City Council - Regular Meeting

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Roll call, please, Madam Clerk.

Mayor Beagle.

Present.

Deputy Mayor Gottschall. Here. Councilmember Behrman.

Present.

Council Member Gremlin-Fox is excused. Council Member Kennedy.

Present.

Council Member O'Day. Present. Council Member Simmons. Here. We have quorum.

Thank you. Changes or additions to the agenda as presented tonight. City Manager Brown.

Mayor, I have no changes nor additions, sir.

Assistant City Manager Benson.

I have none, sir.

Any from the dais? Seeing none, we'll move on to the first item here. Approval of minutes. We've got two sets of minutes to approve tonight. The first is the special council meeting minutes of June 23, 2026. Do I have a motion?

So moved.

Support. Thank you. Any discussion? I've got a motion and a second to approve the special city council meeting minutes of June 23, 2026. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? And we have a second set of minutes to approve tonight, and that's from the regular city council meeting of June 23, 2026. Do I have a motion?

So moved.

Thank you. Any discussion? I got a motion and a second to approve the second, the regular city council meeting minutes of June 23rd, 2026. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Correspondence, we have none, but I will go on to the record and say that I have received 11 emails from residents concerning the data center project. That moves us to the first call to the public. I'm going to read those rules. They are as follow. The public shall address the council during call to the public which shall be included on the agenda immediately after correspondence and again immediately after new business. The first call to the public immediately after correspondence shall be limited to agenda items only. A person shall not address the council in excess of five minutes unless time is extended by a majority vote of the council present. Persons wishing to address the council shall identify themselves in their place of residence and shall state their reasoning for addressing the council. And all comments by the public shall be married directly to council. And with that, I'm asking you to please adhere to the five-minute rule so everybody who wants to come up and talk during the call to the public will give them ample time. Thank you. So do we have anybody for the first question?

Good evening, Mayor Beagle, members of council. Good evening. Tom Resnick, 1636 Wayhill Drive. I came here tonight or plan to come here tonight in hopes of supporting an extension to the moratorium that you had put in place and make further comments on the draft ordinance from the Planning Commission. But instead, I see a request for a waiver of that moratorium, which I feel is a really bad idea because I think we need to spend a lot more time, not less time, working through this draft ordinance and make sure it's right for this future land use. This is why I also applaud those four bills that sit on the Senate floor and the House floor in the state to try to extend it out through April of next year, a statewide moratorium. I also appreciate the efforts that our Planning Commission did in trying to make modifications to the draft ordinance before bringing it to you for the first reading, but I feel we could still do a lot better. While the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act strictly prohibits exclusionary zoning, I feel we could accommodate this type of potential land use in a different way by thinking a lot more outside the box. Water and energy uses aside, I feel we'd be better served as a city if we took the MHP zoned property that's adjacent to the freeway down in the southwest corner, and move it to a more desirable location and designate this parcel and portions of the M2 and the IRO that are also adjacent to the freeway and create a data center overlay. I'm sure that commuters going 70 to 75 miles an hour on the freeway are not going to complain about the constant drone of a data center. Well, I understand it's important to get this zoning ordinance adopted. Let's please not rush it and think about extending it, not waiving it, and allow more time to work through these alternatives. Please remember, it's these people as well as the 200 or so that showed up at the Planning Commission that elected you to work for the people and not a non-resident developer who gets to go back to his quiet suburban home. Thank you for your time.

My name is Katie Weeks and my husband and I live at 1725 Norton Creek Cork in Wixom. We've lived here for 30 years. I'm here today because I'm concerned about the proposed data center, the waiver for the address of 3625 South Wixom Road and all future potential data centers in our town. First thing I'd like to ask of the council is have any of you signed non-disclosure agreements with any data center developers?

Sorry, it's been publicly stated that I haven't. That's been available for a while.

Well, I hope that the others will follow suit.

I don't mind. I mean, traditionally we don't answer questions during public comment.

Okay.

But I have no problem answering that question right now. I have not been presented, asked, nor have I have or would even consider signing a non-disclosure agreement.

That's good to hear. Same. Same.

Same.

Since we're commenting, same thing.

Well, it's lovely to have all of you on the record saying that, and I hope that that will be going forward. That will continue to be your mantra. The second thing is that I'm concerned about the noise levels that a data center will produce. I'm sure that you probably are aware of the noise surrounding the 30 megawatt data center in Dowagiac, Michigan. The data center operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, and emits an external mechanical hum to the equivalent of 60 to 78 decibels. As for reference, that is the equivalent to a vacuum cleaner or a garbage disposal, mechanical noise running outside your bedroom window constantly. According to Purdue University, noises in the upper 70s range are those that tend to be most annoying to people who listen to that. In May, the Dowagiac residents filed a class action lawsuit against the data developer due to headaches, disrupted sleep, and an inability to enjoy the outdoors in their property. And they worry about their property values diminishing. And I don't want to see this happen in Wixom. I've lived here for 30 years. This is my home. Thirdly, I'm worried about the watershed and our groundwater. I'm sure you know the population for Wixom is 17,000 people. And according to the nonprofit Profit Environmental and Energy Study Institute, a large data center can consume the same amount of water every day per day as a town of up to 50,000 people. That is more than double our town and using all of that water. Moreover, their cooling systems often introduce significant amounts of contaminants into the wastewater, including phosphates and heavy metals like chromium. I want to know how we plan to mitigate this water usage and potential contamination. I don't want to see a crucial life-giving resource sucked up or contaminated by a data center. I urge the council to continue to maintain its current moratorium and to pass continuing resolutions which will prevent any data centers operating in Wixom for the foreseeable future. Thank you.

Hello, good evening. My name is Jessica Buck and I live at 3014 Madison Street right in downtown Wixom. I want to thank City Council for being so transparent with this and working really hard for the residents of Wixom and hearing all of us out tonight. urge you to extend the moratorium and also waive the developer's waiver of the moratorium tonight. I really appreciate the diligence of the ordinance and being rewritten after they've heard the planning commission, after they've heard from residents, but they need to do more and more. There are lawsuits pouring in about these data centers. This is really a new thing that these data centers are being built in communities. And the lawsuits that are pouring in are super, super concerning. A data center in Oregon recently settled with residents for $20.5 million because the water cooling that they claimed was safe was not safe and caused health issues including miscarriages, kidney failure, and cancers. I really am terrified at the thought of how many cancer diagnosis we will get, health problems that we will have from these data centers. We really, truly do not know the effects until down the road. as far as that it's state law now that we cannot restrict them or stop them from building right now. There's an upcoming election right now. This is a huge issue that's going to be at the election for governor. And a lot of open election seats in November. And people are going to run on this. A study shows that 70% of the community is against data centers. I think that number is extremely low. I think it's actually way higher than that. I think majority, vast majority of the people, community is against it. When people are running for election they're literally saying no data centers, no data centers and that's what they're running on. This is going to be a key turning point in the election. So I think by extending the moratorium you are going to see a new law in the very foreseeable future that the public does not want data centers and that that law is going to change. So I urge you to extend that moratorium because you don't want to pass anything or allow anything at this point, juncture, before the law changes. We simply just do not know the effects of these data centers. Noise is the number one concern that people have. And what I'm concerned with in the ordinance that I was reading is it puts into noise restrictions for the data centers. The data centers that have been built are completely ignoring every ordinance that is put into place about noise. We saw that when people went and visited data centers. They say that it's under a certain level. It's not under that certain level. So they're completely violating these ordinances. So that's a huge problem. So we need to put a more stricter recourse in the ordinance if they don't comply with the ordinance, especially on noise. And right now it's a fine? They got deep pockets. They're going to be able to pay that fine no problem. They'd rather pay that fine and keep operating. I believe that the recourse, if they violate the noise ordinance, should be immediate shutdown of the facility until they can comply with that noise ordinance. Same thing with the water usage. They say that they're only going to use this amount of water a day. They're going to violate that ordinance. So we need a stronger recourse than a simple fine if they violate that. And that should be complete shutdown of the facility until that they can comply. A simple fine is not going to be enough for these deep pocket data centers. So I urge to look back at the ordinances, put stricter recourses about that. When they violate that, because we've just seen again and again, because there's so much that we don't know about these data centers, right? We don't know really the recourse and the long effects of them. But what we've seen so far is completely alarming and harmful to the public. And so I urge you to wait it out, wait till the law is changed, and definitely look at the ordinance as far as what recourse when they violate these ordinances because they absolutely will. Thank you.

Hello, Council. My name is Alexis Madsen, and I live at 1402 Trailside Boulevard in Wixom. I'm here because I want to talk about the moratorium and everybody to think about who profits from these data centers. As somebody with an MBA, I can vouch for the fact that developers don't show up here with a plan or request unless everything already lines up. Before a single resident will see a dime or a single job is filled, the land, the tax breaks, the powers and water are already planned in their favor. Many cities in the nation are locking these deals and residents are being handed a receipt for purchase that they're never agreeing to. We are not the customer but are the cost of doing business here. Wixom has what these developers want and that's why we need to be more proactive and move first. We have an underused DTE substation, land and water and a small town. This is the exact kind of infrastructure that makes our city a target. Our resources and enjoyment of the city should never become a discount for a multi-billion dollar company. In Cheyenne, Wyoming, their residents are fighting the council because officials had a contract with developers in private, and waited to inform the public that there was contaminated water from the facility. In Wisconsin this year, local officials in Beaver Dam, Kenosha, and Janesville all quietly signed NDA with data center developers before the residents could even know a project was coming. Harm from data centers to the neighborhood is going to start on day one of construction. In Granger, Indiana, a Microsoft data center construction has left neighbors living under what is described as permanent dust clouds that's thick enough to worry about their lung health for them and their children. In Arizona, there's reports of contractors tapping into city drinking water without permits during construction to combat that dust. In Mason County, West Virginia, a month's worth of runoff from data centers have flooded neighborhoods, cracking foundations of homes. In Trenton, Wisconsin, there's testimony about a metadata center 1.6 miles from their homes, or for purposes of this meeting, 2,816 yards from their homes, much less than our current moratorium states. The creek behind their home previously survived generations of drought and has finally stopped flowing and had heavy metals in the water. This is just the beginning of the effects of what construction and early development can show us. We don't know what this operation does to a town in 30 years. Pushing forward in the name of progress too quickly has hurt people before. We don't know yet, and in the name of progress keeps getting used as an excuse to skip the proof. Wixom is not the first community to face this, and the stories of other towns with data centers should be scaring us straight. Weeks ago, lawmakers and residents across the state were at the capital steps defending a statewide moratorium. Why? Because Michigan has already handed out equipment and property tax breaks in 2025 alone that the state's own nonpartisan fiscal agency says will cost our schools, police, and fire departments, as well as roads, at least $52.5 million, likely more. This is less money going to our kids' classrooms and city safety and being redirected to server farms and big companies that do not care about us. We don't get to ask them in 30 years to change their plans if we let this go forward without guard rails and strict rules now. We will be paying for these data centers more than once, first with our wallets, second with our health. When the water our kids drink and the air they breathe is unmonitored and illnesses may not show for decades, when utility bills rise and property values go down because of the data center next door, when tax dollars that should have gone to our schools are being used to subsidize a corporation that will turn a profit either way, we will be paying these costs for infrastructure that we never asked for. And we do need to move forward with a hostile ordinance as far as zoning, not out of spite, but because it's the only tool that we have left in this room to protect our residents. I want everybody to remember the Ford plant in Wixom. When the math stopped working for them, their bottom line, it closed. The state of Michigan even offered over $100 million in tax cuts today. If a company that built our town could walk away after 50 years, what makes anybody confident that a data center will make it past 10 years' time? I'm asking this council to continue to extend the moratorium and not to approve this waiver. I don't want to see any closed doors deals and all contract terms should be reviewed via public hearings before a vote. Developers should be required to pay 100% of infrastructure costs, including upfront and long-term costs for our water, wastewater, treatment plants, and grid upgrades, as well as safety upgrades if required. Independent third-party testing of all wastewater discharge and air quality requirements should be required with no self-reporting. as well as a legally binding community benefit. Money will go to our schools, safety, and community if they're coming here. It requires amounts or percentages that make up the land they're taking. I do want to say that I'm not against progress, but I also know what we're dealing with. They will always resort to where not legally required to. Our kids will inherit whatever we allow long after the data center ends.

Good evening. My name is Annette LeBaron, and I am State Senator Runstead's District Director. Unfortunately, Senator Runstead is unable to make tonight's meeting, but he asked that I read the fouling statement on his behalf. I want to recognize the concerns that have been raised to my office by many Wixom residents regarding lifting the data center moratorium that is currently in place. Any change, particularly one that may impact the character, safety, environment, or overall well-being of the city warrants careful consideration and transparency. On June 4th, I introduced legislation to create a statewide, year-long moratorium on new data centers, any new data center projects. A moratorium is not the end of development. It is a necessary safeguard. It buys time to enact real standards, performance guarantees, job creation requirements, local consent, and taxpayer protections like the bill I'm advancing in the Senate. Having a moratorium allows this board to carefully review the impact of the city regarding water supplies, electrical grids, noise levels, property values, environmental habitat, carbon and diesel emissions, city aesthetics, traffic patterns, employment impact, and most importantly the health and well-being of your residents. Government does not exist to serve developers or out-of-state interests. It exists to serve the people, the citizens who live, work, and raise their families here. As your state senator, I am closely monitoring this situation as it develops and will be engaged in the process, seeking transparency from all parties and advocating for a thorough review of this project or any other project. I want to ensure that the voice of the community is heard and represented in all discussions related to this potential business in Wixom. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Heather Perouche. I live at 1658 Brookside Court in Norton Creek subdivision. This will probably be short and sweet, but my biggest concern is my daughter sitting in the back. Where this is proposed being is within about 7 tenths of a mile and about a mile and a half from where the new Wixom Elementary is being built. So a lot of things you hear about with EMF and all those different things obviously are the first thing going through a mother's head. And I see several of my kids' classmates' parents in the room as well. We're also talking about building a new common area, which would literally be almost across the street from where this location is being proposed. So all of the enjoyment that we get sitting outside these new areas, these new schools we're supposed to be excited about, even if this developer comes in and says, oh, our levels are well under, the walls block it, et cetera. What about the power and the infrastructure that goes into this? What about all the extra lines? Where are those running through? Are they going to be underneath a new school that's being built that we just laid the last beam for? We don't have a big city. It's about nine square miles, I believe it is. And we have right there residences. We have schools right there, new parks right there that we all want to use and enjoy. And the safety of our residents, of our children, of the people that use this space, I think is a lot more important than some extra income that the city would get. I know, as someone said very, very intelligently, there's different things in place at the state that maybe say we can't do this. But I know that we've also done things like banned dispensaries in Wixom and things like that. And so with this moratorium, the information that we need in order to investigate the laws that maybe the state can do in November, it'll give it a chance for that to play out. So thank you guys very much. I do appreciate your transparency. And I remember even last year at our HOA meeting, I'm on the board, you came and talked about the things the city was trying to do to put safeguards in place. So I just encourage you to keep doing that. The city is behind you and we appreciate your attention to the matter. Thank you.

Hello. My name is Nick Cartier. I live at 1837 Swanee in Walled Lake, so I'm not really in Wixom, but I'm like Wixom adjacent. Pretty much at the last meeting, we talked in length about the noises that the data centers make. One thing that I'm really worried about that we didn't really touch on then was how it would affect the local wildlife and the ecosystem around the surrounding area. The variety of rumbling and humming noises that would be flooding the surrounding area with low frequency sounds that we can't really hear would propagate up to about a mile away and it would just totally mess with the whole ecosystem. The noise pollution can cause stress, it can weaken immune systems, and it can disrupt the circadian rhythm of animals, including humans. Also, it can interfere with wildlife's abilities to hunt prey, navigate, find mates, and pretty much do things that wildlife does. I've also seen some studies lately of how it's been affecting bees and just a lot of the pollinators with the... with the low frequencies and everything about how they're able to talk with each other, and I just think that that's something that we don't really have a lot of data on yet, so a lot more research has to go into how it's gonna affect the ecosystem before we can just agree to have data centers come up all willy-nilly anyways i'm going to keep it a short and sweet and to the point i thank you guys for letting everybody know that we're able to come up here and talk and pretty much just like having an open conversation i know uh last time it was a little back and forth and a little heated and some people were angry it went out until like midnight almost but i mean from what i saw you guys are you guys care about the city and you guys care about the community and i appreciate that thank you

Good evening. My name is Michael Foster. I am the property owner at 30681 Wixom Road, the address of our family business, Foster Specialty Floors. We have owned this property for the last 53 years, and I have witnessed the city of Wixom change exponentially in the last five decades. Some of these changes have been great and a real blessing to the businesses and the citizens of this city. However, the current consideration of a data center inside the city limits will cause extreme harm to the current and future businesses and citizens of Wixom. One of the proposed data sites is 30625 Wixom Road. This is the property that touches my property. At last month's meeting, there was much discussion about setback boundaries when it came to residential owners. I have yet to see any setback boundaries when it comes to businesses that are zoned in M1, M2, or IRO. Am I to assume that there is no consideration of the impact on businesses and employees of existing facilities? Am I to assume that there will be a data center within a few feet of my office? Yesterday, I took several decibel readings in my parking lot and inside my office. My parking lot at 9.30 a.m. had a DBA sound rating of 44 with a momentary peak of 61 with an average reading of 50. Last month we learned that decibel numbers are logarithmic and that an increase of 10 decibels would seem twice as loud to the human ear. That said, a data center next to my business with only a 60 decibel limit would be twice as loud as street traffic and it would be relentless. In my research, it seems that most data centers operate between 70 and 85 decibels without the generators running. Most data center generators operate between 90 and 105 decibels each. State and federal OSHA laws require employers to provide free hearing protection to all employees exposed to 85 decibels or more. Has the city considered the potential loss of employees the existing businesses would face in light of this constant roar? As employers are legally bound to provide a safe working environment, how is exposure to potentially hazardous sound levels allow us to provide a safe working environment? The city is inviting workman's comp suits against any business near a data center. In 1989, we removed an underground gas tank from our property. During this process, the environmental engineers discovered chemicals in the soil foreign to anything we use. When I asked what type of business would generate this waste, he pointed up the road to Ford Motor. I asked, well, then shouldn't Ford Motor pay for my cleanup costs then? He said, you would have to sue Ford Motor and prove that the chemicals came from them. And they have buildings full of lawyers. Pay for it yourself. It'll cost you less. My question is, who's going to pay for any potential leak from a data center? During this process, I did find out that the aqua fear under my property flows from south to north. Thus, any contamination from a proposed data center into the aqua fear will run north into Wixom Elementary School, downtown, and City Hall. As mentioned at the last meeting, a concern for possible litigation from a potential developer. Certainly a protracted lawsuit from a multi-billion dollar corporation is unwinnable and the city would go into bankruptcy. Likewise, a class action suit by the citizens of Wixom would force the city into bankruptcy. In both scenarios, it's the businesses and the citizens that lose and the data center would probably get built anyway. A moratorium by definition is a pause of current actions. presumably to gather more data, evaluate long-term consequences, and finally come to a sound and educated conclusion. I would strongly encourage the city to write an ordinance that does not destroy current businesses or citizens. Make it ironclad. Severe financial punishment and criminal charges against the officers for failure to comply. We simply don't know the long-term detrimental effects of data centers. At one point in time, experts thought thalidomide was safe for pregnant women. They were wrong. Let's not be wrong in this.

Mike Bartel, B-A-R-T-E-L, 729 Sibley Court. And I just have some things that I thought about from the planning meeting.

Can you state your name again, please?

Mike Bartel. Thank you. From the planning meeting, they had a guy. First of all, I want to thank you guys for all the work you're doing and everything and trying to get this right because if it's not right, you're going to turn Whitson Town into a ghost town. With that being said, at the last meeting, they had a noise specialist came up with all his decibels and everything. And he said the decibel level should be this much for a data center. Why so high is what I think. But then I thought, what is the decibel level going to be at one mile or a half a mile? And then I came up with, what is the distance that the decibel level will be as the wind blowing through a tree? What's that decibel level? That is the minimum distance that a data center should be allowed to be built from the downtown district. And that's border to border. Because a data center, like the previous speaker said, it'll close those businesses. And they're going to be gone forever. The data center will buy up those properties and increase their footprint. As far as the waiver of the moratorium, if you were going to put a waiver on that and let the guy start doing research, stuff like that, he's going to spend money CELINE JUST WENT THROUGH THIS, WHERE THE DATA CENTER SPENT A LOT OF MONEY, AND THE CITY COUNCIL WAS GOING TO TRY AND STOP THEM. THEY SAID, WE'RE GOING TO SUE YOU FOR THE MONEY WE HAVE INVESTED IN THIS. SO CELINE FOLDED, AND THE DATA CENTER'S GOING IN. ANOTHER POINT WOULD BE IF THERE'S A GOOD NEIGHBOR POLICY, WHERE ONE OF THE PREVIOUS OWNERS SAID, PUT THE DATA CENTER OUT THERE IN 94, 96, AND BECK ROAD. There's a hospital less than a mile away from there. How's a data center gonna affect that? Should we have a good neighbor policy where something built in our city affects a different city if we can adjust? That's basically all I have to say. Thank you.

Stacy Johnson, Medina Drive. Thanks to the board and city council for having us here for this public comment phase. This can be a bit messy or chaotic. Democracy is not quick or easy, but it is worthwhile. There's a short term rush to build data centers and cash in with little long term viability and few long term permanent jobs created. It's a modern day gold rush, boom then bust. My main concerns are there's an over consumption of electricity and water compared to the benefit and the jobs that are actually delivered to the local community. People are making money, but it's the executives of the tech companies that reap the majority of the profits while the burden of higher electric and water rates are borne by the local community. For example, water. Mid-sized data center can use about 300,000 to 500,000 gallons a day. That's enough for a small town of 10,000 to 17,000 people. Electricity. Mid-sized data center consumes 120,000 to 480,000 1,000 kilowatt hours daily, enough for a small town of about 15,000. Employees, medium scale data centers have an operational workforce. This would be full time permanent employees of about 30 people. This is not a good use of our resources, of our shared common resources. Another immediate concern is how this data center is going to connect to the grid. Currently lead times for high voltage transformers are one year up to five years out. This means half of planned US data center projects scheduled for construction are facing delays or cancellations because they lack the physical infrastructure needed to plug into the grid. So what the data centers do is called a behind the meter solution. This is a euphemism for building their own dedicated power generation sources directly on site. That usually means gas turbine generators. In South Memphis, Tennessee, the facility launched. They brought in 30 tractor trailer size methane gas generators to bypass the utility connection delays. Noise pollution and the smog coming from the nitrogen oxide resulted in lawsuits that are still ongoing. The data center can afford to pay any fine associated because they've got deep pockets. The pattern to me is clear. They submit an optimistic plan that doesn't match reality, oversell the good paying jobs and progress, then seek more and more waivers and variances. If those aren't granted, they just move ahead anyway and just pay the fines. They can afford to. If the real plan was known from the beginning, it wouldn't be approved. To me, this is called a bait and switch. Summary, mid-sized data center uses resources equivalent to 15,000 people, but only provide jobs for 30. Then there's the noise pollution and high potential for gas turbine generators and the nitrogen oxide exhaust fumes. Do we want to spend our local resources making billionaire tech CEOs richer while the local community is left with higher utility bills and noise methane pollution and we get 30 jobs in return? For me, the answer to this question is a no. Please do not approve the waiver request. There's a better use for our shared resources that will deliver long-term value to the community than a data center.

