So additional control.

Additional requirements for data center development, yes, sir.

Very good. Counsel, any questions for Ms. Smith? Sure? Okay. Just want to be sure. I will entertain a motion in council. I'm sorry. Go ahead. I need Alan here. I need Alan. I will open the public hearing. Anyone missing to speak on this item may do so. We just ask you step to the podium to state your name for the record. Speaking of Alan, he does have his hand raised.

He does?

Yes. That's why we moved him virtual. I don't need that.

Good evening again. Joe Royer, I live in District 2. Clearly, they put a lot of work and a lot of good thought in this, and I like a lot of what they've produced here. I have a couple of points that I disagree on or I think need additional clarification, but it pains me to see how much work went into this when we all know that this policy is completely worthless. This is never going to apply because all of these large data centers go through specially negotiated plan development agreements, which is a huge loophole in our building code right now. And that combined with the $250 million loophole in the economic development policy means the rules are never gonna apply to this. This is a really well thought out list of criteria that's never gonna matter. And PNZ and staff even said, This only affects Temple's smallest data center, the one that's a tenth of the size of any of the others. It's the only one even affected by this because everyone else has already negotiated an agreement to get around the rules. So that's just infuriating. Um, uh, now the, uh, city council, as we've talked, we've been asking for impact studies since February and you've refused repeatedly to do any kind of impact studies. So of course we've done some of our own and there's still some more ongoing. And one of the things I disagree with on this point is the setback. We've done the environmental impact studies. I love the fact that they did include low frequency vibration because a lot of the other things we've talked about was only audible. But again, we've done the impact studies on this and we know what the setbacks on these things need to be. 200 feet is not adequate. the low frequency vibrations can be felt for five miles. The heat island effect can be felt for six miles. Like if we're going to seriously look at a setback requirement, it needs to be six miles from the nearest home because that is the range at which these data centers cause harm to human beings. Like let alone the livestock and the farms and the ranches. The other point I want to point out on here is they talked about independent engineering reviews. We've already seen Rowan with an undisclosed conflict of interest where they were using an environmental engineering firm that shared a large owner with them. And so I would like to see some clear definitions around what independent review means because that was clearly not an independent review in that situation. The city messaging around this for the last couple of weeks that this is coming has been extremely misleading. We used to have laws about truth in advertising, and I know those never applied to governments, but I would like to see at least an attempt to tell the truth here. So this is a great policy. I love the work that's gone into this. It pains me to see that it was largely a waste of time as long as we've got loopholes in our policy that allow large companies to ignore the rules. Thank you.

Thank you. Ms. Thomas, would you like to address some of that?

Yes, sir.

This does not let the current developments get out of any of these conditions. I just want to point out that this is a codification of the requirements that are already contained in the proposed developments plan development ordinances. The purpose of a plan development ordinance is to place restrictions on the development in certain districts.

It's the opposite of opening and making it less restrictive.

Yes. This process would actually mean that those requirements that we have required in the plan development ordinances that you have approved and are set to consider are required by our unified development code. So they will be required to get a CUP and still maintain these same types of restrictions that you already have in place through a plan development ordinance. So a plan development ordinance is another zoning and land use tool that, just like a CUP is, they give you the same kind of controls through an ordinance that will be effective and run with the land. So it's binding on the land itself.

Very good. Thank you. You know I don't like second bites.

Well, it's still two minutes left.

Well, you don't, yeah, this one. You know what, yeah, knock it out. We're not starting a trend tonight.

I don't have the exact text of the code in front of me, but the way it's written says that when you negotiate a special plan development agreement, none of the existing code need apply. So what you're saying is trust us, we're still going to include the rules in the plan development agreement, but the way the code is written, a plan development agreement does not have to follow code.

No, sir. That's not what I'm saying. Okay. An ordinance is, um, a specific enforceable land use requirement. The plan development ordinances contain the same requirements that are proposed to be included in this, uh, CUP process for light industrial and heavy industrial. It's codifying it into our development code. Um, I'm not saying at all that a special use project is not subject to this, um, UDC requirement.

You're not saying that, but the code says that.

It's not.

Oh, OK.

Yes, ma'am.

Marcy Goodflesh. I live in Temple, Texas. I would like to also speak with a concern about the 200 foot setback. We know there's plenty of information and research about the amount of noise pollution and other pollutants from data centers. And 200 feet is not a sufficient protection area for just about anything. You would not want residences. You wouldn't want to live there that close. That's less than a football field. In addition, it doesn't discuss other types of pollutants such as there was a discussion about using Something's buzzing. Losing diesel. What am I hearing here? It's his chair. Okay. It's like squeak, squeak, squeak over here. Change the gears. Sorry. I lost a few minutes there, a few seconds. We need to take into consideration, I believe, pollution such as the – If diesel is used, there's research, and I've offered to bring this peer-reviewed research to you all to know so that you got it, so you can refer to it, that bees are affected by diesel pollutants and through heat. And we know that data centers, there's research to support this, create a heat effect within a six mile radius. Data centers should not be built within six miles of residences, schools, or a lot of agriculture installations. We want to make sure we have food. We rely on bees to pollinate. And then maybe the UDC or something needs to be reconsidered with the idea of data center, the advent of that. There's not a lot of popularity for data centers in the country right now, and there are good reasons for that. We owe ourselves to be leaders in protecting the city, not pawns of investors who don't even live in our country, much less our city, exploiting our area and our population. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Who's next?

hello again so I just want to get clarity about the storage use that the sixth building or the fifth building is going to be used for storage what happens if they change their mind I think everything like she was saying if it's industrial and heavy use light use it's gonna be updated codes across the board Is that right? I'm not sure I quite understand what your question is. For the last planning development meeting, they said they were going to try to make the industrial and light heavy use and light use all the same. So it could be something easy to administer across the board, whether they identify as a heavy or a light industrial.

I think what you're saying is, so Ms. Smith on one of her slides showed that Planning and Zoning Commission recommended requiring a CUP for the accessory uses as well. Staff is not recommending pursuing that that change to the original proposal.

So are you all going to be working on the UDC codes? And is that something the community can get involved so that we could mend the relationship between the community and move forward for everybody's good? It benefits us all. We're already here. In this moment, we cannot take back contracts or anything. We need to do the sensible thing, well-rounded, to mitigate the amount of destruction this is bringing. We could only, if you allow us to, have those UDC codes been already determined? Is that still in process?

This is a proposed amendment to the Unified Development Code.

So is that a yes?

You're asking if we're going to consider amending the Unified Development Code, and that's what this is, is an amendment to the Unified Development Code.

OK. So and that's going to be decided today?

This is first reading in the public hearing for the ordinance that would change the unified development code.

And forgive us for not being well educated in this. We're trying our best. And what I'm guided by is my heart and doing the right thing. And so it's in our best interest, even the data centers, if they deplete everything, they deplete themselves. There's nothing left to work with. We're the canaries in the coal mine sounding the alarm that this is unsafe. And we want communication. We want to be included in the decisions. Please do that for us.

You're up. Okay, so on, yes, sorry, Alton Fowler. On item seven, I do want to say again, thank you, Erin, for putting together a great presentation. Really great job. So, but beyond that, I am a little bit upset that all the UDC proposed changes were done outside of public comment. I know this is a public comment session, but to initially create them, there was not a hearing on that, or there was not any public input session. City staff, there's a lot in here that those who are opposed to data centers, we do like, we do appreciate. But for instance, if we start getting into specifics, like specifically about the water requirements, those are very watered down. There's nothing specific in there that says, okay, data center this size, you can't use this much water, or you shouldn't use this amount of water. It's very generic, very, how are you gonna hold them accountable? Some of these data centers in hyperscale, they use between 1 million to 5 million gallons per day. And I know for a fact, there's at least one to six data centers in this area, they're going to be using that much water because of the size and scale that they are.

