W Mo does not handle aquifers, so it doesn't fall under their purview, but the permitting and everything does, and people are getting uncomfortable. >> Mhm. You have your speech ready. >> She's holding it close to the back. She didn't show you the other side where she got over. >> She did a couple rough drafts today. >> I did not either. >> We have stand up. Are we cooling them yet? Did they come in yet? >> Uh, it looks like next week, >> which is feeling kind of quick, huh? They're in turn around. >> Yeah, >> it's like Christmas when are my insurance here. >> It reminds me of the old days of Girl Scout cookies when you had cookie day and it was like the the crates of cookies would show up at the cookie mom's house and you had to sort them out and figure out who got what and where they all went. And >> I don't remember that being fun in our house. My mom didn't love that personality. My mom didn't have to do it. AND IT'S like seven. She did not. >> SO WAS I. IT IS 5:30. I will call the work session for March 2nd to uh order. We have a new employee. Welcome, Jen. Welcome. How are you? Good. Good. Um let's see. Do you want to do the intro tee this up a little or should we just jump right into two truths and introduce ourselves? Okay. Sorry. Uh, we met. I'm Courtney. I'm the mayor. >> Um, I'm Christy Fred. I'm city council. Nice to meet you. >> Eric P with city council. >> Nice to meet you. >> Lorie S, also city council. >> Kayla Pasco, city council. >> I'm the city attorney. >> Okay. Nice to meet you. >> I'm Brenda. Hi. everybody. >> Um, well, a number of years ago during co we started two truths in a lie because it was easier when we were all remote and it kind of like then the new employee who's probably already in a little bit of a uncomfortable position of having to introduce themselves like just can play the game and we can kind of go from there. So, if you're ready and willing, we'll let you go. >> Okay. All right. Number one, my favorite coffee drink is a caramel latte. >> Number two, I've met David Kekner. He played an Anchor Man. >> Oh, >> and Office. And my favorite vacation spot is Cook City, Montana. I'm just going to guess what? >> Okay. Cross the board. >> I do once. >> Couple threes. helpful to all right which one's the lie what I don't like COFFEE for me so that's what I'm looking for specific on the second one I knew it was real obscure >> I didn't know if any of you would know who he is because >> and I was given who is that looked up how did you meet him >> he was in international Paul's um he was supposed to be doing a movie. >> Okay. >> And my sister-in-law works at the Chocolate Moose out there. So, he went in there to have dinner. >> Nice. Out there. Huh? >> Did he say whammy? >> Did he say whammy? >> He was he was a great place of mine at that moment. He did end up doing that movie. So, >> Oh, that's probably why he >> Yeah, it was in the winter that he was up there, was it? >> Uh was it win? Uh I don't even remember. It was quite a while ago. >> What was your third one again? >> Cook city, Montana. That's your place. >> I thought you might be pushing them under the bus. That's why >> we went camping out there a few years ago. I don't It's just a peaceful, quiet little town. >> Nice. >> Yeah. >> Well, welcome. >> Thank you. >> Um, you are welcome to join us for the rest of the meeting or you can use this as a opportunity to get up and leave. So, I'm going to leave just because I had other plans, but I would like to sit through some council meetings sometime. They're also available online for your >> convenience. So, you guys >> um Okay, let's talk about data centers. Miss Smith, thank you. Dave and I are in a tag team. And we're hoping I think all of you are hearing about data centers one way or the other. We're hoping that we'll keep this pretty conversational. I just lost the internet so it's taking a second. >> No, that's fine. >> Are you on the internet? >> Yeah. Can you pull up? >> I don't know about anybody else, but I have definitely heard from people about data centers, especially with the new one going in in Ches. >> I don't know where it is exactly, but they've gotten the permits. >> I think it's something by the other ones. >> They have tucked back behind like North side. Yeah. North side of Lake Eng. We can view it on our Just tell us when to turn the page on the computer. >> Thinking that sharing your coffee order with everyone in the room is like a great way to get someone to buy you a coffee. >> I'll grab one for the new for the >> She likes caramel. latte the same thing. >> That would be fun if you did it. Yours and your council members. Let's just throw it into the universe. I would take any ice. You're next. You're not ready to have a hot one. Wow. I know. I like ice. Okay, I really am a Okay, thank you. Mhm. Great. So, the game plan for tonight, I'm going to give a little bit of an overview of what data centers are. We'll talk a little bit about what other cities are doing. There's been a plethora of Minnesota cities who have been faced with data centers. They've taken different approaches and projects have looked different across the state. So, we'll talk through that information. Current landscape in Carver. So, I know there's been some questions about like the property that's developing um with Messenbrink that was formerly the UP project if that could be a data center and what our zoning looks like, the space that we have available in town, some key takeaways, and then regulations and approaches that we can explore collectively with the council's direction. So, what is a data center? The one on the screen is uh proposed in Rosemount. So, that's been pretty big in the news if you've been watching it move through their processing. So it's the metadata meta data center in Rosemount and these centers primarily um store, manage, process and transmit data. So what that means is that it feels like a lot of servers in a room and then what the servers need to kind of maintain um what they need. So like the cooling system is usually something we hear a lot about with folks um having impact of sound with the cooling system, generators, etc. And then why are we talking about this? Why does it feel like there's been such a boom? what's happening. So there's obviously been a huge growth in AI which will will require more data centers to be present and it feels like Minnesota has been a little bit of a hot spot for them due to climate. Um so it's a cold spot for them because for several months of the year it's not as expensive to cool the centers just with uh our climate. So they're able to regulate them in the winter better in Minnesota than say somewhere like Arizona where you'd have to keep it cool 12 years 12 months out of the year. And then other things that people have been talking a lot about is available land. So like many developing suburban communities, we're surrounded primarily by farm fields. And these data centers typically require big swats of land. So it feels like it could be adjacent to our city limits with some of the space that we have. groundwater utilities and then some state tax incentives have also brought several of them to Minnesota recently and it's been a big topic of conversation kind of across the board. You know what those tax incentives look like? Like what any idea? >> Yeah, I I think uh from what I understand they were extended last year by the legislature. Um but they give them breaks on the purchase of like computer servers. Um those I think were extended like 35 years. So, so it doesn't it's not just the ones they buy now, but when they want to replace their servers, um they know that those tax breaks are going to be here. That's probably one of the most expensive components to these things. Um and then I think they also had some significant um um breaks on their energy cost for from an electricity standpoint. >> Um so those are the primary. >> Okay. >> Help me understand when you said that they for buying new servers. I mean where do they buy them from though? anywhere in >> well if they are functioning