Thank you.

Hello. My name is Keith Crowder. I live at 2906 Blue Heron, Wixom. I'd like to compliment the City Council and Planning Zoning Board in implementing many suggestions from the past meeting. The word May was updated to Shell and the residential setback distance increased from 500 feet to 1,500. So thank you. One thing I want to urge to extend the moratorium and not grant the waiver. We're not in a hurry and we must step carefully through the process. Regarding the ordinance, I have a few suggestions. I work with contracts for business. I've been doing this for about 20 years. So one thing I think we need to add is some language for testing. We need testing for wastewater noise. This testing needs to be quarterly at random intervals. It must be done by independent third parties, which are selected by Wixom government officials, with vendors being changed on an annual basis. All costs must be borne by the DC applicant. If the applicant fails water testing, that is dumping contaminants like Tribar did, that are not considered normal business waste, the DC applicant will have to mitigate all costs associated to cleaning up the water, along with any watershed costs, plus they should be shut down immediately until testing is completed and results are at normal levels. If the DC applicant fails to meet the specified sound levels, then they should be held accountable in that failure by forfeiting their ability to stay open until sound levels are at the specified levels. Fines based on my review of the Wixom ordinance penalties is $500. This may be acceptable for most businesses. However, for a multi-billion dollar corporation, this is nothing and would have no impact to changing their behavior. Considering the recent history of data centers and others and failure to comply with ordinances, I would suggest specific fines of a far greater value and continued failure to add a multiplier where fines double, triple, quadruple, et cetera, with no cap. Thank you.

Thank you.

Donald Gambrell, 272 Wright Street. I just wanted to say that I wrote down a few reminders as to the hierarchy of the state of Michigan, who is actually at the forefront, first place of the hierarchy. And that is the people of the state of Michigan. But I wanted to give a few reminders I went to the Wixom website. The Construction and Development Services Department and I wanted to read this. The Construction and Development Services Department is your full service building department. Included in this department is the Planning Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals that perform a variety of services intended to protect, maintain, develop an attractive, safe, and healthy environment. Now, the mayor and city council, I brought this from your particular department, you said that throughout its history, Wixom has enjoyed a high level of citizen involvement which has contributed to the high quality of life, okay, in the community. So I wanted to remind you that you have the ultimate responsibility to protect, maintain, provide a safe and healthy environment for all of the people of the city of Wixom. Okay. And just one more reminder. The Constitution of Michigan, 1835, Article I, Bill of Rights. It says state's political power And first, all political power is inherent in the people. I want to repeat that. It is inherent in the people. We, the people, we are the first of the hierarchy of the state of Michigan. You are in office to serve us. We govern you. You do not govern us. So the will of the people is greater than the governor or any position in this state. And as a matter of fact, in this country. I could go through the United States Constitution, but that's a little bit too much right now. So, thank you.

Hi, my name is Kimberly Clancy. I am a CPA, so I'm coming from a tax perspective, numerical cost of money, profits, losses, investments, assets. I could go on and on. Corporate tax, income tax, research credits, business credits, da-da-da-da-da-da-da. So... If most of the business that I've learned in my career is that if a company wants to invest in a project or a company, don't they get their financial statements audited before they make the decision? So what are the thresholds of all these noise ordinance audits electricity usage, these are just what I heard tonight, watershed effects, air quality, water quality, electrical usage effects, and that I sleep at night, my pillow is about 12 feet from my side of the house in a condo. So what is the noise level that I'm going to hear? And I was told by a police officer in Walled Lake, because I grew up in Novi since the day they landed on the moon. And I've seen them all come up. I've worked at them all. I've seen Ford Motor Company. My dad worked at Motor Company for many years at the Glass House. I've seen all this change. I just want to know, well, I don't need to know, but I would consider if I were doing this, how much am I going to audit all those threshold levels and what is the interval of auditing periods? Are we going to do it every month, every quarter, every half year, every year, every five years? Who's the third party expert that's going to be writing down these things and their liability towards, you know, if their report is screwed up, then they're in big trouble for giving the assurance for us people to rely on that you know, that they didn't go over each threshold for whatever you want to write down, all these things that these people are talking about. What about the IRS charges outrageous amounts for income tax, 20%. I think it is for late filing or non-payment or neglect. So who's going to decide how much these people get fined? Is it going to be a per day? Is it going to be shut down on day two that they learned of the violation? That's all I think needs to be written out. These are processes. The business that owns the plant, they are the risk takers, not these people. They're going to profit off of it. We might get some jobs, but they're going to get all these tax write-offs in the beginning, so the time value of the money of their dollar is going to be worth more. They're probably going to have losses in the beginning anyways.

One minute.

I don't know when the governor's like, I don't even know where to look for the governor's, uh, tax credit. I'm assuming it's a research, whatever, or it's a, a new thing that they get all of these tax benefits if they do these types of projects. Um, Who's going to monitor all those processes and at what time, time length, and how are these people going to know the terms of all these thresholds? Because I sleep right here. So if I can hear something on the other side of my wall, they are breaking the noise ordinance.

So I am told. Fifteen seconds. Five.

Thank you.

Excuse me, ma'am. Can we get your address, please? Sure.

I live at 242 Neptune.

walled lake michigan hello my name is kelly shruba and i live at two zero four seven grassmere in wixom i haven't been to one of these in a while but i always like to follow what's going on in my city i'm a precinct delegate not because i want to but because i think every voice needs to be heard and we all need to vote I know much of what has been in my heart to say has been said by some wonderful speakers, and as you've noted, it's a bipartisan issue. This is because all people can come together when it comes to ruining our environment. We know across the board that the government right now I'll keep it from being political, but I will say that we are looking at a lot of things that benefit the people of this United States of America being taken away from EPA regulations, CDC. I don't know if anybody's heard about this diarrhea thing that's going around. That's from less monitoring. Less monitoring and rushing to make a profit. Who makes the profit? Do we make a profit? How many people are employed in data centers? How many people like turning on their Gmail, any search, and gets like an AI that I can see, I have a weird background from being an engineer to massage therapist to now I'm an occupational therapist. And when I search an AI that I see as something false, I didn't ask for it. I'm training my kids not to look at this stuff. So we're answering to a business model that isn't necessarily even wanted. I want to be able to choose this technology, not have it forced down me. It's not like being told to do math. It's not like being told that you have to learn parallelograms. This is like, just in life, we need to do things that are good for us, like brush our teeth. Oh wait, fluoride's coming out of the water. So I guess that's another one. But as it comes specifically to data centers, I've had a few friends ask me to speak. Not a great speaker, but I will speak often. I have children. I'm part of this community. I know Wixom has been pushing to grow. I know that it gets on the fence with what's our problem, what's somebody else's problem, whether it's stopping gun violence or it's promoting our school system. We're trying to attract more children to the area. Well, this isn't going to do it. This isn't going to build our infrastructure. Yeah, great. You guys might get a profit or somebody is. That's short. That's short term. That's like eating candy to fill your stomach when you need a meal. Okay? Okay. So we have more specifics. Everything's been said, but I don't care repeating it. Extremely high electricity use. Sure, they can say they're going to do this or that or the other. Well, to self-generate is out of date, old, loud generators. I know when my power goes out, does anybody have that problem here in Wixom? Yeah, we get power out. Right? So we have a temporary generator that we have to use sometimes. That thing's loud AF. Okay? So you multiply it. I don't care that it's by the expressway that's already loud. They're going to run the generators because they're telling us they'll use less of our power grid. Okay, so now it's the noise. And then the water damage. Okay, this is outdated technology that they're pushing on everybody before it's done. It's not ready yet for what they want to do. Water damage can't be reclaimed. How long have we been fighting to get PFAS out of the water? you know how long have we been wanting our Huron River to be cleaner that we can't like let our kids going in you're going to put this down the street because somebody gets a profit we're a small city as someone pointed out eight to nine square miles we can't afford this crap nobody really can in the long run but everybody's thinking short-term what about me what about me we need to look at seven generations We have loss of our farmland happening across the country. Saline's going to, that's already been discussed, but seriously. Removal of trees that are going, especially if they expand and they get this nice moratorium lifted. Let's see where else they want to go. Carbon emissions. We already have enough from the expressways. And as we've been having issues with our gas for some reason, our supply chain's a little busted right now. They're starting to ruin what kind of... One minute. Okay, I'm getting feisty. But I'm concerned about air, water, noise, pollution in my children's life. My children aren't having the same opportunities that I had, and I thought I had it better for them. This is disgusting. I moved back to Wixom. I was in Chicago. I grew up in Royal Oak. I moved here for the pretty areas, the proud lake, the nice environment, the good people, the mixed communities. What are you going to do to us? For a short run profit? Moratorium with the look to just not do it. There are other ways to make money.

Good evening. Greg Kelly. 2304 Pawnee. Heard a lot of conversations this evening, and I think a lot of people have spoken very eloquently about all the reasons not to do this, right? There's all these concerns. There's all these suggestions on how we punish them when they violate. Like we're planning on them violating. The last woman who just spoke said, why are we doing this period? I've been riding up and down Airline Trail here in this beautiful summer we're having and admiring the job that you have done with our land use and the mixed residential and the parks and the trails. And why do we want this disaster because we have land, because we have electricity? Oh, it's by the freeway, it won't bother anybody. What do we want to support this technology for? So that eventually it'll replace everybody's jobs? Why does Wixom want to be a part of that? We are a beautiful community that has grown the way I like to see it. I've been here 31 years. The parks, the trails, the residential, the people, a beautiful community. And you want to stick a data center in it with everything that I've heard tonight and read previously? I would just say that I support a moratorium on this. Let's not do it. And I hope that as you listen to every person here, not one person has stood up and said, yeah, I'm for it, right? I would like to believe that as somebody mentioned earlier, as representatives of us and our community, that you listen and that you respond in the best interest of our community, which I think is pretty clearly not a data center. So I know you don't answer questions. I just hope that by the time this meeting is over that there is a commitment from everybody up there that they're going to uphold the moratorium. We are not gonna grant a waiver to somebody to start some kind of nefarious, oh, we're gonna do a little research and then we're gonna sue you because we invested money. No, not in Wixom. And I hope that's your stance, thank you.

Rayetta Hartley, and I'm at 2481 Balsam Court, Wixom. I'm in favor of keeping the moratorium. There was a reason for the moratorium, and it allows the council to review the zoning and to protect the community, which obviously there are many concerns with all of the data centers. So wanting to grant a custom waiver to a developer undermines the purpose of the moratorium in the first place. And just a couple of things, I know a lot of people said a lot of things already, so I will try not to be repetitive, but the infrastructure and there would be a massive strain on the grid, the DTE capacity, obviously we have, okay, we live in Wixom, we are very familiar with our loss of power from time to time, that's why many of us have generators. I do not, but I hear the generators, that is annoying as all get out. And I cannot even imagine something louder than that. So again, the data centers require huge amounts of electricity, creating a massive 24-7 strain on the local power grid. We should not have to face increased risk of blackouts, brownouts, big energy bills, because they want to fast track their nice little project here. There is an unfair burden to taxpayers, and rate payers obviously should not foot the bill for the massive utility upgrades required to power all of that. And again, irresponsible water usage. Data centers, again, you guys have all talked about that. Millions of gallons of water daily to cool their servers, relying on local water infrastructure. Again, puts unnecessary stress on local aquifers and our water system. There is a lack of environmental transparency. Transparency, sorry. AGAIN, WE DON'T KNOW THE LONG-TERM EFFECTS IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES ON ALL OF THIS, AND I DON'T THINK THAT OUR COMMUNITY SHOULD SERVE AS, LIKE, THEIR LITTLE TESTING GROUND FOR WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN 10, 20, 30, 50 YEARS FROM NOW. I DON'T THINK THAT'S FAIR. THE CONSTANT NOISE POLLUTION DEFINITELY IMPACTS QUALITY OF LIFE. The industrial chillers, massive backup diesel generators, they run around the clock, again, producing that noise, that vibration. It's not something I want to listen to, not when I'm at home in my backyard or trying to sleep. And again, it's very close to residential zones, to school zones, to businesses. I don't think that that's what we need in Wixom. And again, there's not a lot of economic value for us. It does not give you a lot of jobs, what you're looking at, maybe 30 jobs. I don't think that that's what we want. I think a lot of people, I think everybody here has spoken that Wixom is a wonderful community as it is, and we just want to keep it that way. We want to grow, but not in this direction. Thank you.

My name is Tim Moore. I live at 369 Decker Road in Walled Lake. I had to come tonight because I went through the Citizens Police Academy. That way I feel that we're all kind of in the same boat. But what I'm trying to figure out here is have any of you, and I know you're not gonna answer questions, any of you gone to one of these places where they have a data center and talked to some of the residents and find out what they're putting up with and find out how their property values have gone down? Now, if that's the case, before they build the data center, find out what your property values are worth now and then have them pay all the people the money that they're going to lose from their property. I said this to the Planning Commission. I want to say it to you people, too. Do your due diligence. Go check it out. Find out what it's all about. Thank you.

Hello, thank you for listening to all of us in this community. My name is Catherine Dyer. I own Wixom Family Pet Practice at 49315 Pontiac Trail, which is very close to where this is potentially going to be located. I bought that practice, oh my gosh, I'm so scared. I bought that practice from Dr. Van Giesen, who used to be the mayor of Wixom. And when I bought it from him and his family, it was because he did not want to sell to a corporation. He wanted this, God, he wanted this to be a part of the community. And since I have bought that practice, you have built a new parking lot. You're putting in a new park. You've done so many things to build this community further. So when COVID came along and we were open and everybody else was closed, I had a really hard time getting people to come work there. But it has been so improved with the bike trail and everything else that it is so much better for me now that I want to continue in that direction. My patients are very sensitive to sound. We're talking about putting this a few hundred feet from my vet clinic. um... my patients don't vote but their clients do and i can tell you with what we've been dealing with just with the fireworks the last couple weeks that these animals are extremely sensitive to sound and if they live in the area this is going to bother them which is also going to bother their parents their pet parents and the clients so although this is a unique way of looking at it i do think that we need to take into account everyone in the community both people any animals that make our life

No.

At the second call to the public, you may.

Okay. Thank you.

Good evening. Michael Moore, 2061 Mabel North Trail. So I was waiting for everybody to speak and seeing if any of them picked up on the things I was going to comment on, and I haven't heard anything as far as recourse for the actual developer and the business that would be the data center. So... We hear about all these costs that a data center would accumulate. Some of it is the cost of water usage, the cost of getting hooked up to the grid, the cost of consuming the water and the power and all that good stuff. Other than getting built, it only produces about 30 jobs of people actually working full time there. What you're not considering is All the Ford plants and former factories that have been built around this country, there are still remnants in Detroit and in Michigan for old Coke plants for steel smelting and all sorts of different businesses that all these factories and automakers used and then they can't even sell that property. Ford owns so much property that they don't even, they can't just sell it because it would cost more to clean it to sell it. Take into consideration that if I was going to, I'm gonna play devil's advocate, if I was going to be the guy running Sim City and I was gonna have a factory come in, in this case the data center's no more than a factory, I would want money down for the cost of developing. I would want money down for the upkeep for how long does a data center last? Nobody here knows. They haven't been in existence for that long. So we're going to say 30 years for a usable data center before the technology gets outdated. The upfront cost for the water that they've used and polluted for the power grid that they've kind of used and abused at the cost of the citizens. And then at the very end of it, how much does it cost for them to clean up what they used and then be able to take down that data center and all the ground soil, all the water, all the poisons that are left in that, because they're going to have to clean that up, right? As far as how I would run it, I would want to make sure that you would leave exactly what you came to. It sounds like the moment they start putting in a data center, they're counting on the fact that the moment they've laid that groundwork and the moment they've put so much investment in it, they can now sue you if you decide that you don't want them there or if it becomes financially unuseful to them to continue so they're gonna want their money back. Well, at the end of all that, what happens? You're now stuck with a data center running because it is too big to fail. They've created a situation where you're never going to pay their investment into it. They have tons of money. They have tons of lawyers. What do you got? You might have some people that are on your side, but they will win a war of attrition when it comes to having that legal battle. Not to mention politicians and all that in the pockets of the guy that has the most money. But at the very end of the day, you basically have committed, the moment they can break ground, you've committed to that financial strain because every time they lay another brick, they add another portion, it becomes an unattainable thing to win against them when they're going to sue for their money back. I would encourage that we include immediate restitution and immediate uh... financial uh... down payment stored where they can't get it back and if they want to sell that property because they want to get out of that business whoever buys that particular business they have to also pay for that down payment that they are not allowed to touch that money for You'd want to make sure that you were able to get your financial restitution back as far as them being in your city. And also, you want to make sure that if they are going to come in and put in something, they plan on making it right because otherwise it becomes a net loss for them. They have to be committed to it. And if you're going to be committed to it, make sure that you do your due diligence and hold them accountable 100%.

Five minutes, thank you. Thank you, sir.

Tony Medea, 1857 Downhand Drive. When I drive in the parking lot, it's usually empty. And I think the crowd here tells you how important this really is. I'd just like to boil this down to one sentence. And I was thinking, sitting in the back, how do you boil this down to a really complicated situation? It comes to my mind that it goes like this. This is a very famous quote. I'll just kind of paraphrase it. A civilization, community, city, organization, a civilization's true moral character is measured by how it protects and elevates its most vulnerable, not how it pampers its most privileged. I encourage you to make a wise decision.

Aaron Resnick, owner at Drafting Table Brewing Company, 49438 Pontiac Trail. Dear Council, first of all, thank you for listening to us. I urge you not to lift the moratorium on data centers. Please do the opposite and extend the moratorium for one year. Today, the governor of the state of New York signed an executive order enacting a one-year moratorium on new large-scale data centers. She said, As data center developments threaten to hike up utility bills, deplete natural resources, and create uncertainty for New Yorkers, it is my responsibility to take action and lead. I urge this council to take action and lead. Do not lift the moratorium. Please extend it for another year. Let there be more research done on unintended consequences of data centers. Do not allow us to be an experiment. Thank you very much.

Steve Jopik, 2017 TNEC Circle, Wixom. I'm going to keep this short. During the previous meeting where this was discussed, a gentleman came up here to the podium and addressed the planning council and he said one of the most profound things I'd ever heard. He said that for every one person who speaks up, there are a hundred more at least that were too timid, too unsure, too afraid to speak up themselves. I urge the council look at this room look at the time this meeting started at seven o'clock we're over an hour into it and there are still citizens residents of Wixom and the surrounding communities coming to address each of you there's no there's no change in what everybody is saying. Thus far and I continue or and I expect for the remainder of this evening the story is going to be the same. The residents of Wixom do not want a data center here. It's not a we'll be okay with it maybe if certain conditions can be met. No. Wixom, the people have shown, don't want it here. I don't want it here. I grew up in Wixom. My parents moved here in 1996. I grew up on Maple Road. I went to Wixom Elementary. When I was in elementary school, I remember being on the playground and hearing corex. I remember smelling it. as a child. And that's a known quantity. These data centers, it's unproven. It's new technology, as many had said. There's been far smarter people than I that have already come up to this podium, and there are smarter people that will come up yet to give the data and the facts on it. So I'm not going to rehash that. I'll just leave you with this. The weight of history is on your shoulders right now. The decision that's made for this city, it's going to outlast all of you and it's going to outlast all of us. It's our children that are going to pay the cost, our grandchildren, our great grandchildren. We have the weight of generations on our shoulders. And that's not a responsibility that anybody should take lightly because history has shown the people who have are not very well remembered in our kids' textbooks. Thank you.

Good evening, my name is David Weishar, W-E-I-S-H-A-A-R, and I'm from Northville. I am not here to give my opinion. I am here to guarantee that the voice of your community is heard not just today, but every time after this. On June 29th, I had the honor of speaking in front of 200 of your finest citizens. I spoke on a word, liber. The foundation, the Latin root, led us to library and liberty. It proves that language, a single word, makes a difference and can and will dictate their future. I asked the Commissioner's Chair on the record whether May would become shall in this ordinance. Tonight I am proud to say that in most cases that change was made making it a legally binding contract for these applicants. After the updates in the ordinance, water usage limits are now guaranteed by shall. Financial promises for infrastructure are shall. Noncompliance now shall result in penalties, not may. Along with this, data centers now carry a 1,500 foot setback and no building in the IL district zones. This commission put the voice of the people to the legal language and the ordinance instead of leaving it ambiguous, subjective, or lacuna. This ordinance is written into binding law by and for the community, not by big tech, billionaires, or a future boogeyman. That is no small thing, and I, for one, will not treat it as such. Whilst I was rereading the new ordinance, I noted two more places that the pen still needs to be picked back up. First, independent contractor studies dictated and awarded by the city give jobs to your citizens and ensure that the community values come before profits. That is what we currently have for the noise ordinance, but we do not have it for power. The electrical demand statement is still just an estimate, the applicant's own estimate. Ungraded, unvetted, and the one figure that we need to know to decide if your community could even handle what is being proposed. Secondly, a sundown clause is needed for this. This lets amendments come back to the table so that if a data center becomes something that we cannot imagine, as small as a Dairy Queen and as quiet as this room right now, maybe your community would want to live with that. Your slide show that you will be showing us later today insists the importance of adopting this ordinance by getting it right and timely. But it also says that amendments can be made in the future. Well, that can might as well be a may. And what you're stating is, in legalese jargon, is a sundown clause, guaranteeing a commitment to coming back to this in two, five, ten years so that as we progress, they can pioneer the progress that they want rather than be victims of somebody else's. And thirdly, there is one line that still needs closing up. The Planning Commission may require reclaimed water unless such requirement is not deemed to be in the city's best interest by the Planning Commission, which is discretion. And this ordinance that we are writing right now is not set in discretion. It is set in legally binding terms. It shall be the standard. So please hold to what the commission built. Direct the staff to bring back the independent verification on power, a real sundown clause as tracked and not just a maybe. And close the loophole on the water section. Do not treat tonight as a finish line for one ordinance, but the starting line in the standard of every ordinance that comes after it. I believe it is the duty of the elected civil servant to not simply listen to your community, but to protect their right to speak up before legalese leaves loopholes for leeches to suck your town dry. Or we the people decide to loosen the reins and build the future that your community consents to. Thank you.

