Good morning. Thank you all for being here. Welcome to this notice meeting on data centers. My name is Monet Holder. I represent at large group one. I'm going to give everyone up here a chance to introduce themselves. We'll start with Mr. Harvey and then we'll go around. Thank you. Terrence Harvey, Office of the General Counsel. Erin Abney, Chief of Current Planning, and we also have Helena Perola, Director of Planning Department here as well. Brittany Norris for the administration, not Bill Delaney. Good morning. Councilman Reginald Gaffney Jr., District 8. Good morning. Jimmy Peluso, City Council, District 7. Again, Monet Holder at large group one. Ron Salem, group two at large, and it's a pleasure to be to the very first notice meeting of Councilmember Holders. We're making history today. Jordan Pope, JEA. Thank you. And we'll have... Ron's never been that nice to me. You're also not me. We also have Councilmember Matt Carlucci, who should be joining us in a few moments, and I think one or two others, but we will... I will respect your time and get started. So call this notice meeting because, and I've said this more than one time, I've been hearing from the beaches to Baldwin that there are questions and concerns about data centers and conversations that I've personally had, not only with folks in community, but with JEA, with our planning department, about what currently exists here, the impacts it has to our community, and whether the concerns about hyperscale or mega data centers coming to Jacksonville is a real thing soon, in the midterm or the long term. So I like to form opinions and take action based on a place of information and being informed, which is why I called this meeting and asked for the folks that you see sitting here to join me and shed some light on the issue. As you see the agenda, I'm not sure if most of you have it, we will kick off with a JEA giving an overview. Mr. Pope will do that. We'll hear from our planning department. Our council members present will ask a few questions and share remarks, and then when we we will open it up for public comment. Based on how many comment cards that we have, that will determine how many minutes you all have, but this meeting in its entirety is 90 minutes. This likely will not be the last conversation that we have, but it is a start, so I appreciate you all being here, and then I'm going to hand it over to Mr. Pope. Thank you and good morning. Do we know if sound is on? Is it on streaming? Are we working on it right now? Okay. I just want to make sure. Thank you for checking on it. Should I wait? Yeah. Okay. Yeah. We'll give it a second. If you have not completed a speaker card, please do so up front with Courtney at ECA, and definitely want to wait till we get the streaming going. Can I make fun of you all? I was supposed to say I could sing, like maybe. Please are on. I think it's still down. Still down. Okay. Are we saying a desk? I don't know. Whatever you want to say. Good? I'm going to keep talking. Does that recording have sound, though, is the question? Okay. So let's go ahead and get started. Okay. Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in today's discussion and share a little bit from the JEA perspective. I know there's a lot of discussion about data centers. I want to make some distinctions today. JEA has approximately six data centers in its service territory today, but they are not what you typically hear discussed in the media or elsewhere. What you typically hear discussed are large-scale data centers. And the way that the Florida statutes have recently defined that, that's 50 megawatts or more. What is currently in the JEA service territory is approximately the size of a Home Depot to three Home Depots? So it is not on the scale that I think is what we're intended to address today. But I did want to clear up that we do currently serve data centers, but they are not hyperscale data centers like you typically here discussed. JEA has had a number, approximately 50 requests for data centers over the last number of years. What data centers are typically looking for when they come to us is power availability. JEA does not currently stand ready to serve a hyperscale data center today. And what I mean by that is if it was as simple as plugging into the wall, that is not going to happen today within JEA's system. There are significant system upgrades that would need to happen in order to serve a hyperscale data center within our territory. To get a little more granular, to serve a hyperscale data center at all, is going to be largely dependent on the proposed location within our service territory. There are locations within the JEA service territory that would be more well suited to serve a large scale data center than others. So it is largely location dependent. To serve a large scale data center, at a minimum we would need to build a new substation. Because of the significant growth in large scale data centers across the country, supply chains have been impacted. So the lead times on a lot of that equipment have been lengthened. And we're seeing that not just to serve a large customer within our territory, but really to build any new electric infrastructure. So they have had impacts across the entire utilities systems nationwide. Recent legislation required public utilities, which at the state level is defined as investor-owned utilities, I think FPL, Duke, TECO, to... Sorry, real quick. Sure. Public utility means an investor-led utility? As far as that that particular definition of the statute, I realize it's counterintuitive, but public utility does not apply to JEA in that instance. Sorry, Chair. I just wanted to jump in on that. It required that a large load tariff. So 50 megawatts or more, those utilities have to put in place a large load tariff that protects other customers for paying for these large loads to come into the territory. While it doesn't apply to JEA specifically in the statute, we do intend to comply with the statute. So we are currently, along with our rate consultant, working to develop a large load tariff and an intake process for these requests when they come in. I can tell you that we have had discussions with speculative data center inquirers, but