I'm seeing you shaking your head they won't because the city by ordinance the city of Temple requires a data center that's built in Temple Texas to use a closed-loop system you're right you're right there are systems in in the portfolio of data centers across the back up real quickly I'm sorry I think in stories meta has three data centers in Texas The oldest one is in Fort Worth, and it plows through water like crazy. It's old technology, and it uses a million to a million and a half gallons a day. It does, every day. Meta also has one in El Paso, which has more up-to-date technology, and I'm not using your time. And that one, because there was some talk at one time with, I think, the Roy, I think, Joe, you think you brought it up, saying that, well, when it reaches a certain temperature, right, outside, then, yes, they steam off. Yeah, those exist. You're right. Closed-loop systems in Temple, Texas, or data centers in Temple, Texas, will use a closed-loop system. They don't steam off. They don't plow through water. They don't drop glycol into our wastewater stream. They are truly closed loop. They crack a valve once a quarter or so, pull water from the system, test it to be sure that it meets their standards for cooling, close the valve. And whenever I say that they take water out of the system, I'm talking less than 1,000 gallons. And then they refresh that with whatever amount they took out, and they run again. And again, that water circulates up to 10 years we had a meeting we had four or five months ago when the rowan folks were here one man that works for rowan said that he has worked a data center that has the same water in it for the last 23 years i've never heard one that high that for that long but 12 to 15 years is industry standard Again, this is some of the frustration, not at you. Fowler? Is that right? Alton? Yes. Alton's my middle name. My father was an Alton. That's not real common. But they, I lost my train of thought, Alton.

What was I talking about? You weren't even listening. I turned to you.

Up until very recently. Well, that's part of the frustration that I spoke about earlier. And I don't know how recent you are to this. But yes, there are data centers that go through a lot of water. Yes. There's some that go through less water than that. Yes. The ones in Temple? Yes. by requirement, closed loop system, period.

Okay, all right, great. So, but then of course there's the worry about when they have to flush the closed loop system. The flushing, that water that comes out of there is extremely toxic. So is that gonna be handled properly? Is that in the UDC updates? That's a huge concern. Because whether we like it or not, we have several data centers that are now gonna have closed loop systems that we're going to have as a community, and how is that gonna be handled? So these are concerns. And I really have so many more concerns. You mentioned about the data centers that are gonna be built near schools. So we have to take your word that, okay, they're gonna be built in such a way that they won't give the kids cancer, they won't cause the kids to have learning disabilities and all of this. These are concerns that the community has. And so when we talk about UDC changes and the public never had a hand in coming up with the UDC changes until now, which, yes, this is a first reading, but that's not really how you create the changes to begin with. The changes to begin with were created by staff. Capable as they are, they're not industry experts. They're not the public. So it's just very, very frustrating the way you guys have gone about it.

And I just think that statement says it all right there. Can someone address the UDC, the adoption of the UDC over time?

The adoption of the overall?

The Uniform Development Code wasn't created in a vacuum by city staff many years ago, and now it's coming in and being adopted. Uh, being changed that, that has always been subject to public input.

Yes. Over time. Yes.

And, um, and this one is too, this one was, and these are the adoptions that are, that have been recommended.

Right.

Is that, is that a correct statement?

Yes. And we'll periodically update the unified development code to modernize it and address what, you know, current, um, things are happening within our community. And so we can make sure that we address the impacts of data centers and protect that. So as Ms. Thomas stated earlier, we had planned development conditions with the other data centers that were rezoned. So we were fortunate to have that. And those planned development conditions are very much like what we are recommending in the Unified Development Code Amendment.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Yes, Jose Martinez. I was here earlier. And in fact, when I was here earlier, I was addressing the council that asks no questions. You said you knew everything and whatever about things and all. But you know what? You talk down to us. Let me tell you one thing. You don't talk down to me. Is that clear? I probably have more education than you and a whole bunch of other people here. Let me point out a couple of things that have been said, or rather have not been said in a way some have to a certain extent. Concisely, data centers attack our health and our resources at our expense while they make billions. Why data centers now? We realize they're damaged now. Took time. And ICE terrorists used data centers for surveillance with citizens killed. And billionaires raced the buildup. About 5,000 currently and 3,000 planned. We don't need 8,000 of these for their profit. Consequently, by this April, 833 groups opposed them. 75% of Americans did. New York lodged a moratorium. Maine tried. Delays occur in procuring equipment. And investors' nerves are frayed. Britain, Mr. Martinez.

I'm really sorry to interrupt you, but I'm over here, right here. Hi. Um, this is a public hearing and because it's specifically for this topic, that's the way you're going to address the actual unified development code amendment.

That's why a number of other people said a number of things, for example, about the closed loop system. So did the mayor. And you're telling me that I can't? That's what I was just going to say next. You're telling me not to talk?

No, sir. I was just saying that it needs to be addressed towards the topic of the unified...

Okay, I'll talk about the closed-loop system that he lied about, okay? Let me tell you. Just like was said earlier, a minute ago, they are flushed at one point. Those are hard metals that go into our groundwater system. Keep that in mind. And a number of other things also, sometimes when people might say about the electricity and whatever other sources as far as that is concerned, when you use diesel, and that was pointed out also earlier, that pollutes the air, your air, my health as well. And you that are for the data centers or whatever, you're going to be affected too, only making dollars. And by the way, that's another thing also that was said a little bit ago. That is to say, these are temporary jobs. The realtors here don't want these type of things.

They basically say that the- Mr. Martinez, you have been asked to hone your comments to- To what? You've been asked to sharpen your comments around the Unified Development Code. Mm-hmm. You just told Ms. Thomas that you were going to sharpen your comments around unified development code?

No, what I said, you didn't hear.

No, that's exactly what you said.

I didn't say that. I said I'm addressing what you said that you lied about and telling you how you lied about the closed loop system. You talked about it for about two or three minutes or so.

I'm not arguing with you.

Then why do you not let me talk about that when you did? Because it was on topic. On topic? And I'm not on topic?

I'm not arguing with you. If you would like, you can sit down. Or I can have you removed. I'm not playing this game. We've been doing this for years. You're a liar. Thank you. You're a liar. Corrupt. All of you are. Everybody's a sexist and a rapist. A sexist and a racist. That's all you ever talk about.

The policies. Keep that in mind. Instead of lying to all these folks here.

Thank you.

Who else? Hey, this is Chris Bost, East of Temple. So this does go back to the Uniform Development Code that we were talking about, but specifically to what Mr. Fowler was talking about in terms of transparency. So just as an example, when I worked for TCQ, for any kind of permits that were issued, any kind of enforcement actions that were issued, there was always an opportunity for public comment. a 30 day window for public comment. And it's really disturbing to me that the city does not have something similar. Really disturbing. And that tells me that y'all are not citizen first.

That's what this time is right now. That's how it was adopted to begin with, as Ms. Smith said. It's been subject to public comment as the UDC changes.

But when was it available for public comment prior to now? And the PNC meeting. That's when the public speaks. But we weren't really heard. That's the thing. It passed unanimously even though we made our concerns established. And so it really sends a strong message to us as a general public and as a public servant myself, that y'all don't care. Okay. Thank you. That's all I have to say. Thank you.

Who's who else?

Actually, mr. Mayor, this is Sarah Royer have a few questions about what you just said You said there's no closed loop of everything's closed loop here. I'm wondering why meta has an unlimited water contract Also You told me and I know you remember this conversation. You told me Rowan their client is was getting 250,000 gallons a day. But they needed more than that. They needed way more water. They needed about a million gallons a day. And that's why we dug the well. And it was a really good well. It was pumping out. You thought it was going to do 650,000 gallons. And it was pumping out 800,000 gallons. I'm just showing the lie.

We have to speak on the topic that was posted. We are. I am.

He just said that you told me something different.

Your comments need to be directed to the actual Unified Development Code.

So you guys can spout off lies. but we can't ask you to clarify them? Is that the legal way? Ma'am. OK. Great. Thanks.

If I could just briefly, we are required by the Texas Open Meetings Act to stay on topic for these public hearings. That's what the public was noticed about. And so that's what the topics need to be geared around for each of the public hearing items.

Evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Michael Smith. I represent Temple Area Builders Association. Aaron, you go ahead and write this date on the calendar. It is one of the few times I'm here to speak in favor of increasing regulations in the UDC. I want to applaud the council for taking this seriously and the responsibility to manage our growth. Before returning home to Bell County, I spent nearly 20 years back down south in Williamson. I watched communities there get overwhelmed by the growth coming out of Austin. And while we did the best we could, too often we were reacting to that growth instead of preparing for it. And that's a lesson I want to leave with everyone here tonight. That door does not close behind us when you move here. Growth is coming to Temple. We cannot stop it. And I don't believe we should try. But we should absolutely, what did I do here? All right, but we absolutely can decide how we manage it and where we allow it and what standards we require. I want to address an argument that I've heard repeatedly over the last several months, and actually I've even heard it tonight, that by allowing these and not increasing these standards, residential home values in the surrounding area are going to plummet. As someone who represents the home building industry, I believe that it's a claim worth examining, not through anecdotes and speculation, but through actual market data. Northern Virginia is the largest data center market in the United States and the world. So if data centers inherently destroy residential property values, you would expect to see evidence of that there. In August 2005, the Center for Regional Analysis at George Mason University researched exactly. Yes, sir.