Nate Carmody, 1349 Chanticleer Circle, Wixom, Michigan. A lot of the points I was going to cover have already been stated, but there's a few that I wanted to revisit. The potential damage to the overall property could be high, but it's also a very high likelihood of failure. If you haven't looked into the AI bubble, we basically have AI companies investing in AI companies with borrowed funds. Imagine investing in 2007 in property right before the real estate crash and then that property can't even be sold. That's where we are with data centers today. The other piece I would like to point out is potential nefarious intent. Would we invest in a ammunition manufacturer or a weapons manufacturer in our backyard knowing that it could potentially be used on US citizens? We do not need data centers for kids to open up chat GPT and ask questions about their homework or to research the most recent restaurants or which car is the fastest. I love that one. What it is currently being used for is for mass surveillance projects. One of the number one purchasers of AI in the government is the Department of Defense. We've all seen the flock of cameras. They're all coming up. Imagine a world where this does become profitable and AI does survive. At that point, what we're looking at is they have monetized mass surveillance against US citizens to the point where when you leave your house, they know exactly when you left, they know where you went, they know who you spoke to, they know exactly what you said, and anything you say or do can and will be used against you before you commit a crime And now we're looking at the 1984 Orwellian Big Brother, or more commonly or more recently, Tom Cruise's Minority Report, where they're stopping you before you commit a crime. Thank you for hearing me.

Good evening. My name is Christina Campbell. I'm a resident of Heartland, but for the past four years, I've worked down the road at one of the manufacturing plants here on Pontiac Trail. And it actually is the building that backs up to where this proposed data center is going to be. And along with everybody else here, I, of course, oppose this. But I want to talk about why. And the vet reminded me, I don't know where she went, but the vet reminded me that We take walks around there at lunchtime. It's quiet. It's peaceful. But my favorite thing about working in Wixom is the animals I see outside my window every day. I saw, I have pictures of it, 17 turkeys one day, including an albino. And it was a place where my colleagues from Michigan or from Germany came, and we had a meeting here in Michigan. And they got to see, as dumb as this is, they got to see Canadian goose for the first time walking around. The nature aspect of that specific area is important. It's ecologically important. We need that biodiversity and we need to be saving our untouched lands so that we don't continue to have even further ecological problems which result in food insecurity and all these other things that the world is facing. So I just wanted to say on the animal side of it, because I'm an animal lover, that I want to make sure we don't have data centers in general, but especially not on our untouched land. If you're going to do it, do it on that old Ford plant. Do it on somewhere where it's already ruined land and not on untouched preserved land. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Belinda. Do you need my last name?

Yes, please.

Gambrel. I'm at 272 Wright Street in Wixom.

And there we go.

I just want to make a couple of statements. I'm going to piggyback off of my husband, Donald. But my background is IT. I worked in IT for like 20-some years, so I understand data. I understand the dangers of this data center, these data centers that are popping up everywhere. I also have a background in education. And what I've come to discover, and I'm sure everyone else has, is that our education system is going downhill. We are not teaching our kids the things that they should know, like who they are and the rights that they have as citizens. I know growing up, we listened on Saturday mornings to Schoolhouse Rock, which taught us all of our rights as far as the Declaration of Independence and things of that nature. So I just wanted to remind you all, as I said, I'm piggybacking off of what my husband mentioned. We just finished celebrating the Fourth of July, the nation did, the Declaration of Independence. And I just want to read one part of the Declaration of Independence and hoping that this will encourage you to go and just refresh your mind on what the Declaration is and means to you and means to us as citizens as well as you all here. on the City Council.

So, let me put my glasses on.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Right now, we are not consenting to these data centers. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people. the right of the people to alter or abolish it and to institute new government laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to affect their safety and happiness. And that is what these data centers are coming against, our safety and our happiness. We do not need to be backed into a corner. I know at the last meeting, you know, some people were scared or saying, well, we can't do this, we can't do this. No, you all as city council must represent us as constituents because that's why we voted you to represent us. And, you know, I don't know if there have been nondisclosure agreements that have been signed, but if so, you need to walk away from those and represent us as the people of Wixom. Thank you.

Hello. My name is Mary Ann Harper. I live at 1614 Bruntwood Drive. And I just kind of did some little bullets because everybody's touched pretty much on everything and I'm glad that gentlemen just referenced that the New York governor extended it for another year I heard that on my way coming home today on the radio and kudos to them one of the things I wanted to mention just because we have a watershed available for a data center to think that they can use it doesn't necessarily mean we have to give it. Why take that chance of another disaster as we know the tri-bar thing? I cannot go down and fish over there at Proud Lake. There's a sign that says you can fish, but you can't eat the fish. That's one of my bullets. And we talk about the noise. So what about the noise that's already going down Wixom from south to north? Because of all of the warehousing that we have, we have all the trucks, all the semis, all the traffic. I mean, I'm sure you're aware of that, and all of the accidents. Just about every night there's accidents along that road. And one more thing I wanted to touch on was that You ask us to always vote for a bond, a millage, and I do believe that citizens here, I've been here for 32 years, have been very generous to vote those in because we want our community to succeed. We want it to be a great place to live. So why should I, there are two millages on the thing, the spout this year, Why should I vote for that when I know that a data center is going to go right over there? Why should I vote for a library to be better? Why should I vote for our school districts to be better when we're going to be having a data center? Who's going to want to come live here in Wixom when there's a data center there? I don't think that's going to happen. So I'd like to thank you for your time, and thank you so much.

Hi, John Palmer, 277 Wright Street. A lot of us got up here and talked philosophically. We don't like AI. It's big brother. That's not our job. Our job is to protect Wixom. We know it's not good. You know it's not good. When we talked about the one person that speaks represents 100 others, that's it, man. You got a lot of people that don't want this. You don't want it. The lawyers are worried about being sued if we make it too restrictive that they can't come in here. Take it as far as you can take it to say it's too inconvenient for them to come in here. You can fine them all day long. They could care less. Can you shut them down? Probably not because the lawyers will tell you we're not going to win the lawsuit. But make it so restrictive they won't want to come here. I lived in Howell a few years back, and we beat down an asphalt plant from coming in there. We can beat down a data center from coming in to a community that is not very big. So you don't want it. We don't want it. Do what you have to do to keep them out. That's all.

Is there anybody else for the first call of the public? No problem, Mayor.

I'm Wayne Vestner. Excuse me, I've got a little bit of a dental problem, but I'm 2045 Hazel Avenue. And I agree with all the citizens that have shown up here and expressed their desire and their opinion on data centers. I'd like to talk to you a little bit about, in a little bit of a direction. We talk about the word data center. It's like you're going down to Staples and you're going to get some data and you're going to bring it home. It's not the fact. Data center is alive. It should be data manufacturing center. They manufacture a product, have a process, and they use more resources than the Ford Motor Company used in the 50 years that they were here in this city. Additionally, they should be classified as heavy industrial. because they are heavy industrial on steroids. Now, M1 and M2 zoning, as I understand it, that's mixed use. A number of years ago, I believe the council and the city, we did away with heavy manufacturing zoning. Why are we even discussing putting heavy zoning in M1 and M2 zoning? Other than that, I agree with everything that's been said with all the citizens that came here this evening and gave their opinion. Moratorium, great. But we need to absolutely define and use specific language to say what we mean and we mean what we say. Mays and musts, language is important. And if you don't have the right language, these guys here are responsible. Got your mouthpieces. Paying good money, I know. I saw their checks. Well, that's all I have to say. But again, I say, let's get this centers classified as heavy industries. steroids and they do not fit in next zoning anywhere.

Hello, I'm Michelle Hendrian and I live at 1935 Hopkins drive. And yes, I'm one of those one of the 10 people. I'm one of the nine people that hate give up front people and speaking. So please bear with me. Um, since our last meeting that we went to last month, I did some further research on these data centers and what they do to our, our, um, and actually they create what they call a data heat island effect, which can actually raise our temperatures, our ground temperatures, as much as or as little as 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit up to 16 degrees Fahrenheit. And it can affect land up to six miles away. So that also includes our kids' school, Wixom Habitat, pretty much all of Wixom, And further cities beyond that. Even going up as close to probably to Proud Lake State Park. And they also found that these data centers, that people that were living within this area, it had an impact as having a remarkable influence on communities and regional welfare. And one that should be a part of the global conversation about environmental sustaining AI. And the temp could also additionally put pressure on communities by affecting the health, energy demand, and overall well-being. And you think about this heat that we've been having the last few days, we're all using our AC a lot more, we're putting more pressure on the grid, same thing is gonna happen again with these data centers. They're gonna need more energy to cool them down, and it's gonna put us in a bind again. I got to jump around here because a lot of people touched base on a lot of things I talked about or had thought about talking about. So U of M also came up with a document that said about talking about the German Energy Effect Act and to put in processes to reinforce protecting our environment and maybe even putting those testing constantly in the water, the air, and doing also made by a third party, one that's also chosen by the city, not necessarily by the data center themselves. When they talk about these jobs also, the jobs are usually the construction jobs, which are short-term. And the long-term jobs are actually really not long-term jobs. They are contract jobs, low-paying contract jobs that don't sustain jobs. Any type of, sorry, I don't like talking in front of the public, sorry. They don't sustain people. They don't stand the quality of life. And in a 2025 data test that was done on a model that indicated that U.S. centers by the year of 2030 could cause up to 600,000 asthma symptoms caused by cases and 1,300 premature deaths, exceeding a one-third of asthma-related deaths in the U.S. each year, resulting in a public health burden of more than $20 billion. And already in the Troy County area ourselves, for the state of Michigan, we have already poor quality of air compared to the rest of Michigan. And talking back about how long these data centers last, I just was watching something earlier today about somebody saying that these parts inside these data centers only last about three years. You think about how long your computers last. They only last for a few years. You have to replace them. And these are mega... supercomputers that they're dealing with in them. And also depending upon the noise and how much noise and data that they need to use depends upon if they're true data centers or if they are like the Bitcoin type. And then the next question is.

One minute.

Thank you. With all the data centers that are going up, I have a, we have over 5,000 already in the U.S. And other countries there are only ranging about 400 to 500. When is the bubble going to burst? When are they going to build so many that they can't sustain the amount of money that it takes to keep these going and to keep their business going? And with the sub-pumps in our township, with the water going uphill, as one of our businesses said, we have sub-pumps right down in downtown Wixom. Anything that's in our water system, it's going to end up in our homes, in our breathing air when that sub-pump comes up. 15 seconds. And also the noise ordinance, 9 p.m. is ridiculous because we are out spending time with our families downtown, enjoying the local stores and the businesses, spending time outside. That lot of noise is going to interrupt your business.

Thank you.

Thank you.

At the second call to the public, you can. At the second call to the public. Is there anybody else for the first call to the public? Last call. I'm going to close first call to the public. Thank you for your comments. We'll move on. City managers reports. We have two reports tonight. The first is the fire report from May 2026. Any questions? Oh, come on. Dave's looking for something. All right, we have none. Police report May 2026. Anybody for Chief Langmeier? Council Member Berman.

Just wanted to give the chief an opportunity to come up here in front of all of you. But specifically with regards to the death of the individual from the delivery driver, is that going to change our homicide number now in the city? Uh, yes. Yes, it'll bring it up once. I noticed that was not reflected in the report. It hasn't been reported yet. And do we have an update on what the prosecutor's office is doing with that?

At this time, we do not. Okay. They're still reviewing the cases and waiting for medical records, et cetera. Okay. Thank you.

Yes, sir. We good? We good? Yeah. All right. Thank you. All right. Consent agenda. All items listed on the consent agenda are considered routine by the city council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a council member so requests. In which event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda and added to the regular agenda at the end of unfinished or new business. Do I have a motion?

So moved. Support.

I got a motion and support to approve the consent agenda as presented tonight. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. All right, and before we move on to the business portion of our meeting, we're going to take a five-minute break. Thank you. With the Wall Lake Consolidated School District regarding public infrastructure improvements associated with the new Wixom Elementary School located at 3515 West Maple Road and authorized the mayor to execute the agreement. Do I have a motion?

So moved. Court.

City Manager Brown.

Thank you, Your Honor. I'm not going to belabor the point too much on what the origination of this is. As we know, the school district is doing a new Wixom Elementary School. The city raised some concerns about the impact on traffic that's going to occur on West Maple as a result of that construction. We had a desire to try to see something happen on road improvements on West Maple to try to deal with that, including things like a left turn lane. rectangular regular flashing beacon for handling people that are crossing the street and keeping people safe when they're crossing the street. So that's the kind of concerns that were raised. Council did a formal declaration of those concerns that resulted in some interactions with the school district that were ongoing for a pretty long period of time. We brought a prior agreement to mayor and council to address an arrangement where the school district would participate in cost sharing on a road project. And council raised concerns about that agreement not being sufficiently resulting in a real commitment from the school district on that front. And as a result of that, we went back and had additional conversations with the school district and developed a new agreement, which is before you this evening, which is a cost participation agreement with the Walled Lake Consolidated School District. regarding those infrastructure improvements on West Maple Road. And I provided a copy of the document that was more or less the ending result of those conversations between the school district and the city of Wixom. We had one item on there that I had listed as sort of a tentative. We had requested some additional language on page four of the document, which was listed in red. And it talked about the termination of the agreement and requiring reasonable cause. We had some difficulty of coming to an agreement with the school district on that front. We made a, for lack of a better description, 11th hour suggestion as we were putting the council packet out that added the language such as a final design that does not include the elements outlined in Section 2A and 2B of the CPA or cost participation agreement. Those sections refer to the RRFB as the left turn lane. So basically it just says really unless we produce a final design plan that doesn't reflect the basic elements as discussed, then that would be what would be reasonable cause. That would really be the only example that we provided of reasonable cause. Subsequent to going to press, if you will, with the council packet, we did get feedback from the school district. They were comfortable with that language, so you can basically consider that as part of the agreement that has been tentatively agreed two between the district administration and the city representation to bring to council this evening. So that's really the only over background or context that I'll provide beyond what you've already heard yourself and seen yourself over the period of time that we've been looking at that. So that's pretty much all that I wanted to talk about. The attached document is something that I had to bring to you because of the governing documents that work for us in terms of outlining the responsibilities of council and city management. But the school district has indicated that the superintendent can approve the document if the city council approves the documents. So that's what's before you this evening. If you want to cover anything else within it, feel free to ask us questions and we'll answer them. There's some exhibits that are involved and other things that provide a little bit more documentation that go along with it. But in the end, we're hopeful that the cost participation agreement addresses the concerns of council in terms of making it more of a firm commitment and hopefully we can have council consider it and decide what you want to do in terms of moving forward with it.

Very good. Any discussion? Council Member Simmons?

Thanks, City Manager. Trying to get more information, I guess. I see the deadline of December 31st. What do we anticipate a realistic timeline for getting this done?

Well, we were hopeful at some points that we would be able to move pretty quickly on it. Some of the hopes that we had for how we might be able to have that occur, it turns out we really can't proceed in the fashion that we thought might expedite the project a little bit further. We'd probably be looking at construction in the 2027 construction season once we put it out for bid, award a bid, and get the construction started.

For construction, but for getting this all formalized, I guess, with what our final costs are going to be and all that stuff.

Yeah, I think the deadline of the 31st is related to that, 12-31. Right.

So is that what we're realistically thinking? Or are we anticipating that we're going to get that done?

It could go sooner than that, certainly. That just allows a little wiggle room, if you will.

Just to add on to that point, really what the next steps will look like. If this agreement was authorized between the city and the school district, we would be coming back to you all with a design quote basically to start the actual design engineering. That's when we'd really start spending money on it. And then that's what will finalize all those costs and kind of get all those together. So yes, we anticipate at this point we would not have an issue finalizing those costs by December 31st and then really being in position to bid it out you know, late winter, early spring for a summer construction.

So I keep hearing December, so we're thinking it's going to take us until December, potentially.

It never hurts to give more time.

I understand.

Thank you. Council Member Kennedy.

Thank you. Are they just not budging on that $450,000?

We did bring up that, and there's been no offer of additional monies from the school district on that front, so that's, you can consider the 450 being what they have on the table, and I think that relates to bond documents that they had included, which related to hypotheticals like this potential road construction.

I would just feel much more comfortable with a larger contribution from them.

Understand, right, so the issue is that the the school districts project is leading to the need for the improvements and yet we're paying two-thirds of the cost i get the under the the concern uh... and just that i say two-thirds of the cost that's yet to be determined roughly speaking i mean we're just projecting what costs are going to be at this point we don't have firm estimates of this this point in time so uh... it's that the way the working of the the contribution right now is either that $450,000 or 50% of the cost of the improvements, whichever is less. So there's a possibility that our estimate could be high, could be low, but I think that the $450,000 would be considered the commitment from the school district realistically. I don't think it's going to drop to the point where it will be less than that, and they're not offering additional monies beyond that $450,000 right now.

Okay, thank you. Council Member Behrman?

Thank you. I guess just so everybody here knows what we're talking about, Walled Lake Schools is building that new elementary school on Maple Road, and they were proposing to do zero improvements to Maple Road. So they're just plopping a school there, and we're just going to have to deal with it. The city, some of us, myself, went to the school board meeting and kind of said, this is not cool. Eventually, we had a public meeting. Not as many people came out for that as came out tonight, but a bunch of people came out, and the superintendent was here, and they vocalized their objections, and the superintendent has now offered $450,000 to the city to help fix the road of the mess that they're going to make. uh... this is improvement i'm glad that they came to the table i'm glad that they worked with the city uh... i i i uh... i applaud them for that and i don't necessarily know that we need to do the cadillac of all improvements that we're spending two-thirds and they're spending one-third i think what we need is a left-hand turn lane did to get around the traffic so if there's a house fire or EMS needed down maple road They can get there and it's not blocked turning into the school. I don't know if we need curbs the entire way. Let's take their $450,000, improve the street, and move on. Thank you to Dr. Lanz. Thank you to the school board for working with us on this. I appreciate it. That's all I have.

Deputy Mayor Gottschall.

Thank you. I also wanted to reiterate not being comfortable with the financial contribution. I mean, their bond was a quarter of a billion dollars and we're asking them or they're saying that they'll cover one third of the cost that they're creating. When we go out as millages, we're brought up and we go out and we ask for help with our roads to improve neighborhood roads. It doesn't go into cleaning up a lack of planning on the district's part. So I still believe that. I mean, we asked if they would budge on that. I think they need to be told that we want a different number and give them a number, not say, hey, will you rethink this? So this is still a no. I do appreciate the cost participation side of things rather than how loose and noncommittal the last document was, but I think we need more out of them. Thank you.

Any other discussion? Seeing no further discussion, I've got a motion and a second to approve the recommendation to approve a cost participation agreement with the Wally Consolidated School District regarding public infrastructure improvements associated with the new Wixom Elementary School located at 3515 West Maple Road and authorize the mayor to execute the agreement. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? No.

Council Member Behrman?

Yes.

Council Member Kennedy.

No.

Council Member O'Day. Yes. Council Member Simmons. Yes. Mayor Beagle.

Yes.

Deputy Mayor Gottschall.

No.

Four yes, two no.

Thank you. That concludes the unfinished business portion of tonight's meeting. We'll move on to new business number one. New business number one is the introduction and first reading of an ordinance to amend the Wixom Code of Ordinances, Title 18, amend Section 18.01, Industrial Districts, Section 18.09.020. dash M2 zoning districts amend section 18.09.04 standards applicable to specific uses to provide specific standards for data center uses in the M1 and M2 zoning districts and amend section 18.24.030 to provide definitions for data centers. Do I have a motion?

So moved. Board.

Assistant City Manager Benson.

Thank you, Mayor. Good evening, members of City Council and members of the public who have joined us tonight. We do have a little presentation for this agenda item as opposed to just verbal. This is a similar presentation as what was given at the Planning Commission meeting, so I do apologize for anyone who is in the audience. AT THAT MEETING, YOU'LL GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEE THIS TWICE, BUT FOR THE PURPOSES OF, YOU KNOW, HOW IMPORTANT THIS DISCUSSION IS, WE FELT THAT, YOU KNOW, REALLY WALKING THROUGH WHAT'S PROPOSED FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS PRETTY IMPORTANT HERE. SO, MYSELF AND OUR PLANNING CONSULTANT, MATEO PASOLAK, WILL KIND OF WALK THROUGH IT, AND THEN IT'LL BE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU ALL TO DISCUSS WHAT YOU SEE, DISCUSS ANY PROPOSED AMENDMENTS OR MODIFICATIONS, OR WHAT YOUR DESIRED NEXT STEPS LOOK LIKE. So with that in mind, as you know, as City Council, you all directed staff and the Planning Commission to begin investigating ordinance amendments to specifically regulate data centers back on November 18th, 2025. And on March 24th, 2026, you approved a resolution imposing a temporary moratorium for a period of six months on the establishing, consideration, permitting, approval, location, or installation of any data centers in the city. So that's just the context behind what brings us to these ordinance amendments tonight. Since that original motion, the Planning Commission has met nine total times now, approximately once a month, working on what is the scope of these ordinance amendments, researching different aspects of what other communities do for regulating data centers and trying to understand the use better to then make a recommendation to the City Council.

Can I interrupt for one? Is there any chance of turning that screen more to the audience? I see some people trying to read it, but thank you.

