Based on the context provided for the City of Moose Lake and the internal dialogue of the meeting, here is the transcribed townhall with speaker identifications. **[0:58] Joanna Ar:** Just for your information, we have to do a little organizational meeting. So, this isn't—this is the meeting before the meeting. It's the first after the first of the year. So, we have to um nominate a new president or chair. **[1:13] Joanna Ar:** I'm Joanna and I'm the chair. So, I'm going to call this to order and I need— **[1:16] Planning Commission Member:** I will make a motion to approve the agenda. **[1:18] Planning Commission Member:** And a second. **[1:20] Planning Commission Member:** Second. **[1:21] Joanna Ar:** All in favor? **[1:22] Planning Commission Members:** Aye. **[1:23] Joanna Ar:** All right. So, our new business is um to nominate a new president and we—I’m going to open up for nomination and we— **[1:28] Planning Commission Member:** I nominate Jan Ash. **[1:54] Joanna Ar:** Any other nominations? Anybody else? Anyone else? That's great. All right. Okay. Don't hurt anybody's feelings. How you um any—Could I have those in favor of Jan Ash by saying Aye? **[2:11] Planning Commission Members:** Aye. **[2:13] Joanna Ar:** And one for Joan Ar? **[2:17] Joanna Ar:** I. So I think that's three to two. All right. Jan is the new president. Congratulations. **[2:25] Jan Ash:** And I will make a motion to close the—Second motion to close the organization that—a motion to close the organizational meeting. **[2:45] Jan Ash:** I'll make that motion to second. **[2:47] Planning Commission Member:** Second. **[2:49] Jan Ash:** All in favor? Aye. **[2:50] Planning Commission Members:** Aye. **[2:51] Jan Ash:** Motion carries. Organization meeting to our regular agenda for the planning commission. First order of business is the pledge of peace. **[3:18] All:** 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. **[3:37] Jan Ash:** Next order of business. Can I get a motion to approve of the agenda? **[3:42] Joanna Ar:** Motion by Joan. Is there a second? **[3:46] Planning Commission Member:** Second. **[3:48] Jan Ash:** Second by. All in favor? **[3:53] Planning Commission Members:** Aye. **[3:54] Jan Ash:** Opposed. Motion carries. So um now this time the public comment—this time is reserved for comments from the public on matters not listed on the agenda and please keep those comments to two minutes. So this would include any items that are currently on this agenda. So is there any open comments or items not featured on the agendas? **[4:29] Jan Ash:** Okay. And um we'll move on to the public hearing portion of the meeting. Uh city Moose Lake request for additional use permit revolve labs Bitcoin mining facility and we'll go ahead and open the public meeting for comment and discussion. **[4:49] Joanna Ar:** I'll make a motion to open the public hearing. **[4:51] Jan Ash:** I second. Motion to open and second is all in favor. **[4:56] Planning Commission Members:** Aye. **[4:58] Jan Ash:** Okay, go ahead and open the meeting. And I guess we'll start with the individuals that have indicated an interest in speaking today. I have the list here. So, could we start with Trish Roes? **[5:18] Trish Roes:** Good evening. I may have a question. I watched the meeting from the 18th and learned a lot and I've done a little bit of research and my concern—which is one you hear very frequently—is about sound and the location that you're talking about. It's right by Quick Trip. So, you have employees that are there for eight or more hours very close to this facility. Not too far away is an elementary school. As someone who taught for um 41 years, the sensitivity of some students um I'm concerned about what it will—what the effect will be on them. And um like in the hotel and tourism and things. You get off the highway and you've got our prison and our sex offenders program and Bitcoin facility and it—it doesn't say, "Hey, come spend your tourism money here." Just bringing that up. But—but my main concern really is the noise. And if you look at communities that have had it, that is theirs. Oh, we were told it wouldn't be a problem and it is. So, that's my ongoing concern. I understand the financial benefits and I see there's a lot of things that are good there. I heard about the fans shutting down at a certain temperature, but there's still a lot going on in the summer when people's windows are open and I'm concerned about the close proximity to the school and some of the businesses. Thank you. **[7:12] Jan Ash:** Thank you. So, next is Susan Pollson. **[7:31] Susan Pollson:** Hello. I have the same questions and worries that Trish does also. And the studies that I did, it was like a half mile away from the homes and they still could hear the noise of these fans. And all of them had said it's the roar. Some compared to a plane that never lands, a lawnmower that never turns off. And even the commissioner said it's like sleeping with a leaf blower under your pillow all the time. And when I did the studies of it, it was mostly the small towns that went on that. Um, the moneywise, I guess they said that there wasn't a lot of money made on it, but there's one other thing. Oh, the pollution. So, the pollution, they said there was a lot of pollution that comes out of there. Put this together. Let's see here. So, there was—I'm going to have to look it up and give it to you guys, but it said there was a lot of pollution that comes out of there and the small towns were very worried about that and like where they're building it. They're going to see that when they come into our town. And do we want extra pollution in here that we have to worry about? The sounds like Trish said is the biggest concern because they said the animals, people that have ADHD, um, autism, the hearing aid people. So that was my biggest concern is like what's guaranteed about that noise? **[9:30] Jan Ash:** Next up, we have Dakota Fisha. **[9:45] Dakota Fisha:** Hi there. My uh questions have been in line with uh what has already been asked but uh I haven't heard anyone specifically bring up the concern of infrasound which is sound generated by these mining—these bitcoin mining centers and data centers um with these machines that are constantly running tend to operate uh creating a sound that's under 20 hertz which is not audible to the human ear but it's been shown by uh research from NASA and other cities that are currently class action lawsuits against some of these mining centers that generate infrasound that can travel up to 2.5 miles. Not audible to the human ear, but it can cause health effects on the surrounding residents, especially those that are especially close nearby, which of course the concern of the Department of Corrections being there, the Minnesota sex program, and you have over 1400 people there, not even counting the workers that are going to spend large part of their days there that could be greatly affected by this infrasound. And I think it would be greatly opening up the possibility of lawsuits against possibly the city or the company that's operating this. And I want to know if there's any sort of plans to mitigate the infrasound because I spend a large part of my day every day in close proximity where this facility would be and I already personally have low blood pressure problems and one of the proven effects of infrasound is uh constraints on the cardiovascular system which could open up someone like me with an existing condition to the possibility of passing out—which would be absolutely dangerous at my job in order to pass out while I'm working. So those are my concerns. I think it's my answers. **[11:31] Jan Ash:** Thank you. So next up we have Leslie Rainy. **[11:54] Leslie Rainy:** As I said at your last meeting that was held about this, my concern is mostly noise. Um, I've seen numerous reports on newspapers, TV, they all say the same thing. They're all promised, the residents are all promised that they won't hear anything—they're far enough away. And it turns out that was a lie. And once you get these facilities in, you can't get them out. And I don't know what you guys are planning to do to make it right if people can hear it. I heard a lot about in the last meeting about goals. Their goal is to keep the noise to a certain level. But according to the Duluth News Tribune, this same company already has complaints in their other site talking about people complaining about noise. That was just in the paper after your meeting was advertised. So my question to you is what are you going to do for people when they are affected? Because I'm going to tell you what—I'm coming back to you saying what are you going to do to make it so my property doesn't lose value. Other residents' property doesn't lose value because you can tell me that it—that noise is not going to come to my house. But I don't believe you. I hear traffic on the highway. I know how far that travels. Now, people say, "Well, you have traffic. You hear noise, so that doesn't bother you." But the difference is it's not 24/7. Most vehicles that travel across that highway, I don't hear. Yes, I will hear a big truck that hits the gas hard. It's true. That being said, that doesn't run 24/7 constant. This is not white noise. This is noise that affects people's property, their physical well-being, and their quality of life. And this is a little community town. And I'm going to tell you people don't—there's a reason why there are moratoriums on these types of facilities happening. They're talking about it at the state level now. There's a reason why communities like Moose Lake—they're going to small communities because you—you know you guys see that pot of money and you take the bribe and what does