You're on the edge of.

This gets the setbacks. This gets the infrastructure.

You may be stretching a little bit. All right. I'll take it. I'll take it. So hone your. Hone. I just told him to bring it in, just like I told Mr. Martinez. Go ahead, Michael.

Okay, I'll tell you again. We agree with increasing these standards. We agree with managing your growth responsibly and setting reasonable and responsible expectations. I want to tell you, Temple is a choice. We can spend the next 20 years trying to react to this growth, fighting every new industry that comes our way and trying to preserve the Temple we remember, or we can have the courage to plan for the Temple we're becoming. It means having these standards, it means demanding responsible development, and it means protecting our neighborhoods while still allowing our economy to grow. And most importantly, it means making decisions based on facts and not fear. The communities that thrive through growth aren't the ones that stop it. They're the ones that have the courage to lead it. I believe Temple has that opportunity, and I believe the council has the courage to seize it. Thank you. Thank you, council. Okay. Who else?

Okay. All right. While he's coming up, let's go ahead and bring Mr. Lytle on.

Good evening, Mayor and Councilman. I agree that all those restrictions and things that were mentioned in New D.C. are absolutely fantastic ideas that need to be addressed. My disagreement with this is it needs to be addressed with any type of business, large business, industrial, manufacturing, not just limited to this narrow division definition of data centers. All large businesses are gonna use excessive water, excessive electricity, or have generators like, for example, a massive distribution center for groceries, or God plays a huge thousand office complex for a corporation. These things would have just as much impact on a temple as a data center would. So I think we, I believe we should take out the data center and data center words, large and small, but instead of adding back in data center and data center accessories, add back in business, industrial, manufacturing, or commercial business. And if you don't do that, then let me ask another question about it. Under the data center accessory use, you mentioned it's limited to 10,000 square feet. In my example of a commercial grocery distribution center, does that mean that the center has to be less than 10,000 square feet or just their IT center?

Alan, sorry, not used to holding the microphone. That is referring to the current UDC requirement. Currently, what we have in the UDC is we distinguish between small data centers and large data centers, and that is associated with size. So a small data center is currently defined as less than 10,000 square feet, where a large data center is. is defined as more than 10,000 square feet. And so we're recommending a UDC amendment that eliminates it solely based on the square footage and creates a data center as an accessory use to a commercial or industrial zone property, um, and a principal data center definition.

Okay. So we're going to limit it. We're eliminating that 10,000 square foot restriction.

Yes.

And I said, I see other industries that we hopefully have come into here that would have the same need for restrictions on water or water surveys or water studies, restrictions on electricity. It would need a large number of generators and so therefore they would generate pollution, noise and other things. An example of the distribution center for groceries, they run 24-7 and have all kinds of lights out in their parking lot. So I'm hesitant to leave it restricted to just the words data center.

Those other developments are managed under the commercial Definition UDC, right? This is just an accessory used to commercial is data centers. Is that the best way to say that? No. Cause you look confused.

Sorry. I may not be understanding your question correctly as far as the accessory use definition.

I think what Alan is saying is why are we, uh, why is the city considering making it specific to data centers? And it sounds like it's almost like commercial buildings and then data centers just simply fall under commercial buildings.

for the accessory, for a data center accessory use that's defined as something that serves a commercial or industrial property, and then yes, these conditional use permit requirements are for standalone data centers.

And then as far as the- So it's not excluding anything that Alan is concerned about? I don't think I'm saying this well. I'm not doing well. I'm sorry. If I understand what Alan is asking, he is wondering why this is specific to why we are naming data centers specifically in this. But I think the other commercial uses are handled elsewhere in the UDC. Yes, sir.

Yes, thank you. I'm so sorry. I misunderstood. We're not redefining commercial buildings. Yes, we still have standards within our unified development code that relate to, um, noise mitigation standards, buffering from residential properties. Exactly. Um, yes, sir.

Yep. We're not leaving those other commercial uses out.

That's correct. Yes, we do have the current UDC requirements that address those.

So we're just having a separate one for the data section. Correct.

Yes. We're adding more restrictions, um, as it applies to them. Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

My name is Franklin Turner. That's spelled T-S-C-H-O-E-R-N-E-R. And first off, I hope I don't throw you gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, in shock because I'm going to say nice things about you. And I know this is a surprise, but as far as I'm concerned, the Temple City leaders over the past years, starting in 1956, made home run decisions in 96, in 86, and they're going to make a home run in 26.

Thank you.

And I think you guys work too hard. There's lots and lots and lots of BS coming in this room. But we've got to stand up for what's right. And what's right is the decision, the proactive decision you guys made to put a data center. And you were proactive enough to get a data center in Temple, which you should be complimented for. And that's what I have to say.

Very good, thank you, sir. All right, is there anybody else that would like to speak on this item? Anybody? You're stretching back there, right? Boy, don't, I'll call you up here. All right, very good. Then with that, I will close the public hearing on item number seven. And council, I'll entertain a motion.

Mayor, since there's a different recommendation from staff and PNZ, could you just all clarify in your motion if you are moving to approve based on the staff recommendation or the PNZ? Thank you.

I make a motion to approve item seven of the staff recommendation. Second that. We have a motion by Councilmember Emmons. We have a second by Mayor Pro Tem Walker. Council, please cast your vote. Item seven passes five votes to zero. Folks, we are three hours in and we still have a few items to go so I'm gonna recess for about 15 minutes or so. Let's all get back here at 8.15 and get a drink of water or do whatever else you need to do and we will gather back up in about 15 minutes, 20 minutes at most. Thank you. Get this meeting done. Huh? No, I don't know where they are. Yeah, we're moving on to automate. I think we had everybody but the city manager. All right, let's dive back in. We'll start now with item eight. Item eight is the first reading in a public hearing to conduct a public hearing and consider adopting an ordinance authorizing the release of 8.441 plus or minus acre right-of-way described as being attractive land situated in the Maximo Marino survey, abstract number 14, Bell County, Texas, and being part of a portion of a certain right-of-way known as Lorain Avenue. Is this you? Yes, ma'am. I'm sorry, I think I started without getting the okay. My apologies. Almost ready. Sorry, guys.

I'm presenting on this item for Kyle Nuttall, who's an attorney in our office. But he's done all the work on this, but I'll present on the item. Transportation Code Chapter 311 provides the municipality the authority over streets and alleys. Under 311.007, a home rural municipality may vacate, abandon, or close a street or alley. It requires that a public hearing be held, which is what we're here for today. Staff is recommending that council consider the abandonment of Lorraine Avenue, 8.441 acres of Lorraine Avenue. The right-of-way is to be included in a single-tracked plat in Synergy Park submitted by TEDC. Abandonment of this portion of the roadway will allow for the property to be developed as one unified tract. Temporary public utility easements will be retained until all of the utilities are removed at the property owner's expense. Staff recommends abandoning 8.441 acres of Lorraine Avenue subject to a temporary utility easement for a term to end upon verification of removal of all utilities currently within the right of way at the owner's expense. Any questions?

Council, anything? Automated subject to a public hearing, we ask you to step to the podium and state your name for the record, if you would like to speak. Anybody? Ambassador Lytle, is he?

Just a silly question. Where are the utilities going to go? They're taking them off of this, but where are they going to put them?

Away, I think, Alan.

They'll have to be relocated into another portion of right-of-way.

Okay, thank you.

Anybody else? All right, I'll close this public hearing, and council will entertain a motion on item eight.

I move to approve item eight as presented. Second.