So this whole process concluded with a public hearing, which is the first step of the required steps for an ordinance amendment to move forward for city council. A public hearing must be held where planning commission makes their recommendation to you all, and then you all hold the first reading. If you like the language or modify it to a degree that you do like it, then you hold a second reading in adoption. Just to give kind of the overarching context for Wixom, Wixom is one of the larger commercial and industrial communities in Metro Detroit, and we do maintain a significant amount of industrially zoned property, most of which is M1 light industrial, and a couple parcels are M2. The city purchases this water from the Great Lakes Water Authority, and we are not on a community well system. I know that's a key kind of consideration and just important. underlying factor to point out. We also operate our own wastewater treatment facility, although there are limits on our capacity on both the water and wastewater sides of things. We're served by DTE for electricity and Consumers for Natural Gas. As a whole, there are a variety of types and sizes of data centers. They are not all the same. The most common ones that are referenced are the hyperscale ones, like what we see in Saline, what's proposed in Lyon Township. The reality is that there are also much smaller ones. But as a whole, they are relatively new, especially in the size and scope that we are now discussing here, which is one of the key reasons why a new definition is recommended to you all. AS A WHOLE, WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THE INDIVIDUAL CONTEXT OF ANY INDIVIDUAL PROPOSAL, IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO SAY WHETHER WE HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE OR DTE DOES OR ANY OTHER ENTITY, WHETHER WE COULD ACTUALLY SUPPORT ONE OR NOT. WE SIMPLY DO NOT KNOW. When we talk about creating zoning ordinance regulations, it's important to remember that the zoning ordinance text that is put in place regulates the use for every situation and every context in the city. So whether it's a reoccupancy of an existing building or whether it's a request to build a new facility, the set of standards that are adopted by the city apply to all of those uses. Again, whether big, whether small, whether whatever. Another thing, and it was pointed out by a couple members of the public who spoke tonight, the city is enabled to have zoning by the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act, and specifically MCL 125.3207 states a zoning ordinance generally may not totally prohibit a lawful land use where there is a demonstrated need and an appropriate location exists within the city. Therefore, when coming up with regulations, it's important to have a balance between compatibility, feasibility, and having regulations that mitigate the impacts of whatever a proposal is. Ultimately, it is at the discretion of the Planning Commission and the City Council to determine what those regulations should be, what is compatibility, and what is feasibility. But again, those are just key things to consider. Oops, sorry. I'm looking at different things. That all being said, public comments are important to consider. Obviously it's been part of the Planning Commission consideration and your consideration tonight. I kind of already covered those points. They come in various different sizes and could be as small as 5 acres or as large as 250 acres. Just very quickly, at the June 29th meeting, there was a similar number of people, maybe a little less, a little more, it's hard to say. And at the end of that meeting, Planning Commission took in all of the various comments that were received, most of which were similar to what we heard tonight about seeking stronger regulations, perhaps more time to consider regulations. Those sorts of things. Ultimately, the Planning Commission made a variety of motions. I realize that this is small and hard to read, but I felt it was very important for the City Council to be aware of all five of the motions that the Planning Commission made. The very first thing that they did was approved a motion to request that City Council consider extending the moratorium on data centers to allow more time for study as it relates to regulating data center uses. Second, after discussion, they approved a motion to amend the draft ordinance to allow data centers only to be considered as special land uses in the M1 and M2 zoning districts and to not be permitted in the IRO's zoning district, and it already was recommended to not be. permitted in the Office Service 1 zoning district. Therefore, they also removed the specific standards that would have been applicable to IRO zoning, which would have been Chapter 18.08.040, since it would no longer be applicable given the use is not permitted in that zoning district. They also amended the draft ordinance to increase the setback from 500 feet to 1500 feet in the M1 and M2 zoning districts and directed staff to change all references to May to Shell as appropriate and that those were all put together and then they finally approved the motion to move this forward to you all. So I'll kick it over to Mr. Pasolacqua to kind of walk through what this ordinance now says, specifically both the specific standards as well as the general standards.

Good evening, Mateo Pasolacqua, Carlisle Wartman Associates. We are the planning consultants for the city. So as Mr. Benson indicated, the slides that we'll kind of go through next are the specific language from the ordinance. It is not typically my MO to read them verbatim. However, given the importance of the evening and the understanding of what we're writing, I will do so. But I'd be happy to answer any questions or provide clarifications when council discusses the ordinance. So text amendments to the zoning ordinance section 1824-030, definition C through D. The definition of a data center is proposed to be identified as a facility or group of buildings whose primary function is the housing operation and maintenance of computer services, data storage systems, telecommunications equipment, and associated infrastructure used for the processing, storage, or transmission of digital information. Such facilities may include backup power generation, cooling systems, fuel storage, and security infrastructure. This term does not include server rooms or data processing facilities that are accessory and incidental to a primary permitted use. Text amendments to the zoning ordinance section 18090-020, schedule of uses. Data centers as newly defined would be special land uses in the M1 light industrial district and M2 general industrial districts found in chapter 1809. Data centers would by default be prohibited in all other zoning districts. So all of your residential and commercial districts would not permit the use of a data center. Text amendments to zoning ordinance adding section 1809040N standards applicable to specific uses. This section provides specific standards for data center uses, standards references minimum distances from residential zoned properties, required noise studies, noise regulations, cooling system design, anticipated utility usage and capacity verification, traffic analysis, security measures, and decommissioning plans. These standards that I'm about to go through are reflective of the changes directed by the Planning Commission during the public hearing. Required application submittals, the addition to the materials required for a special land use and site plan review applications for data center shall include the following. Utility capacity verification, which will be written documentation from the electrical utility provider confirming available capacity and then identifying any required system upgrades. Documentation from the city or appropriate authority verifying water supply and wastewater capacity. An electrical demand statement, which will be an estimate of average and peak electrical demand expressed in kilowatts and megavolt amperes, including a description of redundancy and resiliency systems. Cooling and water use plan, a description of cooling technologies to be utilized, estimated average and peak daily water usage, and identification of potable versus non-potable water sources. Section D does cover noise standards, which we'll cover in a few slides down as there's more technicality to it and one of the more important or finer points of the ordinance. These standards were prepared with assistance from Soundscape Engineering, a firm that specializes in sound studies and has an extensive background in helping communities regulate data centers nationwide. Part E of the required application materials would be a backup power and fuel storage plan, the number, size, and location of generators, type and volume of fuel storage, containment methods, and fire suppression measures. If one or more generator units are proposed as a part of a data center application, air quality permits may be required via the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, also known as EGLE, or its successor agency unless such requirement is waived by that agency. Routine generator testing shall occur only between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. during weekdays but excluding holidays. All noise from generator usage is subject to the ordinance limits except for temporary use during utility power outage emergency. Traffic and delivery analyses, identification of anticipated truck traffic associated with construction, equipment, delivery, and ongoing operations if applicable. Security and access plan, which would be a description of proposed fencing, controlled access points, lighting, and coordination with emergency services. A decommissioning plan, which would be a plan describing procedures for facility shutdown, removal of equipment, and restoration or reuse of the site. sold back peddling depart d which is the noise noise studies uh... so the noises that would be required uh... in addition to the standard set forth in section eighteen twelve one three oh e which is your current noise standards uh... for uses in the city data centers So those standards apply and then the standards we're about to go through would be new standards applicable for data centers. Data centers may not exceed the equivalent hourly LEQ sound level limits in table one at any location at or beyond the nearest receiving property line for the relevant land use. The measurements or predictions shall be conducted at five feet above grade or at the elevation of maximum predicted impact. If data center equipment produces tonal sound, a 10 decibel penalty applies. So, well, to kind of go through the requirements, for residential properties, between the hours of 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., the maximum allowable noise would be 55 dBAs or 70 dBCs. dBAs is more of kind of a general daily noise measurement, whereas the dBCs are for low-frequency noises. Nighttime requirements at residential properties from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. would be 45 dBAs and 60 dBCs. The noise requirements for daytime and nighttime at institutional or public parks would be 60 dBAs. If the data center creates tonal noise, which I'll explain, explain what that is to the best of my ability as outlined in the ordinance. But if they create tonal noise, you subtract 10 decibels from each value. So if a data center creates tonal noise, the 55 DBA goes to 45, the 45 DBA goes to 35, the 70 DBC goes to 60, and the 60 DBC goes to 50. The tonal noise penalty as described by Soundscape was ineffective manner in which to deal with the low frequency noise uh... issues that these days there's can create so total sound is any sound that can be heard as a single pitch or combination of pitches or any sound in which the one-third active being some pressure level in the band with the tone exceeds the rhythmic average of the levels in the two contiguous one-third active bands by five d bs in bands five hundred hertz and above by 8 dBs for bands between 160 and 400 Hz, and by 15 dBs for bands below 160. Just to clarify, that language was written and proposed by Soundscape Engineering, which was contracted by the City of Wixom to assess the ordinance and provide guidance.

And just for kind of some additional thoughts on that, one, it seemed that the Planning Commission was pretty appreciative of having basically more nuanced sound language than your average noise ordinance. That actually was one of the things after going through this process that they would be interested in revisiting. Section 18.12.130E, the city's general noise ordinances applies to all uses within the city to try to have similar levels of specificity to prevent issues in other scenarios. But we do certainly recognize that a lot of this is very technical and very dry language. We do have materials from our sound engineer. They presented at the planning commission meeting. I'll admit it was a little bit long and maybe not well received, but I do believe that that presentation is on our website, and we are happy to provide the information and kind of background to this to anyone that may be interested. A copy of their presentation was given to City Council in your agenda packets, but again, for the purposes of time and everyone's investment, we didn't necessarily think that bringing Soundscape this time was the right decision, but they certainly can come out to future meetings if ever desired.

So required application materials as it relates to noise studies. Data centers and associated equipment shall not produce perceptible ground-borne vibration as defined by the ANSI, which is the American National Standard Institute at the nearest residential zoned or used property. Compliance shall be verified through noise impact studies submitted with the special land use application and review, construction permitting review prior to issuance of a building permit, and post-construction review prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Pre and post construction sound studies shall be conducted by an NCAC, National Council of Acoustical Consultants member, firm or INCE board certified acoustics, acoustic consultant and independently reviewed and verified at the expense of the applicant. The noise studies shall be site specific and evaluate noise generated by all site operations and scenarios, normal operations, maintenance, power outages, et cetera. including all noise generating mechanical and electrical equipment such as chillers, generators, transformers, cooling towers, air handling units, etc. The initial noise study shall include the following. Baseline ambient LEQ sound level measurements of the existing pre-construction environment taken at the quietest accessible locations near the nearest residential property to the project site in each of the four cardinal directions. These measurements shall be at least 24 hour duration to capture daytime and nighttime hourly LEQ levels. Predictive 3D modeling to demonstrate compliance with applicable noise standards outlined in this section in section 18.12.130E. The predictive modeling shall be conducted on an octave band basis and provide contour maps showing overall noise transmissions in DBA and DBC. For the initial study, noise source data for the equipment can be based on generic data. The purpose of the initial study is to demonstrate the feasibility of meeting the noise ordinance through the site layout, equipment type selections, and practical noise mitigation methods. The final noise study shall include the following. Refined predictive 3D modeling to demonstrate compliance with applicable noise standards outlined in this section in section 18.12.1.3.0e. Predictive modeling shall be conducted on an octave band basis and provide contour maps showing overall noise transmissions in DBA and DBC. Manufacturer provided octave band noise source data for the specific models of equipment planned for the project. Data center developers must include a mitigation plan in their noise study to ensure that operational noise does not exceed the local noise limits detailed in this section and section 18-1213-OE, including the penalty for tonal equipment. The report must include enough detail in the noise impact report for the independent acoustical consultant to peer review the analysis and results. The pre-construction sound level measurements shall be repeated post-construction with all equipment operating. The post-construction sound study confirming noise standard compliance during daytime and nighttime operation scenarios at all relevant locations will be required prior to a certificate of occupancy. Essentially the way this is structured is that prior to a building permit, so site plan review, they need to show with some predictive modeling that they can meet the noise ordinance before they're allowed to put the shovel in the ground and build the facility. Once the facility is built, they have to provide us with a post-construction sound study that also requires the operation of the site under certain scenarios before they can get a certificate of occupancy, which would be their legal means for operating the building.

So the one additional thing to point out before we continue on, these are all of the recommended required application materials that would have to come with any special land use application. Again, that is both if this was a new use, new construction, as well as for reoccupancy of an existing structure. is a special and use any such application would go to the planning commission would require the public hearing scheduled and held alongside consideration of that use and these are the bare minimum materials that an applicant would have to provide to the planning commission really you know have the planning commission be able to scrutinize you know, as we go through this. The following points that we'll get into really are the specific site standards. But again, I just wanted to make it clear that these are, this is really the first step. This is what you have to give to even, you know, go before the planning commission for this, you know, for the special land use consideration. And then we go from there. Up. All studies submitted by an applicant are paid by the applicant. They have to submit, and this is for any project, an escrow account is established and all consultant review fees are charged to the applicant.

So moving on to site standards. A data center shall adhere to the standards outlined in Chapter 1809. A data center shall not be located adjacent to a residentially used or zoned property. Additionally, no data center principal structure or mechanical equipment, including generators, shall not be located within 1,500 feet of a residentially zoned or used property line. During the eight months that the planning commission worked on this ordinance. We studied a lot of various setbacks as it related to adjacent uses. We looked at 300, 500, 1,000 feet. And ultimately during the public hearing and after receiving public testimony, the planning commission made the residential setback 1,500 feet from a residentially zoned or used property. The minimum setback for residential is expanded on by the noise ordinance. In essence, you have to meet both. You have to be at least 1,500 feet from the residential zone to use property, and you need to meet the noise requirements. Additional site standards as it relates to screening and landscaping mechanical equipment, including HVAC generators, fuel storage transformers, and cooling towers shall be fully screened from public view in adjacent properties by masonry walls, architectural panels, or evergreen landscaping in accordance with this ordinance. Rooftop mounted sound barriers shall not exceed 15 feet in height above the surrounding roof surface. Sound barriers shall not be included in the maximum height measurement of a structure. Ground-mounted sound barriers shall not exceed 25 feet in height above grade. All sound barriers shall be architecturally compatible in appearance with the principal building. Construction materials must be durable, weather resistant, and rust-proof. Standard concrete block walls and poured or precast concrete walls are not permitted unless approved by the Planning Commission, who may require aesthetic or other design alterations. As it relates to water usage, air-cooled, hybrid, or closed-loop water systems shall be required unless the applicant can provide sufficient data indicating alternative cooling systems are needed. If access to the city's water utility is required, the Planning Commission shall establish maximum daily or annual water usage limits based on the capacity of the city's water utility. The Planning Commission may require the use of non-potable or reclaimed water where feasible unless such requirement is not deemed to be in the city's best interest by the Planning Commission or is otherwise not permitted by applicable law, ordinance, or other regulations. Electrical generation, the use of on-site renewable energy generation, including but not limited to rooftop solar, is highly encouraged. Fuel storage shall comply with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations and may be subject to additional setback screening or secondary containment requirements as determined by the Fire Department. As it relates to infrastructure mitigation where a data center requires on or off site public or private infrastructure or utility improvements, the Planning Commission shall require a development agreement, financial guarantees, and or applicant funded improvements. That improvement shall be at the sole cost of the applicant. For operational compliance, the city shall require periodic third-party audits of noise and utility usage to ensure compliance with the site plan and required application materials. Continuous monitoring may be required at certain locations at the city's discretion and the applicant's expense to ensure noise standard compliance. Audit shall be created by a third party and at the cost of the applicant. Failure to supply said reports within a reasonable time established by the city and or non-compliance to standards shall result in any citations, fees, permit revocations, or any other penalties available under the city's zoning ordinance, general ordinance, as well as state or federal law. For parking, one space per employee at peak shift plus 20 spaces for visitors, corporate vehicles, and contractors. Again, being a special land use, the Planning Commission shall, as needed, impose reasonable conditions on approval of a data center special land use to ensure compliance with this ordinance and to mitigate impacts on surrounding properties and public services in accordance to Chapter 1818, which is the special land use section. So in referencing these setbacks, where would data centers be allowed? All properties within the red outlines are industrially zoned parcels that are directly adjacent to residentially zoned or used properties and therefore ineligible for a data center application. So any parcel outlined in red is immediately disqualified from a data center proposal. All the areas with the blue buffer are areas within 1,500 feet of a residentially zoned or used property and therefore ineligible for data center structures or equipment to be located if the parcel is eligible at all. Any portion of a M1 or M2 parcel that is in the blue shading, that area of the site would not be eligible for any data center buildings, mechanical equipment. Any portion of the... lot that is not covered by that buffer would be eligible so long as they can also meet the other requirements of the ordinance, being noise, the other items that we're discussing this evening.

And just for reference, we do realize that the map on the screen here is pretty small. A copy of this map was provided to City Council in your agenda packets and is available on the City's website as well.

You can keep it.

Oh, it is May, isn't it? Yep. All right. So as mentioned at the beginning of this, the purpose of this discussion item is to introduce this ordinance for city council and give you all the opportunity to discuss and or modify or whatever you see fit in terms of next steps. Broadly speaking, you have essentially a couple options here. One, you could approve the zoning ordinance amendments and additions as presented and schedule a second reading and adoption for your July 28th meeting. You can modify the zoning ordinance amendments that are proposed to you and then schedule a second reading for the July 28th meeting. You can modify or comment and send the ordinance back to the Planning Commission for further review. And in addition to all of those things, the existing moratorium is in place, is adopted by City Council. It would not expire until September 24th of 2026. So If the intent would be to maintain the moratorium as established by the resolution of council, that would not have to be done tonight. An alternative version of how to establish a moratorium is to actually adopt a moratorium as a zoning ordinance amendment. Therefore, it would require a similar process to essentially what has taken place to get here. That process requires the drafting of an ordinance, holding of a public hearing, and then a first and second reading. So that would take a significant amount of time, but it is an option, right? So we want to give you that option as an alternative way to enact a temporary moratorium.

Can I make a point? No. No? Nope.

So do I get to ask a question ever?

You get to ask it at the second call of the public. All right, thank you.

You're welcome. I can ask Q&A?

I can do a Q&A? You sure can. Thank you.

So as a whole, and this was expressed at the Planning Commission meeting, ultimately moratoriums are not the strongest defense that municipalities can have when it comes to regulating uses. Whether done as a resolution or whether done as a zoning ordinance amendment, there is always the chance that they could be challenged. Therefore, it is our recommendation that it's in the city's best interest to adopt an ordinance and adopt updated definitions to define these uses. Ultimately, those are decisions that are made by city council how you want to move forward. But I do just want to point that out. The one other thing is that any ordinance can be amended by the City Council really at any time so long as it follows the required process. So there is no reason that even if the City Council did decide to move this ordinance forward at this time or some version of it, you can continue and have the Planning Commission continue to work on further amendments to this ordinance. There's no reason that you couldn't adopt an ordinance, let's say, in a month and then come back three months later with further amendments to the ordinance that you just adopted. But with all of that in mind, there's a lot of pieces in play here and really we're handing the floor over to you all to discuss. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

Very good. Council Member Kennedy?

So I don't know about everyone else, but I was looking through the decibel levels. The first question I have is why is it such a difference for DBC and DBA? I know DBC is outside the range of our hearing, but why would it be 15 decibels different?

Our understanding based on what Soundscape provided us is that there are two different types of noise measured in two different ways. So what is perceived to be, what is perceived to be, I guess I don't want to use necessarily the word harmful, but noticeable on a DBA measure isn't the same as the same level as a DBC measure. And that's why those two different levels were established.

And then in the next section, in section B right after that, when it talks about average levels, if it goes down in this certain band, it's an extra five decibel. Is that more restrictive, or is that saying it's less restrictive in that band?

Are you talking about the tonal penalty?

Yeah, when it starts getting into the bands of between 160, 400 hertz, it's an extra eight.

One third octave wave?

Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah, that is more strict, and it's related to tonality.

I don't know the proper process for this, but I'm just going to say that I would really like to see this daytime one drop down to at least 40, because later on in here it talks about that being the general noise level of wind in the trees. And if a data center goes in and I'm living anywhere near it and I hear any sound happening, that's more than I want to be hearing, the constant thrum of any kind of sound above and beyond what I've already been living with. So I would first like to see the decibel drop down to normal sound in the area, and then at least a 2,000-foot setback.

Yes.

Council Member Barron?

First, you know, I... I wanted to thank the Planning Commission for all the work they did in this and also thank all of you for coming out to the Planning Commission meeting and then also coming this evening. I kind of wanted to touch on a couple of things that people talked about. Friday the 26th of June, my wife and I were hanging out downtown and we ran into Planning Commissioner Sandra Ograsi. and the owner of Directing Table, Kristen and Aaron Resnick. And we got to talking that none of us have actually heard one of these data centers before. So that Friday night, Kristen and myself and Sandro decided that we were going to drive out Sunday morning to Dwagenach. I always say that wrong, so I'm sure I said it wrong. To see what one of these things actually sounded like, because none of us had heard one. So Sunday morning, 7 a.m., Kristen drove Sandra and I out to listen to this data center. And it was horrible. Absolutely horrible. And we had the decibel reader on our phone and we listened to those levels. And we were standing across the street from it and it was like 65, 68. And right behind us was a neighborhood And the people who live there, I mean, we saw one guy outside, another guy cutting his lawn. We talked to the guy that was outside working on his car, and he said it never stops. Never, ever stops. He can't get away from it. He can go in his house. He can close his doors, close his windows. Like, it never, ever stops. Now, the sound requirements in that municipality are higher than what we're proposing our ordinance. So hopefully that there in itself will help. But, you know, we wanted to kind of do our homework on this. So we walked. 500 feet away from the data center and we listened and we took videos and then we walked a thousand feet away from the data center and we could still hear it and we listened, took videos. We got as far away as we could from it uh... where the street started turn the neighborhood was ending that on private property and if you wanted to hear it you could you could still hear it the neighbors air conditioning unit was clearly louder at that point in the data center we i don't think we're quite fifteen hundred feet away yet uh... we're getting close but so to put and perspective I feel that with the lower sound requirements in our ordinance and 1,500 feet, you're not going to be able to hear it. Now, I can't talk for whether or not your dog's going to hear or all those other things. I'll leave that to my vet who came up here and spoke earlier this evening. And maybe that's something we need to look into. But I am really glad that the Planning Commission took time to listen to the residents and expand the setback. And I heard a lot of people talking at the Planning Commission meeting that, or I heard concern from one person at the Planning Commission meeting that 1,500 feet was too much. So I wanted to look into that. And the development. You are correct. Jefferson County, Colorado, their setback that they're proposing and putting through right now is at 1,500 feet. Jonesboro, Tennessee, their setback that they're requiring right now is 1,500 feet. Aurora, Illinois, is also proposing to go forward 1,500 feet, and they also are putting some really stringent sound restrictions in there. It's kind of like our ordinances here in Wixom. I mean, key characteristics of the municipalities that are getting ahead of this is they're looking to address this by setback. noise control, screening, and then obviously monitoring the water and energy using that's going to be required. Probably the most useful resource I found was something put out by the Kentucky Resources Council. It's a non-profit, non-partisan environmental group in Kentucky. It was a statewide public interest environmental law organization. They provide free legal advice and representation and strategic advice to individuals, grassroots organizations, and local governments facing environmental challenges. They took the time to put together a draft ordinance that they believe municipalities in Kentucky or possibly throughout the entire United States should consider using to regulate data centers. setbacks is one of them and I mean 1500 feet was basically the aggregate number that they were looking at and a lot of it but one of the one of the interesting setbacks they required was an interior setback of the property on where a data center is going and they're recommending at least a 500 foot setback from the data center on their own property so they gotta absorb the sound on their own property before it even gets to the property line so it's not the hardwood floor company that has to listen to it fifty feet from his office is there's going to be a five hundred foot buffer between on the property of the data center before it's even going to get to a neighboring person's property i think that's something we should look into i think interior setback making the applicant absorb their own sound on their own property would be extremely important. At least a 1500 foot setback from any sensitive use, and they define sensitive use of any residential, commercial, or even agriculture land. I mean there's studies out there that plants don't grow, cattle don't grow, I mean there's all these things that we need to look at that we don't know. that's at least a fifteen hundred foot setback uh... including i believe the five hundred feet on the property there's so much more that we can look at here and and and i do believe that passing something is better than nothing and i believe we can come back and do more later But I think increasing the setback is the number one thing we should do. And I think looking at including an interior setback on the property. Because as you're going to see later this evening, the site plan that was in the packet, there's no interior setback. I mean, that's within like 50 feet of the property line. There's not even bushes between the building and what they're looking to propose. And that's not fair to the industrial neighbor's that are next to them. And then the Kentucky ordinance suggestion also did have the lower decibel number, and they were at 40 to 60 between 10 and 7, 10 p.m. and 7 a.m., and 45 and 65 during the day. So about five decibels lower than what we were proposing. And then lastly, as I was continuing to go through that, I saw Bowling Green just decided to move forward and adopt basically the same proposal from that think tank in Kentucky as their ordinance. I saw, I'm going to say this wrong, Girard Township earlier this week, which is over by Coldwater. They just enacted a data center ordinance, I believe, earlier this week, or last week, that is limiting a data center to only one piece of property in their township. They're taking a very aggressive approach there. Granted, they only have one piece of property in their township that's zoned industrial, and they're saying that's the only place it could go. South Streambrain Township in Pennsylvania just approved a 1,500-foot setback in June. And then lastly, really a question for our consultant. This being proposed is a special land use, correct? Correct. So it's only going to go to Planning Commission, correct?