in Minnesota they would have to pay sales tax on anything they buy. So it's the sales tax that they're >> um getting the tax breaks on. >> Okay. Right. >> Yep. >> Aaron, you might not know, but there looks like there are a lot of little exterior things in that picture in addition to two really big buildings. Are those the generators you think? >> This is going to be a guest room. I'm going to say yes. >> Okay. So thinking about the impacts of data centers, there are impacts across the board. So uh economic, environmental, and political are three that we've been thinking about just at a staff level. So for economic, they are a great tax revenue generator. So these buildings are expensive. So they allow a city to collect a significant amount of tax revenue. So thinking about it that way, um if it was just an empty property adjacent to city limits, it would be something that could come into town and give us good tax revenue. There's some local job creation. So, majority of it would be a construction job. I think in an upcoming slide it was like the creation of a thousand construction jobs and then 100 full-time permanent jobs. So, heavy on construction, lighter on day-to-day folks uh on the property spending time there doing work. And then development. So, for some communities that are seeing these data centers are seeing them as a positive for development. So getting new people to the community, extending infrastructure, bringing other folks to the community for a job, even if it's only a 100 people, that's really impactful for some smaller communities that are having data centers proposed in them. The environmental one, I think, is something that a lot of folks are thinking about. So water use has been something that is a concern. Millions of gallons of water are typically required for them. Energy need is also really high. If you're watching any um news segment about it, you'll often hear from the neighbors of a data center talking about noise, how it's just a constant dull sound that they hear 24/7. So thinking about the generators that are on site and then the cooling components can also generate some noise. And then there are a few studies right now on the comprehensive impact of them on the environment just based on the growth in AI recently has obviously created the need for more data centers, but our timeline with those data centers has not been super long at this point. So we don't have a ton of data that goes very far back on the longlasting impact that they could have on in the environment. Political is another one. So, if you've been following like the Hermantown data center at all, that one's been tricky with folks because the elected officials and city staff signed a non-disclosure agreement with that company. So, they weren't able to share a lot of details, which to the public looked like a lack of transparency. >> Is that legal? >> You So, those are those are interesting because on the one hand, um, an NDA doesn't can't circumvent the data practices act, right? we we can't sign something that says we're not going to follow the data practices act, but they're having cities sign these and effectively they're not creating any data about them. So, there's nothing to get um one of the big pushes last year when the legislation was introduced about these tax breaks and other things um at the state level was to ban those altogether because that's what's a lot of these issues are created because of lack of transparency and >> public confusion and the unknowns, right? Um, so yes, they're legal, but to some extent, cities, a city couldn't say, "Oh, we're not going to share data with somebody who made a legitimate data request." Um, and point back to the NDA to say that that's why we can't share it. So, >> and they'll often call the project something that feels kind of mystical. So, it' be like project cloud instead of a meta data center, right? >> So, information >> in the city realm would be project cloud. So that information could be searchable, but it might not be the direct impacts of the Facebook Meta data center. So it feels up a little bit. They're they're also almost always um handled by like a developer who's who has an end user that nobody knows who it is. And sometimes, for example, the one in Pine Island, they have Ryan Companies working on that. Ryan Companies is a big developer in Minnesota. Um, I think they did the ones in Woodbury too years ago for when Amazon had their new facilities out there. Um, and so a lot of times they don't even tell the city. They say, "Here's what our use is going to be, but we we're not going to tell you if it's Amazon or Meta or Google." Um, I know the one in Pine Island just was in the last week or so, it was learned by everybody that it was Google, but nobody knew what nobody knew what it was um until then. So, um, that's to me it's it's interesting, but it also kind of drives fuels that fire again of like people want to know what this huge thing in their community is going to be. And it's really frustrating when we're used to getting transparency from our public officials and from public employees and city staff and in this case, we just can't do it. Um, so I think that's one of the issues that >> Yeah, if you want to read mistrust, that's one, >> right? But they probably dangle the carrot up. There's this project that will generate all this tax revenue. We can't tell you what it is until you see this sign right here. >> Have you, Brent, ever had to sign an NDA for anything in your Okay. >> Never been approached on it. >> Okay. Okay. Do you have a question? >> I do. So data center comes in. What protects the residents of a town from increased electric rates or increased water rates? Is there a but for provision? So if we didn't have this data center, your rates would have been this. But you know, 3 years down the road, there's so much increase in uh use, electrical load or water uh use that requires us to do something for infrastructure. What protects residents from that? >> I don't know if there's been a comprehensive look at that, like what impact a data center would have on those two utilities. I think it can be. Yes, they use a ton of water and they use a ton of power, but it's any other development too. Like we were working closely with a cold storage facility about a year ago and they would have used a ton of power too. Um, and it's just it's thinking of thinking that through essentially to say like a cold storage facility uses a ton of power, a data center uses a ton of power and then treating them kind of similarly, which is the tricky part I think is maintaining that. But I don't think there's ever been like a a run of utility system added. >> Data centers don't just draw data for processing. They also have to draw it for cooling which is why they save a bunch of power here. >> Yes. >> Um but so we don't know that. That's not >> not that I know of. No. >> What about air quality? When you see banks of generators that looks like 20 locomotives parked outside. So that is a piece of it too is like the environmental permitting of them can feel a little bit clunky thinking through some of those pieces of it. Um a little bit of a tangent but something I mentioned to Brent when some folks had a question about the mess and brink piece like could that be a data center and based on the EAW the environmental assessment worksheet that was done a data center doesn't fall within the parameters that got approved that way. So based on square footage, an EAW or an EIS would most likely be triggered. These data centers that we're seeing are massive. So via state statute, those processes would be required to look at the cumulative impact of the built and natural environment. So, it's when we're talking um we'll joke sometimes about the long-haired bat or the rusty patch bumblebee, but those it's that level of scrutiny on these projects how they'd impact the space that they'll be built on. Air quality, water quality, traffic, sound is a big one. So, all of that is covered through the environmental process that would be required