we have not talked directly to the specific user. So I don't want there to be an illusion that JEA is speaking directly with Meta or Oracle or folks like that. As best we can tell, all of the inquiries so far have been speculative. But back to the regulations, we intend to comply. There are a number of them in there. We are committed to making sure that the new rate class will ensure that data centers pay for their own infrastructure, that our other customers are not impacted by that. In addition, we're monitoring federal regulations. One proposal on the table would require data centers at a certain point in time to bring their own electric generation. I don't know where all of that will head. Your guess is as good as mine, but there are a number of proposals out there. The recent legislation also addressed water. I will tell you that water usage at data centers, this is a general statement, has largely been addressed by closed loop systems. In other words, they're not drawing on a significant amount of water every day. They're recirculating that water. Reclaimed water is starting to be used more widely in the data center area. And so we will make sure that we work to ensure that the water supply is not negatively impacted as part of any of this as well as required by the statute. That is a high level to a complex issue. So I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you for that presentation. You mentioned locations. Can we as a city or JEA drive them if we're going to have them to a location that makes sense to us and not let the person that may have property that they want to put a data center on? I think the answer is yes, we can. What the way JEA can affect that is parts of our territory will be more readily or be more ready to serve those loads because of the way the infrastructure has been built out or the development. There's capacity in that part of the system. So if you want power sooner, our goal through this process is to make sure that those parts of the system are identified and communicated. And to be clear, it's not just for a data center. That would be for any large load, a manufacturer, et cetera. If you have a second question, if you have several of these coming to you, how do you make a decision which applicant that you may take? Does it go to the board? What is the process there? It's a great question. And it's one reason why, as part of the rate study, we are designing the intake process to ensure that we are equitable in the treatment of these applicants. I will tell you that to date, because JEA cannot meet their timeline for their needs, we have not had that issue yet. Okay. At some point, I wonder if the council should get involved in this and be the ultimate approval of these things beyond maybe the JEA board. That's just something to think about if we wanted to have some input into this process. Thank you, Councilmember Holder. You're welcome. I agree with that, but I had taken us a step back. I know you mentioned there are six data centers that are here today. Do you mind saying where they're located and at what capacity they are, what megawattage they're operating at? Yes, ma'am. I could ask. I don't think there's an issue with the locations, but I would like to check and be sure, considering potentially the sensitivity of what's processed in there. That is an abundance of caution. I'd be happy to provide it as long as that's not an issue, if that's okay. It's my understanding that all of them are four megawatts or less. Okay. I think four megawatts is the top end. Can they grow? They can grow, and it is one thing we'll address in this new tariff is, to your point, if you come in at one and then you go to 10 and then 30 and then 50, how do you handle that? And one additional question. As you mentioned, oftentimes the, I guess the entities that are interested in bringing them to the city and JEA not being able to meet their timeline in the manner. When do you foresee us growing to that, to that, to being able to meet the required amount of energy that they're looking for in the next five years, 10 years? So in order, in order for JEA to be ready to serve one as soon as they came, we would have to invest other customer dollars up front. It would be, I mean, these are some general statements, okay? Okay. That would be a little bit speculative. In order to comply with the statute, I think what you would have to do is work with a specific entity that is interested in locating here. Those would need to be contractual terms worked out to ensure that they're paying their costs. No one else is bearing any burden of the cost to serve them. And so it is hard to imagine as on a system-wide basis, building a particular site ready to serve them day one without their involvement and financial commitment. I think the nuance to that is if your system is growing, you don't build a power plant just for what you need today. You may build it for the future, and it may not just be a data center. It may just be general growth. Some of that could be allocated to them, but they would still need to pay their fair share of that. So it's a little bit nuanced in that regard. Gotcha. My last point before I hand it over to Councilman Pelluso. To your discretion on the locations, if you're not able to, per se, give a physical address, I would be interested in knowing what parts of town that they're located in, and that'd be helpful. I do think there's one downtown. There's a couple on the south side, if that's helpful. Okay. So downtown and south side are where they're currently located. Thank you. Recognizing Councilman Pelluso. Thank you, Chair. Yeah, no. So, I mean, obviously we have our planning department here as well, which is going to be incredibly important for location and buffers and however we kind of want to plan from that perspective. For JEA's, you know, side of this, yeah, 50 megawatts sounds like a substantial amount. Have we ever said to an applicant, or do we, have we ever had a policy, I'm asking a lot here, have we ever had a policy in this city where we said no single applicant or no specific area can go beyond a certain megawattage because that's just way too much for our system to handle? I'm not aware of any policy that