that bribe cost you? The truth of it is the last meeting we were told that the Moose Lake Power Company that their rates are very low compared to other people. That's what we were told. Nobody could tell us those statistics. And my point is part of running a—a business or or or a municipal business is you have to budget in those costs for improvements. **[14:56] Jan Ash:** I have to let you know that it's been— **[14:59] Leslie Rainy:** Okay. Thank you very much. **[15:02] Jan Ash:** Thank you very much. Next up is Paul Christensen. **[15:16] Paul Christensen:** Good afternoon. I'm going to read so I don't get off track here. So, uh I understand the company has already been selected. Uh my concern isn't about opposing development. It's about doing due diligence. Um a project that consumes uh four and a half times our city's current electric usage represents a fundamental shift in infrastructure demands. Uh this site is adjacent to the correctional facility and secure treatment facilities that require uninterrupted power. Uh so I think that we need clarity on grid reliability, infrastructure upgrades, obviously the noise impacts, and the financial protections if this company decides to leave. Completing an environmental impact statement isn't anti-business. It's—it—it protects the city, taxpayers, and future council members. Given the scale of this project, I respectfully asked why formal environmental review would not be warranted. Um, the M—7 days ago in the Star Tribune, the MCEA in Minnesota has sued over proposed uh mining centers in Lakeville, Hermantown, North Mankato, Pine Island, and Faribault. The lawsuits argue that these cities didn't adequately review the projects. I would also note that uh in these secure facilities as well um if DOC has been part of this uh discussion or Department of Human Services and the impacts that this has on their treatment programs. So, I'm not sure if they've already been uh part of this or not, but uh I would really ask that the city completes an environmental impact statement so that we can address things like the pollution, things like the impact that this will have on the city. So, those are my points. Thank you. **[17:06] Jan Ash:** Thank you. Thank you. Next, we have Pam Sawyer. **[17:22] Pam Sawyer:** Thanks. A lot of points I have to make were brought up. I keep the noise being a big one. I live on the Moose Horn River south of town. Um we can hear the guys over at the city building across the river. We can hear them talking. We have to know what their plans are for the day. Sometimes they probably—we decide what we're going to—go down to the brewery in the summertime and listen to music because we'll walk back to the river first and listen and go oh no I don't want to hear that or yes we're going. We can hear voices, we can hear docks when they call count balls hitting the bats. Now you tell me something up on that hill coming across the lake—every one of us that lives in this town is going to hear it and feel it all the time. I found a website—it is called thebitcoinmanual.com. I don't know how reputable they are, but they found really good information. And one of the things they had was a tape, a video of one of the machines running. They put it at 50 to 75 dB all the time. That's one machine. That's what a vacuum cleaner or a blender sounds like. Now, I know if I—somebody puts a blender out on their dock on the lake, we're going to hear it down the river. And imagine that 24/7 and not just one, but several. Um, I have eight grandkids between the ages of 20 and 30. That's just part of them. I asked them, I sent them all texts and said, "Okay, you guys, two of them are married, have starting families. If you were going to move to a community, you had a reason to move there, and you knew one of these facilities were there, would you move there? Would this be one of your considerations?" These are engineers, medical professionals, mechanics, um, across the board. They're college-educated kids. It was a—not just a no. It was a capitalized "HELL NO." We know we're an aging population here. Look at the room. I mean, I'm so happy to see them. Normally, it is—normally it. We're aging. We're the ones paying the taxes. We're the ones that are going to want to be selling our houses. It's already—we know—we know our property value is going to go down with this. It just—it really needs more time. Um the legislature already has said this week they want to put a two-year moratorium on any more data centers, Bitcoin centers in the state. Um please don't jump into this. It's too important. And just the one more thing on it is we have an eagle's nest. I kayak around the lake to watch the baby eagles. They osprey nest for both sides of town. What's going to happen to them? We know they're not going to live in that. They're not. It's going to be gone. We are a tourist city. We don't have industry here. It isn't here. Our industry is tourism and we need to keep it. I wouldn't go to a town and camp— **[20:19] Jan Ash:** I'm sorry. I've been told. **[20:21] Pam Sawyer:** Thank you. **[20:22] Jan Ash:** Thank you. I hate that part. Sorry. Okay. Next we have Molly Heert. **[20:33] Molly Heert:** As an RN, my biggest concern is of course um healthcare. Um, as stated previously, uh, cardiovascular and respiratory disease are some of the most uh proven symptoms and conditions that come with Bitcoin mining. I just want to say on top, I emailed the city nine questions on January 26th and have yet to get answers. Um I did receive answers from Moose Lake Power however but um so when I asked if medical concerns and citizens are caused by this operation who will be accountable to pay for the care and treatment of those citizens, the answer was "not aware of any valid medical concerns." Um that tells me that that wasn't even typed into a Google search. There are proven medical concerns linked—linked to Bitcoin mining noise and local air pollution which is caused by PM2.5. Those are very tiny particles that are created during Bitcoin mining and are in the air. Um they're smaller—they're 30 times smaller than the thickness of hair. So that tells you how minute they are. Um there are published articles um one by Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Um another concern was the environmental impact statement which I asked about which the answer was "not determined if one is needed." Um another question I had was how can citizens stop this operation from happening altogether. That question was ignored. Um oversight for these are FERC and 47 regulations have been sunsetted. I have no idea if any of those are—pertain to this. Um but there is a federal level deregulation which makes it easier for companies to take advantage of and that is obviously um concerning. A little bit of research in Revolve Labs. They used to be called Bit 49. They rebranded in 2023 um because they were looking to go more towards AI databases. So where is that—where is the accountability if this is a bait and switch that we are starting with one and it is moving to something else. Um, AI data centers are driven mostly on liquid taken from local water sources. I don't have to let everybody know, but our water source is very fresh. It's—but it goes all the way to the ocean. So, what we do to it has consequences for many. **[23:42] Jan Ash:** Next, we have Chris. **[23:50] Chris:** I stand before you today as a 35-year-old man with a wife and two children in this community. Despite whatever these tech bros have assured you of, I—I as a citizen of this city will assure you that uh I don't think any of us are okay with this. Uh please deny this conditional use permit. Do I really need to help these other people remind you that the idea of continued noise is unacceptable? We've already accepted a trade-off in this community. It's called the DOC and MSOP. Between the two, they employ several hundred, if not over a thousand people. That's great and all, but uh the trade-off is the all-night light pollution. So, why are we going to trade off all day and all night sound pollution and trade for four jobs and 90k in tax revenues, all while using four times the amount of electricity that the entire city uses? Didn't the city itself state at the last meeting that uh on this matter that the south station is already at capacity? There's a lot of elderly in this community who will need to sell their homes eventually. How are they going to do that when they have uh no property value when it plummets? Are we really going to be forced into rolling brownouts in Moose Lake? At the previous public meeting, Mr. [Name] tried to tell me that there was no fiber projects between Duluth and here. Uh but a simple Google search reveals over 15 million dollars in current projects between here and there using anything from fiber optic to private connectivity fabric which by the way is specially specifically for AI cloud and data center interconnection from Charter Spectrum to Mediacom WCB SCI CTC. I mean, come on, guys. It's disingenuous to deny that. Look, if these clowns want to come to our town and try to sell us snake oil, that's fine. What's not fine is to force this entire town to purchase said snake oil. I don't know what kind of backdoor deals are being made here, if any. But if you have nothing to hide, then why screw all of us over? I would hope that you'd do a little, you know, be a little more skeptical at the prospect of two tech weirdos coming to town and asking if they can profit off of our electrical grid and natural resources. I tell you, nothing makes me want to leave this city permanently more than the idea of this disaster moving forward. But it also motivates me to really think about who I vote for locally as well. Good day to you. Please