based on project size typically. And uh um to the point about the EAW, that's that that middle column on that chart on the last slide, that chart, I mean, that's really a a big push. And what you're the reason you're seeing a lot of data center stuff in the news. Um um for example, one of the large ones that's tied up in litigation is that Pine Island one. Uh, and I know that the plaintiffs who brought suit in that case are an environmental group who said that the the EAW process didn't go as it was supposed to. They they're challenging that they did that correctly. Um, I don't know whether that's true or not. I'm sure there's it's all there's all kinds of background and stuff going on with that one that of course not being involved in it, it's hard to know. Um but the reason that one's um making a lot of headlines is because of that lawsuit and that lawsuit is being totally driven by a nonprofit um environmental group who who doesn't think these are good for the environment. So um your other point uh Eric just to answer your question too you know it's cities of course have control over water rates um we have inherent statutory authority to determine how we um invoice our customers that use water and how rates might be tied to specific uses and amounts of water. Um we really have no jurisdiction over energy or electricity in Carver. We're not a municipal utility that that provides electricity. Um and usually those things are driven by state legislation and or the PUC or the um yeah the the public utilities commission. And so, um, that's interesting, of course, as in terms of a question because one of the big things is I've heard and I'm sure you've all heard too, these data centers can use up one data center could use up the amount of energy that like an entire city uses, right? Just for its businesses and its and its single family homes and and multif family homes and all those things. So, there has to be an impact on that. It's a supply and demand issue. Um, and I know that, um, the legislature is looking closely at that, um, including, and I think the the feds are also looking at it too from a more, you know, nationwide, um, standpoint because these are making news not just in Minnesota, but all over the all over the country. So although I wish I had a better answer in terms of how those um rates are affected by them, especially on the local level, it's just hard to know cuz these are so new um that we're not seeing a lot of, you know, the devil is in the details yet because like the Rose Mountain one for example, that's that it's just about to finally open and um it's hard to know. Sorry, I cut you off from what you were saying before. >> And then just a couple other things. It's uh tricky spot knowing that AI is part of our lives. We're using it. We're using the internet storing things and then the impact that can have on the community that that gets chosen to have the data center. So, uh many of us contributing to the need for a data center but not necessarily wanting it in the community in which we live. For the noise part, if they're having continuous noise from these generators, do they have to have a buffer of space? Is there some any law that says you can't be this close to these homes or whatever? >> Yeah. So, the rules that we have are via the MPCA. So, it would be noise generation at the property line. And then there's different decibb you can hit during the day or at night and then you apply different uses. So an industrial user to an industrial user can be louder where industrial to residential the decibb the loud decibb are lower. So we would use that same information from the MPCA for noise. >> I don't know how much this means to you but I think it's like between 60 and 65 uh dB and you can only from what I know these these generators run pretty consistently and for long periods of time. So, um the PCA rules on noise um they don't deal with like um impulsive noises like just loud like fireworks or things like that that >> isn't it like 5 minutes out of the hour you can >> 5 minutes out of the hour outside of your decel range. So it's like the random car backfiring you couldn't call the city and say hey my neighbor was loud for a minute cuz it was a minute out of an hour instead of continuous. >> Yeah. And to Erin's point, it does matter what you're next to. If you're next to other industrial users, you're the levels that you can use are or can meet or not exceed are a little higher than if you're, you know, next to a residential area. We looked at them with Lashwab, I think, just because they were close somewhat to um some homes of course and I've looked at it a lot in the pickle ball context, believe it or not. Right. So then when we're talking about the people are seeing or are hearing I should say they're not seeing it. They're hearing a continuous buzz or noise. So so it's not like lights where you could say okay foot candles have to be zero at this property line. You can still have that background noise that's coming over right the wind the wind blows every direction but whatever. Um, so if you put it into or next to residential areas that have already been there, you're going to be adding they're going to hear it, right? There's there's no way to not hear it. >> As long as they're under that decel threshold, yes, there would probably be some ambient noise from them. >> Okay. For comparison, a household refrigerator is 55 dB and they say 60 to 65 dB is a normal conversation. And he's saying that's what the limit has to be at the property line. Correct. >> So the conversation we're having right now is about 60 to 65 dB. >> Okay. >> Depends on WHO'S TALKING. IT'S REALLY HARD to study noise and like even these with these PCA rules um when we've done sound studies and had other organizations do them um it's really interesting because they have to use the right type of equipment. You can't just go out with your app you download it on the Apple i store or um iTunes store and try to measure sound because that isn't accurate. I mean, it it can give you an idea maybe, but um people will come into city hall and they'll say, "Look at this pickle ball noise that I recorded last week and it's exceeding this and this is a violation of the MPCA rules, but um you know, it requires some specialized equipment and scientific inputs and all that." So, which I think is interesting. So, >> that's part of what concerns me. If it's hard to measure, it's probably harder to enforce, right? And then like these folks have money, right? So what are they going to say? Like sure, we'll pay the fine if we can be louder. I don't know. I'm getting too far ahead of ourselves. But it I love the idea of the noise. Well, I just just for context. So when back in the day when I worked for this, the condos were going up behind it and they were getting complaints about the noise coming from Floyd. So they had to buy a decibel reader and then someone had to stand out there and read it when they got a complaint. And it was it was a almost such a pain that it finally just dropped off and they >> they didn't see you out there and they're quiet. >> Yeah. It just or people just kind of stopped complaining because it was just how do you nope you were under? And they're like, "No, I weren't. It was too loud." And then it just doesn't go anywhere either. >> Yeah. Right. >> So thinking through some cities, these are some popular ones you've probably heard in the news recently. So Rosemont is the meta project that was successful through permitting. So, it opens in 2026. Again, that's where I got that 1,000 construction jobs, but only 100 longterm and it's on 280 acres of land. Hermantown has been another one that's been in the news recently. Um, just a lot of folks showing up for public meetings. The city council recently approved a zoning change for the project, so they reszoned the property, but the city council right now is saying they haven't committed fully to the project, just the reszoning change. So the proposed project is four buildings on 200 acres, $650 million project. When we talk about