would restrict that. The, what that really comes down to is how long would it take us to build the infrastructure to serve them, and what would their fair share of that infrastructure cost be? I mean, so if we just put aside data centers for a minute, if you had a large manufacturer come in, you know, we have a policy what's called contribution and aid of construction. So what is their fair share beyond what would be typical for JEA to cover as far as building out that system? And we apply that across the board. Data centers have just created a different conversation and a need for a different approach. I understand that, and that's a fair point because you're right. I mean, I don't want us to overstep our bounds and go too deep into where maybe the board or JEA wants to approve something, but we do have the planning department here and obviously the city side to maybe give us more of that right. But if there was a megawattage that we as a council decided after a certain level, you know, in one applicant or after it hits one applicant goes beyond, you know, 30 megawatts or something, now we really now we got to step in. It's got to be for us to approve. That's something that I would be considering, that I would consider. You also mentioned that most of these systems are closed loop systems. Do you mean just the ones that you mean the hyperscale ones or the ones that we have here in the city currently? I couldn't speak to the ones we currently have. Just as a general statement, the water utilization is being addressed through these more efficient systems with the hyperscalers. And that's fair as well. I mean, closed loop systems are very common, but it being someone who's, I've lived on ships before where we have closed loop systems and they all leak. And we've got a submariner, we got Will Lannan who was on a sub for many years, they leak as well. And so you got to consistently pull in that water. And when we have such an important natural resource like the St. Johns River and the aquifer below us, I'm just always concerned when it comes to pulling up water that, you know, is publicly owned for that purpose. And so, you know, I'm just, it's one of the reasons, go ahead. If I could add, the new legislation does require a consumptive use permit. Of course. For the specific to that use. So it's beyond the JEA consumptive use permit. They have to get their own. That's correct. All right. From DEV or from the water management district? I believe it's both, but I would need to clarify, I would need to double check. And that's for 50 megawatts or more. And that's not just, again, but the legislation was not specific to data centers. It is large loads, 50 megawatts or more. And I understand that because we probably can't, you know, just say that it's for this one thing. We all know that from a policy perspective, you can't target that kind of way, but certainly in the, in the amount of energy that you use. Um, that's all I have right now for, for JEA, uh, uh, councilman. Thank you. I want to recognize councilman Matt Carlucci has joined us. Thank you so much. Are there any other questions for Mr. Pope from the council before I turn it over to the planning department? Okay. Helena. So what we have so far at the planning department in regards to data centers is we have an interpretation regarding the large load capacity data centers. So that would be the 50 megawatts or more as defined and described in the Florida statutes that recently passed that Senate bill. Um, the planning department, the zoning code does not specifically call out data centers as its own use. It does fit into when you're talking about the high megawatts of 50 megawatts or more. It does fit into the light industrial description. So we would find a large megawatt. This is right now appropriate for the light industrial or heavy industrial districts. And there is an interpretation that we have made, um, that states that if you are proposing a large scale data center, anything, 50 megawatts or more than it would have to go through the planned unit development process and not only be called out in the written description, but also called out on the site plan. So it's not something you can just include, um, you know, in your written description, among other things, you have to actually be planning on putting a data center in that location. So that would be required to go to city council for approval. Um, that way there can be a public hearing and right now, while the code does not have any other specific requirements on locations, as far as buffers, um, specifically for the data centers, we can work through that with the PUD process. So that's what we have right now. It's not specifically called out in the zoning code. Um, we can't add anything right now to the zoning code anymore, anything more burdensome or restrictive person at bill 180. Hopefully that will change in the next legislative session. Um, and those are the restrictions on data centers. Now we do have the small scale ones that, uh, Mr. Pope was talking about and those would, those could be in a commercial district. They're usually a part of another use and they might look like a warehouse to us as we're looking at them in the planning department and even through civil plan review. Uh, we might not even know that there is a data center use there. There's no restrictions on that. So just real quick to, uh, Ms. Parola. Thank you for that. Or Director Parola. What, uh, so Tallahassee right now has kind of held our arms together on this in terms of being able to add language to our zoning code. Cause right now it's all interpretation. With Senate bill 180. Yes. Interesting. I mean, what a shame if only we had a speaker who was from the Jacksville area who maybe could have changed this, but, uh, I guess he voted for it instead. Go ahead, Chair. That just threw me off. To, um, yes, Councilman Salem. How does the planning department work with JEA through this process that you just described? Is that purely for, uh, for units much larger than five megawatts is the process that you outlined? The process that I, I outlined is for the large scale data centers. So 50 megawatts or more. So it would have to be listed as a use in the planned unit