We have a motion by Councilmember Pilkington. We have a second by Councilmember Grant. Council, please cast your vote. Item eight passes five votes to zero. Next item, item nine is a first reading and a public hearing to consider adopting an ordinance authorizing the voluntary annexation of 316.13 plus or minus acres located in the Maximo Marino survey, abstract number 14, located in the city of Temple's extraterritorial jurisdiction, Bell County, Texas.

identified by Bell County Appraisal District parcel ID number seven seven five five two four nine five five and one oh six two two eight miss Smith Thank You mayor and council as the mayor stated this is just around three hundred and sixteen acres and directly adjacent to the city of temple they are proposing to annex this property in it's also located adjacent to a major railway FM 3117 So this is a voluntary annexation process. So the property is required to be annexed to be contiguous to municipality. It would authorize the voluntary annexation upon receipt of a petition that we received, and we must conduct a public hearing, which is what we are doing here tonight. Pursuant to the local government code, we are required to provide notice to entities within this area. That includes Rogers Independent School District, Little River Academy Volunteer Fire Department, City of Temple Fire Rescue EMS, and Bell County. That was sent by certified mail on August 14th. We are also required to look at potential fiscal impacts associated with the future development, and that was evaluated in this process. Also another requirement is a municipal services agreement overview. That's required pursuant to chapter 43 of the Texas local government code. Um, that serves as our negotiated agreement with the property owner. That's requesting the annexation and identifies all the municipal services that would be provided upon annexation of the property. We did circulate that to all city departments and receive no concerns. Uh, we offer the, we agree, we offer the agreement to the property owner on July 16th and they accepted that on July 23rd. So services will be available upon annexation, um, including fire protection, police services, EMS planning, permitting inspections, code compliance, animal services, solid waste and public parks and facilities. In addition to that, um, infrastructure services to include streets, water and wastewater. Final delivery of those utilities would be determined during our planning and development review process. So we received this annexation request, the petition, on June 4th of this year. A development agreement was offered on June 8th, and we drafted the municipal service agreement on June 30th. As I said earlier, we offered that to the applicant on the municipal services agreement on July 16th and, um, July 27th, we conducted a development review committee meeting where we received no comments from staff. Um, there were no concerns on August 14th. We published an ad in the newspaper, um, and. Uh, included notices that were mailed to entities. and today we are conducting the public hearing and if it moves forward it would be for second reading at the september 17th council meeting so today we're recommending approval of the voluntary annexation request based on the following that it would need to comply with tuxes local government code it's contiguous to our city limits it was initiated by the property owner and is voluntary and it supports our city's long-term growth in service planning we have to answer any questions you have thank you council anything for ms smith

This item is subject to a public hearing. Anyone wish to speak, we ask you to step to the podium and state your name for the record. Or raise your hand. Mr. Lytle.

I apologize, I know I've asked this before, but I'm old and I forgot. What if this area, happen to already have a, I don't know, non-agricultural value to a manufacturing facility or a data center before it was in, before they requested a voluntary annexation? Do they have to change what's there because it's still gonna be an agriculture?

Well, as Ms. Meyer said earlier, anything sitting out in the county does not have zoning assignment so it's just it's just raw land and then when it's brought into the city into the city limits it's assigned AG until it's um until a request comes in to change that but my question is but if it's not quote unquote raw land what if it's already got something on it if it has something on it already it would come in as agriculture too just because that's how it happens

Still comes in as agricultural as the holding designation and then any current land use would be, if not allowed in agricultural zoning, would be considered legal non-conforming and then you would move forward with a potential zoning change. But anything that pre-exists its annexation would be considered legal non-conforming. It could be legal conforming if it was an inappropriate use for agricultural.

Thank you very much. I appreciate that.

Yes, sir.

I'm Ed Suffolk. I've been working with Rohan. And I work with lots of different organizations in buying and selling and with the city and everything else. And Rohan is just at the top very top of my deals dealing with Rohan. Everything, we used to farm all that land where the data center is being built. And they let us, they took care of us in the farmland and everything. And same way, anything that we asked to do in the ag end of it, Rohan has done it, and they are a tremendous organization.

Yep, very good.

I got to know all the people there and everything. And I've been in business for a number of years in the equipment business. Yes, sir. Work with the city here and everything. And it's been just a wonderful organization working. Are you speaking in favor of the annexation? So that's all I've got to say.

You bet. Thank you, sir. Appreciate you all. Yes, ma'am.

Hi. Marcy Goodfly, Temple City resident. Given the history with the community concern about Rowan and about data centers in general, I find it premature and maybe possibly inadvisable to annex yet more land to serve a company that's basically exploiting, in my opinion, our city. The effort here appears to be to put them in an area where they can get zoning to build more data centers that are not doing good for anybody. I teach, I'm an adjunct professor at an accredited university, and I see people using AI all the time to cheat their way through school. That and people make little memes and stuff. It's not serving the public any, and you have a tremendous amount of concern from the community. I would very much appreciate if you would table this in item nine, or 10, to get more input from the community about what the impact of bringing more Rowan into the city would be. and that's just what I feel is a very appropriate request. Thank you.

Chris Bost, East of Temple. So just so that I'm clear, since we've been talking about data centers a lot, this is for Project Ranger, correct? Associated with Rowan's Project Ranger? Yes. No, sir Just the way that they've been shoved down our throats it's a little hard to keep them straight these days So Long story shorter we are definitely not for that annexation So just to kind of give you a little bit background where my emotions are coming from so my partner I got married in March and returned back in April and literally the day that we got back, we learned about one of these data centers that's actually going across from us, right next door to us, just on string town road. Um, and Lisa say it went from the happiest day of our lives to the shittiest day of our lives. Um, with including this one that will be going in, we will literally have three of these hyperscale data centers going in within five miles of us. including the one next door. So a little bit of background, too. The farm that we're on has been in our family since the 1870s. 1870s. On top of that, we also farm commercial cattle and raise registered boar goats, which they do provide services and food supply and all the other fun stuff to our local community. So once these go in operation, I'm sure you've probably heard the statistics, but just in case you haven't, that AI data centers have been shown to drop cattle and or any livestock's body weight by 30%. and there has been studies that have shown that once these dinosaurs have gone online that none of the cattle will have will have live kids they'll have all stillborns so literally by approving these you're literally killing us you're driving driving us out of our homes and shutting us down which is the opposite of what the city should be doing. It should be protecting the citizens, not causing them harm. And it should be regardless of the money. Okay? Also, I have a sister with special needs. She had prenatal stroke before birth. And these data centers, especially the one that's going in right next door to us, with between the infrasound the heat islands and the other pollution she will no longer be able to come visit us. And a little bit of additional background I do get a little bit of revenue from the state for providing the service to her which goes back into keeping our farm up and going. So literally by doing this you're literally taking away revenue from me and my family. You are putting my family's health at stake. So Lisa say I can't even begin to describe how much disgust I have for y'all. How much disgust. It is sick and disturbing. So I really hope you'll seriously reconsider this. I seriously doubt it by the way that y'all have been going through things tonight. but I'm at least putting it on record. Thank you. Very good. Thank you.

Hello again. Joe Royer. I live in District 2. Real quick, I just want to make sure that the record is clear that this is for the Rowan Lasso project. And they need this annex in order to get access to more of our water. And that's basically where we're at with this. And I also am opposed, of course. Thank you. Thank you.

Hello, Belinda Alotta here again. So if I could be corrected, the way I understand is annexation provides some kind of control over the water, electrical use and stuff, oversight over these data centers. So it's the lesser of the two evils, right? So we're putting the cart before the horse again, and we're going downhill. So why can't we just take a step back? Why does it need to happen so fast? It wants to happen so fast because the state is already changing the laws. So whether somebody's grandfathered in or not, everybody's gonna have to follow the environmental codes. So we're gonna be right back where we started with 200 foot setbacks, the decibel, everything, all over again. We need to have the UDC codes put in place before we move forward. And I would like community input on that. I would like for us to be part of that. Can that be possible?

This is you being part of it.

We need more because a lot of things were not addressed. This is something new that's overtaken the whole nation, the whole world. Everybody's under this trance. of data centers and all this, and yes, technology does bring advancement, but not when it's putting the population and our planet at stake. We need to put a step back, take a big giant step back. We don't need to rush through all of this. What's the rush? Let's do this correctly. Let's stop doing this whole game, let's do this the right way. We all live here together. They need the centers to run. We need clean water. We don't need contamination. We need good air quality. We all do. Let's really do something here, please. Thank you.

Thank you.