deny this application. **[26:18] Jan Ash:** Thank you for your comments. We're going to move on now to the Revolve Labs Bitcoin mining facility presentation. **[26:32] Ellissa Owens (City Administrator):** So um I'll just give a little bit of background uh from a city perspective what our engagement has been um in regards to our process what timelines look like what has occurred and what will occur um and our engagement with Moose Lake Power as well. So through strategic planning— **[26:55] Jan Ash:** Christian, were you interested in speaking? **[26:57] Christian:** Sure. All right, guys. I appreciate it. Um, I would just like to echo what my community members and uh friends have said here today. I think um there are so many unanswered questions about this project and some we can't answer yet. Uh but it just raises so many concerns around not only the noise that you know—the ripple effect of you know—are we really coming out ahead? I understand that we—we raised some revenue from this project but how much are we losing in things like our—our health—health status, our quality of life? How many people are moving away or you know—how many property values go down. I don't—I don't see this as a—as a net gain here. Um, and as I understand it, I don't know what the the land situation is there, but uh I believe that the Bitcoin mine that was started in Glencoe is now being upgraded to a data center. You know, are there protections in place for those sorts of things to—to protect our community if—if we were to move forward with this? Um, yeah. And—and I—I would just really ask like have we looked at—at other options that don't run that risk of degrading the quality of life um in our—in our city and outside the city? You know sound does travel and—and it does make a difference if—if people are—are not you know—not coming into our city. I don't think this is a—is a draw for people and are trying to grow our community. This is—this is a detriment to—to our space and to—to um our city. Um yeah, I—uh people mentioned the potential lawsuits again. You know, what are these ripple effects and are we really going to come out behind in this—in this um potential deal? Um so I appreciate it. Um I would just say there far too many questions that are not answered on this project. **[29:21] Ellissa Owens:** Um so the city has been engaged in this process through land lease agreement discussions. Um that's at the point in time which when you know the city became engaged. Um the city attorneys are assisting the city in drafting a potential lease regarding this proposed project. Um that lease will address things like size constraints on the site. Um and so if there are any concerns regarding um expansion from a data center perspective from a Bitcoin mining facility, the lease would address that. Um in addition, the lease uh has language um in it regarding uh sound monitoring and um mitigation requirements. There's a city ordinance that dictates sound and there's also state regulations for sound as well. So, we are working with the city attorneys um if and when that—the the lease goes to the city council for review. All of those types of items are what is being um incorporated into the lease agreement per public concern at the public hearing. So, uh your comments have been heard. Uh we have taken note of all of them and our mechanism from a city perspective is to utilize the lease agreement in order to implement and facilitate this in a way where protections are in place for the city. Um the city attorney made a rendering—so other than the land lease agreement uh zoning is the other engagement from uh the city and um the city attorneys made a rendering regarding the use of a conditional use permit. So the reason being um it is the appropriate mechanism to facilitate this based on a termed lease agreement. So the lease agreement has a 5-3-2 year term built into it currently. Again, it's still in drafting phase. So none of this has been finalized. Um the 5-3-2 term results in a 10-year lease. Um that would give opt out portion or opt out periods between five years, three years, and two years. Um because it is not a um a permanent uh engagement nor is it a uh permanent uh structures on the site—they're module pods that are being proposed. Uh the city attorney felt that based on that—those two areas of um uh of the project proposal—um the term lease and the presence of city infrastructure existing on the uh the parcel currently—that a uh conditional use permit should be utilized versus some other type of zoning mechanism. So there's been questions regarding whether or not we're going to uh consider rezoning uh from a planning commission perspective, but the conditional use permit was a better fit. Um, in addition, uh, just talking about timelines and and things moving forward, uh, the city is requesting the conditional use permit, uh, the conditional use permit would have to be approved in, um, in combination with the lease agreement. So those are things that the city council would be engaging in collectively at the same time. And so the city—uh the city council will be actively reviewing a lease um regarding this potential project and all of those items will be in it um that have been discussed and more. So um it's not—drafting has not uh been finalized and the document has not circulated between the water and light commission, the city and revolve labs yet. Um we are just merely in a phase of uh collecting public comment and working through what that document will look like. Um and we'll continue to do so in the background. The city is requesting a conditional use permit from the planning commission. Um as we are moving forward and engaging in this uh what that looks like is the planning commission renders a recommendation to the city council and the city council then reviews that um recommendation from the planning commission. As it stands right now, um if drafting is completed on time, uh the um March 11th city council meeting would be when some of these items are reviewed from a city council perspective. **[33:29] Resident (Female):** Can I ask a question? Ask a question. Can I ask a question? You just said there was an opt out. Is that just for the company or can the city opt out of this in that 10 years too? **[33:41] Ellissa Owens:** Thank you. That is a great question. That is for the city. So 5 years, 3 years, 2 years—and I'm—it might be 5 years, 2 years, 3 years. Uh the three and the two could be interchanged and I can—uh that again will become finalized as we move forward. But those are different opt-out points uh for everybody involved. **[33:57] Resident (Female):** That's five years minimum. **[34:00] Ellissa Owens:** It starts at 5 years. There's also language in the lease currently being drafted regarding um sound monitoring, mitigation, things of that nature to where um it would require Revolve Labs to be able to meet the—the um sound constraints of city ordinance and or state uh state regulations as well. So um there are mechanisms in that document uh in order to try—well you know in order to be able to enforce and monitor— **[34:25] Resident (Female):** Can I ask one question? Can I ask a question? **[34:36] Jan Ash:** Accept your questions at this— **[34:38] Resident (Female):** Can I—Can I just ask a quick question? So, you're—you're—I understand you're coming from the city perspective. That's how you're speaking. But there's a lot of people that live just a mile out of the city. So, your monitoring of the city ordinance doesn't help me that lives just outside of the city. So, um, you know, there's a lot of people that live outside of that school—the school area, and into the—that lake area. And most of them, um, and I—I'm just saying that I understand your perspective is from the city, but there's a lot of us that support the city that live just outside of town. And where does that leave us? We would like some protection also. **[35:20] Jan Ash:** I think we'll go ahead and proceed. Now, we do have some additional written um public comments that we're going to go ahead and read at this time. Are you completed with your presentation? Sorry. Um in addressing—Can everybody hear me? Okay. This one is from um Ruthanne Parish. In addressing the proposed data center, my household opinion is absolutely no thanks. Number one, do not rezone school and parkland for industrial. Number two, neurological issues from the constant hum. This often is not even noise heard by humans due to its level, but issues have been well documented in areas these centers reside in. Number three, data centers do not economically improve your community. A, most data centers are requiring no human interaction. Therefore, the promise of jobs to the community is not factual statement. B, data centers use up to—so much electricity and water that forces utility costs to skyrocket within the community. C, the issues of utility cost will force current citizens to relocate to other communities because financially they can't afford the utilities. And it says, "Please include this email as my response at the 2/26 council meeting and rezoning the school and park plan for data center in Moose Lake." **[36:41] Jan Ash:** The next comments come from—there was a few people Joanne Thorston, Renee Brunner, Grace Brunner, Maria McDonald. And addressing the proposed data center, my household, which consists of four senior citizens is absolutely no thanks for: Do not rezone school and park plan for industrial; Neurological issues from the constant hum— **[37:08] Planning Commission Member:** It is the same. **[37:11] Jan Ash:** It is different statistics. Um, most data centers are dark, requiring no human interaction. Therefore, the promise of jobs to the community is not a