development. And once, um, someone wants to use that use, then we'd work with JEA. We'd start the process. We haven't had to use it yet. An article that I read last week, interestingly, the Wall Street Journal described where other communities are looking at power plants that are being retired as sites for these things. And we have one that will be retired in a few years, obviously. Is that something you've considered looking at infrastructure that we already have for these types of things? Um, not yet. That's what we're hoping, um, as we develop where these could be located and what's appropriate. We're hoping that something like that would come out of recommendations and changes to make as far as our policy and our zoning code. Thank you. Councilman Peluso. Thank you. And again, to expand on what Mr. Pope had mentioned earlier. So yeah, let's say you're doing a 15 megawatt or a 10 megawatt and you want to continue to add to it. Must you get a PUD to add to it? Or right now the interpretation is only for 50 megawatts or more. So the idea of adding megawatts and growing, that might be a concern. And that's definitely something we need to consider if it does happen. Yeah, I think to the point, I think, I think 50 is, you know, that's the max. I think we need to go lower. We should look at if it goes beyond 25 or 30, then you need to go through the PUD process. Um, and I don't know what, you know, a brand new 2,500 home development, what's usually their load? You know, single family homes or something like that. Is that a wild light, for instance, what is wild light pulling? I know that's up in Nassau County, but I'm not trying to be funny, but I bet somebody is going to text me within the next two minutes with the answer to that question that I'm sure. Okay. But point being is that it's good to know if that's what the comparison seven megawatts, right? Because that'll be like, oh, wow, 2,500 homes only has such a lower amount than we might expect. That might be higher. I don't know. I'm just, I'm just spitballing here. Sorry, Chair. And to Councilman Peluso's point about, um, growth. So let's say you come in at 48 megawatts, right? And then somehow you grow a bit more or do we have a mechanism in place to track that? Um, or is it the responsibility of whoever owns that facility to come back and then seek a PUD because they're now reaching the max? Like, or like, is that something we need to? Um, we haven't had to deal with that yet, but I think it would be a joint responsibility of JEA and the city to work together when that comes in because they might expand and ask for power from JEA without even having to come through us because they, for whatever reason, have already been approved for the use. Okay. Yeah. Any other questions? Mr. Harvey? And I'm just here to answer questions, but the reason why we have that 50 megawatt limit is because Senate bill 484 is what restricts her for that. So we can't, the statute itself basically allows for a local municipality to regulate those things as it relates to a large scale data center that's 50 megawatts from higher. So that's why her interpretation does not address that zero to 50 megawatt window or 50 zero to 49. So I guess the, the big elephant in the room is based on that interpretation and what we're hearing. Um, what band, what parameters does local government have to, Oh, sorry. I want to recognize Ms. Norris. Thank you, chair. I think I might actually be about to answer your questions. So whatever, wherever we go from here, we would like it to be a collaborative process between the administration and council, um, and JEA. And so I think you can see there are a lot of questions and what ifs that we haven't had to consider, ideally we have talked about the mayor's very much in a position of fact finding, understanding what we're looking at and how to deal with that moving forward. Um, I think our preference would be if council were to act, whether it's a moratorium or whatever legislation they should choose, that it would give our staff time for some sort of working group or something that with the planning department, probably OED, JEA, and whatever, whatever other stakeholders that we could tackle some of these questions, make recommendations and also identify what can be done now in the meantime and then what might have to wait until after hopefully SB 180 is changed or taken away. Um, so however you guys choose to move forward, we're positioned to assist and build up that path. Um, so just want to keep that in mind. Gotcha. And SB 180 expires in October of 2027. Is that correct? Maybe if we don't have another natural disaster, is that correct? That is correct. So it, uh, well, natural, well, as it's currently written, it will expire October 1, 2027. If we are in that cone or within 100 miles of a named hurricane, it will then extend for a year from the time that we were declared to be within that zone. Um, and then you would have to, you know, unless the state, uh, statutes are amended. Gotcha. Councilman Salem, I want to recognize Councilman Johnson who joined us. Thank you so much. Dr. Johnson, excuse me. Dr. Councilman. Thank you, Councilwoman. I hope as a council, we can let this process evolve over time and not come forward with a moratorium of some sort. Personally, I just think it's very early in the process and we've seemed to have controls in place. That might not be the popular thing to say, but that's what I believe. And, uh, uh, so I'll leave it at that. So before I recognize you, Councilman Peluso, so to pass President Salem's point of a moratorium, um, Mr. Harvey, can you explain to us or for the crowd what that actually means? Sure. So a moratorium is a legal pause on the, well, on the actions that the city has taken at this time. It is not an outright ban. It does not, um, say that you guys will never accept data centers. Um, doing so would be in violation of, excuse me, of the case law and of the state statute that's currently in place. But a moratorium would permit you the time to evaluate policies. Now you can also do that without the need of a moratorium. Um, but the legal effect of a moratorium is to put all the policies in place, um, as they currently are in, um, a standstill. So that