I actually can walk. Hi, Lynn Thomas. I'll answer your question. You asked, I think it was, can we stop and take a moment and take a pause? And I think the answer is no. I think you guys have made it very clear that you've made your minds up before we get here. I'm not for this annexation. I'm not for the next one either. I noticed that we had quite a packed house tonight from Rowan and the union guys. I don't know why. I'm trying to stay relevant, stay on point tonight. It's just a little disingenuous that what we've heard tonight was a big discussion about how this is an open meeting and this is what we're here for and everybody's input is being taken seriously. But yet we received a big lecture and what we got with that lecture this evening was how y'all know better than we do. It's going to happen. It doesn't really matter what we think about it because you know better than we do, and you know all the answers, and this has been worked on for years. So I wonder why we're even here. Why do we come to these meetings? Everybody gets up with earnestness and their different expertise and their different areas of their occupations and whatnot, where they live and how it affects them, and we all talk about it week, month after month, and nothing ever happens, and you all just march right along and do what you want. Cause you know better, y'all know what you're doing. We don't know what to do. Obviously you're smarter than we are. And I think that is at the core of why you're having such a disagreement with the city of temple and the people who come to these meetings, because we don't feel like we are being heard. You can say, well, that's what this meeting is for to give input. And then we give input and then you go nay. Yay. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Yes. And it's over. Because before this meeting started, y'all had a workshop, y'all got around, and y'all sat there and made the plan and decided already. It's a done deal. It was done before we walked in this door. And it's that way every week that we have council meetings. And that sows discontent. It sows distrust. We don't feel you're being transparent. because you just, you do what you want is very condescending. And so now we're at each other's throats because we're not being listened to. If you're going to take the input that we have with these annexing and these different things, and we're up here talking to you, y'all don't talk back unless it's an answer that you want to make. There's no give and take here. And so that that's my whole point. I don't see the point of this when you guys have made it crystal clear that you're going to do what you want. You're smarter than we are. You already know how this works. You know more than we do. And that's just the way it's going to be. So thank you.

Thank you. Who else?

Anybody else?

All right. Very good. I will, uh, close the public hearing in council. I will entertain a motion. We have a motion by council member Emmons. We have a second by council member Pilkington council. Please cast your vote.

I am having trouble with mine.

So item nine passes four votes yes, zero votes no, and one abstention. Moving on to item 10 is the first reading in a public hearing to consider adopting an ordinance authorizing a rezoning and binding site development plan request from Ag to Plan Development Light Industrial on 316.13 plus or minus acres, located in the city of Temple, Bell County, Texas, identified by Bell County Appraisal District Parcel ID numbers 7755, 24955, and 106228. Got Ms. Smith on here.

So this is the same property that you just considered for annexation and they are proposing a zoning change request to light industrial with a planned development component That will include conditions with this property so they are proposing a data center, um, within this area, um, they will be required to have 50 foot setbacks along all boundaries that would be abutting any residential districts or uses. Um, as I mentioned, this is a larger economic development project, um, in an area that's. Someone's moving this on me. Um, so, um, uh, we have seen other light industrial, uh, requests within this area. So this is in line with the surrounding land use categories. Now I can't do it. All right, here we go. So as you can see, this is the area generally shown. Here's the map. You can see here that we have that future minor arterial that's shown to go within this area, and it's also along an existing minor arterial roadway. So right now, um, if annex into the city, it would be agricultural. So this rezoning, um, would be going to, uh, plan development, light industrial. Uh, we are looking at the future land use plan, uh, associated with this, this area is changing. And so we'll be making some amendments that, um, directly reflects the change that we're seeing in this area, um, moving forward. Um, those zoning conditions, um, that we have addressed in here that I'll go through in a minute. Um, we are proposing to address compatibility and mitigate any potential impacts to surrounding properties within this area. So here's some site photos. As you can see, it's undeveloped right now. Uh, the site will require some extensions of, um, water and sewer, uh, to support development. And as I mentioned earlier, it's located off of a monetary known as FM 31 17. We did send out property notices to owners within 200 feet. There was one owner within 200 feet within the city limits, but we did send out 17 courtesy notices to the properties within the ETJ around here, and we did not receive any responses in agreement or disagreement. We did publish the notice of the public hearing in the Temple Daily Telegram on August 7th, and we recommend approval of the rezoning requests with conditions. On August 17th, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval with a vote of four to two with the following conditions. So in regard to access, they'll need to coordinate all access locations, configurations, and dimensions with the planning director as well as the fire marshal. Um, as they create their site development plan for this site, honey, future phases would need to be consistent with those planned development conditions and approved administratively without any additional public hearings. Uh, they will be required to have a minimum 50 foot landscaping screening buffer between their use and any residential uses. Uh, looking at the north, they'll need to have buffering along that abutting residential line. Uh, for the south, there will be buffering where there's feasible. There is a Creek there and some overhead. infrastructure and existing easements that already provide quite a substantial buffer in that area. To the east, there will be buffering adjacent to residential uses, and to the west, no additional buffer will be required because that's where it joins the already light industrial zone property. Utility service agreement will be required to address the infrastructure, and as far as platting goes, they'll be required to plat the property. They are not required to do a preliminary plat, so it would just be a final plat unless It would not be required if it's divided in five or fewer lots and consists of more than a hundred acres. Otherwise they would move forward to a final plan. So as far as noise mitigation go is the, they would need to comply with some things before issuance of a building permit. They'll need to have a noise mitigation plan that's prepared by a acoustical engineer. Um, they'll in that mitigation plan, identify any noise sources or equipment, sound data. Um, develop model predicted sound levels at all property lines during their design phase. Um, they'll need to incorporate those measures needed to meet the standards. Um, some noise mitigation things may include sound walls, burns, enclosures, barriers, um, and other materials. They'll need to make sure they address any equipment placement, orientation, operational controls to also mitigate any of that. Before they're issued a certificate of occupancy, there will be some post-construction acoustical testing. Looking at that under peak conditions, they'll need to demonstrate compliance at the property line. And any exceedances would need to be corrected before we issue them a final certificate of occupancy. During operations, similar to the UDC amendment, the city can investigate any validated noise complaints that we receive and require additional mitigation adjustments be done. And they could receive a citation or arbitration if that's unresolved. And that's all I have for you tonight. I'd be happy to answer any questions you have.

Thank you. Thank you. This Adam subject to a public hearing as you step to the podium and state your name for the record, if you would like. I think I saw that pop up.

All right.

Hello again, Joe Royer. I live in district two. Um, this obviously is for reasoning the land we just talked about in item nine for Rowan's lasso project, which again was not clear from the presentation. I would like to see that, uh, the, the naming consistent for, you know, the public's benefit of nothing else. Um, this also in particular is an excellent example of my comments on item seven, where a plan development agreement can ignore override rules in the UDC. Hence, specifically the 50-foot setback versus the 200-foot setback. This is what I was talking about earlier. I'm not sure the city attorney understood my point there. But the way the UDC is currently written, companies are able to override it with planned development agreements. And so, as usual, I'm opposed. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, I was, this is Sarah Royer, I was at the PNZ meeting and we're talking about third party doing the noise to make this from agriculture to industrial, you're gonna make sure that there's noise, third party engineers coming in to tell you what it is. When we were there, we told them that the last environmental agency that Rowan had, was owned by Blackstone. And Blackstone also owns 49% of Rowan, so that's not truly an independent third party. And we asked them what they meant by independent third party, because this will really hurt the people who live around there. And they said, and I quote, I'm not sure that's possible because Blackstone owns everything. So I'm wondering, how we're doing independent third party testing for noise for any of this, because right now it doesn't seem very independent of big corporations.

Who said Blackstone was there?

The guy on the far left. And I'll pull the video and send it to you.

OK. Good evening again. Thank you for your patience. I'm Marcy Goodfly, Temple resident. This particular item on the agenda documents the fact that this is what a done deal before we ever came here. This entire thing had been agreed to by every single person up there. It's along the dais. It's abundantly clear. And so much of that was said to us earlier in the meeting. We know what's good. We know what's better for you. Like I'm not bright enough to know what's better for me and for the city, I would dispute that. I am inviting you to have a little bit of integrity tonight. Every single one of you who has voting capability to table this and have a genuine public hearing about the advisability of allowing Rowan to be zoned for any sort of activity in this city ever again. This is an opportunity to rectify or at least, no it wouldn't rectify, but it would at least address what was never allowed to the city when Rowan was originally recruited and bought its way into the city it is abundantly clear oh we're donating to this we're donating to that they don't even live here they're they're in other countries making money off of data centers on our backs on our our community you have an opportunity to show some integrity tonight and not pass this this evening and put it for extreme public scrutiny because everybody's complaining about data centers. And I will learn a lot once I hear how your vote or non-vote goes tonight because this is a matter of integrity, honesty and integrity, decency, loyalty to the people who elected you and who you serve. You are here to serve us. You are failing. I'm sorry you're looking in the other direction. This means all of you. Show some integrity.

Thank you, ma'am.

So I do have a question relating to this annexation, I'm sorry, regarding this item. So out of curiosity, which of the wastewater treatment plants will be receiving wastewater from this facility, from the status center?

So I didn't understand.

I was asking which of the two wastewater treatment plants will be receiving service or I'm sorry, which wastewater treatment plant will be receiving wastewater from the status center? The one near there. Okay, I gotcha. So essentially sending wastewater to a plant that can't treat was coming to begin with, got it. The other thing which actually I wanted to touch on as well, So my question is why are we subjecting more people to potential non-compliances from Rowan?