factual statement. Data sets use up so much electricity and data that it forces utility cost to skyrocket within the community. The issues of utility costs will force current citizens to relocate to other communities because financially they can't afford the utilities. Please include this email as our response at the 2/26 council meeting on rezoning the school park plan for a data center in Moose Lake. **[37:46] Jan Ash:** The next written comment comes from Leslie Ramy. The city of Moose Lake should not approve the crypto mining conditional use permit. The city should not accept the bribe of this company which will affect our little town in such a negative way. They will have huge energy usage, be a noise issue and also an eyesore for the entrance to a little tour stop. Sound travels especially at night and these businesses run 24/7. When people equate this noise to traffic noise, it's false comparison—I also hear traffic noise at night but it's not a constant noise. I've heard numerous TV reports and also newspaper reports at how much neighbors have been affected. I don't believe these companies' claim about being a good neighbor because all these new sites have reported that promises were made but not kept. The people that were interviewed all said they were lied to. I went to the public meeting the power company gave. This company talked about noise goals. Never once did they say that if they exceeded these goals, it would be shut down. They also talked about learning a lot at their other site where they run. However, in the Duluth News Tribune, it was reported that neighbors have complained about the constant noise of this business, which is what I spoke about at the Power Company public meeting. I also found it interesting that the Moose Power Board had only one person go visit their current site. I am sure Kurt didn't go talk to any neighbors of the site or this would have been mentioned. The comment that the Moose Power rates are low, but no comparison was given to other rates tells me that these folks certainly have not done their homework. My thought was how do you know they are low if you do not know what others pay. I also realized that if you haven't budgeted in the improvements then these rates are artificially low. So that's why we are—they are taking this bribe. I live outside the city of city limits of Moose Lake. It's my primary shopping area. So Moose Lake is a city I support. I pay plenty to live on the lake but noise travels across it. If I can hear the site, you have destroyed my property's value. Unless the city is willing to buy us out at a premium so we can buy a lake property somewhere else, then your answer should be no to this project. People will not be buying your housing building sites at Quick Trip. If this is approved, as a friend said, why would I ever buy there when I would never know if I would hear it? They also said what's to stop them from adding more or I would then hear it even if I could not when I purchased it. As my friend said, they would have taken the bribe once. Why would I ever think they would not do it again? There is a reason that neighbors have fought these sites. The state of Minnesota is even talking about a moratorium on these sites until further studies can be done. Do not take a bribe. End reading. **[40:41] Jan Ash:** Okay, we'll move on with the agenda which is the conditional use permit request discussion. So opened up for discussion from members. **[40:58] Joanna Ar:** I have some items, bear with me. Um I have several concerns as well as a member of um this planning commission. Um many of which involves the research—or the research that I've done since I found out about this um conditional use permit and mining itself. And I've looked through different research about um you know scientifically peer-reviewed research that I looked at and did and—and dissertations and articles regarding the environmental impacts of Bitcoin mining. This was from the um you know nature.com scientific reports. I have another report which I'm happy to share with anybody who likes to look at it. Nature Communications. This is titled "The environmental burden of the United States Bitcoin mining boom." The next one I've read through um is "Advanced Earth and Space Sciences: The environmental footprint of Bitcoin mining across the globe called for urgent action." The next one is "Energy Research Letters" which is "Bitcoin's environmental impact: examining carbon emissions patterns through price and volume dynamics." The next one is "The current and future implications of Bitcoin mining on energy and climate change." The next one comes from the "Royal Society of Chemistry: Environmental Science Advances identifying the key drivers of Bitcoin's emissions." The next one is "Science Direct" which is "Carbon footprint comparison to Bitcoin conventional currencies in the life cycle analysis perspective." Another one comes from a Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health regarding um increases level of air pollution harmful to human health. Um numerous news articles um that have come out. Some of the titled "Trapped in their own home by Bitcoin mining," "Incessant din," "Driven from their home," "Determined to fight." These are just some of the titles that I'm seeing on the articles. The next one is "The environmental burden of the United States Bitcoin mining" and a UN um university study reveals "The hidden environmental impacts of Bitcoin carbon is not only harmful—is not the only harmful byproduct." And I bring these up because um I wonder just how much research and planning has been revolving the environmental impact of this. What's concerning to me is that we as a planning commission are asked or—here asked to decide on this information. It's a very important um decision that the community is going to be impacted by. Um and some of the things that I'm concerned about is—and I'm going to read because I you know wrote this stuff down. Um, I didn't even know the planning commission would be addressing a conditional use permit until February 9th when I received the notice of this meeting via email, which is only 15 days. It gave me only 15 days to research, educate myself about Bitcoin mining and the current use of subject property. To me, that's just not enough. I don't feel—I want to be as confident as possible. So, I feel like I've really been kind of doing a cram course on figuring out as much information I can so I can try to come here and make an educated decision regarding this situation. Um, just something else that I talk about a little bit—the communication, the environmental impact of it, the noise is a huge deal, the potential pollution is a huge, huge deal, but also just the whole process that this has happened. You know, we received an official notice on February 9th that we were going to be discussing that there was no preliminary planning meeting on this. It's just we're having this public hearing. So, that's a concern to me because we really had no input prior to this public hearing. And generally, there's a little bit of a process that we do before then. Um, I did receive information that was sent to papers because I had inquired like where was this—not where was this um advertised? Uh it was sent to the people within 350 ft. Uh were sent notices, publishing and postage requirements are met, it's posted on the board and then much later on it was actually on the social media of the city page. Um the agenda and packet—I was also told that the agenda and packet would be coming with report and I received it Saturday, three days ago. So, I didn't really completely know what was going to be on the agenda until Saturday. Again, I don't feel like that really gives us enough time to review all of the information. **[45:44] Jan Ash:** I would agree. I feel like we're being asked to do some—some pretty big decision-making when we've got 100% coming at us saying no, no, no. And people I've talked to. So, I'm currently long-term subbing at the school and I worked there for many years and all I could think of was those little kids with that humming and— **[46:11] Joanna Ar:** Yes. **[46:13] Jan Ash:** 50, you know, and I've got kids from all spectrums all over the whole thing. I live behind Mercy Hospital and we hear the compressors in the summer all the time. All the time. And I've listened to the meeting when it says, "Well, it goes below 40 degrees and you don't hear them." Well, are you opening your windows at 20 degrees? I'm not. So, I feel like we can't make a—an informed decision on any of this because we—I know I'm speaking for myself. I feel like I'm in the dark. I have had a crash course in Bitcoin. Thank God I have a very intelligent son who's been working with me because this is a lot to comprehend. I also know that up in Hermantown, they're totally against the um data center and what I understood from the—from your meeting with the um the Revolve people that this could be changed from Bitcoin to a data center because all they need is—I think it's called—I wrote it down because I can't remember—high-speed redundancy and um that can happen and he did say yeah it could happen. And then we're looking at water. Now we're just not noise—the noise. So if you can kind of tell, I'm just really thinking this is not something that I in good conscience could say, okay, let's give you a conditional use permit until I would like to see more science on it. I would like to see more data. I would like to see what's happening in other communities. And I—I also—so—so I have a—I don't have the scientific mind, but I just have that common sense. And I heard $90,000 that comes to the city through um taxes. Well, what are we trading $90,000 for? **[48:00] Joanna Ar:** Less than