way you would not receive any applications or any permits related to moratoriums while you guys develop the policies, um, that are required to better, uh, uh, evaluate these data centers. Thank you. Councilman Peluso. Thank you, Chair. Well, I'm glad we're talking about moratoriums because that's exactly what I've been asking, uh, Mr. Harvey and, uh, Director Parola, um, and Chief Abney to work on, uh, over, over the past couple of weeks and months. And so it was my, it was the intention and I believe, uh, Director Norris kind of brought it up too, doing the moratorium for a certain amount of time, creating a working group, um, that could explore, you know, hopefully future, future fixes, not only to our code, but kind of waiting, waiting out Tallahassee in the hopes that they kind of, kind of get their minds right on this one. Um, you know, again, the, there's, there's going to be a leadership turnover up there and that's going to be a good thing because leadership right now is very pro data center, it seems. But, uh, it's just one of those things that I did want to put into legislation and kind of move forward on and I was hoping you might want to partner with me on this. Um, and, and do we have any, any, I know you guys were working on it before. Do we have any draft legislation or draft work that we can kind of talk about? If you'll, if you'll permit it, chair. Are you formally asking me to co-introduce legislation with you? Not yet. It's a draft, but I do want to, I do want to kind of, uh, give Terrence a little bit of, yeah, I want to give him the time to speak on it. I know we only have a limited amount of time. I didn't want to go guard your meeting. Go ahead. So the draft legislation has not been presented to you yet, so I wouldn't feel comfortable discussing the details of that. Sure. But it would essentially, uh, be similar to what some of the other counties, um, in this state have passed regarding moratoriums. Now, there is a risk that you run with violating Senate bill 180 that must be, um, analyzed by yourself and by council, um, as to whether or not a moratorium would be appropriate and what that would look like. So then through the chair, I mean, have any of the other counties had their moratoriums struck down by the courts or have they been challenged to such a degree? If ours are going to be similar to that, I can't envision that ours would have a problem. To this date, I have not received or any, um, acknowledge of any lawsuits where they have been, um, in legal pending litigation regarding their, those moratoriums. But again, their municipalities do not look like the greatest, uh, city of Jacksonville. They are smaller, uh, counties and municipalities. Understood. Well, consider this analyzed. We can prove, we can move forward. Uh, uh, but chair, I apologize. Thank you. I think on a queue, we have Councilman Johnson and then Councilman Carlucci. Thank you, Madam Chair. And, uh, I've been following this and it's something very interesting. I like to do this. It's just a little easier. Yeah. Thank you. It's me. I just turned it up there. There you go. Um, so it's one of the things I learned from the League of Cities. Uh, my question though, uh, it's more to you through the chair to, um, Mr. Harvey, if, and it may come back, but exemptions with moratorium, if there were one to be put in and would that then on a legal basis, if someone did say, Hey, we want to exempt this specific group, does that run afoul of the law and not the protection? Yeah. And I would think we would need to evaluate that a little bit further in research because I don't, it would depend on the party or what exemption you're specifically regarding requesting. All right. And let me, and being specific, Councilmember Holder, um, if this does happen, one of the things that I would want to exempt it, I've had in the past six, seven months, some meetings, um, there are, and I know it sounds kind of, you know, weird, but I will be honest. They're talking about extraterrestrial data centers, right? And the beautiful thing about, and I see Ms. Norris, uh, with that smile. It's an interesting concept. I've had several meetings with a group, um, a few groups that are looking at it, but the beauty is we have a spaceport here in Cecil, right? In district 12. And so to be able to utilize that and not have the impact of data centers here and to be able to utilize the weather condition, obviously having no weather in space and the coldness and all the things, and they could do the launches from the Cecil Commerce Center, which means, um, we could have access to the capital and revenue that it would take to have that, but not have the environmental impact of the data center. That would be something, like, I don't want, um, I'm not running toward a moratorium. I think there's so much more research that needs to be done before we go in and act something. But if we do, um, I hope that the body, and so I won't put anyone on the spot now, but I hope the body will at least, one of the things that I would do to amend it, or at least if we started out, I hope we can say, if we're talking about data centers that are not terrestrial based, maybe the, the, the space to get it up to space is here at Cecil, but it's not only a revenue generating opportunity for the city, but it also allows something that we know will continue to continue. Thank you. Councilman Carlucci. Wow. Um, I, uh, so there is legislation, uh, being put together or being considered. Is that what I'm hearing? I got, I got here late, so I apologize, but, um, Councilman Peluso stepped away. I think, uh, for quite some time, he's been having conversations with, um, the planning department on, I guess, potentially proposing something that they're still reviewing, but there's nothing, but it'd be a moratorium perhaps. Well, I'll wait till Councilman Peluso comes, because I don't know. I haven't seen it or Mr. Harvey. Um, so as Councilman Peluso alluded to, he was back to answer your question. Well, all you got to say is Peluso and he's right on back here. I'm trying to get an idea of what this legislation is. Is it going to be a moratorium or, uh, you know, let's, let's just. So I'd like it to be a moratorium and then directing the