taxable revenue for some of these communities that aren't seeing a ton of development, that's a deeply impactful project for them. Egan is one that you probably saw in the news in the past week or two. So they just did a one-year moratorum for data centers. So what a moratorum does is it allows you to pause and then you need to study and make a plan for what your um take will be moving forward. So we can't just say we're doing a moratorum and then do nothing. We need to develop a plan how we would work through a data center what it would look like with zoning regulations. So it's typically a year process. Can a moratorum at the end become a no? I mean because you work through processes. Does the having the mortorium mean you have to find a way or can you get to the end of it and say yeah it's not gonna work for us? >> Um you can typically get to the end of it and say no. It just kind of depends on the specific use. Like for example we had one we had a mortar in place for cannabis. Remember um in that situation there was state legislation that says we can't prohibit cannabis businesses. So in that in that case um we could not have said no after the fact. We had to come up with some regulations. Um, generally as it relates to data centers or really any use, um, you can say no to things, but you also have to make sure your provisions aren't arbitrary and capriccious and you can't treat, you know, certain users differently. If if one user um has the same impact from a land use perspective as another type of user, you can't say no to one and yes to the other. um you have to be able to sort of identify reasons why and talk about why this use is different and why we're saying no to it and maybe saying yes to certain other uses if that makes sense. >> Mhm. Okay. So, I shook my head when you said that cuz I thought this would be one of those things where we've got to find a use for it somewhere in our plan. We can't say like no no thank you. That's one use that we're going to absolutely say no to. >> I'm not aware of any legal prohibition on saying no to any specific use. if we can um identify reasons why it's different and and isn't workable in our community legally, you you can prohibit uses. Um okay, >> there's a lot of cities that prohibit um different uses. And in fact, um you know, I think the default is if it's not listed in our code as a permitted use, it's prohibited. Um because there's so many uses out there that none of us identify in our code, right? There's a there's thousands of different businesses and uses that someone could use their property for that might not be specifically referenced in our code. Right. I would always take the position as a city attorney that that those are prohibited unless proven otherwise and unless someone can tie them to another use that is allowed. Say that they're the same or they fit into that category. Um I don't see any reason why you can't breed. The details matter though on that where if it if the co if the provision say because of the noise but then Lake View Industries has that same generator then you have a problem. >> Okay? >> You know so to Dave's point it can't be arbitrary but there there can be unintended consequences if you create rules that prohibit something that you intend to support. And so that review is uh delicate. >> Yeah. chose the megawatt threshold. >> Makes sense. >> That was >> well that was for a mortorium but yes I mean I think that's where they're going with that is they're going to probably be looking at data centers of a certain size. Um, and to just piggyback on Brent's comment, you you have to with any zoning provision, you have to point back to public health, safety, and welfare. And if you're incorporating findings into an ordinance that says to protect public health, safety, and welfare and or more specifically the noise issue and and this size thing or this you have to you have to differentiate that from other things that you allow um in order to make it legally enforceable and not you know invalid otherwise you could run into issues. So for example, we could inadvertently run into a problem with for example the cold storage because it would have a similar high energy usage >> to a data center for example if we used >> if we used energy as a basis for example. >> Right. >> Right. And in just informal conversation with some folks that I know at Egan, one of their drivers is they have these large corporate campuses that are now kind of largely vacant. >> And so they're trying to protect job centers, which is, you know, for what it's worth, maybe a little bit different than like a green field development project. And so, um, it gets back to every city's going to have its own circumstances. And that might be a good segue into like maybe available property. >> Can I talk about the Chesco one quick? >> Well, yeah. >> So, the Chesa one is a little bit different where as an adjacent community, um, Chesca has not had a similar response as other communities. Like if you compare a Chesa City Council meeting reviewing the Cloud HQ project versus the Hermantown city council, it's a vastly different landscape. And part of that is the I think the way that um the Chesa operation will run. So they used airbased chillers, not water. So there's not a direct impact on their water system beyond like what a development might need. So I think that that was a big piece of it is that some of these data centers um can feel less spooky if there are ways that they mitigate things like the if the water isn't a concern. If that was Chaza's number one, they found a different way to do it. And then the Cloud HQ project is a large p large purchaser of renewable energy. it won't be on that site specifically, but that's something that they've said in most of their approvals is that the company is committed to renewable energy. They're just not able to do it on that site. So, uh, as community members, you probably have heard a little bit about the Chaza project, but a different general acceptance of the project for some other ones we've seen across the state. >> It also might help that they already have a server farm in that area, so people are already kind of used to. It's kind of like our second affordable housing development. It's a lot easier to put in than the first. >> And just to go back really quickly on one thing um about prohibiting something, I mean, there are ways to to make your ordinance, I think, less um have less of a target on its back. I mean, if you just did a prohibition on data centers, I haven't seen a city do that yet. I think you'd be on sort of the forefront of that endeavor and you could make yourself an example for a lot of big companies with a lot of money to say, "Well, we're going to we're going to go after these now so that other cities don't get ideas." Um cuz just someone said it, they have a lot of money and they might be very much worth it to them to go after it and make headlines because they're suing a city who wants to prohibit something. There's ways to make your ordinance, you know, um, not prohibit outright, but also maybe strategically set yourself up for situations that, you know, maybe we could have smallcale data centers that work in a certain part of town, in a certain type of district that we don't even have yet. I mean, just kind of throwing examples out there. Um but I do think when you think about this strategically there are um there there can be a lot of value to not prohibiting something uh but rather thinking more big picture and kind of again creating that proverbial smaller target on your back than >> if you're on the you know trailblazing the the prohibition train which isn't always a great >> similar to the cannabis discussion like we had the option to do buffers. So we would allow cannabis businesses with XYZ buffer. It wouldn't necessarily probably be a footage point for this one, but it could say no development in Carver can exceed X amount of gallons used per year with a forecasting number. So um there are ways I think that you could allow them but protect folks around