one. **[48:01] Jan Ash:** Yeah. So, I know—I also heard, oh, your taxes on your houses couldn't do that. And I heard that from somebody. Well, my taxes are pretty darn high, but they're not 90,000. But what was going to happen to my taxes if my property is devalued—and what's going to happen to our kids and that's my number one thing—those kids. **[48:24] Joanna Ar:** Thank you. Some more information I would just like to reference as well too is talking about the processing. I think everybody's been very eloquent about just explaining about their concerns about the environment and the—whether it's here that we're producing this energy or elsewhere, some—somebody's air is going to be polluted. And I heard there was some figure of like 33% was um renewable resources. Understand that still means 67% is not. So wherever we're getting our energy from um we're causing pollution whether it's here from the actual creation of the energy or not. The other biggest—the other concern I have—and I have a lot of concerns. I'm sorry, but I'm going to be going on a little bit because this is my first opportunity to even express my concerns because I wasn't notified about this until um February 9th. The other thing is any planning commission, if we're going to be reviewing an application for a conditional use permit, should have received a copy of the original application, any supporting documents um and references so that we could be fully prepared to look at all that information that's been submitted with this requesting this, you know, additional use permit. And all we received in our packet of information were two pieces of paper and I think they're listed out here. And one is a marketing uh page uh provided by Revolve Labs which the only reference—and I don't even know if this is Moose Lake Chamber or not—but it says it highlights that there's a chamber of commerce support and I kind of question how many actual members are supporting it or who made that statement. Um of course all the positive things that they're thinking what's going to happen and the other thing is I'm assuming this was put together by u the Moose Power and the City of Moose Lake and it focuses on three different things: general fund transfer, keeping rates low, and infrastructure improvements. But I really again question like how much improvements we're going to be able to do with that 90,000 when we think there was expenses that they talked about incurred. So there's a lot of things—this is not enough information for a planning committee to make. And if we're supposed to be making a recommendation to the city council with two pages of information that we've officially received, so how could that possibly make us confident enough to make an educated decision unless we would have went out and done our own research to make that recommendation to the city? Um, the other thing I'm concerned about is there was no mention from what I understood—and I—I appreciate there was a couple of videos. Um, I wasn't able to get there in time to the public information meeting. I was not happy about that, but it happened. And I was lucky enough to watch—catch Carlton County Fire News had a live uh Facebook feed, so I got to watch a part of it. It was very hard to hear everybody, but then um I know that there was another video um that was surfaced on Facebook. I believe Rory, you were—released that video, which was a very good um sound. You could hear everything that was um going on at the informational meeting and not once did I hear anybody mention that this is all contingent on providing or approving a conditional use permit. There was no mention of that that I heard anybody say. I heard reference to—you know—that there was um talk of like leases, there was talk of like agreements, there was talk of—you know—compensation, but not once—because I heard people ask, "Is this a done deal? Is this going forward? What's happening?" There was no mention that this is contingent on a condition—and so to me that wasn't very transparent in letting us know—the community know and the planning commission know. **[52:08] Ellissa Owens:** I would have go ahead—address um just—just a couple of things. So, at the—the public hearing held by the um Moose Lake Power, the city's engagement thus far was um extremely limited. We were just getting involved at that point. Since then, we've had complete city attorney engagement to which they have finally issued a rendering that a conditional use permit is the proper mechanism moving forward. That is something that just came to fruition to the city um and to the city council. Um I know that there's a desire for um engagement prior to but this is all coming to us at the same time. Um city administrative staff is simply facilitating um in—in no means rendering personal opinions on this particular project. We are facilitating process. Um you are getting information as we are getting information. The planning commission is tasked with—with rendering whether or not the zoning ordinance supports a conditional use permit for this project. The city council is tasked with the due diligence um that—that we're speaking of in addition to the planning commission. So, it's a collaborative effort. Um information has been given as soon as it is received. Um I requested to the city attorneys whether or not the ground lease could be shared as part of um in—information for the planning commission and I was denied that request by our city attorneys. It is in draft form. It is not complete. We are going along the process um that is uh being communicated to us by legal counsel and that is the process that's being facilitated. We have followed every single word, every single recommendation and rendering from the attorneys and that information is brought back forward um during that time. **[53:58] Jan Ash:** Um so it does feel very rushed at us though. It does feel that way because you know—three—I watched two videos and I watched one where you had the water and light with you and you had nobody in the public to give any information and some of your counselors were questioning what was going on and they didn't seem to know—just for your information. She and I are appointed. I think he is too. And you have two that you elect. So we're appointed and they are privy to more things than we are. But I don't want to be rushed and I still—I understand process. I understand that infrastructure and money is needed. I just think this is a big deal and if people's health is number one—people's health. And so okay then slow it down a little. This gentleman over there said an environmental study. My husband who served on the city council for 16 years said oh that's going to—that just delays it. And called me one of those liberals that would delay something. That's what he called me. I—he didn't mean it in a bad way. I'm sure. But what we're have—can we do an environmental study? And is there something—I know you asked for it at the meeting in January and now you've asked for it again? **[55:06] Jan Ash:** What's the rule there? We don't—we don't follow that because you didn't ask for it. I just think we need to research this more. I think it's being shoved down our throats. I looked at that—that company, the man who's in charge of the company. Oh, when he was asked, is it—who's your owner? It's privately owned. It's on. You can find out who owns it. I googled it. It's a man who's got his degree from the University of Boston. So, not to say anything bad about Russians or anything like that, but then there has been the name change and somebody referred to that as the name change. So, I'm just thinking it doesn't pass the smell test to me. So I DON'T just go and then you move forward and then you go to the council and say well they recommended that. I can't recommend any of this. I in my conscience I can't. So I wouldn't even—you two guys know more than we do, ladies. He knows because he's on water and light. So here's the two in the dark. **[56:02] Joanna Ar:** Well, that's why we—we felt it necessary, I did anyway, to do my own research so that I could be informed on what's happening here. And I realize that there's a process as well, Ellissa, and I understand that, but there should have been some mention then—if it's not—that we're going to have to use a special use um permit or conditional use permit, that there's some zoning questions or there's some further, you know, information that we need to receive from our attorney and he had the opportunity to address that and it was just more about lease and rates and things like that. So, to me, it wasn't—it wasn't informative—and just the fact that at some point if it was going to be—you either knew it was going to be zoning um rezoning or conditional use permit. I think it would have been um pertinent for you to inform um the members of this planning commission that here's this thing that's coming up or even months ago. **[57:08] Ellissa Owens:** It may or may not be a conditional use permit. I—the city was completely um—the city was not engaged until recently in terms of zoning and um a land lease. Those—that is—that is brand new as far as um being—having verdicts rendered from our city attorneys on—on those particular items. The city council did receive an attorney client privilege memo regarding zoning, regarding some of these things you have questions on. Um, I asked to share information and I cannot share those with the planning commission. Um, but the—the city council has received multiple attorney client privilege memos. I understand your concern. I appreciate your due diligence. I'm a person of process. I respect it. I'm just, you know, simply facilitating my job. And I wish I could share more information with you. Um, and—and I respect