council, uh, to, to create a special working group in tandem with the planning committee planning department and JEA to kind of give us some time while we hope that, you know, Tallahassee changes its mind. Meanwhile, we create a new policy that hopefully we can prepare to put into our code when we get the opportunity to do so. Okay. Um, so, uh, have any of these other counties that, are there other counties that have moratoriums? That is correct. Okay. And do any of those moratoriums have a sunset provision on them? So most of the moratoriums, because it's not an outright ban, they are time limited. So most of them either range from six months to 12 months to 18 months, um, going beyond that kind of could be interpreted as going towards a ban if you're going to like five years and things like that. Uh, so my, my feelings on this whole thing with, with data centers are, um, you know, the, the, um, the AI technology I think is both good and bad. You know, there's, there's parts of it I think that are really great. There's parts of it that, um, uh, make me very nervous if it gets in the wrong hands or if it's used, um, um, if it's used in a destructive type of way. And we know in this world people will use things that were meant for good, uh, in the wrong kind of ways. Uh, and so, um, uh, and so I, I would, I would not be opposed to a moratorium, but, um, but I would lean towards there being some type of, um, for lack of a better word, a, um, a sunset provision so that, uh, it would, it would have to come to an end where there would be an evaluation that would, uh, conclude what we would do from there. And, uh, and then, and then the, I hear, um, concerns about the environmental, uh, effects of it, um, unless we go to the moon with it or something. Um, and, uh, and as crazy as that sounds, it's kind of interesting. Uh, so I hear it's pretty cold up there, but, uh, and, and the reason for the environmental is they use the water for cooling purposes and, but apparently it takes a lot of water. Uh, I don't know if they would use St. John's River water or what, I mean, this is all so new to me. Uh, but, um, but I, I just felt like I, I, um, I don't want to see us rule this type of technology out, but I don't want to see it get ahead of us and, and, and, and us start implementing it when we don't know what, you know, all the, uh, ramifications could be. And, um, and, and I, I, I, um, I, I really want to applaud, uh, council member Holder for having this meeting because, uh, I, I think a lot of people in this town, uh, myself included, have been wondering as we watch on the news, other communities grappling with this and wondering about, I wonder if Jacksonville is going to do anything and what are the problems with it? And gosh, there's some parts about it. I like, but there's other parts that make me nervous. And the only way to deal with something is to grab the bull by the horns. And I think that's what you've done here. And I appreciate that. And that's why you elect bright, new, young council members, uh, because they, uh, have young minds that will take us into the future. And I compliment you on that council member. Thank you. Thank you so much, councilman. Carla, she's there. Uh, councilman, please. Thank you. And yeah, through, through the legislation, it was, we were going to have a time certain where a report had to be provided. Um, and I was expecting it to be, you know, December 27 or January 28 point is it gives us enough time. Let's us go through this council year goes into the next council year as well. That way, if there's potentially new council members that come in and they have their own positions and thoughts that they could be a part of it, you know, if I could extend it a little bit further than that, if I can get us to February or March, uh, of, of 2028, that'd be great. But I think we're going to, we want to make sure that we're still, and I'm not, that we are not as a body, um, you know, trying to go too out of our lane, but I, but I figure, you know, January 28, it would be a good moratorium period where we can kind of figure out what policy we want to do. But, uh, but that's also to be discussed and probably debated as we move this bill forward. If, if this is the bill that we want to, you know, take on, I don't know if you've got other ideas, council woman. So a question for you, I guess, Mr. Harvey on moratorium, do we, does that require a two thirds fold or, um, how do we, how, how does something like that get passed amongst the council? So, yeah, that would be more of a procedural question. So yeah, you would definitely need to get, um, because it will be just presented like any other bill. So you would need to get, um, the, I believe it's a simple majority, um, but it may require, I'll, I'll double check that for you, but keep in mind, um, as far as the, um, data centers go, we have no definition of that in our current zoning code and also our comp plan. So when we're creating language and policies for that, we have to make sure that we're not affecting the current users who may qualify or may fall under a definition of data centers as it's currently provided under the state statute. Um, the state statute does provide a definition for data centers, and then they provide a very specific definition for large load, um, uh, capacity data centers, um, for what that, for what that's worth. And then a part of the Senate bill 484 legislation also provides that the office of it's OPEGA, but forget the full OPAGA. Yeah, it's a office of program policy analysis and government accountability. They will be conducting their own study to talk about or to determine the construction and also the operation of data centers. Um, and so if the state legislature during the time of our moratorium imposes additional, uh, regulations, um, and also preemptions from the city, um, it will be a working policy that the department will have to adopt. Thank you. Um, Councilman Salem. Thank you. There's nothing preventing the president of the council today to set up a committee to begin this kind of work without a moratorium, is there? That is correct. So, I mean, what we're talking about can happen today. That is correct. We do not need a moratorium necessarily