them and be able to control the process a little bit more than what some communities are going through right now. So, um, thinking through our code, land that's available, etc. So, we don't specifically have data centers in our code. I would say most communities don't right now, but it's something they're obviously working on. Egan being uh the moratorum. They're obviously working towards some type of ordinance or zoning regulation. I would say right now we don't have land in the city of Carver that would typically work for a large scale data center. So any project that would need to um that a a data center might look at would need to be annexed into the city uh zoning change etc. Several reviews by the city council and uh annexation is always contingent on the city council. So we have that piece with us too that annexation is not a given. It needs to work for the city as well. So right now we don't have land I think that is super data center ready. Um, might someone be able to combine some parcels on our very northern growth area and make it work? Maybe. Um, but that's not something that we're hearing right now just based on where our city limits are, the type of development that we're seeing. So, there could be options in those areas, but right now a large scale data center likely doesn't fall anywhere in our community, but potentially could in our growth area or across uh County Road 11, Jonathan Cover Parkway, and Chaza or north when we get to Victoria. So some of those spaces it could happen, but right now it's not something that's keeping me up at night that we have this huge property that's really ripe for a project that we're not ready for. >> Can you remind me, Erin, when you say far north, are you saying far north side of the growth area? >> Um there's a lot of property in between current city limits and those parcels, right? And so although maybe there's some parcels that could theoretically be thought of as maybe combined being combined for that kind of use, the infrastructure that would have as we all know about filling infrastructure gaps in Carver and in the growth areas we've talked about it can be tricky and expensive. And so um I say that because I think a lot of the thought that goes into this is well how uh desirable is land for these developers. I think there's a lot more desirable land out there. Um, which is um why we're not seeing as much here maybe as other cities are right now. >> Slide. So, some takeaways. I'll do a couple of these and then hand it over to Dave. Um, but the projects are happening in Minnesota and they're often contentious. They often hit some pretty big news circuits. So you probably have heard about several of them, but there probably are several projects that we're not hearing about that are happening where community is really excited for that tax scheme and the jobs that they can create for a community. Uh emotions will likely be high for a variety of reasons. So you'll have some folks that maybe are excited about the project and some folks that are terrified of what the impacts will be. Most cities do not regulate data centers right now. Like we mentioned, Egan is at the forefront right now with that moratorium. So it'll be interesting to see what language they develop and which policies they move forward with. We don't have any pending projects in Carver. So now is the time that we're being proactive. So we're not having to pump the brakes and try to find a way that we can take a step back and learn some more. So uh as always, planning through a review and public transparency are essential. I'd say in Carver, those are some of our core values maybe than other cities to toot our own horn a little bit, but we always want folks to know what we're working on and why. But there's also the balance of economic development with long-term environmental impact, but also public trust. So, making sure information is available, transparent, we're sharing information should a project come to Carver. I did all those. Sorry, I'll let you do the last slide. >> I said we were going to share that one. >> Uh, last slide. So, let's talk about options. We've talked a little bit about moratorum and you know this council does have some experience with um recently with the cannabis moratorum. Essentially what it does is it it allows us to say okay we're hearing a lot of things about these things. We realize our code city code does not specifically address data centers. We have certain industrial uses and other types of general language in the code that don't really go right to the heart of what a data center is. Why don't we why don't we just press pause? We'll say for now these aren't allowed. Um, and we'll let uh planning staff, consultants sort of talk about how they might fit in Carver and what that would look like and then come back with recommendations and that way we don't have to scramble and, you know, all of a sudden we get a phone call from a developer who wants to do something and we we we don't have to react. We can be more proactive. Um, there's of course the statutory authority for a moratorum. It cannot last uh more than a year. Um, and the way we do it is through what's called an interimm ordinance that would come back to council for consideration. Those do not go to planning commission. You don't have a public hearing on interim ordinances, but for two exceptions, that wouldn't apply here. Um, so that would be one option. And then staff could take some time and think about it um and look to see what other cities are doing and really maybe talk to the engineers about water and where it could fit, if it could fit, and all those things. Um the other option is to you know kind of skip the moratorum and go right to the the planning and amend uh zoning amendment process which you know frankly is a little hard to do when you're under the gun and you're not feeling um like you have some time. Again the nice thing about the moratorium is that you you don't have to rush and you have up to a year to do it. Um, and then of course option three, which is always an option, is you could do nothing and wait for something to happen and be reactive and um um I I don't necessarily condone that option, but and I don't think staff does either. Anyone does, but that's an option. A lot of cities say, "Look, we we we think our code's okay, and if it isn't, we'll make it we'll figure it out." So, I don't want to not say that that's an option as well. Um, so we're happy to answer other questions, talk through these options a little bit more. Just from anecdotally, I think from a from the standpoint of what a potential zoning amendment could look like. Um, you know, I think it could be myriad things. You could create these as a permitted use only in a in a new type of district that maybe is confined to certain parts of the city and or its growth area. You could make them conditional uses and create some performance standards that we would look at. Um, again, a lot of this is hard to to think through and forecast too much because, you know, we're we're we really just have the information that you've seen and we've talked about tonight. Um, but those are just options of potential zoning regulations that we we could think about and bring back to the council to talk through. >> Dave, when you say performance standards, is that the no water use above, no electrical use above? >> Uh, kind of. Um um you know I think it would be the buffers potentially from certain areas or setbacks uh property setbacks or >> construction materials >> construction materials um but yes you can get into you know potential resource those are hard to those are really hard to like put your finger on though because I I think when it comes to u these data centers I think technology is changing so rapidly that maybe something that is really scary today might not be in a year. Um, and you know, like the one in Chesca, they're using air cooling. Um, you know, so I I don't know if you could require a certain type of cooling and then all of a sudden, wait, maybe those coolers are louder and use