It would go to Planning Commission, but a public hearing would be required for that review.

So once we approve this ordinance, we, the elected body of the city, are never going to see this again. It's just going to be on Planning Commission. Is that what you're saying? Correct. So... You guys see where I'm going? Uh... Why not a PUD agreement where it would have to come back to us for the approval of the PUD agreement?

If the goal would be that that site plan review would ultimately be decided by the city council, we would have to look into what the appropriate measure to do so would be.

Well, I would have you look at Pittsfield Township, which is a township that your company has written the zoning ordinance for, and your zoning ordinance for data centers in Pittsfield Township is proposing a PUD. So I don't know why you need to look into it. I mean it in the nicest way possible. Your company has done that.

No, I'm familiar with that ordinance. I guess my hesitation at the PUD direction is we're establishing some very specific requirements for data centers. PUDs kind of imply that there's a lot of give and take and a lot of flexibility involved. So I'm not saying we can't look at ways in which it comes to you. I'm just saying I don't know if a PUD would be the right way to do it based on how PUDs are typically used with a high level of flexibility. That's all.

I'll let you go, Drew, in a second. What I would say is a PUD would allow us to get a lot what we want. We would be able to put that in our contract with the developer, what they're going to do, or allow us to put what the penalties are going to be in the contract with the developer. And you're saying zoning only allows us to find them $500. A PUD agreement is going to allow us to put in there that we can find them $500,000 if they don't listen. And I also, I trust our planning commission, but they're not voted in by the residents that are here, and I feel like the residents are going to feel a lot more comfortable if we're the ones that are making the decision if a data center could be approved. So I would like to see this either PUD or something that has more teeth that's going to have to come back before us.

That is certainly a fine direction. I just wanted to support what Mr. Poslock was saying. One of the key things, in the city of Wixom, PUDs are enabled by, and I'd have to find the exact zoning ordinance section. It's chapter 1811. That is the key concern. Does our current PUD ordinance allow for that to be structured the way that you're saying? I'm not saying it can or can't. I'm just saying that that's not something that's been researched ahead of this meeting, so we are hesitant to say... 100% that can work exactly the way that you want. I'm not saying it can or can't. That's just to clarify.

Please. Let's not interrupt. We never interrupted public comments. Please don't interrupt our business portion here.

The one other thing is there are special land uses in the city that specifically call for them to be sent to city council. Airports are actually one of them that are special land use, I believe, in the M2 zoning district. So just for clarity, we could do either one of those things can happen, whether it has to come to city council as a special land use or it has to come through as a PUD. We would just need to investigate that one way or the other to give you better advice.

I would be comfortable... putting something on the record this evening and passing something with the addition that it has to come before us and if we ultimately decide to make an amendment several months from now to make it a PUD we can take it bigger teeth into it, then we can address that. I agree that having something is better than nothing, which is where we're at now. It just concerns me that the same planning consultant is recommending a PUD to one municipality and a special land use to another, and I don't feel comfortable with the response there. It should be one or the other, right? I guess

I guess all I can offer is we don't treat every community the same way, that we work with our planning commissions, we work with to kind of do our research and see, apply the context of the community to the ordinance that we're proposing in the planning commission's direction.

Understood. Good. Deputy Mayor Gatchel.

Thank you. Got a few pages here, so hopefully everybody will bear with me. And all of these could turn into proposed amendments to what we have, or just do it as one unless people speak out and say they don't like something. But I did want to first thank also everybody for coming out tonight and being informed of what's happening in our city. I do, though, want to ask as your neighbor, somebody who's lived here for 38 years, so I probably have a good portion of you beat in terms of being a Wixom resident, to help push back against some of the rumors and misinformation you're seeing online. And so we've heard people speak out tonight, then why are you building a data center? We aren't building anything. And we're discussing rules about how to make regulations work for the city. So just in one post alone, there have been comments about NDAs, even got asked tonight, which is insulting to everybody's character up here when you haven't come to know us. Question about a $10 million bribe. Don't even know where that came from. But more concerningly, from a video which was trying to raise awareness of this meeting, which I appreciate having everybody here and bringing awareness of the meeting to everybody, I'm going to read you comments. These lawmakers need to be scared of the people. They need to believe their lives are in danger because they voted these data centers through. Again, we haven't voted data centers through, and I hope you will begin to fight against that kind of language. Some people have shared it. You share those comments when you share the videos. Please do better on that. Another one, which was also posted and we heard from comments tonight tying flock to data centers and AI data centers about our meeting tonight. Make sure even their family knows the dangers of being a traitor to America and we take these tyrannical criminal flock supporters out on site and by whatever means necessary. It's disgusting. And then the light stuff is to have our character question about NDAs and bribes. I've been here for 38 years. There are people in the crowd who've known me since I was a kid. It's sad that we run here to represent you. You're all my neighbors, and I don't know most of you. But I think of you as my neighbors. That's what I get up here to do. Please stop sharing that crap and start commenting against it. You are all here. You all know what is happening in our meetings. You're all our most informed residents. Please help us spread the word. I know a lot of people came here to the Planning Commission meeting thinking we were at odds, Planning Commission, the city, and you. It's not remotely the case. The most proactive thing that we can do as a city is establish ordinance language to protect you. That is why I motioned and brought this up in November. It is why I brought up a moratorium to protect you. So let's all understand and get back to teamwork makes the dream work. Please. The rest of it is going to get technical and boring, but I do want to preface the rest of this by saying, and I know from Planning Commission you brought up they want to review the decibel levels. I think there's a lot that has come up in this that we found our ordinance language in a lot of areas is outdated. and we can probably adjust a lot. And there are new issues, environmental concerns, that came up that didn't exist in the 70s. So I think we need to have a really good look at all of our ordinance language in the very near future, not later on this year. Now to go through what has been proposed, and I'll kind of read out the sections so people can follow along. If you want to, it's all on the city website too, but you'll be scrolling like a maniac on your phone. So section two, and then subsections N1B, Section two is the overall. But in terms of electrical demand statement, adjust the language so it is not an estimate, it's an exact amount of the demand needed, and that it will be verified independently by an expert chosen by the city but paid for by the operator. Section, sorry, that was on page two, subsection B. Thank you. Yep. Right below that, cooling and water use plan. Include wording related to the estimated discharge and mitigation technologies used to prevent bacteria and chemicals being discharged in the wastewater system. Cheyenne's water system has been from a meta data center infected with a bacteria that is metal resistant they found due to them flushing and preparing their closed cooling system. So we need ongoing testing but we also need a statement in their plan as to what they intend to be discharging as well as any chemicals Getting into the table for the actual sound levels and limits. First, I would like to amend the daytime hours from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m., which is wild to me, but 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. being daytime. And then that would make nighttime 6 p.m. to 8 a.m. I'd like to amend the limits listed. So right now we've got hard numbers in there. The more research that I did, it kind of came out to be maybe a better, since we're going to be doing sound studies anyway, it came out to be better so we're not adding too much noticeably the ambient noise to change those instead of hard numbers to the leq of the sound study and then the residential and industrial every use would just be plus one decibel a and plus one decibel seat so they're not adding noticeably to the existing ambient noise levels. Rather than having hard and fast numbers, because I think nobody knows what they're going to get when we say a number, but they're going to do a study anyway, and so we should be within what is already existing. Luckily, we have a lot of good industrial users and good neighbors in that respect who don't make noise all day. That's kind of where this comes from. I couldn't tell you every business on West Road, and there's a lot of businesses over there, but the point is that they don't become a nuisance for our residents and that's kind of in line with where I'm headed with all of this. I also wanted to expand the table to include three or four different groups. Right now we just have residential and then institutional and public parks. I think group one should be residential and inclusive of all three VCA types. Group two should be schools, both public and private, as well as places of worship and faith. Group three is existing parks, habitats, and recreation areas, including but not limited to our city parks, county parks, regional, state, and national parks, not that we have any of those around here. And then group four, any existing overnight hospitality businesses, i.e. hotels and motels, since we've got a bunch of those in the city as well. Yes.

I just wanted to clarify. For residential, all of the VCA districts are considered residential because residential uses are permitted. It's fine to clarify. I just wanted to make sure that was clear.

So instead of having residential and institutional and public parks on there, I think all four of those categories should be broken down. Sorry, I was jumping around here as well as I was typing all of this.

Just to be clear, the standard for all of those would be that there's an ambient sound study that kind of establishes an average and they can't be more than one over that?

Correct. So by the current language, we're saying that they're going to do their sound study at the nearest accessible point for each receiving property. We would call all, we'd need the nearest receiving property for each of those groups. and then it would be based off of that. Correct. I had page three below subsection B, but I don't know where. So that's the top of page three. Change the wording of the paragraph, which is data center and associated equipment shall not produce perceptible ground-borne vibration as defined by ANSI beyond the properties or the site's property line. So right now it says data center and associated equipment shall not produce perceptible ground-borne vibration as by ANSI at the nearest residential or zoned, or residential zoned or used properties. I don't think it's fair to just say residential only when we've got schools, offices, businesses. It should be, there's no vibrations beyond the site's property line. Subsection A on page three, so about mid-page. Adjust the wording so that the initial sound study provides existing pre-construction environment readings taken at the quietest accessible locations. Not just for the near list, but the near list, the fur list, and an intermediate or median receiving property for groups one through four that I already said. And right now we've got a 24-hour duration in there. I believe a 48-hour would give a better idea understanding of the actual ambient noise. So I'd like to bump that up to 48 hours. Section B at the bottom of page three will require that the final noise study shall be based on the exact equipment to be used in the development of the plan. and that only equipment with manufacturer specifications for noise output may be used in the plan and development. It's been found in other areas that some of the equipment being used, it does not have manufacturer output information for noise, so their modeling isn't accurate because it's based on something that was made up or what they guessed. All equipment used should have manufacturing specs for noise, and that is the only stuff allowed to be used. Jumping to page 4, subsection B, adjust the language so that the compliance in all scenarios will be required prior to commencement of operations under a temporary CFO or full CFO. Right now it just reads CFO and we do let businesses begin operating while they're under temporary CFO and I'd hate to see a loophole where we've got a TCO out and we're not complying with the rules. So that needs to be adjusted for the commencement of operations. We need compliance. Then section 2... subsection N1, then E, require that if generators are to be used for backup power, only tier four or more efficient and less polluting generators are used, and require the generator manufacturer and model type to be listed. Right now, that isn't required in the ordinance, and I believe that would be useful for the fire department, probably, to know if something does come up, what equipment is on site. Also prohibit nuclear micro reactors or nuclear small modular reactors and any sort of future nuclear power generation on site. Also remove the language accepting. So right now we say when there's utility power outage emergency we accept the noise requirements. I don't believe that's appropriate. With all of the equipment running, including generators in a worst case scenario, the facility should be compliant with our ordinances. So that language should be adjusted. Then section two, N1H, add language that the decommissioning plan shall include full environmental reclamation of the property. strip miners do that. I don't know why we can't ask an industrial use to do that. Moving on to section 2 and 2a, increase the setback distance to one half mile and add schools, places of worship, and parks as the designated setback areas as well as residential properties. That is based on a variety of factors, including noise and findings and studies for residential property value and equity loss. Section 2 amend the language stating that the maximum daily or annual usage limits be established and instead just set a daily maximum. I can foresee instances where we'd have intermittent but extreme draws to cooling systems or what have you and extreme draws could strain our system. So I think if we control a daily maximum, then we also have control over the annual maximum, but it's much safer for our system because it keeps things standardized with the daily maximum. I'd also like to add that in the event of, and nobody's had this in the last few years, add that in the event of a water service line break in the city water system or GLWA system, that has any possibility or likelihood to impact Wixom's water customers, such as water main breaks we've had, or cause the city to need to use the water tower supply, as we do in emergencies, that any data center shall be prohibited from drawing on the city's infrastructure immediately after they are provided notice by phone, email, or in-person notification, and that prohibition from use shall be maintained until such time that full service is restored. And then full service restoration should be differentiated from our temporary or partial restorations when we've worked through a smaller line from West Bloomfield that's 24 inches instead of 48 inches. It should be full service restoration. I'd also like to add another subsection related to water discharge and require prior to discharge in the city system or natural environment that water discharge is tested for bacteria and chemicals and outline mitigation measures to ensure neither enters the city system or natural environment and have an outline plan such as we've had to install with Tribar when they were here for PFAS, not saying it'll be the same things, but we need a mitigation system in place and testing as we did with Tribar. And add language that any material that can reasonably be traced to the operation of the data center that results in noncompliance with discharge standards shall result in all operations to immediately terminate upon notice provided by the city via phone, email, mail, posted notice, or in-person notice. Going back again to the Cheyenne water system in Wyoming. And then add a subsection that states that no utility upgrades necessitated by the existence of the development shall result in the foresale or seizure of other property within the city. And that comes from the fact that A Georgia electric grid provider is forcing the sale of a number of properties so they can install new transmission lines, which they even say is 80% for data center use, and the remainder would only be serving the residents. But they're kicking people out of their homes and forcing the sale of properties to upgrade for data centers. That's not right. Section 2 and 3 add language to include that public safety, fire, and public works equipment purchases and upgrades that are necessitated by the development are purchased by or paid for by the operator. And add language that the development agreement shall include that equivalent pass-on costs of any utility customer rate increases for electric, water, gas infrastructure that are necessary due to the existence of the development or operation shall be fully paid for for a 10-year period following the development commencing construction and operation. Section 2 and 4 adjusts the language to state continuous monitoring shall be required at the nearest receiving property for each of the groups 1 through 4 that I had mentioned at the applicant's expense and the operator's expense to ensure noise standard compliance. Right now, I think that's kind of loosely written as a may or we'd have an audit. It should be continuous monitoring. I also believe we should adjust the language related to noncompliance to state that operations shall immediately cease upon notice by the city via phone, email, mail, or physical posting of noncompliance with noise standards and the resumption shall not begin until all compliance issues are corrected. and include that the city may undertake independent audit based upon complaints received from residents or nearby businesses, and if noncompliance is found, then the operator shall be responsible for reimbursing the city in full for any audit activities undertaken. Section 2 and 6, and this is the last of the specific things for what we have, Change the wording to state that the Planning Commission and City Council shall review things. To Councilmember Behrman's point, this was also in my notes, we are elected, Planning Commission is appointed, I don't believe that they should be bearing the weight of decisions that should be on us. And also add that a community benefit agreement shall be signed with the city outlining specific guarantees, including but not limited to local hiring guarantees, water and energy caps, a residential property value protection program, and community investment fund funded by the operator. Then just in general, again reiterating, city council shall have final approval similar to our condominiums. You had mentioned airports. We also do it with condominium plans as well. Add language that upon city giving notice of non-compliance issues to the operator, all operations, and this is for anything, all operations shall immediately cease until verification of compliance is verified by the city. I know it's a lot, but thank you.

Thank you. Council Member Simmons. Thank you. So obviously, that's a hard act to follow. uh... as a new council member i just want to uh... say thank you to everyone for coming out this is the most exciting meeting i've had uh... so far so it's good to see everyone uh... obviously it's my job to represent you also it's great uh... to hear the feedback uh... i get it i hear you i understand uh... we're in this issue i think i'm not gonna go through everything cuz i echo what Deputy Mayor said as well as what Councilman Berman has said in particular about as a whole we need this to be more stringent. As a whole we need to make sure that we're protected and that means I think we need to do something because we have nothing right now but modifications I think we're going to be an option number two. We're going to be making some modifications tonight to get something moving. Um, obviously water, energy, noise. I think a lot of that stuff is just too unknown for us right now. Um, so I echo that, uh, sediment. We need time. Uh, the planning commission was directed to look into this, um, starting last year before I was on council, um, and with the planning consultant as well to their point, they've made progress, but, uh, I guess we're just not far enough, um, to, to have good enough information to say where we need to be. I do like the concept of figuring out some rezoning aspects, but I do think, again, we have to make some decisions, at least tonight, to get some things moving. What my question to administration, well, I guess before my question to administration, the timing, I agree with everything from Deputy Mayor. The one change, I think the time of day, I think we should be 6 to 6 instead of 8 to 6. I think daytime should be 6 to 6. I like to sleep at night. Okay, well. And the setbacks, I'm in full agreement with creating four zones. We had a couple business owners speak up tonight. Obviously residential is a big concern for all of us, but our businesses should be a big concern as well in understanding what that setback actually looks like for other industrial businesses and schools and parks and things like that. So I think we need to analyze that. What I would like to know from administration is the concept of this sunset clause or the addition of that. What does that look like for us? Is that possible from a zoning perspective to have some sort of full-fledged solidification for us to come back and make changes to this as things go? What does that look like for us?

I mean... In general, you have the right to look at your ordinances at your discretion at any point in time that you want.

Sure, I understand that.

If there is the interest in having something in the ordinance that requires a review of that ordinance at certain intervals in time, we can research what that language might look like a little bit more so we can structure it properly. But you have that power now as it is. I understand... the intent of it, but we would need to look into it a little bit more as to how we would structure it appropriately so as to be the correct tool that you want it to be and not more or less be a burden or a hindrance or something that we don't conceive at tonight's meeting.

Thank you. Good. Council Member O'Day.

Okay. Thank you. Um... A lot going on here tonight, right? And there's a lot of people here. But since any of you who came up for public comment were limited to five minutes, I will endeavor to limit my comments to that as well in fairness to all of you. I guess I'll start out by noting I actually was not elected by you. I was appointed to fill a vacancy. And I only say that so that I can convey to you I did that out of the desire at this point in my life where my demands of raising kids have gone by the wayside and chose to do something that can be helpful to where I live and be a voice for the citizens. And just know that that's what I'm up here to do. And you might not hear me ask a ton of questions or get into the weeds as much because I heard everything you said. um you know we had a lot of comment tonight and while we have focused heavily up to this point on residential and schools kids you've all brought up such great uh points that maybe hadn't considered before obviously the businesses pets, wildlife, right down to the patterns of bees, right? Things that maybe seem small but are really important in the big picture and really important into perpetuity that we have to take into consideration. I would also say in a crowd of this size, you would expect to find at least one dissenting point, right? That maybe there would be some healthy debate. But we have had unanimous voices speak to us, both at the Planning Commission and then here tonight. So I think that's a pretty powerful situation to take into consideration and know that I am and that I heard all of you. We talked about the jobs. And the data center itself may employ some people. Even the construction, I don't truly believe, employs Michigan residents. I am fully aware, because I have a cousin who lives in Arizona, who's being contracted all around the country to build these places. So it doesn't even create jobs for Michiganders, much less Wixom residents. uh... i do have some notes here that i took down while everyone was speaking but just now i don't have pages and pages i didn't come with some pre printed lengthy speech because i wanted to come in with I don't want to say it open mind because I already knew where mine was, but I wanted to hear what all of you had to say. Like I said, I didn't have a ton of notes. I didn't go visit anywhere to listen to anything. I'm not here to grandstand or pander to any of you. I'm just here to listen. And I seriously respect the opinions of our administration as well as our planning consultant. I don't think anybody's here to do anything nefarious, so I'm certainly not going to question the advice or direction there. Finally, again, I'll just reiterate, I heard everything all of you have said as residents and what we want the city of Wixom to be. And just know, every vote that gets put before this council, my vote will reflect your comments, your concerns, and your safety, along with that of all the future generations of Wixom. And that's it.

All right. I want to thank Planning Commission for all the work they've done on this. And I want to thank you all for being here tonight, too. And I'm just going to touch on this for a moment. I've been a resident of Wixom for 40 years. I've been up here representing the city in one way or another for 19 years. And it's pretty damn insulting that the first time something controversial comes up, I'm crooked. Okay? I've signed a nondisclosure. We're taking money. I'll challenge anybody. There's an election next year. Why don't you file and run for a seat up here, okay? I challenge you guys. We won't get anybody. But going on with that, I just have a couple of things here. I would like to see put in the ordinance nothing north of Pontiac Trail. No data centers north of Pontiac Trail. That's where all of our residential are. I know at the moment there's not any property probably for that, but in a couple of years we will have a piece of property that's available and I would not want to see anything like that go in there. So that. And then what are the penalties for the violation for the noise and utility usage? I know right now it says that the applicant will pay for those testings, but is it ONCE EVERY FIVE YEARS, ONCE EVERY YEAR, ONCE EVERY QUARTER, ONCE... WE DON'T HAVE THAT SPECIFIED IN HERE, AND I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE SPECIFIED IN HERE HOW MANY TIMES WE TEST. AND I KNOW THE CITY ALREADY HAS PENALTIES FOR ORDINANCE VIOLATIONS, BUT I DON'T THINK THEY'RE STRONG ENOUGH. SO I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT AND MAKE THE PENALTY STRONGER. AND ALSO, We're not in a hurry, so I think we should push back the second reading of this to the second reading in August. So that gives us time to look over things, make sure that you guys take all the notes from everybody here tonight, implement those changes in this, and we move on. And I see the lawyer has a question.