Um, do you have the, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Okay.

Um, so as I mentioned earlier, my partner and I have the farm off of string town road. and we're situated next to a proposed data center which is currently being constructed. From what we understand from one of the contractors, it is ruined back. It is approximately, according to information that they submitted to TCQ, it'll be approximately 75 acres that's going to be developed out of 113 acres. Um, the punchline to this is there's been multiple, um, violations of state law that very happened during the construction process. So for instance, they started construction, uh, on or about June 18th of this year. And they did so without obtaining the TCEQ stormwater permit, required stormwater permit. Per the permit, you're supposed to obtain authorization under the permit prior to convincing construction through the development implemented of a stormwater pollution prevention plan or a protection plan. Submit a notice of intent to the TCEQ to essentially gain coverage under the permit, which they didn't know that. Um, it's interesting though, um, that self fencing miraculously got installed, uh, on or about August 19th of 26, which is ironically a couple of days after I brought up this matter before the planning and zoning commission, which the Roman attorney was part of, which he's here tonight. Um, also, um, there has been improper waste, uh, I'm sorry, improper disposal of waste tires. which has been brought to the TCQ's attention as well. We are working with TCQ to get both of these matters resolved. Additionally, after checking with the Bell County floodplain administrator, they are doing work within the floodplain, the 100-year floodplain, they did not get the required authorizations from the county. So you're talking about a organization that can't even hire contractors that know what the heck they're doing. So early tonight, it seemed like it was a Rowan, Rowan, they're so great, blah, blah, blah, blah, which it's been a constant theme. And so I'm pointing out the exact opposite. The actual impact that these people have on our community. I'm sorry it's inconvenient for your situation, sir. I'm sorry, but it's just a fact of nature. So just as an example, and this is more of a civil issue, which is being addressed, but the contractor actually dumped hundreds and hundreds of pounds of material on our electric fence. And as I mentioned, we have cattle, commercial cattle, which we raise for our means to support ourselves. During that time, the cattle were able to get out or could have gotten out, which could have caused even more issues, traffic otherwise, for other folks. So it's a danger issue. So from what we understand, a solutions group is the GC for the project and then CNC site prep LLC is a subcontractor. So anyway, with this certain issue, even though we have, and we have tried to work with CNC to get this matter resolved, this is just an example of how cheap they are. So literally, they broke our fence pickets, and then they didn't even have the decency to replace the pickets with new ones. Instead, they just re-erected the broken ones and used dirt to hold them up. So literally, our family, who are farmers and a public servant, have to put money towards something that we didn't even do. Sorry, back up.

Mr. Boss, your five minutes is up. If you have a couple of more, one super important point, if you'd go ahead and make that. I don't wanna just cut you off.

Okay, I gotcha. Well, it feels like I've already made a lot of my important points, but the bottom line is, again, they're all about the money. And that has been abundantly clear. and they don't give a horse's butt about anybody but the size themselves and how much money they get at the end of the day, nor the common everyday person. So I would really, really, as so many people have already said, you seriously give a whole lot of consideration before you approve this thing and how many people you're impacting, not just us, but the countless number of people that are in your community. Thank you.

Uh-huh.

Hello, Belinda here again.

Belinda, please be sure to watch your time.

There's one right over there behind you, too. Thank you, Ms. Myers, for letting us know about notifying everybody and being in compliance with UDC and all that stuff. These are old, outdated rules. We need the six mile radius. We need notifications going out. We need to redo the UDC. Why is this being on the agenda simultaneously with the UDC without the UDC being put in place? We're back where we started. Why are we going that way? And with the noise and mitigation, have you considered what goes down to the bedrock? How it goes and travels down into the ground? Have you explored that? I mean, we keep saying the same thing. How long?

Who else? He hasn't already spoken on this topic. No, I have not. You're up.

Mr. Mayor, Council, Alan Lytle, Temple. Just have a really quick question. As the young lady was saying, we have some PD UDC changes in the works that have been preliminary approved tonight. The plat is being preliminary approved tonight. Since they started this, Before the UDCs went into effect, will they be in effect for this particular site plan?

Yeah, the UDC is not yet in effect. It was the first reading in public hearing today. So it would be subject to any future development.

So even though this is future development, since they asked for it right now, it's not future.

Yes.

Correct.

Thank you. This will be subject to the planned, if approved, this would be subject to the planned development conditions that Ms. Smith went over, which are very similar to the UDC, but that the PD would be what would govern this development.

Thank you.

Yeah. Who else? All right, council. At this time, I will close the public hearing and entertain a motion on item 10.

I move to approve item 10 as presented.

I'll second it.

We have a motion by Council Member Pilkington. We have a second by Mayor Pro Tem Walker. Council, please cast your vote.

I'm struggling, but aye.

Item 10 passes four votes yes, zero votes no, one abstention. Item 11 is a first reading in a public hearing to consider adopting an ordinance authorizing an amendment and adopting the tax increment financing reinvestment zone number one, financing and project plans start over first reading in a public hearing to consider adopting an ordinance authorizing an amendment and adopting the tax increment financing reimbursed reinvestment zone number one financing and project plans to align with master plans which include recognizing and allocating funding for infrastructure agreements and related projects well as adjusting revenues allocating funding for future debt service operating expenditures and public improvements for fiscal years 2026 through 2062 miss Bernard yes thank you mayor and council can you hear me

The financing plan amendment that's before you was approved by the reinvestment zone board yesterday at their board meeting. Just kind of going through the process for the financing plan amendment at this time of the year. We receive certified values from the appraisal district. We update our revenue estimates. We also go through projects and look at aligning our funding with project delivery. We review the project managers and design team go through reviews, project scope, delivery, timing. They continue to update project cost estimates as some of these are long range master plan projects. We also look through the master plan project listing for funding of any of the projects listed there. And then there's also the concept design and project visioning that helps drive this amendment process. Looking at from our certified values, I'm gonna back up two slides just to show the reinvestment zone. of the city of Temple that Brynn mentioned earlier in her presentation that was created in 1982. It is the area around the airport, what we call the airport park, the corporate park, the green park, the industrial park, the purple, And then we have the TMED area. It also goes through our downtown and then also picks up not all of Synergy Park, but some of Synergy Park. Participating in our reinvestment zone are seven taxing entities, Temple ISD, City of Temple, Bell County, Temple College District, Troy ISD, Elm Creek, and Belton ISD. And looking at the increment values from the certified tax roll for 2027, and I'm gonna look at them by entity, you look at the far right increase or decrease compared to the value that was for 2026, You can see the first four taxing entities had significant increase in their increment value over, ranges from 520 million to over 614 million. Most of that is attributed to Meta Palmer coming online to the tax base. If you look down at the bottom table, tax levy, the total reinvestment zone tax levy for 2027 was $59.2 million. That is an increase of $17.3 million compared to the levy in 2026. And again, it shows by each tax entity the increase compared to the previous year, but the total is $17,379,000. Looking at the increment revenue by tax levy entity, Temple ISD makes up 49% of that levy. City of Temple, a little over 26%. Bell County, 12. Temple College, just a little over nine. And I won't read through the others. Looking at the tax base, and this is for City of Temple only, the increment value of over $2.1 billion, 62% of that is commercial properties, excuse me, industrial is 62%, commercial is a little over 15%. So significant industrial, commercial property values within the reinvestment zone. We've also seen an increase in our multifamily and residential development within the reinvestment zone. This year it makes up a little over 18%. Looking at our future increment revenue as we project those for 2027, or what was on the certified roll plus in the future, I mentioned earlier Palmer Meta. It was their, they come online almost 100% complete with all their buildings as of January 1, 2026, which will be the levy for FY 2027. We had estimated their value based on their investment commitment of $800 million. Their actual investment as of January 1, 2026, was over $1.2 billion that was added to the tax roll. So almost two times of what we estimated the value would be is what come on the tax roll. And what does that mean for the reinvestment zone? Once the abatement was applied, we were estimating revenue would be, to the reinvestment zone, a little over $6. close to 6.4 million, it actually is 13.8 million, which is an increase of 7.4 million during the abatement period. So significant increase compared to what we estimated. And again, when we estimate in the future, we try to be conservative in what our estimates are.

But usually you send back at about 20%.

I do. I back off the commitment because investment doesn't necessarily equal taxable value.

I understand. I'm just giving you a hard time.

I know.

But that's super conservative.

Yes, sir.

Sorry.