your—your position as a commission. **[58:02] Joanna Ar:** Well, I think it was a client, you know, privileged information, but what was to keep us from getting a copy of a conditional use permit? Did they do an application process? Is there an application that they submitted? Because that should have been the process for conditional use permit. This—this um the planning commission is the—is the process for conditional use permit. **[58:19] Ellissa Owens:** There's not a particular application or document that is reviewed. It is—it is brought forward as far as um what mechanisms of the zoning ordinance are impacted, what type of zoning, um how people are notified are all dictated by our zoning ordinance. The parcel is included. Um the type of request is included. Uh there is no paper. The city has never had a paper application for conditional use. **[58:43] Joanna Ar:** You—you have one on your website and I printed it off. **[58:46] Ellissa Owens:** We—we have never—use permit. **[58:48] Joanna Ar:** I looked it up city conditional use permit application. So if the company has never asked for—this is coming the conditional—where is this conditional use permit—who generated it then why are we the conduit for it and why isn't um—what should it have come from water and light—water and light has been involved in this much longer than the city correct? And you are the ones who made the contact or did they contact you I don't know how that works but—so you've had it in the works. Do you see why the public wasn't going to trust us? I mean it says I—there is a condition to use permit and if it's—it's up—the website isn't updated but— **[59:28] Ellissa Owens:** Everyone else who's coming before us—we—we have not used those applications since I've been here. Um I—I—I am aware that you have one here. I've not reviewed it. I can review it. I appreciate your concerns. It is the city's applicant as the applicant because the city um is the one that owns the land and that is why the attorneys have um rendered that the city is the applicant for the initial use permit. **[59:56] Resident (Male):** What? Can I ask a question? Why was this rushed then if you guys didn't have all the information at the hearing? Why is it—it still feels rushed right now. Like it still feels like the vague language that's being spoken is, okay, we're hearing you, but we're going to just keep squeezing through until we get it to work. That's what it feels like. **[1:00:23] Joanna Ar:** The planning commission has had no ability to plan. **[1:00:28] Jan Ash:** The other three to make a decision. And we do have even though we're not elected officials, we're appointed. We all still have the equal vote here to make this determination. **[1:00:30] Ellissa Owens:** 100%. That is what this meeting is for. And your engagement is—is a part of that process. It's extremely important. That's what we're doing right now. **[1:00:38] Resident (Male):** Right. But they didn't have any information prior to the hearing. **[1:00:43] Jim Michalski (Mayor):** Power already signed an agreement with them. **[1:00:44] Resident (Male):** Yeah. **[1:00:46] Jim Michalski:** With—with the purchase power agreement. All we did was negotiate rates. Everything else is facilitated through the conditional use permit and the land lease. **[1:00:55] Resident (Male):** So I guess my question was why didn't you just push the hearing out further? Delay it by a month or something instead of pushing it to be done now. Give us some information. Are we saying no to something that we shouldn't say no to? Give us some information. **[1:01:07] Jan Ash:** And we could always say yes in the future. Why are we rushing to a yes? That's how it feels. And Mr. Ohly, were you going to say something? **[1:01:26] Lou Ohly:** Oh, yes. I will say this—this is—this is a process. We can decide anything today, but we don't have to sit. I don't feel like we're rushed. This is the process. **[1:01:40] Resident (Male):** They said they felt like they were rushed. **[1:01:42] Lou Ohly:** Only feel like you must make a vote that you're not comfortable making, right? And I—I think this should be a process where you feel comfortable making this vote. I'd like to see how many people in here are big Bit Mine Bitcoin mining fans. I don't think there's any. **[1:01:52] Resident (Male):** Why should we be? We can't. **[1:01:54] Resident (Male):** Oh, we got you. Okay. Millionaire. **[1:02:00] Resident (Female):** I feel—I feel like we've learned more from these two and their little bit of time speaking than we have from anything from the city about any of this, including the last meeting. **[1:02:08] Paul Christensen:** And they're in the dark. That's the scary part about this. But we haven't decided anything, right? But they didn't have information about it. So why would you have a hearing when they don't even know what's going on? **[1:02:26] Lou Ohly:** Is that not what this is for? Is to approve the conditional use permit. **[1:02:30] Paul Christensen:** So—so the potentially—potentially— **[1:02:34] Ellissa Owens:** So our zoning—our zoning ordinance requires a conditional use permit for items that are not a principal permitted use. And because this is city property um and this is—would be something completely new, it requires that the planning commission review a conditional use permit to have the um operations occur on public land. This is—this is the—this is more or less designed to be an assessment of the zoning and um planning and zoning related items of this project where city council has the burden of doing all of the due diligence from the perspective of the ground lease and um all of those other mechanisms. So though that burden is on your elected officials from a council perspective, this planning commission meeting is intended to assess the zoning ordinance and our mechanisms for—for utilizing the land for something other than what it is uh currently zoned as. And so I—I understand—I understand the frustration. This is the process. We are at the—the very beginning point of the process from the city perspective where we're looking at land use. These concerns are all valid. Your concerns were heard at the public hearing and we're using those concerns as we continue to draft the land lease. Nothing is finalized. We are stair-stepping it and the council has the burden of—of assessing all of these public concerns. What we're doing today is um part of the process and it's engaging with the city's zoning ordinance on whether or not a conditional use permit is something that can be utilized to facilitate this project on public land. It is more geared towards land and land use for this particular meeting. **[1:04:30] Paul Christensen:** Why not complete an environmental impact statement? Why not? Why not do that before you ask to get permits to do this? I—I still don't understand what the person—will somebody just answer whether you will do that or not? What? Why? Why shy away from it? I mean, feels like it's such a good deal and there's no emissions. There's nothing to be worried about, then complete an environmental impact statement. Why not? **[1:04:52] Resident (Female):** Yeah. **[1:04:53] Jim Michalski:** Um, as a city aspect, we had contacted our attorney on that and this project does not require environmental impact. **[1:05:01] Paul Christensen:** That's not—that's not—that's not the point of an environmental impact statement. It's—it—it's not whether they want to require it. It's the community has concerns. It's going to impact the environment. It's going to impact health. That's why you do an environmental impact. There are ways that the community can get us to do on— **[1:05:25] Jim Michalski:** Asking if they petition it and the council voted that we did not need to do a impact on— **[1:05:38] Jan Ash:** I have so neighbors city taxpayers people who are township. So it just kind of boggles my mind that you are feeling all this resistance and yeah I get the process you want to go ahead with that process. Is it worth it? I mean is it worth it? Are you going to get the bang for the buck that you are thinking—so you're pushing ahead when look at this—two—sorry guys—two guys over there they are Bitcoin people the rest of them are—don't want the noise don't want to help. You've got this coming at you and you're the city. **[1:06:08] Lou Ohly:** But this is part of the process. We don't know what—if this—if we pass this today. **[1:06:15] Jan Ash:** It's still not guaranteed that this is happening. The other step that we have to take. **[1:06:22] Joanna Ar:** I'd like to mention too, Jim, you talked about how you know petition or people community petition to do the environmental impact statement. Why wasn't that? There was at least two times that I heard at public informational meeting to request—to request. **[1:06:34] Jim Michalski:** We—we discussed that with their attorney and we had a meeting on it and you share those thoughts of like—the community can't petition to do that. **[1:06:48] Resident (Female):** They didn't know that. **[1:06:50] Molly Heert:** Why didn't they let me know when I asked about it in my email? **[1:06:54] Ellissa Owens:** I would like to—I would like to—I've been told that we can't petition at the city council. That's right. I have to petition for the police department. Do you have to petition the state when they tell us that we have to do that? How much time do we have? City. the city administrator told me that I could not per the city attorney that the citizens could not petition. So the—the mechanism that was in place for that—and I shared the attorney language with you on that Jordan. Um I'm very transparent on that. As far as this issue is concerned, this is a different type of petition