more energy or electricity than a water, you know, and you know, I've also heard things about how, you know, there's um companies working on these like recycling systems that will let water be significantly saved and still cool these servers the way they're cooling them today. um why that's not out there already. I I'm surprised it isn't. Maybe there it will soon be. So, it's kind of a moving target. Um but performance standards generally are a list of things that in order to even meet our ordinance for us to approve the conditional use permit that you're requesting, you have to check all the boxes um in terms of the performance standards. So, >> thank you. >> Y >> All right, guys. >> Well, I'm 100% for the moratorum. I think that gives us time to look at all of the information, get answers to the questions like water capacity is one thing I'd like to make sure that we hear back about is if they are not doing air cool and they're doing water, what does that do to our water towers? What does that do to our water capacity? Do they drill their own well, is that something like that going to suck all the water from our water table? But anyways, um amending the zoning will probably what comes at the end of the moratorum, but it leaves us open to something we're not prepared for if we just do the amend zoning and not so I am all for the moratorum and taking that to give staff time to get us in the right track. >> Thoughts from that side, Lori? >> Yeah, I um have a I know we want to be transparent. I have a perspective though on the data center. So like 15 20 years ago there's a company in Eden Prairie called on track and they became troll on track but they were a data center anyways I used to work there um and just at that time just the way their like a data center was is um people they didn't want other companies to know where their data was being stored. So like that's why you get that you know feels like they're not being transparent about what company. Um but I think that's changed since then and also um that prolong track then it became KL when they got really into the eiscocovery business and today like what I've last heard is that would not it's right by Henipin Technical College but that would not be a location that a data center would probably want to build because they have different risk factors. It's too close to a small airport. Um so there may be places where you know they don't want to build. Um then I have a question on time frame. If if somebody came next week and said you know we are going to approach these land owners we're starting this process and then you know go to the planning commission there's you know several steps to the process like what is the shortest it could be? Uh so >> or like a range like hypothetically >> for a property outside of city limits. Um in your hypothetical is it guided correctly in the comp plan? >> Yes. >> Um annexation is typically it's a 30-day review by the township city council and then a 30-day review by the state. So that can be 60 to 90ish days depending on meeting dates. So that's the first step. uh moving through concept plan to final plat I would say is probably a six to eight month process to final approval. So those two things together I'd say a year um based on size and environmental review is probably required. So an EAW but that can fall within some of the work of that can be happening while you're working through annexation and premium plat but I would say a yearish is probably as fast as it could happen. >> Okay. And I wanted to ask that first because I also favor a moratorum, but I didn't want there to be like a worst case scenario where um we say we're going to take 10 to 12 months and then here, you know, there's a hypothetical that somebody it would hold something back. But it's like our that time frame would be shorter than this hypothetical. Well, if if the council approved and adopted a one-year moratorum, uh just like when we did it for cannabis, if you get if things are done in eight or nine months, the moratorum is goes away. I mean, the the termination language on the moratorium and say the earlier of one year or when we update our zoning regulations and so, you know, I think it frankly it's going to take some time for staff to think through this. And and I do think also like using a lot of that time could be beneficial because so rapidly changing this environment. So it's like you want to kind of use as much of that experience and um external um evidences and from other cities experiences as possible. U but that doesn't means that we wouldn't get something done in 6 months that this council loves, right? Um, so it doesn't necessarily mean the full year, >> but we would be faster at it than that process that we called a hypothetical. >> Correct. >> I also favor the moratorum. Um, I think we owe it to our residents to do something and even if that something is to have a really good discussion, transparent discussion about what this looks like with the city and then decide we don't need to do anything. Um I think we owe it to our residents to do that because it's clearly on everybody's mind and people are clearly concerned about it. So, I would favor a moratorum um just at the bare minimum to figure out what our plan is because the last thing I want is for this to show up on staff's doorstep and for us to be scrambling to figure something out while we're dealing with an NDA and while we're dealing with residents concerns and while we're dealing with the whole process of annexation and resoning and everything else. So this is one piece that I want in place before somebody shows up at the city. >> So we're really fortunate to have some other communities around us go first. We see that uh and I also support a moratorum. However, we get one year and it sounds like we're not an attractive target for a data center. Do we want one year to start from today or is it in our interest to delay that as things are proceeding in these other communities? Is there risk to waiting to start that one-year time or is it better for us to do that? >> It just kind of depends on when those scales are tipped then, right? I mean, >> somebody theoretically could identify land and have it under contract and >> Well, if there's a risk of that, then then now I just it sounded like we may be uh low on anyone's list. >> It also like it'll be a resolution via the council. So, that will happen the first meeting in April. >> Interim ordinance, >> an interim ordinance. First meeting in April. So, that's a month from now. So that is also it's our moratorum process would start after the ordinance. So we have an extra month right now kind of of leeway where other folks are already working on this that we could they're going to finish their processes faster than we are. But we can look to them to see what they did, how they got there, what was important. >> I just want to use that year wisely. >> I understand that. I think the other thing about it is that once we have something figured out, we can go back and change it if we look around us and the environment has changed. Um, but we should have something in place to protect our community from the start. >> That's the point that I was going to make is I I get it of like the crystal ball question of when's the right time and if we want a full year to think about this, but we don't have anybody knocking on our door right now asking about this. Do we gamble and wait 6 months and then talk about this this fall? I don't think we do that. >> Well, that's why I asked. >> Um I also feel like a moratorum would help me feel better about this. Like >> this was really informative. This is great. I was sharing with Brent and Aaron there's a really large data center going in in Port Washington which is in southeastern Wisconsin in my old stomping grounds and it has gotten a ton a ton of news even more push back and I'm not even sure that I understand like why residents hate this right you know like the noise the usage of water and electricity but I think we just need to know a little bit more of like what's