Looking at other... Awesome. Earlier, when I went over the map for the reinvestment zone, when you look at Rowan's projects, only about 80% of one building is within the reinvestment zone for Stampede. Ranger development, that will be in our reinvestment zone. But what's Lasso, Kayak, Temple, that development, that is outside of the reinvestment zone, so it doesn't go into the increment zone. But looking at forecasting what their revenues will be to the reinvestment zone in the year that they come online at 100%, you see Stampede is adding 8.6 million. Ranger would add a little over 6.5 million. It's not total revenues, but to the reinvestment zone. And then Palmer, the 13.8 million, all of those total over $29 million. And when I looked at the percent of revenue for the reinvestment zone in 2030, 31, that would make up about 37% of the revenue, or the increment, those three developments. Again, significant. Also, we look at this amendment comparing what our current financing plan is compared to the proposed financing plan. Again, some of this, we had estimates in it, in the plan. This shows the net, or the increase compared to what we have adopted today. And that's the far right column. Even though you saw the revenue was $17 million more than the previous year, only $10.3 million is being added because we already had some in the plan for META. Looking at our financing plan amendment, just some other highlights. When we go through the source of funds, we have the increase in increment update to the certified role, which I just went over. We also have estimated South Temple infrastructure projects, developer contributions at 23.8 million. Project savings from other projects, 7.4 million. And then we're accelerating two projects in future years that adds money back in financing them today. That adds money for reallocation in future years. Highlights of some of the proposed use of funds. We have the public safety assessment fee. We're bringing it up to the actual certified increment value for residential multifamily development within the zone, we added 507,000. Added, this amendment includes 1.9 million for street maintenance. Zone-related municipal services, 4.5 million for four years. That's being included in the amendment. The construction, or relocation of fire station number eight of 8.8 million. future land purchases of 1.6, expansions of the airport parking for jets of a little under $2 million, and then a new project that's being added along I-35 overlook district development, a total of $54.1 million, and that's over a period of four years. And then also allocation of additional funds for the South Temple infrastructure projects of 36.9 million. When I said that we added the 500,000 to public safety assessment.

Tracy, can you bring your mic up?

It brings that total to 3.5 million. The zone-related municipal service payment of 4.5 million, again, that covers four years, is to pay for incremental municipal service costs, not intended to duplicate costs funded through other zone programs, and it ends in FY 2030 as additional taxable value strengthens general fund capacity. I'd be happy to answer any questions related to that amendment or any of the revenue sources.

Thank you. Council, anything for Ms. Bernard? This item is subject to a public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak may do so. We ask you step to the podium. Let him in.

Yes, I'm it then. Mayor and council, thank you once again tonight. I know this is reinvestment zones number 47 and 50, and talked about reinvestment zone number one. Are they all put together? There's just one governing board for all the reinvestments, or is it individuals?

I could start that explanation, but I see Ms. Myers is leaning forward. I'm going to let her go for it.

This item, Alan, relates to a tax increment financing reinvestment zone, which the city has one of. The other items, though similarly named in state code, are different animals. Those are tax abatement reinvestment zones. And so those are entirely different things, although very confusingly similarly named.

So we only have one?

We only have one tax increment financing reinvestment zone, which is governed by the board of directors. appointed by the city council and the other participating taxing entities. And then the TARS, which are the next two items on the agenda, are geographic designations that the city council has to make prior to the consideration of a tax abatement within for investments made in that specific area. A TERS or a tax increment financing reinvestment zone is also a geographic area, but it takes the increased increment or the taxes above the base year taxes and reinvests those into additional infrastructure projects that help support future development and growth within that geographic boundary.

And that's a real problem.

And we reference it with individual numbers because they're non-contiguous or just because they occurred at different times?

On the TARs? No, the TURs. The TERS does not have to be contiguous under state law. Ours happens to be contiguous, but it doesn't have to be. You could have non-contiguous areas under the same TERS, but ours is a continuous area. That map that Tracy showed, it may not look like it, but there are at least strips that connect it in different parts.

It goes down the...

east loop 363 and connects to the synergy park in in the south let me just say that i appreciate all the hard work both of you folks do to try to keep this thing straight and try to help me thank you they named them something different so that'd be clear but thank you alan is that it

Does it? All righty. Anyone from the audience? All right. At this time, council, I will close the public hearing on item 11 and entertain a motion.

We approve item 11. Second.

We have a motion by council member Grant. We have a second by council member Emmons. Council, please cast your vote.

Aye. Aye.

Item 11 passes five votes to zero. I'm gonna read Items 12 and 13 in together. Item 12 reads, the first reading in a public hearing to consider adopting an ordinance redesignating the boundaries of the tax abatement reinvestment zone number 47. located generally east of bob white road and north of lorraine avenue and further currently identified by bell county appraisal district with property id numbers two three nine six seven six three six four nine one one two eight nine four seven seven five five two four nine five five and 106228 for commercial industrial tax abatement and item 13 is the first reading in a public hearing to consider adopting an ordinance designating approximately 303 acres in synergy park located generally east of highway 190 and both north and south of fm 3117 and further Currently identified by Bell County Appraisal District property ID numbers 7068, 7073, 7067, 7069, 7071, 209986, 209988, and 234587 as City of Temple tax abatement reinvestment zone number 50 for commercial industrial tax abatement. You're up.

Um, as you just read that long description, uh, this is for item 12 and item 13. Item 12 is the first reading and redesignation of TARS number 47. Item 13 is the first reading and designated designation of TARS number 50. I've combined the presentations tonight. Uh, tax abatement reinvestment zones are governed by tax code section 312.201. The city council may by ordinance designated tax abatement reinvestment zone or a TARS. If the designation is likely to contribute to retention or expansion of primary employment, attract major investment in the TARS, that would be a benefit to the property and would contribute contribute to the economic development of the city. The ordinance must state the boundaries of the zone and the eligibility for tax abatement. requires a public hearing and a finding that the improvements sought are feasible and practical and would be a benefit to the land to be included in the zone and to the municipality after the expiration of the agreement. Temple's standards for tax abatement, the council can consider designating a tax abatement reinvestment zone and authorize abatement if at least two of the following criteria are met. The project involves a minimum increase in property value of 300% for construction of a new facility or 50% for expansion of an existing facility. The project makes a substantial contribution to redevelopment efforts or strategic economic development programs. The project has high visibility image impact, or is of a significantly higher level of development quality. The project is in an area that might not otherwise be developed. The project can serve as a prototype and catalyst for other developments of higher standard. The project stimulates desired concentrations of employment or commercial activity, or the project generates greater employment than would otherwise be achieved. Under this tax abatement criteria, staff still believes that the project meets Temple's standards for tax abatement and the criteria in Chapter 312. The project involves a minimum increase in property value of 300% for construction of new facilities and makes a substantial contribution to redevelopment efforts or strategic economic development programs. The project stimulates desired concentration of employment or commercial activity and generates greater employment than would otherwise be achieved. And the project will expand the employment base, attract major investment, and contribute to the economic development of the city. On October 2nd of last year, council approved a tax abatement agreement with Rowan Temple LLC to abate a percentage of the increases in the taxable value of property associated with their project in the Synergy Industrial Park. That agreement contained a provision that the agreement is applicable to future phases of development under the same terms and conditions if the next phase of land is in a TARS. Rowan must invest a minimum of $700 million and retain 40 full-time employees per phase in order to receive the abatement. And today is the first reading of ordinance of ordinances, re-designating tar's number 47 and designation of tar's number 50 tar's number 47. Um, currently tar's number 47 includes approximately 554 acres located generally east of Bob white drive and north of Lorraine council designated this tar's at its, um, October 2nd, regular council meeting after two readings in a public hearing. If redesignated, the cars will include the approximate 316 acres of land adjacent to the initial project, which is shown in that circle circle. This is land acquired for Rowan for phase one, after the city purchased the landfill, um, expansion property. That was the original location for their building. The land is in synergy. Industrial park is near a nearby proximity to the landfill and Panda BKV power plant. Um, the first reading and public hearing for annexation and plan development, light industrial zoning for this additional land was heard earlier today. Regarding TARS number 50, the land is zoned PDLI as of April 16th, 2026 with plan development conditions, including screening noise mitigation, traffic impact study requirements and utility service agreement. The land proposed for this TARS includes an approximate 303 acres in synergy park. located generally east of Highway 190 and both north and south of FM 3117, as depicted in the circle on your screen. It's also located in the Synergy Industrial Park in nearby vicinity to the landfill and Banda BKV power plant. And I'd be happy to answer any questions you have about the redesignation or the designation of these TARs.