Can I jump on that? You sure can. I have that biting my tongue over here. I know I'm the substitute for tonight and the new guy for tonight. First off, can you introduce yourself? Oh, I'm sorry. My name is Tom Schultz. I'm with the same firm that Beth Cirella, your normal counsel, is with. So I think that's a great idea. And in fact, I would suggest maybe you modify it a little bit and not actually vote on the first reading yet. That was probably, I've been doing this for a long time, the most kind of subject to and proposed amendments that I've seen to an ordinance. So with my communities that I normally represent, with that much discussion, some of which was great and seems pretty easy to implement, some of which, frankly, I'm going to tell you, we're probably going to give you a letter saying it's a great idea, but I'm not sure we can do that. So we would like, I suggest that you give our office, staff, consultants an opportunity to go back and listen to the tape take better notes than I was able to and sort of address them either by just making a proposed amendment to the ordinance that would come back to you in a revised ordinance or addressing it in some way substantively some of the issues like you know, the PUD question, which, you know, is a great idea, but is a pretty rare thing to do when it's the only way to get a development approved. The sunset, you know, a lot of this is just off the top of my head, and I can't do them all in one night, but the reason why we typically discourage that is because you have a potential, essentially what you do is you make an approved use and not conforming use. So these are things that there are, good ways for us to have a discussion on and I think it probably makes more sense to do it as another first reading because that's a lot of stuff that was changed or suggested to change. And I think you could have a very good conversation on almost all of that at the next meeting and then decide whether or not to put it on the second reading.

Assistant CM Andrew Benson.

Yeah, just to add to that, we will need, I'd prefer it as a motion, it could potentially be consensus, but just an understanding of specifically which of the changes that were suggested tonight by individual council members. There were some people who said the same things, but again, we don't want to make assumptions about what specifically you want us to change and what you don't. So having a motion or specific action from council saying, you know, we want these modifications, you know, with Councilmember Gottschall's or Deputy Mayor Gottschall's, I'm sorry, you know, that either could be, you know, incorporation of Councilmember Gottschall's comments as written. I assume you have these written down in some way that's shareable. Or you could go individually through them again and make a motion, say I motion to do this. I'm just saying for the purposes of record keeping and making sure that what we, the modifications we make to your ordinance are consistent with the discretion of all of council, that's some advice. Because again, we don't want, some of you may not agree on one or two sections or those kinds of things.

Council Member Kennedy.

I just wanted to say that I thought Deputy Mayor Gottschall's speech was so perfect for what I was looking for to say, I just didn't have the right words for that. I'd be perfectly fine just voting on his changes.

That's it.

Council Member Behrman?

I'm fine withdrawing my request for a PUD if we can put Council approval into the special land use as proposed by the Deputy Mayor. The only concern I have that I need to see in diagram form is whether or not the setback requirements requested by the Deputy Mayor still leave anything viable. I don't want us to get in a situation where we're making something not viable and be challenged that way. So I would need to see the updated map. And then lastly, the only thing I would change from what the deputy mayor suggested is I do still think an interior setback, which could be subtracted from the total setback should be required because I don't think it should be another industrial use should be 50 feet from the noise problem of a data center. I think There needs to be land on the data center itself that is absorbing the sound and not right next to the office of another industrial use. So I don't know what that number should be. I mean, like I said, looking at the ordinance out of recommendation out of Kentucky, it was 500 feet on the property, then plus 1,500, so 2,000 total. Maybe that's something we can have just an educated discussion on once we have some maps to look at. So maybe that would be the only thing I'd say that I'm fine with all the proposed changes by the Deputy Mayor, but what that number is going to be still needs to flex once we see the maps. Does that make sense?

It does. One of the things I was just going to add is that's part of the struggle of assigning specific numbers and specific setback numbers is what parcels would even be left available that could meet those kind of rigid setback numbers. That is one of the benefits of the way that the Planning Commission recommended language with you have to be able to meet noise standard or you have to be set back far enough to do so because again you know depending on the context of what the underlying application is if this is a again a hypothetical a five-acre parcel that's an existing industrial building and they want to convert it to an to that use you know, they may not be able to meet that standard. And that may be fine, right? That may be the intent. I'm not trying to imply that it isn't. I'm just saying that rigid numbers can be challenging, so we need to map it.

I mean, and it may come down to going back to the same recommendation from the former deputy mayor this evening, and then those also just suggested by, you know, just the property in M2. I mean, a data center is... a heavy use. It's not like our normal mom and pop tool and dye shops we have in the city. So maybe the property that is zoned already for M2 should be the only place that we should be considering this at this point in time. Maybe that takes a lot of this problems off the table because that's not bi-residential. But however we do it, I just want to make sure that we're protecting the city in the best way possible, that there is some viable land so it meets the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act. But at the same note, if someone's going to want to come here, they're going to have to work really hard to make sure that they're not affecting the daily lives and the health and safety of our residents, because clearly that's not what we want.

Council Member Simmons.

Thank you. So the question I guess I just have is for administration, maybe for our council in our temporary council is just understanding in the conversations that we have had previously the council advice uh... was to that were exposed uh... and trying to understand what that looks like for residents currently uh... from a timeline perspective of not having anything for protection. So I guess I'm just trying to understand a new time. I want to get it right, so I'm fine with waiting, but I want to understand from council what that timeline looks like for us. Are we just talking about pushing back a meeting? And does that give us are there any negatives with that? From your perspective, that you would know of from our actual council.

Through the mayor, there's no particular timeline. I think Drew pointed out the moratorium is still in place to the extent, you know, there hasn't been a Challenge to that, that's where you are. You're moving along with an actual ordinance approval process and I think that it, from a court's perspective, it shows that you're not simply sitting on your hands. You are ultimately trying to put together an ordinance here that's gonna be enforceable and found to be reasonable. So, you know, the ordinance that came before you tonight had an awful lot of time and energy spent in it and a lot of wordsmithing. And a lot of what came up tonight was some fairly quick, a fair number of changes that I think are going to need some review. I think that review has to happen before you take action to move it on to the next step. If you do, if you decide we don't want to wait, we want to pass this first reading with all the comments by Deputy Mayor Gottschall to come back to us, that's obviously what your staff would do. That's what would come back to you at the next meeting. But it would come back to you with some explanatory you know, comments on some of the things that we put in there. So you can do either. What you need to show is that you're actually, the moratorium was temporary, is temporary, and it's to allow you to finish an ordinance. Great. So as long as you're working on it, I think that's helpful. Great. Good.

Nope. And I'm good with the changes with the six to six time. Add that in there, please.

Deputy Mayor, you got you.

I will relent on that. I would like to then make a motion directing city staff to review the proposed ordinance to incorporate my comments as well as the comments of my fellow council members as practical and to bring this amendatory ordinance language back for a first reading in the near future. And then also, if some of the comments made by council members can't practically be put into the ordinance, as alluded to, maybe ideas of how something similar could be put into effect, or if it's just a bad idea to begin with, then a comment as to why we shouldn't do that. That's my motion.

Thank you. Did you get that motion, Madam Clerk?

Sort of.

Okay. Any discussion? All right, I got a motion and a second to approve the motion that Deputy Mayor Gottschall proposed to us. Is that good enough? No, just make sure clerk gets a copy. All right, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you.

Mr. Mayor, what are we going to do with the first motion?

So we need whoever made the motion in a second to withdraw their motion in a second, correct?

Would it withdraw or just table it?

It would be postponed, wouldn't it? technically if you're going to the next meeting or a future meeting. While she looks up who did the motion in second, I just want to point out we will attempt to try to turn this around for your next meeting, which should be July 28th. I just want to be candid. It may take us a little bit more time specifically.

We will still be under the moratorium, so that's fine.

I believe the first and second were Council Member Kennedy first, myself second, correct? I think I...

That's correct.

Okay. Do you want a motion to postpone?

Yes.

Motion to postpone.

So was the first motion to introduce, to approve the introduction, and then there was a second? I'd take a withdrawal of that motion, given the one that you just passed.

I'd withdraw my second from a motion. Then withdraw the motion. I withdraw my motion, okay.

You all are getting a lesson in Robert's Rules of Order here. No extra charge for that. All right.

So now can we move on?

Yes.

All right, new business number two is a request for a waiver from the adopted resolution imposing a temporary moratorium on the establishing, permitting, consideration, approval, location, construction, and or installation of any data centers in the city of Wixom to permit the review of a site plan application for a proposed data center at... 3625 South Wixom Road, parcel identification number 22-06-200-049 as requested by Wixom Industrial 1 LLC. Do I have a motion? Do I have a motion?

I'll move to, well, so I guess there were a few things outlined in here. Can we ask a question or do we need a motion first?

We need a motion.

Different councils have different practices. Is it your practice to do a motion first? Then you should do that.

I think we have to have the motion first and then discussion.

I guess the recommendation would be to make the motion. You're not, you know, making the motion doesn't, you're not deciding what you're doing with the motion. You're just putting the motion on the floor.

For the purposes of discussion, purposes only, I will make the motion.

All right, so I have a motion and a second.

Assistant Manager Benson. I think you just have a motion and a second.

I thought you made a motion. Okay, I've got a motion. Do I have a second?

I'll second to hear a request.

Okay.

Good evening, Mayor, members of City Council. Just to address the motion part of this first, and then we'll get into the meat and potatoes here. Ultimately, the recommended motion coming out of this would be a motion to approve or deny. You'll pick which of you do based on whether you find the request to be reasonable or unreasonable. In one scenario or another, you're going to need to modify The motion that's on the floor, really, I don't have the exact language. I think you made a motion to about the request. Really, I guess with the motion on the floor, and you can adjust this if you feel so inclined, is your motion is to discuss the request, and then ultimately you'll need to modify that with either approve or deny based on it being reasonable or unreasonable. Does that make sense and jive with the...

The motion was to discuss. I'm making a modification later if we need to.

Okay. All right. So the request before you tonight is in relationship to the moratorium that was established by resolution of city council on March 24th, 2026. Specifically section three of that moratorium of that resolution stated. A waiver of the moratorium may be granted upon the request of an applicant if the City Council finds that a waiver would not impact the health, safety, welfare of the City and is deemed reasonable by the City Council in exercising its legislative authority over land use regulation to remain consistent with the City's zoning ordinance. That's pretty boilerplate language, that's a common text that is in moratoriums and it really offers a first administrative remedy for individuals who are seemingly impacted by the moratorium in place. So that's the context of what sets up this. In this particular scenario, Wixom Industrial One LLC has submitted a formal written request requesting that city council consider a waiver of that moratorium. Alongside that, they submitted a site plan application. These materials were submitted to the city on June 2nd. Consistent with the moratorium that is in place, city staff is not permitted to review, consider, or put it through the routine site plan review process, so we have not. In your agenda packet, you will not find the customary planning consultant review, engineering review, fire department review, or any of those things. And one of the key things to keep in mind is the question before you tonight is not whether this site plan is satisfactory, whether it meets standards, whether we want it or not. The question ultimately is just, do you think it is reasonable to waive the moratorium to allow this project to go through site plan, to enter the site plan review process where it would then be reviewed by the Planning Commission both in terms of the use category that the applicant is suggesting and in terms of whether their site plan meets the current ordinance standards as the revised data center ordinance amendments have not been approved yet. So again, that's just the overarching context. The applicant is here tonight and they will have the opportunity to present their case to you But I will give just a quick overview of kind of what the context is. This is a 54.1 acre site located west of South Wixom Road and east of Oak Creek Drive at 30625 South Wixom Road. It has an 87 foot wide frontage on South Wixom Road and approximately 650 feet of frontage on Oak Creek Drive. The applicant in their site plan submission proposes to construct three buildings totaling more than 519,000 square feet. It also proposes approximately 170,000 square feet of mechanical yard. although the context of that doesn't seem to be well defined. There was no provided operational statement as a part of the application package, so we cannot comment, and perhaps this is up to the applicant to talk about anything related to the end user, hours of operation, noise impacts, number of employees, or current or future utility impacts. That information was not provided. they did provide some information related to reviews from Eagle. Um, this, none of that has been verified by the city. Um, the applicant, uh, uh, proposes that, uh, they be reviewed as a permitted use by right, um, as opposed to, um, any other kind of category. Uh, sorry, I'm just kind of going back through this. Um, That use categorization may actually need to be determined by the Planning, or by the Zoning Board of Appeals for a use interpretation. That is the body of the city that adjudicates use verifications. But with all that in mind, I will pull up the applicant's presentation and you all will be able to hear from them and discuss their request.

Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Richard Rassel, 380 North Old Woodward in Birmingham, Michigan. I am legal counsel to Wixom Industrial One, limited liability company. I have with me this evening to make the presentation to you on the merits, Mr. Dennis Griffin, who is a member of the organization Wixom Industrial One. We're here this evening, of course, not in connection with a site plan review. We're not here in connection with an interpretation of an ordinance. We're here with a moratorium waiver request, which is submitted to this body. On June 2nd, the site plan that we are anxiously awaiting to move forward with in your city was also submitted for approval on that same day. Our plan is by right. Our plan is without project variances. And our plan firmly fits within the waiver request criteria because it is consistent with the health, safety, and welfare of the city of Wixom. And our position here this evening is that we are concerned about a number of different things from a legal standpoint. Our site plan, which was received by the city on June 2nd of this year, has not been processed. Our application has not been presented to staff for review. Our application has not been presented to the Planning Commission and is apparently being put in the position of awaiting the process of the consideration of a new ordinance amendment and there has been what we believe to be a substantial delay in the consideration of a moratorium waiver request. So we're here respectfully to make a request this evening that the waiver request that was set forth and documented and is going to be substantiated on the merits by Mr. Griffin be granted by this board this evening. We would then move forward in good faith with your project, with our project and your city. We do not need any project variances. We are of right under the ordinance that exists today and we ask that we be allowed to move forward and of course that our project be treated equally with all similarly situated project applicants before the city in any industrial or commercial district in the city today. We can answer questions for you. Your staff has been very respectful and accommodating to us and we've had the chance to participate at the planning commission and uh... share our comments on the ordinance changes some of which were made in connection with an ordinance uh... amendment proposed by the planning commission which differs greatly than what we heard tonight uh... but that looks like that process may have another chance for for comments. So we'll share those for another day, but we'd like the council to focus on our moratorium waiver request as set forth in your March moratorium resolution. Thank you. I can address any questions you have, but I turn the table over to Mr. Griffin to walk you through the merits of our request, which supplement our June 2nd letter. Thank you.

Good evening, everyone. My name is Dennis Griffin. I'm representing Wixom Industrial One. I'm actually very proud to be here today. I'm proud of our progress on our project. I'm proud to present that this is a safe project. I ask for respectful, objective consideration of what I present today. I want everyone to know that there's never been any discussion of NDA or secrecy or anything from my group or from any of the public bodies here has never come up. We have been entirely transparent from day one. We are not new to this process. We began our investigation in this exact project in late 2023, starting with a site that really was... It was lost with a big corporate name. UPS owned it. It was brought to me by CBRE, one of the largest real estate group in the country. And they're like, Dennis, you're probably one person that can start to figure this out. No survey, no environmental, nothing. It was literally a surplus property for UPS. It took me a long time to figure it out. I worked very closely with Phil Sprague, who is our representative, and immediately put me in touch with Mr. Benson, Mr. Pasolacqua, And we dug in. We validated zoning, utilities, soils, access, all of it. The things that we would do as a sophisticated developer. And I'll stop there for a minute and go to my philosophy for development. I'm a corporate developer. I started out very much suit and tie. I got wiped out in 2008. Now I go more personal projects, fulfillment projects. I'm not looking for fights in any communities. The projects I do, generally the communities sometimes don't agree with it, but they applaud it when I'm finished. Projects I've personally designed, planned, been constructed with and sold, still own. in downtown Royal Oak, the Hyatt Place, the apartments, Regis. That was my project. The mayor at the time asked me, personally said, we need a hotel, can you help? I did help. In downtown Ferndale, Ferndale and Pleasant Ridge, there really is no downtown Pleasant Ridge. I did a complete redevelopment with my partners of a former steel factory, Walker Wire. It was a mess. We cleared out PCBs. We brought in a fitness center. We brought in tech companies. We cleaned it up. We worked with the city. We worked with the state. We worked with the agencies. We did a cross multi-jurisdictional project. It's beautiful. There's new housing. There's new apartments. It was clean. We're proud of it. I sold it to my partners and we moved on. We moved south into Woodward Heights and Walcott area in Ferndale. We have breweries there. We have Urban Rust Brewery. I was asked personally, take these young people under your wing and help them so they don't screw up. I don't come and trod across cities. Never would. The overall arching idea of data centers is unfair. Data centers are produced by people that are good people. People that their wives love them. You know, mine does. You know, I'm not here to do anything terrible to anyone. And I can tell you, yeah, she does. She really does. And, you know, and I have asked, you know, early on in the planning commission for the exact things that you all mentioned. Respect. I said the things that the public bodies say, they affect me. And the things that have been said about my company without knowing me, you're upset? I don't know if I'm upset, it doesn't surprise me. It hurts, it's not appropriate. The things that I would show you today, everything is thoughtful about this community. I don't build projects that I'm not proud of. I don't build projects that trod on municipalities. It is apparent that everyone has decided that's all that's gonna happen. Open your minds a little bit, perhaps. If it's possible, who knows? So we went through that process, and in October 24, we purchased the first 40 acres. The entire city from the staff was aware of it. At that time, we had validated that data uses, data centers, were by right. We didn't say, hey, we want to hide a data center. We asked. Yeah, it's by right. Our agent, CBRE, marketed it, broadcast it across the country for data centers. You know, Wixom is a redevelopment-ready community, pro-business. That was the things that we were told to say because they were true. We did. We said those exact things. We have great interests because you're a business-ready community. That's the way I marketed it. That's what I believed. We also rezoned residential in that exact corridor from residential to M1. That's what you all wanted. It was a no-brainer. You know, residential doesn't fit there. So we consolidated the property. We purchased an additional 15 acres. We presented a first data center site plan in October of 2025. And we did. We presented it to staff, you know, with my partners. And we took comments, we modified it, and we presented another plan. That's the plan you have today. Our plan is a smart plan. It's one that's conscientious. It takes into account, you know, setbacks. It takes into account smart planning, repurposing buildings. We own buildings forever. We're not going to build a building that can't be repurposed. I'm an adaptive reuse developer. That's what we do. So that's the general project history. And I said to the honorable mayor here at a planning commission meeting, I come in peace. I do. I absolutely do. That's my essence. I'm not going to do a crappy project. Maybe I won't do a project at all. But if I do, it's going to be one we're all proud of. No questions asked. So for health, safety, and welfare, this is very important to me, and it's a very defined thing. In the moratorium, it says it shall not impact the health, safety, and welfare under the current ordinance. I can prove that to you exactly that we would not negatively impact these exact items. You have very good noise ordinance in place today. It's got a daytime, a nighttime. It's also got language that includes annoying and tonality and those type of items. So we've considered it. We also looked and followed very closely your sound consultant. I was at, maybe I missed one, but I was at every planning commission meeting. I was at the first public hearing. It was me, my team, and maybe one or two other folks. It wasn't this. This was, I don't know. I'm not upset at all about people being concerned and maybe even afraid. It makes a lot of sense to me. They're also, I can help educate. I know more about these buildings and how to quiet them down, how to position them, than I'm sure anyone in this room. Because that's what I do, that's my job. I know how to line up EC motors, serrated fans, how to point generator, exhaust fans in one direction, how to put critical exhaust systems on them, how to do canted sound walls. I can make a building virtually quiet, but you won't let me do a virtually quiet building when you can't even let me put it on my land. So this is not even knee-jerk. This is preemptive before you even let me present. I said the same thing to Planning Commission. I want you to see my plan. No, because we don't like you. We hate data centers. Everything is scientifically available to fix. The data center world is going very fast. The people that are in it have made mistakes. You probably all made a mistake when you went to a Bitcoin mining 1970s building in Dowagiac. That's a Mack truck. We're working at Teslas. That's not the same. It's not close. No, that's right on top. I grew up in a small town. That's where factories were right across the street. We don't have that situation here. And I respect very much. I've driven all the neighborhoods here. I know where they are. I know that I can't send sound to them the way you're afraid of. I just can't do it. It's physically impossible for me to do. And I'll show you that tonight. Physically impossible for me to do. So we reference the standards that you've presented to us. Existing ordinance, ANSI, EPA, typical levels. We presented a receptor by receptor analysis that we are safe and we will not hurt the health, safety, or welfare. Single family apartments. And there's... They're all way north of Pontiac Trail. By corex or cortex, I screw it up sometimes. And then I know where the other ones are in town. I know where the other multifamily is across Wixom Road. And there's an oddball receptor that is being measured now. It was approved as condos in a space, we're gonna call it Receptor D, that's sandwiched between Pontiac Trail and a truck yard. I mean, that's tough to say that we want to protect residents, but also the city approved, you know, front doors 15 feet off from Pontiac Trail. That's a 45-mile-an-hour, five-lane highway that's humming 70, 80, 85 dBs. You know, so who's getting protected all the time? Are we protecting everybody? Are we looking at every plan? Or are we just attacking data center plans? I would have never oriented those buildings that way. No way. I would never sell, you know, I don't want to say anything about someone else's property, but we have to look at planning in context. And we have to look at existing elements in context. Our site is 100% surrounded by industrial. I mean, it's not a large site compared to other data centers. It's the right size and location in my opinion. I'll show you that it's beyond safe. It really cannot negatively impact the health, safety, or welfare of the city. So our modeling basis is 65 dBA nighttime in Wixom. And we're offering that as a worst case scenario because our equipment won't be that loud at the property line. When we have our gen sets right, our RTUs right, our screen walls right, we move them off from the property lines, we have the best equipment in terms of serrated fans, offset, chiller systems. It's a Tesla. It really is. So here's some terminology that's from your consultant, and I think it's very, very important. Probably gonna be hard to see, but I remember him saying that apartment next to a freeway, no one would live there, and I agree with that. But we also have a downtown, excuse me, urban row housing on a major avenue. That's the plan that's between Pontiac Trail and Gibson. There's no question. Everyone would say Pontiac Trail is a major avenue and that is row housing. We also have older urban residential areas. Not so much of that here. We have wooded residential and then the other areas of absolute decibel-based descriptions. These are from your sound engineer based off from published governmental data. This lays out what our basis from our measurement is, is what M1 is allowed to produce under your current ordinance. Well, this is actually the same metric that will be in your new ordinance the way it's trending. The operative measure is 70 days, 65 night at our property line. Regardless of what happens with the rest of it at a receptor, the current ordinance, Mateo, you would agree, does not change that, correct?