to a state board that requires a different process. Um as far as your email is concerned, your email was forwarded on to Moose Lake Power. Um and they were collecting information and responding and in preparation for their meeting. Um and—and now the city is engaged. We have included every single correspondence that we have received. **[1:07:54] Molly Heert:** Um and so I called the city of Moose Lake and asked them what email address to send my questions so the city of Moose Lake could answer them and I emailed that email address. **[1:08:02] Ellissa Owens:** I would—I would really like to know what email that was. We can talk after that. **[1:08:08] Molly Heert:** I have a copy of it. **[1:08:12] Jim Michalski:** But this is the process that we have to follow. **[1:08:18] Jan Ash:** I think we all get—it's not a done deal and it by no means isn't a done deal. **[1:08:20] Resident (Male):** But they said they didn't have information to do the hearing. So why not push it out? You guys are rushing it. Why do a vote today if we're not—you're not ready to vote? **[1:08:31] Resident (Male):** Voting yes today feels like zero off-ramp forever in the future. **[1:08:44] Ellissa Owens:** Appreciate that. There are a couple of fail safes. This is the first city meeting. This is the first city of Moose Lake meeting regarding this issue. Um your attendance and participation is—is valuable and appreciated. As far as what the planning commission received, they are receiving information on the zoning ordinance on—on the parcel on what the public um public zoning principal permitted uses are. They are receiving information pertinent to planning and zoning. They have not received information that is attorney client privilege with council who has that long information. **[1:09:24] Joanna Ar:** what we received—and I just want to reiterate—what we received is the um article in reference to the current use of the um which is a one page—it's currently um zoned as P1 park schools and related district so that's a sheet of paper that it's what's its intended uses for now—we received a notice—a copy of the notice for the request for conditional use permit and we received a map um that was created regarding the location itself and like I said a marketing piece from the company and um you know a page indicating the cities and the Moose Lake Power Commission's support of it that to me and now we're here at a public hearing which we're going to be making—we decide today to make a recommendation to the city council that's going to be deciding you know—and I understand our frustration, Ellissa—is we don't have as much information even as the city council hasn't yet. So how can we adequately—you know inform the city or make an informed decision to make a recommendation when we don't have the information. **[1:10:24] Ellissa Owens:** So the recommended—the recommendation today of the planning commission is intended to be um a condition—whether or not a conditional use permit is the valid zoning mechanism to facilitate the project. It's not full-on support of the project. The planning commission is looking to review just the zoning and conditional use permit mechanism. I respect your—your—your—um your feelings on the information you've received thus far. Um I know why it feels like it—is a—it is a green flag for the project in totality. That is not what—what is occurring today. This is whether or not a conditional use permit is the best mechanism to facilitate that on public property. That is what the planning commission is looking to review today. **[1:11:15] Joanna Ar:** I—I understand that. But what information have we gotten even to support that aspect of—so that isn't even as clear as what you said here. "The city of Moose Lake requests for a conditional use permit revolve labs." That's not saying what you're just saying—that it's the first step. When I read this, it was like, okay, you want a conditional use for this. Well, that's not what you said here and that's what it's two different things. What you're explaining—that it's the first mechanism. That's not what was sent to us. **[1:11:51] Ellissa Owens:** So—I apologize for conditional use permit and then Revolve Labs Bitcoin mining facility is what the the permit is— **[1:12:00] Joanna Ar:** but it didn't make it clear that that's what you're saying—that this is the first one—because it does feel like it's a green light. That's how conditional uses have been. Just so you know I've been on the planning commission the longest. I might not be the most smooth, but whenever we had planning—uh whenever we had conditional use, we would make that recommendation and the council would rubber stamp it. That's how it's worked so much in the past. So, my concern was, okay, we're going to give you a rubber stamp on something we know nothing about. So, that wasn't clear to me either what—what this is about. So, there's some language problems here. I still don't agree with it. **[1:12:28] Jan Ash:** So Joanna, I'd say, you know, from my personal experience, I've come three times. **[1:12:30] Lou Ohly:** Oh, yeah. You've been on things for different—for the, you know, conditional permit for our building. It took three times. So, right, I never assumed they're going to come here today and—and grant us permit. Right. Apparently, I mean, obviously, there's a lot more that people need to find out about this. Mhm. I heard nothing before in my life about infrasound. I'd like to know more about that. Whoever brought that up, if they can let me know after the meeting, so I could do some research there. I'd appreciate that. And of course, no idea the, you know, the depth of people's feelings about this. And it's not warm feelings. I haven't at all. So, um I'm not into rushing anything that—that people aren't comfortable with because this is going to work for—work for um the city and for our power company has to work for everyone in the city. **[1:13:30] Resident (Male):** I have a question because if you don't vote today, does the project just go away? Is that what—is—is today a deadline or something? That's my—my question. So what—what's— **[1:13:40] Lou Ohly:** Revolve could go away—what happened to me. **[1:13:45] Resident (Male):** I just—I came back and came back and came back. Yeah. No, I'm just asking—just asking. I—I don't understand what—I mean. It sounds like there's a pressure to vote, but it doesn't sound like there's enough information to vote. You know, when there's something that you're not comfortable with, everything feels like it's squashed. **[1:14:02] Lou Ohly:** Yeah. No, it's just a matter of how you interpret it. I—I came here today and I never felt like I have to make a decision today. **[1:14:10] Resident (Male):** Yeah. Okay. **[1:14:14] Lou Ohly:** I wanted to find out how anyone else felt about this too. And there might be things about this project that I have not looked at. **[1:14:19] Resident (Male):** Yeah. **[1:14:22] Lou Ohly:** And I appreciate any information—this—like I said—this should be a positive for everybody. **[1:14:28] Resident (Male):** Yeah. I just ask—just ask why—why the—it sounds like it—back and forth and I'm not picking sides here—but it sounds like back and forth. It sounds like almost like well we have to vote today and no we don't want to vote today. So if we don't vote today what happens? **[1:14:44] Ellissa Owens:** There is no requirement to vote today and—and there is no—there—there—is no forced timeline. Um again, the city council will engage—um there—there's a lot of other documents and—and legal documents that are in the process of drafting just um as far as those are the things that council can review in order to make decisions. So, we have to draft in order for them to make decisions. That's ongoing. Um what's—what I was trying to make clear is that t—today's meeting was the first city meeting and it was—it was intended that the planning commission is planning and zoning just review conditional use permit not—not project greenlight and I—and I will be accountable if that's something that these planning commission members felt. Um this is merely step one as far as conditional use permit utilization on public property. Um and so um that is again—the city staff is—is facilitating. Um I don't get a vote. I—I—I do not share my personal opinion. Um this is process and this is what is being facilitated. **[1:15:59] Joanna Ar:** No, I appreciate that. So I just was—will say for—just referencing the email that we got received there was none of this additional information about what—what part of this meeting is in this—what the process is. **[1:16:15] Ellissa Owens:** So we were supposed to talk about that today and if I could speak to that a little bit. Normally we don't take public comment first. I have an opportunity to present on the agenda items prior to taking public comment. I didn't get that today. Those are types of things that were going to be explained and how council has a land lease to review and council has a um—uh an agreement that—to review between the city and water and light. Those are all components that I didn't have an opportunity to mention based on how the—the meeting progressed versus what is—we've done in the past. Um and so I apologize. Those are things that were supposed to be shared publicly in this meeting, not in a private email. Um and so I again—I'll be accountable to that. Um but those are the types of discussions to be had today. **[1:16:53] Joanna Ar:** I just want to be clear that I'm just simply following the agenda in the order that I received it. So that first it starts out with the—after the public comment—alternative public comment—that we um started out with public hearing. **[1:17:11] Ellissa Owens:** That is for the