Ma'am. Council, anything for Carla?

I mentioned the other day that 700,000, if they go below, I mean 700 million, if they go below 700 million, then they get nothing, correct?

That's correct. They have a minimum investment commitment of $700 million per phase.

That's so significant. Sometimes we talk about millions of dollars, like millions of gallons of water, but that is a huge investment in our community. I'm very grateful for it.

Counseling, any other comments? I'm going to open the public hearing. We're going to hold one public hearing on item 12 and 13. So if your desire is to speak on one of those items or both, yes, you step to the podium and state your name or raise your hand on the virtual platform.

Good evening again, Joe Royer district two. Um, again, for the record, I'd like to point out that item 12 is referring to Rowan lasso. I did not hear that mentioned item 13 is referring to Rowan ranger. Also, as I understand it, we must table item 13. We have to redo the public forum at the next meeting because proper notice was not given. Notice was given on August 16th, but the state code requires 30 day notice. And the whole point of giving public notices for the public forum. So I hope that we can redo our item 13 public forum at the next meeting. Um, again, I'm no fan of Roland. I'm no fan of hyperscale data centers, so I'm opposed. Thank you.

Thank you.

Mayor if I could respond to his statement. The notice that was posted on August 16th is for the consideration of an amendment to the tax abatement agreement which you'll consider at your next meeting on September 17th.

So these both items were duly posted.

Yes sir.

The creation of a new tax abatement district requires 30 days notice.

It requires a seven day notice published in the newspaper.

Hey, Joe, for the audio.

Yes, I double checked this twice today. Item 12 is fine, but item 13 requires 30 days notice because it's creating a new tax abatement zone.

Yes, the requirements are that you publish in the newspaper a notice at least seven days prior to the public hearing, which we did that. For a tax abatement agreement, since we're amending the tax abatement agreement, that requires a posted 30-day notice, which was posted on August 16, 2026.

As I read it, this was creation of a new tax abatement zone requires 30 days notice.

That's not correct.

All right.

Marcy good flash resident of temple. This reminds me of something that hit Austin. As I told you in a different meeting, I lived there for more than five decades and I was active with the city council and the community. I would recommend, and I would ask, and I would appreciate if we put a pause, you have a chance to pause some things, and this is one of them. There's a lot of outcry about the concerns about the data centers. Yes, they're saying they're gonna bring a lot of money into the community. I would like to see an economic breakdown of that, of is that really gonna be monitored, that they actually did that, and what informed does the money happen? How does it actually hit the community, and who does it affect? Tax abatements are not a popular topic now for understandable reasons. And I'm not a fan of that to be randomly given. In Austin, and forgive me for bringing this up, but I really feel like I'm living through the horror story of Austin again. There was an effort to develop some land for something, and it was done, a lot of approval was given in secrecy. And I believe there's been a lot of silence on the things that have been agreed to that we were not made aware of. because there's a done deal in a lot of the happenings tonight. I was very active in raising a protest against the city, to the city, and they listened. The Austin City Council, this was back in 1984 and 85, listened to the community. Had they not, Austin would not have developed to the great level it has today, which was a little bit more than I cared to see happen, but an area would have been ruined had they approved this particular project. The entire part of Austin, below what's been White Boulevard, I don't know if you know what that is, Highway 71, would have been, No man's land it would have been trash would have been turned into trash. It is now all of Austin So sorry with allergies all of Austin is now very very prosperous It has grown it has grown economically because they listened to the community they didn't listen to the entity that wanted to do this one particular thing and they realized they needed to listen to the city, to the citizens. I would imagine that's gonna happen here too. I really wish you all would partner with us, the people who live here, not the people with billions of dollars who wanna make money from the city. Please consider, we're bright, intelligent, educated people. Please consider involving us to a greater degree than it appears this has been done. I can't tell you how bad it would have been if Austin hadn't listened to the community back then. And I know what I'm speaking of. So thank you for listening to me.

Thank you.

We appreciate your words and appreciate you being here. There are other bright, intelligent people that are for this. So they you know, they may not come up here and speak, but they're also telling us that they approve of what's happening and they appreciate us moving forward with it. So I mean, it's We just can agree to disagree, and that's okay. That's what this is all about.

Okay, thank you.

Anybody else want to speak on this, Adam? No, Alan? Do we have a camera on him? Did he go to sleep?

Is he okay? No, I'm still here.

Okay, all right, all right. We were just checking on you, Alan.

I actually spoke on this item on the previous one by mistake.

Oh, okay. All right. I apologize for that. No, no, you're fine. I think that it's appropriate to point out that all this development that we're talking about is in a designated industrial park. with a landfill to the north and a power plant to the south and the loop road to the west. So, and, and a railroad track. And this is, uh, this is all appropriately located and, um, To me, the location means everything. It's not going up next door to Scott and Wyatt or something like that. This is a designated industrial park, and that's what it's for. Anybody else want to speak on the public hearing? I'm not going to ask Alan. So with that, council, I'm going to close the public hearing on both items 12 and 13. And I'll entertain a motion on item 12.

Make a motion to approve item 12. Second.

We have a motion by Mayor Pro Tem Walker. We have a second by Councilmember Immons. Council, please cast your vote.

Aye.

Aye. Adam 12 passes four votes yes, zero votes no, and one abstention. Council, I'll entertain a motion on item 13.

I move to approve item 13 as presented.

We have a motion by Councilmember Pilkington. We have a second by Councilmember Emmons. Council, please cast your vote. Item 13 passes, four votes yes, zero votes no, and one abstention. That's the end of tonight's agenda, but I would like to, real quickly, we've always done this in the past, point out the leadership temple class we have a couple of of the leadership temple no I think we've got to we've got Stewart yeah so so Whitney or BJ Uh-oh, you're up, BJ. If you would stand up, give a two-minute synopsis of Leadership Temple, and then we'll have each of the members, participants, classmates, give a quick intro.

Can you come to the mic, please?

Oh, sorry. Those two guys, y'all come up, too. You're going to speak for just a second. Don't take too long.

We're all tired. It's been a long night, I know. So I'm the class president this year for Leadership Temple. This is my third year participating. Whitney Terrio is the chamber CEO, president. Yeah, OK. So this is the 40th year of Leadership Temple, and they open applications every year, and they look for individuals that are up and coming in the community and serving in some sort of leadership role. We go throughout the community for about 10 months and get to visit all of the local things that the community has to offer, city council, county commissioners, and different things like that. So all of the individuals going through Leadership Temple have to attend one council meeting, and these individuals chose tonight. So I'll let them introduce themselves.

Do they get extra credit if it's over two hours?

There you go.

My name is Bailey Eichenloff. I'm one of the owners of Legacy Home Builders. We're the... construction company that builds all the two-story uh duplexes in east temple right now and i'm also a real estate agent with the fox real estate group and a active member of tapa and i'm also the skeet shoot chair for the home pack very good thank you you need to come to our clay shoot

I'm Stuart Spidell. I am Director of Business Services and McDonald's Engagement with Ronald McDonald House Charities here in Temple. Speaking on that, we have seen an influx of... support from our community we were on the news and stuff earlier this week and i just we want to say how grateful we are the last three months we've seen a very high occupancy rate where we've been completely full with the wait list in my 10 years there that's been rare but anyway and that's not good news huh right that's not good news that means there's some sick children you know it's I always think of it like it's like this weird thing where you're like oh are we there's a service and we get to provide it and then it's like

Well, okay, well, there's a service.

But what a blessing, what a blessing for Ronald McDonald House to be there. Yeah, I also serve on ZBA, and thanks to y'all having some faith in me and whatnot. That's been very educational, and it's been a pleasure to serve on that board.

So, yeah, that's me. Thank you. And I actually forgot one other individual here, Chief.

The new guy.

Yeah, never been to one of these meetings before. But yeah, it's truly a blessing. One of the first things I did coming on board four months ago was reach out to the chamber. It was an important program at my former agency and through that city. So being a part of it here, it's a fantastic thing. Just being able to connect to multiple areas that you typically would not be able to connect to just

living or coming and commuting to a city so looking forward to it it's just the start but uh it's definitely a pleasure to be a part of it thank you thank you all thank you all for your participation in that i've put a couple of employees through that and they've really benefited from that so that's been good um i want to thank everybody for being here tonight i know that uh it was at times fiery and um you know some disagreement here and there and that happens that's what community outreach and discussion is about so we are all building a community that we that we believe will best serve the residents and we have differing opinions on that and I hope I hope that's okay so again thank you all for