So these standards stay in place for property lines that are adjacent to zones other than residential?

Correct. So that is the source property line of how we have to measure from there are we not impacting negatively the health, safety, and welfare as it exists in Wixom today. Here is the land use compatibility. And interesting here, I've heard mentions of 40 and 35. 45 is the lower limit in every classification as presented by the entities and your consultant. So we have single-family residential. We respect a 45 to 55 compatible notion. We have residential multifamily moderate outdoor use. That's what we're going to qualify any apartments that are next adjacent to our project. And the rest of them, you can see, there was a discussion of what is compatible, marginally compatible. Marginally compatible is, you know, compatible, maybe not perfect. But what we've put is the low level to the high level, and we've provided an average, which seemed very fair. It's squarely and compatible. And as we go on. This is the map of our project and the distances to A, the closest single family, which is 2,300 feet away. B, the closest urban apartment, which is 2,200 feet away. I'm a developer, I say square feet a lot. Suburban apartment, that's to the east, that's 2,800 feet away. And then we have the proposed condo, which is D, which is 530 feet away. And from what I can tell, that's expired on its own merits for no construction during the timeframe. So those are the modeled receptors. So looking at receptor A, the single family, 2,300 feet away, the ANSI category is single family, extensive outdoor use, compatible range is 45 to 55 dB, average of 50 dB. On the thermometer, that's the one up and down with the different components. That's called wooded residential from the thermometer and your consultant. Using two components, it's sound and noise. spreading over distance and a loss of sound through going through a built environment. The distance is very much scientific. The built environment, we made a conservative estimate. So our project, at a worst case, 65 dBA, which we're lawfully allowed to deliver, is 30.5 dBA delivered to that residential receptor. The thermometer equivalent is below wilderness ambient. It's the quietest category on the EPA reference scale. We literally are sending silence to these homes at 2,300 feet. And practically, we heard some of the folks say, well, all the noise is coming from down below. The ambient level, and I appreciate the Deputy Mayor's thinking about the ambient, the ambient is... It's not even a guess, it's gonna be above 30 for sure. And already this is well, well below your consultants and the government's estimates of what is compatible. 30.5 DBA from our project at those single family homes. That is safe. That is not impacting and making a negative impact to the health, safety, and welfare of those homes, as far as sound is concerned. The urban apartment. This is behind Wixom Road and Pontiac Trail. 2200 feet from our project. The multi-family, moderate outdoor use, compatible range is 45 to 60 dBA. We went 52.5. The thermometer category allows urban row housing on a major avenue, 69 dB. Our modeled measurement on two very trustworthy, and they're from your own consultant's data, is 31 dBA delivered to that site from our project. That's below wilderness ambient coming from our project to those apartments in downtown Wixom. 21.5 db below the ansi average 77.5 quieter perceived loudness than what is allowed poor per government data receptor d is the proposed townhome condominium this distance is 530 feet from our property line The ANSI category is multifamily moderate outdoor use. Again, our position now is that it's expired, but it's also sandwiched between a truck parking lot on the south, Pontiac Trail on the north, And generally, it's surrounded by commercial. I think we all can say that anyone that's living there has a different perception of what their built environment is. Also, we checked it in the exact same measurements. At 530 feet away, we measure 45 dBA. This is equivalent to agricultural crop land from your consultant's thermometer. We're delivering agricultural crop land noise to this receptor. Everyone would conclude that that is not impacting negatively the health, safety, or welfare of that site. 7.5 dB below the ANSI average. Again, this is worst case legal amount of noise we can deliver from our property line. And we can do better, and we will. This is also something that I think is very important when we're looking at health, safety, and welfare, and also as you're deliberating on these ordinances. And data centers and their use may be being treated very, very unfairly and inappropriately. So between us and this receptor D is a project called Matrix. There's a project called Vestas. There's another large building that happens to be vacant right now. Those are allowed to deliver the exact same sound at the property line as we are. 65 dB. They're allowed to be, you know, a side yard 20 feet off from the rope. So that property can deliver two receptor D, 64 dBs to that property line. So our contribution to that property is 45 dB. And our modeled, again, appropriately modeled is nearly 20 dB below what an adjacent property could deliver to it. No question, our project is not negatively impacting the health, safety, welfare of that property. It's physically impossible. We cannot throw quiet over a wall. Can't be done. Again, the category here is urban row housing, which your own consultant says should be expected at 69 dB, but we're modeling it and we're 7.5 dB below the compatibility range. And we would all agree, everyone that's been over there, that is not a quiet area. And if you look at the ambient, our consultant measured the ambient on that between 48 and 50. So we're well within the range there. So the conclusion here on noise, which is the number one concern across the board, is our project for the receptors that is defined cannot negatively impact the health, safety, or welfare as far as noise on those projects. I want to talk now about the project site and infrastructure profile. There's a lot of discussion and concern about power and water. It makes a lot of sense. Those are consumable items. A developer doesn't want to consume them. They're expense items. We're concerned about having sewer charges sometimes coming out of sprinklers. We're not cheap, but we're efficient. You know, that's one thing, for sure. So, our Sarkand characteristics, I want to show you some renderings of building designs and the site massing. This project, and Drew and Mateo saw that early on, very early on, we were looking at a traditional built business park. We had some iterations where the first round of data centers were, they were big. They were too big. They were two stories. They were not appropriately positioned for generators. And we had a session with Drew and Mateo, and we worked on it. We went back to kind of a hybrid of our first plan. And a big part of it was that exact thing, the concerns. What do you have with the building? I mean, obsolescence right now is in office buildings. Going to Troy, going to Southfield, they're sitting there vacant. People are putting self-storage in it. We left our geometry here to be universally ready for traditional industrial, most likely multi-tenant industrial. So you'll see our generator courts have a dimension that allow them to be pulled out, and they go into truck courts very easily. You talk about traffic impact and the comparisons to uses that are already permitted by right. The traffic is ridiculously low comparatively. Some may say, well, that's tied because you don't have any jobs, but it also is not diesel fumes, diesel noise, the wear and tear on the roads. That's a safety and welfare item that this project actually is actually predictable and improving those components. Infrastructure and safety. We verified very early on with the Detroit Regional Partnership and with Drew and Mateo and your DPW, and we worked together, and we actually got a VIP program together for this exact site. It's a site that's desirable for corporate use in southeast Michigan. Detroit Regional Partnership, Oakland County, and we did it together. Zoning consistency, it's zoned M1 as we said, and then we'll conclude that this is consistent with the health, safety, and welfare standard. So the project here, I think it's important to show a couple things, and we'll get into them. But in general, you'll see the layout. The layout of the buildings, they are north-oriented to them, but that's actually to mitigate sound. And what we do is inside of the buildings, it's called an acoustic canyon. Our generators are contained, sound is absorbed between buildings, and it literally can't escape. We put a wall on the north side of this, we point the fans south, and this is quiet. Our generators alone are going to be delivering maybe 30 dBs to receptor D. That's the design of them. And on the roof, if we do RTUs, rooftop units, then those will have mechanical shields. But they're EC, electric controlled variable frequency drive. What you heard in Dowagiac, those are belt driven screamers. And it's a Bitcoin miner. I looked at it. I've had Bitcoin miners in my buildings. They're chaos. I mean, they're terrible. And them allowing them to continue to go, I think, is inappropriate and I also think that some of the other large scale data centers that are being proposed, including Lyon Township and others, they're not thoughtful. They're parked right next to horse farms and apartment complexes and the golf course is gonna be turned into homes. That's not the same context we have here, not even close. I think that Lyon Township was one of the reasons where people said, okay, we have to really start protecting. No one talked to me about it. Someone we've been working on for two years. What do we do together? You know, don't let this happen. No one said boo to me. You know, that's kind of insulting the way you were insulted. You know, it's very tough sledding when you're working on someone that long and nobody even talks to you and you're the expert. You know, we've become the experts. We're here to help. We're not here to trot on any city. And you'll also see that we're preserving wetlands, and acres and acres of them. And this was a decision very early on with my partner and me. It's like, we can mitigate these, we can get them out of here, we can get more land. And we're like, why? This can be a very calm class A location. That was our choice. We're a little bit longer in the tooth with development. Those are the choices we make. We're making fulfillment choices. This is one. And we're not stretching the density here. We've got 50% impervious. We can go to 75 for your ordinance. That's 13 acres of land that's left here in the city. I think that's commendable. I don't think that's something to be afraid of, of a data center developer. I think that's someone that's doing the right thing. No one is going to say, yeah, you're right. I know. I don't expect it. But it is right. Here's an aerial view, more rendered, which shows our projects and the green areas and that we're completely surrounded by industrial, every direction. I heard the man from Foster Forest. We're not right on top of him. Our generators are tucked behind. Our RTUs are up top, and they're shielded. We've got a corporate location facing him, but it's still 600 feet off the road, 600 feet. To the north of us is Vestas. Right in between our generator yard is a large industrial building, providing that shielding, providing the exact shielding that people want to see. This is thoughtful design. The next step between Receptor D, as we're calling it, is a 24-7 truck yard. No, this is not us deciding what is the built environment. That was the city that approved that use. That was the city that zoned this. So we're working with the environment the best we can. And we believe in data center use done right. It's a Tesla, it's not a Mack truck. This will show the context in different directions. This is a northwest view. You'll see the large industrial buildings. What you don't see with the other industrial buildings is this much green space. You won't find it. You might find some different areas, but people that have done a complete park, they haven't looked at this screen. No one's contemplated that. Everyone else is saying, how much can I get? We're not saying that at all. This is a northeast view. Getting a little more context, I guess that would be going towards town. So there's the intersection of Old Wixom and Wixom Road. And then there's Gibson Drive and Pontiac. That is not a quiet area by any stretch. Any noise, any tones coming out of our project, already we're limited what can be at the property line, but they're masked. Anything your sound engineer will say, we know it. Next thing that comes out of there is masked. The sound is masked. We cannot literally negatively impact the health, safety, and welfare of the city. It's practically scientifically impossible for us to do it following the rules of your ordinance. This is the southeast view. Again, the same context. We're surrounded by similar scale buildings, 100% surrounded by industrial. And you can see now those are actually the gensets. And interestingly, those gensets, they're not going to be running all the time. They're going to be tested seldom. But it's practically the same device inside of a tractor of a semi as a genset running all the time, running around the roads. Ours are in one spot with controlled testing. Here's a southwest view, just to continue recognizing the views. Site design highlights that are very important for us to communicate. The building depths are sized to the data halls, but they're also sized for future uses. They're 212 feet deep. They're very good for light industrial. They're not real good for large warehouse. That's not our intent. That's really not our business model. The truck courts are set up Future truck courts right now, they're GENSEC courts and equipment courts. The parking and access as designed in the plan is per the industrial M1 counts. It's perfectly set for a decommissioning plan if it has to come. We wouldn't wreck these buildings. We would turn the GENSEC courts into truck courts and bring in new clients. shielded mechanical equipment. The equipment progressively moves away from the north. The most attenuated equipment are the RTUs and the generators that are closest to the north. Progressively going south, they get further and further and further away. And our distance to receptors A and single family, the apartments, and even receptor D is at our property line. very, very quickly you're 2,200, 2,300 feet from a single family. That equipment is now 3,000 feet away. It's progressively further away. It's designed very smartly to have limited impact. The science is perfect on how distance and masking and stacking of equipment works. I didn't invent it, but I've studied it, and that's exactly how it works. It's immutable. And the efficient acoustic canyons by the building massing is very smart design, and it works for the gensets. They have a different, I wouldn't say a tonality. They're more of a rumbler, but they also, because of their design, they're easier to mask. You can grab that sound next to buildings. You can grab it next to acoustical walls, and that's exactly what we'll do. The campus is secured. There's minimal strain on public utilities. Absolutely secure campus. It's full access maintained for fire and life safety. This is vacant land today. Every building is gonna be brand new. Every roadway is gonna be designed per your standards. Stormwater is for Oakland County and your standards. Every impact of this building is better than even some of the things that Drew mentioned, a project that may go into an existing building. And by its own design, by your own rules, and we were obligated to follow them, we can't negatively impact the health, safety, or welfare from that site. The scale is appropriate. You've seen it, our building's raised range from 130 to 200,000 feet. That's the range of buildings that are floating through that neighborhood, no question. The traffic impact is quite telling. The average daily trips, if this were built out as M1, is 1,200. One of the most qualified traffic engineers in the country is 310. It's 950 fewer trips. The AM trips are 191 lower. PM trips are 300 lower. Daily truck trips are 182 lower. Very, very significant reductions in predictable for a very controlled environment. It's healthy, safe, and good for the welfare. Infrastructure and site design. The water system is already in your proposed ordinance. It's also smart design. It's a closed-loop system. It's a combination of glycol, water, and it's filled once, and it gets topped off. That's it for water. That's the way it works. It's less water than a golf course, less water than a whole host. One of our early groups that was looking at this was a bottle packaging company for soda. They've been consuming water like crazy. We're not even close. That same use could come in here any time. We have a limited water use. probably the most predictable and lowest water use of most users. Industrial processes use much more water for cooling and it's gonna go in the drains. This doesn't go in the drains. We're gonna have toilets, we're gonna have restrooms, we're gonna have break rooms, minor. Electrical service, yeah, we will build our own substation. That's the location that Drew was talking about on the site. It's about five acres substation. It's smaller than our original plan. That was about a million feet. We have 200 megawatts. It sounds like a lot. It is a lot. But it's a third of the size of Lyon Township. You know, it's, what is it, 1.4 gig for Saline. That's, you know, seven times as much. Lyon Township is 170 acres. We're 50. We're not even using 50 of it. We're reserving 13, so we're using 40. I mean, this is the appropriately scaled project that's not going to impact your city as you're all, like... Immediately assuming. Thank you so far for the open mind on this. The utility rating impact. I can tell you our deposits with DTE already. We make deposits with them. We're like, what do we need to deposit? Because the law is... Nothing, including your studies, can impact any resident. Everything that we spend in that site by law, by DTE, and by the Michigan Public Service Commission says that we are not even allowed to impact the rates for your residents. We can't do it, even if we tried, couldn't do it. Fire protection, it's fully sprinkled buildings, brand new. It'll be inspected by the city. The standards for fire inspection, the radio fire department, No problem there. Stormwater, modern stormwater retention, outlets, storage, four bays, everything is our engineer's web engineering. He drew most of the buildings in Oak Creek and Century Park. He knows your city very well. Personally, he's one of the best. In purpose coverage, we talked about it. We're 50% proposed impervious versus 75%, which we could do by right for industrial. 13 acres. 13 acres. That's not what the money-hungry developer does. They don't do that. That's what we're doing. Backup generators is something that I think people should learn more about. And they're not purposefully regulated by the city. They're regulated by the state for exhaust, for fuel, for performance, for testing. The testing there is required. It's so when they do fire up, they burn cleanly. The fuel classification is combustible but not explosive. Again, it's diesel. The best thing to equate it to as a semi driving around the road is the generator. It's really how it works. Fuel storage and containment is per NFD standards. It's not up to us. These are machines that are highly regulated, put in place to serve a purpose. Testing hours and attenuation, already they're tested during the day. Anything in terms of days and no holidays, that makes perfect sense to us. It's not a problem. And there's going to be a lot of them, but they don't get tested at once. They get tested in batches of two, batches of three for a short period of time in an acoustic canyon. It's very quiet, very controlled. This is one about the utility. The utility is ahead of this. DTE has laid down the law with us. They're like, this is your burden. It is. The Michigan Public Service Commission and DTE has mandated that these projects are not gonna impact local rates or residents. That's the mandate. We have no option to violate that. zoning consistency, again, health, safety, and welfare within the existing ordinance. We're zoned M1, light industrial. Our use is permitted by right. We're not asking for any variances, none. To the north is M1, to the south is M1, to the east is M1. to the west as M1. Offsite improvements, they're not required. We're coming up from Oak Creek Drive as a primary entrance. We're connecting to existing stubs for water and sanitary. It's elegant, clean, and a great use. I mean, the infrastructure is there. It makes sense for us to use it. City staff, when we were coming through for zoning, there were no identified issues relating to public health, safety, and welfare. That's not putting anyone on the spot. That was something that was already vetted. So when we're looking at this objectively, can we negatively impact the health, safety, and welfare of this project? The answer is clearly no. We're not. There's arguments across the board that we're protecting the health, safety, and welfare. This is a predictable project that can run quietly without an undue burden on utilities. It's zoned, currently zoned for this exact use, and it's not scary. I don't want to be a scary person. I can talk through and design this. We already have for something everyone can be proud of. Here's a scale comparison, which I believe, from conversations with staff, the bogeyman for this exercise here, Project Lion. That was a by-right project that probably got jammed through. I've seen the plan. There's no elegance in that plan. That's how much can you fit in and how can you slide it through by-right. That's what it looked like. Our site area is 55 acres. That's 172 acres. Our developer site area is 40. It's a quarter the size. Their building area is 1.8 million square feet, ours 525,000 square feet. We have three buildings, they have six. Our electrical load is 200 megawatts, theirs is 525 megawatts. Ours is a zoned M1 surrounded by M1. There's a zoned industrial surrounded by a mix match of incompatible uses. There's no question about it. We talked about scale. This is a larger site, but it's not of the scale of the buildings further south of us. It's really not, it's the same size of the buildings that are immediately west to us. You know, where Wolverine is, and it's the right scale and the right location. A third of the site of these that we've mentioned is nothing like Dowagiac, is no comparability. We couldn't build that. You don't have the resources to let me mess up that bad. And I think it was a big miss when people started pulling Dowagiac out as something that we're intending to do. And that's a big miss. And I think that's something that maybe you could walk back because it's not the same animal. It's not even close. That's an abomination. I've had those people in my buildings. And I heard it. I've screamed it. I hear it screaming. It drives me nuts when we have a belt loose on one of our industrial fans. I get it. And that's not what we're doing here. Not even close. That's a Mack truck. We're Tesla. There's no question about it. Yeah, I'll say it again. It's true. Our proposed use is permitted by right. And you can giggle. It's fine. But your job also is to look at property rights and look at developers and give them respect. And I'm here before you just like everyone else. My preparation is based on facts and data, not emotion. My job is to deliver class A projects. There's all different types of users. I haven't had a marijuana user. and not that I'm against it, just haven't had one come across me. I have Bitcoin, I've got breweries, I've got makers in Grand Rapids, coffee shops, I've got Ford, I've got all kinds of users. I don't discriminate, but they're not going to come in and make a mess out of my projects, and I'm not going to come in and make a mess out of any city. So if you actually can objectively look at the rule here for your own waiver, and what I just presented, you'll see that we cannot negatively impact the health, safety, or welfare of your community based on today's ordinance. That's what I'm asking. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Any discussion? Council Member Barron?

Given your analogy to Mack Truck and Tesla, Where would you describe that there is a Tesla we could look at? Because frankly speaking, all we know is what we know that we could research ourselves, and no one has told us where there's a Tesla we could go look at.

Well, That's a very good question, but I know we can find them. I know that my development partners, they're dealing with this day in and day out. My development partner is one of the largest mechanical providers in the United States.

So you haven't built a Tesla yet?

No.

You see where we're concerned.

I see the concern exactly. But your rules, which I am not legally allowed to break, force me to have a Tesla compared to your comparison. The rest of it, it's empirical what the equipment is. Our clients are no joke. They demand the best. And they are some of the greenest companies on the planet. These are not what you guys think of people coming through like Bitcoin miners. So I'd like to find the example of that exact Tesla. But I can tell you that my acoustic design that has been seen by other data center developers and my own partner is superior. It's superior. Wow. Would you endeavor to find a Tesla, or are you going to endeavor to find something that is repulsive?

I'd be happy to look at a Tesla if you had one to show me. And frankly speaking, I think that's something I would implore everybody to look at the Mack truck and the Tesla if you could find one, and then make an informed decision from there. you mentioned your clients would not settle for that. Our clients are sitting out here in the audience. And that's what we have to listen to within the confines of our ordinance. And I know you referenced earlier that you were having conversations with staff regarding this potentially being a data center development. But when you came to council last year for the rezoning, it was presented as a light industrial park by yourself. And the minutes in the planning commission support that as well. And the first that council learned... that there was even a potential of data center use was when you went to the planning commission meeting and said that, and we read it in the planning commission minutes. And at that point, we as council decided that we had to do the moratorium until we could figure this out. So within that confines right there, I think it's in that health is very reasonable for the health and safety of this municipality that we finish our ordinance before we grant you a waiver And we only got two months left on the moratorium, so let us finish our ordinance and respectfully, and I appreciate your presentation this evening, respectfully I will modify my motion to deny based upon the reasonableness of the health and safety for the residents and the city at this point in time.

Well, that's not accurate what you said about my presentation at zoning. My presentation exactly said use is permitted in M1. And CBRE formally was marketing this as a data center last April. There is no way that I'm delivering a site of this magnitude to the marketplace without verifying its permitted use with your staff. Would never happen.

Well, we're not going to debate it this evening. I mean, what the staff says is not what council says, and council speaks for the city. So again, I'd like to modify my motion if the mayor would allow that. And let's move forward with our ordinance.

You're going to withdraw the original motion?

Well, the original motion was for discussion, so I'd like to modify or withdraw however the attorney would like it to deny the waiver request due to the reasonableness of the health and safety concerns. I believe that's what you wanted, correct?

Yes. Okay.

Respectfully, if I can just make a suggestion, right, that what we were trying to interpret your earlier motion was basically just to say a motion to discuss and then pick up the rest of the language after approve and deny, approve or deny, right? However you would like it best. And instead, we're going to now say motion to deny and the rest of the language the same. That's fine.

I concur. Whatever makes it easier for her.

Thank you. Council Member, or Deputy Mayor Gottschall?

Thank you. I guess just to clarify, because there is another section that has a slash for reasonable, unreasonable, it would be unreasonable then, correct, for your motion?

Right. Correct. Due to the health and safety.

So I have a motion. Do I have a second? Second. All right. Any further discussion? Let me make this clear. We have a motion by City Council to deny the request waiver from the adapted resolution imposing a temporary moratorium on the establishing, permitting, consideration, approval, location, construction, and or installation of any data centers in the City of Wixom to permit the review of a site plan application for a proposed data center at 30625 South Wixom Road. Parcel identification number 22-06-200-049 as requested by Wixom Industrial One LLC due to the request of unreasonable as it relates to the potential health, safety, and welfare impacts in the city. Is that correct? All right, that's the motion and the second. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes the business portion of this meeting tonight. We'll move on to the second call to the public. I'll read those rules again. is extended by a majority vote of the council. Persons wishing to address the council shall identify themselves in their place of residence and shall state their reason for addressing the council, and all comments by the public shall be made directly to the council. All right. Again, five minutes. Step up. Please be careful with your time to make sure that we allow everybody the proper five minutes.