motion to open the public hearing. That wasn't to take public comment. That was the motion to open and then we go through the agenda items. And I apologize—this is—this is new and—and we are you know—engaging in a—in a—a new year here. Um that was designed to be um a reminder for planning commission to open the public hearing. Um and so we—we had presentations to give and I actually didn't give the presentations on some of those other items just because of the way things have—have gone today. But um I apologize for the confusion. I would have addressed some of these concerns prior to had I had an opportunity to speak um prior to public comment. It's okay. This is—this public comment is—is most important. **[1:17:53] Resident (Female):** So why not just put it on hold until people feel comfortable? **[1:17:58] Lou Ohly:** We have to go through a process. **[1:18:01] Resident (Female):** Yeah, I know. I understand it. But why don't you just put it on— **[1:18:05] Lou Ohly:** and that—that may be what happens. **[1:18:08] Resident (Female):** Yeah. I'm just—It depends what it sounds like. **[1:18:11] Ellissa Owens:** It depends on what motions are made and— **[1:18:15] Resident (Female):** Yeah. Yeah. **[1:18:17] Ellissa Owens:** —votes go. That's how the process works. Yeah. **[1:18:21] Resident/Journalist:** Would you accept the open journalist question? Um I'm confused about this sort of divorcing the CUP from Revolve. And I—I grew up on Morris Thomas Road in um where—in Hermantown. And the first betrayal for that data center was passing the CUP that sort of opened the door for what they're all facing now. So I don't—Can you explain better I guess how—how the CUP is something apart from Revolve? **[1:19:19] Ellissa Owens:** Sure. So I mean this scenario is very different than what's happening in Hermantown in some regards. Um so the city owns the land. Um and so the city—the the land is currently zoned public. In other areas when these centers, data centers, Bitcoin mining facilities have—have come about. Um it's not always public land. It's not always public property or sometimes requires a rezone. Well, because there's a—a termed lease and there's existing city infrastructure on the parcel, um the attorneys did an extensive research, which is why we didn't know it was going to be a conditional use permit at that time of the meeting yet. Um but they rendered after their research in case law that the city is going to continue to own the parcel, there is the existence of city infrastructure on the parcel and because it's a termed lease of 10 years and the—the mod—the pods so to speak are modular and not permanent that um a conditional use permit should be what is acquired versus rezoning and the conditional use permit has to be from the applicant of whom is owning the property—which means City of Moose Lake—and then in addition to that um the land lease would be between the city as the property owner and Revolve and the land lease would contain a lot of things that um—uh from a—a facilitation or monitoring or enforcement perspective. A land lease would be what controls that dynamic between the city and Revolve. **[1:20:45] Resident/Journalist:** So would you—would you agree that the CUP then tacitly sort of implies that we're going to do something else with this land? **[1:20:53] Ellissa Owens:** Yes. Um and that is what the attorneys have rendered. That is why the application was necessary. I mean, the city—it—it's part of doing the process correctly is—it's weird, but the city being the applicant is part of the process being done correctly versus just doing it because it's city property. So, this is—this is a commitment from city administration to make sure that this process is followed properly and all the steps are taken because it's odd that it's city land. **[1:21:24] Jan Ash:** And did I understand right that it—in this process it would change it from what was it—parks or recreational or— **[1:21:33] Ellissa Owens:** —school? It's—it's public. It's P1, public parks, schools and other. **[1:21:40] Jan Ash:** So you're taking—So it would essentially be taking away land that could be used for parks or something else to— **[1:21:46] Ellissa Owens:** No, thank you for mentioning that. That's really important. There's already city infrastructure on there. There's a substation on that parcel. The lease would be pertinent to that parcel only. The operations would be pertinent to that parcel only. **[1:21:58] Jan Ash:** But that could never be used as any other thing. **[1:22:01] Ellissa Owens:** It can't because there's—there's a—a massive substation on it already. An electrical substation. **[1:22:08] Lou Ohly:** It should have been rezoned years ago or—it should have been rezoned years ago. **[1:22:15] Ellissa Owens:** Well, it's—it's public. **[1:22:16] Lou Ohly:** It's public, but there's city infrastructure on it. So that's—that's why it's so attractive to Revolve—because there's a substation. **[1:22:25] Jim Michalski:** Yeah. And so that's just a natural fit. **[1:22:31] Joanna Ar:** Well, I'm a little confused too when I talk—you talk about the—the P1 designation because the principal permitted uses indicates soil and water conservation programs, forest management programs, wildlife preserves, parks, playgrounds, athletic fields, ice rinks, similar recreation uses, community centers and related community buildings, public offices and public schools. **[1:22:47] Ellissa Owens:** Yes. But it—so conditional uses do say "public facilities and utility buildings not specified above." And so the reason why a conditional use permit is—is required is because there's going to be um public facilities and utility buildings on there in addition to public infrastructure. And so Revolve Lab is that extra component—um that is why we are here. **[1:23:19] Jan Ash:** Is there any other information on this? I don't have anything. **[1:23:25] Planning Commission Member:** I guess that would just warrant discussion on how we would want to proceed. If we want to proceed, if we want to discuss um do we want to look at voting? Do we want to close the public hearing before we can— **[1:23:51] Jan Ash:** Is there any more discussion regarding it? **[1:23:56] Jim Michalski:** I—from the city's aspect, we're doing our due diligence to make sure we do this right. We're not rushing right into it. And this is just part of the step before we can—as a city can go much farther either. It's—She was asking. **[1:24:22] Jan Ash:** Um, so I guess we could go ahead and have a motion to close the public hearing. **[1:24:32] Lou Ohly:** I make that motion. **[1:24:34] Joanna Ar:** Is there a second? **[1:24:36] Jan Ash:** I'll second. **[1:24:38] Planning Commission Member:** Motion made and seconded. All in favor? **[1:24:41] Planning Commission Members:** Aye. **[1:24:42] Jan Ash:** I then proceed. What? If any motion is going to be determined and discussed and going on—have a motion in relevance to that motions. **[1:25:01] Lou Ohly:** Is there possibility of tabling this and—we have—yeah we have people on this commission that feel like they are in rush the situation. I would like to see if we could delay this a certain time and figure out what would be a comfortable time to intervene and have a go where you feel like you're— **[1:25:31] Jan Ash:** Is that in the form of a motion? **[1:25:37] Lou Ohly:** Yeah, that's a great idea. **[1:25:40] Joanna Ar:** I'll make a motion that we table this to a time we agree upon a further action. **[1:25:54] Planning Commission Member:** Is there a second to that motion? **[1:25:57] Joanna Ar:** I'll second it for discussion. **[1:26:01] Jan Ash:** Any further discussion? I think we almost need to set that time now though. You know, I don't want it to go on for 3 months because we—yeah, we're kind of—we're not up against time strains, but we can't do any more work until, right? **[1:26:15] Lou Ohly:** And I don't want to spend any more taxpayer money on this of, you know,—I agree we should—the reasonable time. Do you have a suggestion about that reasonable time? 30 days or— **[1:26:35] Jan Ash:** Well, I would ask the two of you what you would think would be a reasonable time. You feel like you—you could get fully um invested in the information that you need to make a decision—suggestions. I'm not talking like a week. **[1:26:51] Joanna Ar:** No longer. **[1:27:00] Jan Ash:** And I—it's just—and we have to remember we're just deciding on this. This is what that land can be used for. It's not saying it's going to happen or not. So, it could be somebody coming for a sign and saying they want to put the sign there and you have—we have to go through the same process. So, what about right before the council meeting on the 11th? What about the 10th of March? Is that enough time? in a few weeks. Just a few weeks, two weeks. **[1:27:30] Joanna Ar:** Maybe we wait. Look at March 24th of 30 days from now. That could be considered April second—time for—up to March 24th. **[1:27:44] Jan Ash:** Motion has been made and second with the discussion we can add in time frame of the next meeting. March 24th. **[1:27:55] Planning Commission Member:** Yes, I'll take that motion—table for today and we brief on the 24th of March. **[1:28:01] Jan Ash:** Motion's been made and seconded. **[1:28:05] Joanna Ar:** Well, seconded—since I second the original one. **[1:28:09] Jan Ash:** Any further discussion? All in favor? **[1:28:11] Planning Commission Members:** Aye. **[1:28:12] Jan Ash:** Opposed. Motion carries. **[1:28:16] Joanna Ar:** I make the motion that we adjourn. **[1:28:18] Lou Ohly:** I second. **[1:28:20] Jan Ash:** Motion made second to— **[1:28:35] Resident (Male):** I'm not sure that day—jobs. **[1:28:49] Lou Ohly:** It's also—