an option I think there's a closed loop system with water that isn't as big of a water user Sure. But like do we want this in our community? I think the other issue that could be standalone from data centers is and I don't know if we could have a policy of this, but like I hate the idea of signing an NDA for anything, right? Like our community would love a grocery store, right? But even if it was a grocery store, I hate that idea of that lack of transparency. So, I don't know if that's a policy that we can make that's for council and for city staff going forward to kind of cement that desire to have transparency. >> Um, would there ever be a case where we would sign one of those? I think the reason most cities sign them is because they really they believe in the development and that doesn't mean that some cities I mean it's uh proven that some cities are very in favor of some of this development when there might be a subset of your residents that don't want it and they're the ones that are mad about the NDA. So I think those cities are saying if if this is what you're telling us is necessary to make this happen and further conversations with your end user we're happy to do it. Um, so I and I do think that would probably come a policy would be tricky to because you I don't really know. I mean maybe we could think through that, but I think it would more come at the time like is it right to sign this or not? We could have that discussion then. >> Okay. >> Um rather than to set up a policy that might be inconsistent with the council's either goals or strategies or viewpoints that might change or even a different kind of user that you really like comes in and they say we have to do an NDA for this reason. So >> outside of just this though, would we ever sign an NDA for >> very rare? Um I would say it's very very rare. Um the closest we come as a gas convenience user. >> Quick trip to want to be announced. >> Oh, got in my career, I've never been asked the question. So, I just >> and I feel there's a lot of almost like gentleman's agreements of like, hey, this is happening, but don't tell your friends. This isn't this is Facebook official yet. And I think we're good at, you know, before folks are ready to come in, you know, like next month this is going to come in for a concept plan or whatever. and understanding just that when there's a user that's not ready to go into prime time and make it Facebook official that we honor that as a community from both staff and from a council side. But the whole NDA and formalizing it and like those to me I think in my mind are like longer term bigger agreements. Um I don't love that idea at all. >> Well, we can always choose not to enter into one, >> right? >> We don't need to codify that. We can always choose them. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> Right. Okay. >> Do you have anything from us? >> Yes. >> All right. Thank you guys. >> Um Okay. Uh AMIs a meter replacement program. Sorry. Andrew and I was just writing the slides. >> Next slide. Okay, thank you mayor and council uh and for running the slides. >> Um I don't even remember when we met last. Was it a month ago or was it the last meeting? >> December. >> No, right this year. >> Anyways, uh >> there were a few questions that popped up. Uh one was the frequency band. Um, so Corm told us they operate in a 900 to 950 band, whatever that means, but it's a licensed frequency owned by Census and it can't be repurposed in the future. Um, so hopefully that checks that box. Um, neighboring cities, uh, Chaza is currently undergoing a meter change out and moving to this technology. um not with uh corn main but they have different meters because they have the electric um as well as their water meters. Uh Chanhassen, they have operated under the AMI for like 12 years. I think they had to be one of the first ones in the area to do that. Um and they have the Neptune meters. They have several collection points around town due to their topography which is similar to ours. Um, so here's a map, a little distorted, but um, these are the locations of the SR2 meters, which are the older style meters that would need to get changed out, so it would be compatible with the system. Um, a lot of those meters are older than they have not been installed basically since 2010. There's a sprinkling of houses that look like they have the SR2 meters and that might have been an issue that timed up with CO and not being able to get the meters cuz a lot of cities had meter shortages at that time. >> So, the Red Ones need to have new meters. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Yeah. The neighborhood on the north side is a good neighborhood too, >> right? >> That's my neighborhood. We got some weird uh meter shortages back then uh which are all squared away now, but um so a lot of those, you know, especially like in the Bluffs neighborhood, those are approaching 30 years old. >> How come all the older houses in the Bluffs don't require them? >> Uh they have could have had their meters changed out by then. >> Okay, >> so that's another point. you know, we're trying to change out meters as we lose communication with them or they die. Um, so changing out meters is an ongoing process. So, a part of this project, you know, would be one, yes, the AMI stuff, but two also the meter change out and getting them all done at the same time rather than peacemealing it over the next couple years. So, just to emphasize that these meters get replaced anyway. >> It's just a matter of do you do it over 5 years or over one year? Your long-term plan contemplates doing it in one year. So, you have the financing to make that happen. What does your house have? >> Mine I HAVE right there. >> That would be a great like data verification thing. Uh Christy's house is old. So >> So when you go to home tonight, take a picture of a meter and send it to us. >> Yeah, I'll be right back. >> Take them all at the same time today is the use. >> What is the average useful life remaining on the meters that need to be replaced? >> A lot of them are past 20 years. Um, >> and that's typically when you want to start thinking about changing a map is 20 years. >> Mhm. So like the ones in the bluff, I can't remember Lind or Chad had >> any. >> So there's 342 meters that are older than 20 years. So >> of the 500 or so >> of the 500 or so. So there's a big chunk of them that should be replaced like >> should have already been replaced. >> And then there's 113 that are within 15 to 19 years. so quickly approaching that >> uh lifespan. And then there's like 42 that are less than 5 years old. >> The co houses. >> The co houses. So, >> and I think that about equals what we add on there. So, so there's a big chunk that should be replaced um today. uh propagation study, they were able to get us uh what one tower would look like versus what two towers would look like. Um so the two towers covers I think it's like 98% of the houses. Um the only issues with the two house or the two tower is kind of the ones that are tucked up against uh the bluffs uh down by Creek Side Park there. Uh but one we'd have a lot of gaps and then especially where we're looking to expand to the southwest and to the west and to the north, you know, that second tower uh would be needed sooner than later. >> So with that kind of dead zone along Main Street, what is it? Main Street West, is that you had talked about there's another little little repeater that goes in there or something? You could put a repeater. I mean, it's since it's in like that blue area, there's like the oneway communication. Um, so it's potentially you could get the read. >> Okay. >> Um, and you might not get it every time. Maybe you get it in the winter when there's no leaves on the trees, stuff like that. Um, otherwise it would just be drive by. >> That's a short stint. >> Yeah. >> Which especially when our public services facility will be down here someday potentially. Like that's going to be drive by that. >> Well, you drive by the whole city or you drive by like half a mile right there. >> Yeah. >> Um so that's kind of that's like overall what the coverage map looks like. Um zoomed out a little bit. Janass I think has close to seven um stations. So it' be nice to just have two for a long period of time. So then this is where we have the metering system and install is 160,000. Um and then there's setup and training fee so we know how to use it. Uh that's huge. I can think of several instances even like in the past month where having access to this data would be very helpful for us. Um then the software fees that's ongoing. Does that include the resident portal? I know that was an option. Uh >> I don't know, Lynn. What do you know? >> Um I think that's separate. >> So I think that's an addition. >> That was like seven grand, wasn't it? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So anecdotally about the resident portal. Um my therapist lives in Plymouth and they have I think it's Plymouth that has she has resident access. Is it Plymouth that has it? >> They probably do. >> They probably do. It's up that way. Anyway, she was telling me that when her son was born, she got an email from the city because their water usage went up, >> that the amount of laundry they were doing was enough to trigger the system and they got a notification. So, anyone who's had kids, that's not unsurprising, but just as an idea of like it does it >> does work. >> It does work. It does trigger to the to the users. >> I really liked that aspect of this system, >> especially as we're moving to where people are on an app. We're improving our website. >> I would like to see this go forward with that resident component of the software. So, if we're looking at cost, I'd like it presented with that. >> Mhm. >> That's my thing. >> I think the plan initially was to get it rolled out um so that we know how to use it before rolling it out to the residents. >> That makes sense. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah, I remember that. We wanted to get ourselves >> really comfortable and trained in before try to roll something out and then try to troubleshoot that same >> as long as we're able to add that later in there. So $12,000 charge to add an additional plugin. >> Yeah. >> Okay. And then so that portion of the project would be 193,000. And then uh to go replace the meters that need to be replaced um and the MXUs that are associated with those meters maybe 296,000 and I think the CIP has currently budgeted both of those portions of it. >> Yeah. Covered. Hey, can you just do a little um commercial on the the purchasing authority for this is a little uh different than how we would usually do like a public bidding process, >> right? Yeah. No. So, usually when you are looking at contracts that exceed $175,000 as the council, you probably heard that number before because that's what triggers the public bidding threshold. Um, in this case, we're dealing with a a sole source u situation where um we already have a meter system that we've begun using in Carver and it's based on a certain type of meter that is only um there's only one authorized dealer that sells these in Minnesota. So, we really have only one option. it doesn't make sense to go up for bids because if we want to buy from an authorized dealer who can give us the warranties and the guarantees that um we would want we are going to be purchasing from them. So there's no sense in wasting the time and effort and energy and going out for bids. Um I guess we could jump through those hoops but um we have a statutory ability to kind of work around that. it would require the council to approve a resolution sort of memorializing the findings why we're doing that, why we're not bidding it. Um, and um that's the exception to the public bidding requirement that we're we're talking about here. So, if you do want to move forward um just expect there to be a a resolution about that on an upcoming agenda that would allow us to um take advantage of that exception. >> Anything else you need from us? Just if you can share your support or opposition moving forward. >> Got the feeling that we were all in support. Is that not >> I support it. Support it. >> 100% support it. >> I support you with and I but I have one more question. So what I'm looking says the long-term financial plan has allocated 296,000. We're looking at the CIP budget of 203,000. >> Two different buckets. >> Okay. Okay. One's for the meters and ones for the >> and one's for this. Okay. All right. That was it. But yes, support. >> Given that we're looking at the end of the useful life of the vast majority of these meters anyway, I see no reason why we shouldn't go ahead with it. >> Great. >> What you need from us? >> Yes. >> Thanks for >> um Okay. City manager report. >> Yeah. um some fun things to share uh kind of team related. Uh so today was uh the first day for Sergeant uh Josh Baker uh the Carer County Sheriff's Office. So he's going to be out at your uh April 6th uh meeting just to do kind of a true truth and a lie. >> Um but already just a you know came introduced himself to the team talked about issues. We're going to once he kind of gets his feet wet and is aware of kind of more of the community nuances, uh we've talked about doing a kind of a series of work sessions where the council has an opportunity to identify some public safety goals. You know, right now we have that four to five page work plan that's I think largely ceremonial. And so I think if we can kind of simplify that and really target some key uh initiatives that the council wants to see, I think we're going to see some success. We're going to facilitate that uh closer to the summer. Um wanted to highlight Mallerie and Lynn's work on the 2025 audit. Got a lot of kudos from the ABDO staff on the preparation work that Mallerie and uh Lynn took part in. Um, wanted to highlight Jordan Walkey's work as the utility superintendent. Uh, there's been a smattering, I would say, of like, uh, discolored water concerns, primarily in the that west end area where we had some previous kind of leaking issues. Uh, there's a large water mane where this water doesn't get through that area and until it warms up, uh, we can't do a flush. But uh Jordan and it and that team along with Andrew have really been kind of I would say pressing it on whenever there's we get a report of concern. Uh it's a phone call and not an email. And so Jordan's touching base with them and uh giving them some best practices on to handle the problem kind of in the interim and kind of walking through it. And uh I think that's just been a great success and a and a kind of a sign of the dedication that him and Craig and Brian and Caleb have towards resolving uh some water issues that have been kind of lingering for folks. Um got a very uh nice email from a resident regarding Brian Matson. I can share out to the council, but it just gets into he, you know, long story short, he had an inspection and checked out uh their uh smoke alarms. Am I saying that right? >> Um and and windows and just kind of that if you've spent any time with Brian or Frankly Nick, you it's not a surprise to see kind of that kind of level of care and kindness. And then uh uh got a call also from John Messenbrink who you might meet later on in the uh United Pro he's the kind of the new owner of the United property site and was kind of gushing uh with our team's response specifically errands on how we've been kind of helping them navigate a really kind of fasttrack process for their development. And so I we probably don't spend enough time kind of lifting up our team to the council, but uh some really great examples of the work that the team is doing on a day in and dayout basis that I think would make me proud. So wanted to share that. >> Awesome. Thank you. Uh any council requests? Always making eye contact early. Okay. I'm going to entertain a motion to adjurnn. I'll make a motion to adjurnn. Motion by council member comment. >> A second. Second by council member UM that's why I'm always like such a all those in favor say I. I oppose same side motion passes. Thank you.