Samantha Moore, 2061 Maple North Trail, Wixom, 48393. I just want to say, I understand being upset about stuff that's on social media and false accusations. However, there is a proven case of NDAs being signed by councils and health risks of the citizens. So it is our due diligence to ask you questions. It's our job to do that. No one in this room stood up and called you a crook. And I'm sorry that someone said that you, someone took a $10 billion, million-dollar bribe. That's obnoxious. I agree with you. And, you know, apart from that, I do appreciate the due diligence that you guys have done and your attention to detail. Deputy Mayor... Your points were fantastic. Councilman Berman, fantastic. But you have a lot of people that work today. I started my day at 4.30 in the morning, and I'm sure a lot of you did too. I did not come here to be reprimanded on comments on social media.

John Palmer, 277 Wright Street. The Deputy Mayor and Council Member Behrman, great work, great work. I just wanted to make a comment, a concern that the attorney that was here last at the zoning board meeting I was at, commented that if you don't do something about extending the moratorium, There's legislation moving through the state that may prevent you to extend the moratorium. Maybe I got it wrong, but the last attorney made that comment, and I would really be terrified that we kick this down the road another couple weeks, and God knows the state of Michigan does something that prevents you from doing what you want to do. I really, really appreciate... the emotion of the crowd in the emotion that you share that we don't want this in our community if we're going to have to take it the five hundred foot property setback i don't property it would be great if they could be in addition to the fifteen hundred but what you say from kentucky there's a lot of stuff out of that think tank that is verifiable, that it's not a matter of Wixom just wants to make us so hard for you, you can't come in, and then they sue us on that behalf. So really great that Kentucky's doing that. Thank you very much for doing what you do. Thank you for having our back. And if you took a $10 million bribe, what the hell are you still doing here?

Michael Morgan, 2061 Maple North Trail. So it looks like our guest speaker already took off, which for somebody that said that they were so concerned about everybody's views and that sort of thing, suddenly he's hightailed it out of here after he didn't get the answer that he wanted. That said, if everybody is all about taking the time to commit to the process of making sure the right things happen and then getting upset at uh... somebody wanting to take the extra couple of months to get it right to make sure that the ordinance was drafted properly it's already been pointed out that Whatever that ordinance is, it's going to affect more than just what he's trying to put forth in the future. And I'm going to add to that, that as he was speaking, I also noticed that he's talking about all these places that he designed, and I'm glad you pointed out that none of them was a data center. And more importantly, the gym and all that stuff, and he tells you about how he sold it to his partner and moved on, well, what is it for him to sell whatever his interest is in the data center and move on while somebody else makes modifications afterwards? Because, you know, you can work on an old vehicle and eventually, if you were so inclined and you could adapt it and you had the brain for it, you could put a Ford engine and a Corvette who would want to but anything could be modified all it takes is the brain to do it and the ability to disregard any of these safety features or the original intent and yes everybody has their pet projects and they want to think that they create perfection. Nothing is absolutely perfect. And while his big concern is the biggest health concern is the noise, listening tonight, it was not the only concern. There was multiple concerns on many different levels, and he just kept focusing on that one. Meanwhile, you know, you're talking about Mack trucks and Teslas and all that, but you don't know what it is until it's proven. And I appreciate you guys keeping the moratorium. I consider extending the moratorium while you still can so that you get it worked out right. Because in 10 years, you guys might not be on the council. Some of you might not be living here. Some of you might not be alive, right? But your kids will... That's not a threat or eminent... But it's your kids and your grandkids and your friends' kids. It's the people that are left to deal with it. And we're here to think about the future. It's not just what happens tomorrow or next year. It really comes down to what the next generation is going to inherit. I appreciate your time. I'm sorry it's this late. And to add to the time, but thanks for listening.

For someone who doesn't like to speak in public, here I am again. Kelly Schruba, 2047 Grasmere Lane. And again, sorry for my emotional responses to things, but it's how I roll. Because we're all here because we care, we're tired and everything. And again, thank you so much for your due diligence and taking the time to drive across town to see the Mack truck. And honestly, as far as I'm concerned, it sounds like a cyber truck. But, um... I can't help it. But in my questions, and I'm so glad that so many of you brought up more. I want to know why we're so, I mean, they do have a property already. They do have a request already. But what is our obligation, I mean, to make sure that they have what they want when we're the residents? Okay. and i didn't appreciate at the time he mentioned two thousand eight i was homeless living on my friend's porch don't tell me your parties dude you're here to do a job we're here to do a job you guys are doing excellent i don't understand what our obligation is to given to their timelines when you are all looking into our timelines for life water was barely mentioned waters are Most, I brought it up last time I spoke, but water is our biggest concern because you really just can't clean it by flushing. And I can't even keep my washing machine clean, much less for what they're going to do with this stuff. I just really felt the negative response of that contractor to say, like, shame on us for wanting a good community. How dare he? I'm sorry. I've had a lot of jobs and I've worked with a lot of personalities and I didn't think that was fair to you city council members. And I don't think it was fair to us. And I do appreciate the extension of the moratorium. And I don't know why we can't extend it with all the things. Why do we have to make it so that it fits what they want? It's what we need. Thank you again.

Okay. Heather Perouche again, 1658 Brookside Court. Just want to say that this evening, hearing you guys speak, hearing everyone out here, restores my faith in democracy a little bit. So I appreciate all of your due diligence. And I'm not going to get it right, Deputy Mayor. Nolan, hats off to you, man. You hit every nail on the head. As someone who had to rewrite her HOA bylaws, and it was the most painful thing I've ever done, your attention to detail and everything is just so appreciated. So thank you. Just a couple things. As I was hearing about different people talking about the ordinance, there was a couple things I wrote down that I wanted to note. The first thing that I heard about was, which I didn't know, but this Michigan zoning law. One of the things it said was you cannot restrict the use for demonstrated need in an appropriate location. Obviously this is bigger than all of us, but I would just ask, who deems what is a need? Because I'm sure it's not anyone in this city. And also, an appropriate location in the size of our town, I would also say we don't necessarily have that. So, bigger than us, which is something that brought to mind. I also, another member had said, if we went heavy industrial, does it make anything more restrictive or give us more leniency? I just think something to consider. A couple of the smaller nuances about the ordinances that I would just say consider that kind of came up to my head. The decibel levels I had written down, you kind of already said it. It goes beyond just residential. It goes to businesses, schools. That's what I'm going to keep bringing up. And those levels did seem a little bit high, so I think you included that one. Okay. In addition, one of the things that the last speaker just said, too, it was constantly about the sound, constantly about the sound. I had brought it up earlier, and it's something that I didn't hear in anything of the ordinances that I would ask you to consider. I know we talked about... water and putting things back into it and the cleaning, but air and water quality testing at different locations similar to what you're doing sound, I think that's something for consideration. And then the one that I didn't hear anything about that I'm going to focus on is again what I'm going to call the EMF, ELF, RF radiation exposure. That was not talked about at all and I just have a couple quick facts. These are different types of electromagnetic field radiation. So not typical to what we normally see with x-rays, but things that even though we don't have the science on the data center EMF studies, it's exactly the same exposures and things that are getting off by power lines and power plants. We have decades and decades and decades of data. And what that shows us is that it takes three to four milligrams of that exposure to cause exposure. negative health effects like miscarriage, asthma, obesity, Alzheimer's disease, and childhood cancer. Three to four. Our federal government has set these levels at 2,000 and 9,000. So consider putting in some kind of testing about these EMF levels at different locations just like sound to understand the impact not only the data center has, but also any power lines they're considering adding or any power sources. Because what happens is that electricity that's needed to power that data center ends up with all of the EMFs additional in the surrounding areas. So it wasn't talked about at all. And again, I'm going to go back to my daughter who is here. When she is sitting in Wixom Elementary for eight hours a day for nine months, and she's 1,500 feet away from this, I want to know that there's not crap flying in the air, giving my tinfoil hat, but let's make sure that the things that we don't always talk about, like sound, are not something that's going to affect our children for years to come. Thank you, guys. Thank you.

Katie Weeks, 1725 Norton Creek Court in Wixom. I wanted to get up to apologize to you for asking about the non-disclosure agreement. I did not mean any disrespect, but as some of the people have mentioned, there are places where that has occurred, and I wanted to make sure that we got on the record whether that had occurred here or not. So I am sorry if that seemed as though I was attacking your character. I did not mean to do that, and I do appreciate all of the work that you've done, and you seem to be very much listening to us, and I appreciate that.

I appreciate the apology and it's not so, I do understand and I've heard the stories and seen the videos about other councils signing NDAs or not even answering that question like in Tyrone Township where they just sat there and looked at the person asking. So I do get it. The main issue, though, as I stated, is I view you all as neighbors. We haven't ever met, but there isn't an attempt to know me or ask about me or go read about things, so that's where it comes from. I'm always open to questions from residents, very available.

Well, I've been very impressed with what you did today, so when your name comes up on the ballot again, be assured that you have someone who appreciates the work you're doing.

Hello. Cecil George. I live in Lyon Township, so address doesn't matter. I'm running for State Senate, and I talked to some of y'all during May's session. Mayor, I know you should remember me. And I praise y'all for the work that you did, what you do. I want to continue to say you guys do an amazing job. I'm very proud of you. There's not a lot of city council's board members who are doing the work that you are doing job a very proactive i said that before and i'll say it again also uh... i'm not for the last minute right around but um... one thing you cannot say the community benefit agreement It's not legal, but you can set a development plan that's basically the same thing and force them and hold them accountable for those things. Other things are you want to set a wellhead protection because you do have residents on well water and That'll help, you know, at least make them feel more secure with what's going on. Like I said before, these are y'all residents. I've been to Dowagiac twice. Once just to hear the data center, the other just to see what it's like on a holiday with a data center by their homes. Still wasn't pleasant. It was very sad. So... I'm just saying what you guys are doing is great. Make sure that you're putting in every protection that you possibly can. The noise level is still a little high, but like I said, he covered everything that I was going to say. And that's it, yeah.

Hi, I'm Sanaya George. I live in Saline Township, and I think you guys did a very good job tonight. However, even though I don't live here, can I please ask you guys one thing? I'm already getting a data center in my area. That's just going to happen. I want you guys to please make sure they don't get it. I already feel like what he said wasn't even the full truth. He mostly said sound, and yes, he did mention water and electricity, but it will go up and it will affect you, and there's nothing positive that's going to come with it. You're not getting any new jobs, and as you already know about the water and electricity from past data centers, I just want you to please think about it some more, even if you decide to change your mind. That's it.

Hello, Michelle Hendrian. I live at 1935 Hopkins Drive. I know we talked about last at the planning committee, we talked about wetland protection. Is there any type of information about that for, I know there's some state and federal guidelines, but I was wondering if the city has anything ordinance set to protect the wetlands also that are on the property, because there's, I think, 6.7 acres of wetlands, I think just in one section, but there's more on the north end, I remember reading. And then we also talk about testing about the sound, the water, the air, our soil. And not just about the commercial areas, the school areas, the places of worship, the play areas and all the community areas. What about the daycare center? It's right down in the heart of our downtown where kids are spending up to 12 hours a day going from infant to preschool. We've got to take care of them as well. And I did have a question about... The 10-year agreement for electricity, by 10 years, why not protecting the whole, no matter what, extending beyond that, other than the needed increases that annually happen or

So I guess first to backtrack, the daycare in downtown Wixom would be covered under the VCA ordinance. Well, it said it'd be a different group. If my grouping is adopted, it'd be residential and VCA. So it'd be under that. And even their map Kind of mixes up. What is BCA and residential like they had the nearest residential at I think 2,300 feet but realistically The one that they have as receptor D is the edge of BCA which we also consider Residential because they can and that's only at 530 feet by their own map in terms of the 10 years I think that is Honestly, it could use more research. I think it's just based on the likelihood of DTE coming through and needing to upgrade things. For example, and I don't know, we've been discussing with DTE about plans like for West End Commons. We don't want the overhead power lines there forever. How long does it take to bury those? We've been talking for Chambers Drive and along Pontiac Trail, widening that sidewalk on the north side of the road. like getting rid of the overhead power lines in the downtown area. And it seems to be like years and years down the road. I don't know the exact, if it turns out that it's longer than I'm open to longer, but to me it was better than like a quick, Hey, one or two years, because I know from our discussions with them, DT doesn't move in one or two year increments. It's longer. Yeah.

So I was just kind of curious because I'm like, cause yeah, They can hold contracts with DTE and the power companies have an agreement. We've got to make sure what their agreement is and how it impacts us as well. Thank you, guys.

Just one moment. Assistant City Manager is going to answer your question about wetlands.

The city does have a wetland protection ordinance. It's Chapter 17.08. Thank you.

I'm Mary Harper. I live at 1614 Brentwood. And if I stutter, I'm sorry, because I'm cold, because everybody left. And this is probably my fault. Shame on me. Trying to read the minutes, I read the agendas in the minutes. But you've almost got to be like a lawyer to understand most of what's going on. But when I was looking at Mr. Griffin's presentation, I noticed that it was three, not a data center, it was three data centers. So how does that fill in with, like, the noise factor? I mean, if you got three going, does that change the decimals versus one big one? Or is it all the same? I don't know.

That's just a question I'm right I can interject real quickly mayor on that one It's something I considered saying something about earlier There was much talk during the presentation about sound levels and can't possibly do this and can't possibly do that And references to a study cities not been made privy to that study So I can't speak to that studies Veracity and methodology or anything else the city's not seen any study That relates to that sound issue that he kept citing over and over and over

I mean is that something we want to Josh to make sure that three data centers is the same sound level as one data center?

My point is we can't answer that question because we haven't seen the sound study that he prepared.

I think the question is how would we treat that? Right. And they're all on one parcel so it would be treated as one development not three different development.

Right. Correct. And I didn't want to focus on sound because last week was a very lengthy sound and this presentation was just as lengthy. But one of the things that he was saying on Pontiac Trail and Old Wixom Road that it's really noisy because of all the semi-traffic. I don't notice a lot of semi-traffic after eight o'clock at night. So I don't think there's a lot of sound there. I don't see any trucks. pretty much after 8 o'clock on Wixom Road or Pontiac Trail. And that was it, and I also wanted to thank you for hearing us and for supporting us. Thank you very much.

Excuse my voice. Real quick, I want to thank you for...

Address again, please.

Donald Gambrell, 272 Wright Street. I want to thank you for representing the people and understanding that we are the hierarchy above all government. And thank you again for representing us. We still got a fight going forward, and I pray that you will continue to represent the will of the people. Just a little bit about myself. I served with the 101st. I'm an Army airborne ranger. I served as a police officer for two decades. I have a will to protect and to guard people. I just want to say that this gentleman that came up and expressed everything pertaining to sound and different other things about pertaining to these data centers, I just wanted to point out that the city of Wixom I don't know if you realize it or not, but the city of Wixom is already strained as far as ecological destruction. We're dealing with PFAS already in the water. We're dealing with air pollution. Me and my wife have fought the Corax Corporation since 2022. I've been following the reports with EGLE and battling with the Corax Corporation because they continue to emit carcinogens into the atmosphere. And I've dealt with them on water runoff to this very day. Even today, I had to make a report yesterday with EGLE and a report today. And this is since 2022. So my thing is... and we dealt with Tribar dumping tens of thousands of gallons of carcinogens into our water systems. Kids couldn't even go to the beach. So what I'm saying to you as the city of, representatives of the city of Wixom is that we haven't even cleaned up our own water systems yet. I don't even know if you have the technology to even be able to clean up. You can't even, like someone said earlier, you can't even eat the fish. You can't even go fishing and eat the fish. So if you can't eat the fish, the water is still poison. So, and then you have this corporation, which is 700 feet from us, off of Old Wixom Road and Pontiac Trail, which is where everybody comes together to have these events on Thursday. This company is emitting carcinogens into the air, and it's poisoning the people. So, you gotta clean up your water, you gotta clean up your air, You've got to clean up the soil. You're already dealing with these problems. You bring in that data center, it's going to be 10,000 times worse. We the people have already spoken. It is the will of the people. We do not want these data centers. So thank you.

Thank you. Is there anybody else for the second call to the public?

seeing now i'm gonna close the second call to the public will move on to uh... city manager comments in the manager brown i think you're on the uh... divert from my usual m on this and talk a little bit more uh... about something besides just the what i had in my city manager's update for somebody that took on bridge with the with the common comment from that the america for a little bit earlier in the meeting about challenging the nba and other things that he had discussed the nba commentary that he was referencing, you could negatively consider that as cynical. You could positively consider that as something to in an attempt to clear the air. The larger issue from my perspective that was brought up was direct quotes that were blatantly threatening public officials. Unacceptable and it shouldn't be defended in any way shape or form by anybody and nobody should have an issue with him taking umbrage with having threats posted to him and people he cares about in his life. Absolutely unacceptable and is not to be defended. I will not accept that. Nobody else in this room should accept it. I'll get off my soapbox on that. The other item I want to talk about is just the city manager update. We've got updates on a variety of good things that are happening in town. Sidewalks, Mack Park, Gunnar Metalla Park, West End Commons, Hillsboro and Millstream paving that's happening as well. I won't go into all the details on that because it's been a long night, but lots of good things happening there that I wanted to bring to the attention of council and Anybody else, if you get a chance to read it, just lots of good stuff that we're getting accomplished here in the city. And I wanted to make mention of that. Other than that, I have nothing else to add this evening, Your Honor.

Very good. Is this the City Manager Benson?

Given the late time, the only thing I'll add is just I want to confirm on the record for city council members and anyone in the audience or anyone watching, no members of our staff have signed any nondisclosure agreements related to this project or any others. Again, just for the clarity of it all. And beyond that, I have no additional comments.

Thank you.

Council Member comments. Council Member Behrman.

I have not gotten $10 million in or sign a non-disclosure agreement. Really, thank you to the residents that took the time to come out. Obviously, a lot of you put a lot of time and effort into this. I know, speaking for most of us up here, we spent a lot of time on this. I drove across the west side of the state to apparently look at the wrong kind of truck. Thank you, Kristen, for bringing me to the wrong truck. Next time, a Tesla, please. Thank you to our staff. They did an awesome job setting up this room this evening. Those of you who came to the planning commission meeting, most of us were standing or sitting on the floor. You all had a chair for the most part if you wanted one this evening. Appreciate that. Thank you to our city manager and our clerk and our assistant city manager and To Mateo, sorry for giving you a hard time earlier this evening on the difference between a special land use and a PUD agreement. I understand you work for a big firm, and you did a good job deflecting my frustration with this entire process.

We both did our jobs this evening, so thank you very much.

Well, I apologize for coming down on you.

No need. Thank you.

That's all I have.

Council Member Simmons?

Thank you, Mayor. Just thank you to everyone for coming out. It's great to see so many people. And I was also going to say thank you to city staff for just the much better setup tonight for the residents who are attending. I'm sure everyone appreciated a seat and the ability to see the presentations on the screens. Okay.

excited we were able to wrap up the uh... walt lake stuff so excited for that uh... and uh... looking forward to what we have to come within this one s thank you customer mckennedy uh... i wrote down some comments early i started taking cataly marks on who didn't want the data centers give up really quick because it was everyone but i want to address a couple comments on here I heard people say that council was inviting them in, that we were allowing this, and how could we just put it down the street and just think of a short-term profit? And I'm hoping after everything tonight, everyone can see that's not what's happening at all. Everyone up here is trying to protect Wixom as much as possible, and everything they're doing, that's all they're thinking about. Thank you.

Council Member O'Day.

Thank you. Thank you all for being here and to all of you who are still here and in for the long haul. We really do appreciate that and your support. I think, ma'am, you had said thank you to the council for supporting you all. No, thank you all for supporting us and being here tonight and having your voice heard. This kind of... reaffirms, I think, a lot of our faith in local government, in government as a whole, but also to see that local government can really affect change. I mean, this one's kind of a slam dunk, but even in things that aren't necessarily as much so. As a matter of fact, it's still up there in the conclusion. I know we talked about that the gentleman was articulating predominantly the sound, but he lost me when it was that DTE is making assurances, and right there we know is... I don't trust anything that comes out of DTE's mouth ever. So, you know, that right there was a tell. So again, thank you everyone. Thank you to staff. And just look forward to seeing everyone out and about around our beautiful city.

Deputy Mayor Gottschall. Thank you. I also wanted to thank everybody that came out tonight and those who couldn't make it but also emailed as well. We did get a couple handfuls worth of emails over the last couple of weeks. So thank you everybody for your feedback. I also wanted to thank staff for making sure everything was much more comfortable for our residents and accessible through the screens. One non- Business item, I guess, though. Been getting a few emails about damage, whether to sprinkler lines, shooting water in Millstream and Hillsboro, and mailbox damage. I'm not sure if Mr. Sigma's here, but I don't remember getting this many emails from the last few neighborhood road projects, so maybe we can have a contractor meeting and settle things down on whatever's happening to cause all of the damage over there. I'd appreciate it.

We're gonna get addressed. Go ahead.

Yes, we are working with the contractors to get all those damages repaired. And as we hear about them, we contact them and contact HRC to make sure that that happens for you guys.

Thank you. And maybe if we can just talk to them and put in some safety standards or something to slow it down a little bit.

Yeah, so most of those damages were because of sprinklers. With the curb and gutter work that we've done and some of the sidewalks, it's going to happen that way. And they have, like I said, as soon as they know about them, they repair them. I think we have a good contractor, and they've been very responsive for us. Okay, thank you.

Thanks. All right. And I want to thank everybody for being here tonight and thank you to city staff for making the arrangements so everybody gets a chair and has a great view and we got sound and things like that. And I just want to bring attention to a couple of events that happened. past week we had a got involved with a police chase and the bad guy rammed two of our police cars and I'm very thankful that none of our police officers were hurt in the incident and he was captured so hopefully we can take care of him and get some insurance money from him to fix our cars rather than have you guys pay for it. And then last night we had a big fire in one of our major businesses in the city, and I went up there, and, you know, it's 85 degrees. These guys got 50 pounds of equipment on, and they were not worried about the heat or anything like that. They were worried about getting the fire extinguished with as little damage as possible, and I was very impressed with that. So thank you to the fire department as well for what they do for us. And with that, do I have a motion to adjourn?

So moved.

All right, I've got a motion in support to adjourn. All those in favor? Better say aye. Aye. Thank you.