to do that. If a moratorium is enacted, it is by the will of the council. So I can't understand, but the point I'm making is there's nothing we're talking about here that they cannot start next week. If there's, if the council wants to do it, that is correct. Thank you. And to your, um, question you posed to me, Councilman Peluso, as far as what I wanted to do, excuse me, my first step was to have this conversation. Um, I've been talking to folks in, in silos and different pockets of the city and different, um, agencies about what we've learned here today. And some of which are new things that I'm learning as part of this conversation, but wanted to bring it to light to the public and different stakeholders to figure out a path forward, but also have the opportunity for my colleagues on the council to hear the same thing I'm hearing. Um, so if it does result in moving forward with a moratorium or, um, hopefully moving our council president to establish a working group, which was for me, the next obvious step, um, we'd build some support for it by having this, this meeting. I think two things can be true at the same time. Like councilman Salem mentioned, we could start this and not do a moratorium, or we could, um, run the risk of why we're in the fact finding process, uh, expedited path to bringing these, um, mega skills back to, to our city just arises out of nowhere and we're blindsided. So we want to be sensitive of that too. But I definitely think that we need to establish a body that gives us parameters and, uh, a time certain on how we're gathering information to figure out the next steps. So I hope that the folks who are here will support me and, and I did invite our council president. He had a conflict today. Um, but to be on board, to get that going. So councilman Poulosso. Thank you chair. I just have another random kind of question for planning. Um, what about noise buffers, things like that? Cause we really haven't discussed the noise pollution as well when discussing kind of these, these hyper scale systems. If you're, if you're JEA, that's something that's really not in your wheelhouse, but for planning department, I mean, do we have to, does one have to plant a thousand trees, 2000 trees? What do they do to help make sure that they're kind of mitigating that for the neighbors? We would rely on environmental quality division. There's the noise ordinance. So there's a certain noise level and they can measure the decibel level. So we would require, we would rely on their expertise as far as what noise level is too much and what buffers might help that noise as we look into, um, different policy decisions. It's just to me, as we've, as the city has grown and evolved, um, I know like there's a lot of old manufacturing areas of the city and now there's all these residential neighborhoods kind of moving around it and there's kind of this weird encroachment on those properties. I just want to make sure that if we, if we get to a point where we okay certain, um, you know, a certain number of these in the years to come, I don't care if it's 10 years or 50 years, I would just hope that we would have massive buffers in place. And I don't know if that's for us, if we're allowed to do that on our own, uh, if we have stuff in our code now, if we could put that into any future PUDs that involve one of these hyper scales, you know, I guess, I guess my question is, what are we allowed and not allowed to do? Because I know we've got a pretty robust tree ordinance. I wasn't sure what that would mean for this in particular. Um, I do. That is one of the reasons why we wanted to require a PUD for the 50 megawatts or more. So we can examine that on the PUD level, as far as what kind of buffers would be needed. Um, also there might be, and maybe JEA can answer this, a certain amount of land that is needed for a certain amount of wattage that you use. Do you, um, Mr. Pope know if, because if it's a larger site, you know, there might be enough land there to create those buffers. So we'd have to look into those concerns as well. The JEA has no specific requirement. It would really depend upon the use. It would, there's no specific land requirement for equated to number of megawatts. What's that? Okay. That's Councilman Salem followed by Councilman Johnson. I say this and don't mean to be provocative when I say this, but technology is growing. We just had a situation recently with flock cameras. And I think we, and I think there's good things with flock cameras and clearly there's some issues with flock cameras, but it's a technology that's out there that if you talk to judges and police people, they were very helpful, but they can be abused. And I wonder if we could include this, if there was such a committee looking at technology more globally than just, just this technology. I just throw that out. Thank you. Thank you for that. Councilman Johnson. Thank you. Council member Holder and Dr. Salem is absolutely correct. I think we can't silo this and look at it as just data centers. A quick Google search reveals the decibels that are in data centers in specificity, um, are much less than 40 decibels, um, per acre. I think it's a very small hum, and it's almost inaudible in looking at other parts of the, like people being able to hear it. But I think, uh, Dr. Salem brings up a much broader idea while it's interesting and we need to look at it. I don't think, you know, obviously sitting on land use and zoning as long as I have, I think those PUD conditions must be on a case by case basis and we should look at that. But globally, I believe that we need to look at technology altogether to see where the city needs to fit. Case in point, I don't mean to bring, uh, we all are watching the news and reading the news and looking nationally and internationally. Um, one of the things that I have a major issue with, um, in New York, uh, Mayor Mondami, uh, who has banned all AI from school systems. Um, fortunately, uh, there are people who are looking at it to say, we don't want to rush down this path on technology, but to ban a technology that will be here. We know that, that AI and the data centers will be here. The question is how to responsibly integrate them into our communities and to use them, um, responsibly and respectfully. As a former classroom professor, I didn't ban AI from my classroom or said, we did say we can't talk about data centers. It's the responsible use of how are we putting these things in our communities? And it it was at the infancy when I was in the classroom every day, but I talked about it and I did research on it. I think we should be in that same space of not just doing our committee, but reaching out to the educational institutions of which we have some fabulous ones in North Florida, maybe having them and commission some research so that we have some tangible actionable data before we start making decisions and banning things or adopting things. We need to just take a look at things. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Carlucci. Okay. So, um, maybe Councilman Salem and Johnston can, uh, clarify what they're talking about a little bit. Um, so we were talking about perhaps a special committee of sorts on data centers. And then, um, the idea I think I heard was that don't limit it to just data centers, but are we talking about then, um, broadening it to like different types of technology as well? Um, um, and if so, does that, um, put at risk the, um, putting the focus on data centers, which seems to be the issue that really, uh, needs kind of right now the most attention. Uh, I'm just, I'm thinking that we just focus on data centers, but if everybody else thinks we ought to be throwing other types of technology in their flock cameras and everything else, I, I don't want to, um, I don't want to throw water on that idea, but I'm, I'm just curious if that's what they were talking about. Councilman Salem. Yeah. I think maybe something that focuses on new technology. I, I believe one of our colleagues actually was in the process with legislation on flock cameras. Um, it, I haven't seen it, don't know what it says, but I understand it was in development when this ban occurred. Um, so maybe something that's more broader, new technology of some sort and, and try to be more broad would be my thought process. That's what I would think. Rockman. I didn't know. He asked the question to both of you. If it's a question, I'm like, I'm all important. I think it's important, right? I think that data centers while, you know, and, and looking at it, it's a fascinating, uh, we're, we're the zeitgeist of where we are right now is so amazing because not only are we coming into discovering new technology, but how do you use it to become more efficient as humans? And I think it's a good thing because while, uh, I gave a talk the other day, uh, while I was at Goodwill, um, I was able fortunate enough to bring, uh, the good trades program to, to my district and Goodwill has graduated like hundreds of students now. It's just a great time. But one of the things I said in my talk is that, um, AI can help you build a more efficient house. It can, it can help you make sure that you have the right materials, but it ain't going to help you put a toilet in. It's not going to put a roof on top of the house. You've got to have human ingenuity to do that, but this can make it more efficient. Well, the, the mother of that is going to be the data center. So I don't think you can exclusively say we can only talk about the center. Um, there are opportunities and, and Ms. Norris, correct me if I'm wrong. I think there is a, if I'm not mistaken, um, we use AI in planning, maybe, or permitting. I think it might be permitting some of the newer things that we're doing. And, and I may be incorrect. I think I read it somewhere that like NLP logics, which is a major, uh, AI company here in Jacksonville, we're using it, some of it here. But what I, I bring that up to say, how can we use the technology to make permitting more efficient if not for the data center? So it's not that we want to stop them. It's, we want to say, how can we responsibly use them? And I think that is what's going to be most important. So council member, while I do believe that some things have to be looked at individually, this, especially with emerging technology, uh, is something that must be, should be, I won't say must, but certainly should be considered collectively. I'll make the last comment on this before I, um, transition to public comment, because I definitely want to make time for that. Um, I actually think we data center should be its own, uh, committee on working group. I think considering where we are and the huge impact it will have on our community, whether good, bad, or bring us into the next wave of being prepared for the future. It, it, it needs its own dedicated, uh, committee. But what I do think is that, um, in my understanding, I know in other conversations that I've had, even with Mr. Harvey, that our existing council committees can, um, have subcommittees for, for certain topic areas. So for me, if someone who sits on TEU, which is transportation, energy, and utilities, I would like to explore the opportunity of bringing emerging technology under that and something that we take up, um, as, as part of our process. So I'm still new here. So we would love to talk with the administration and others to figure out how we make and leadership to figure out how we made that work. But I think that's a good place for it while we still simultaneously have its own committee for, um, for, uh, data centers. Um, I'll take you last, one, one last comment, Councilman Carlucci, and then I am going to transition to Michael. Yes. After I listened to both my colleagues, I just want to make sure I was hearing what they say and they make great points. Um, but Councilmember Holder, I, like you, I think the committee should really aim in on the data centers because that's the biggest unknown right now. So that's, that's just my two cents. And, and, uh, I won't be the one making the decision on that, but that's just my thinking for what it's worth. Thank you very much. Thanks again for the meeting. Thank you. Councilman Peluso had to step away for another commitment. We appreciate him joining us. Um, we're going to shift to public comment. So we have about three minutes per speaker. Um, Courtney is going to set the timer beginning with Rachel Zavala, followed by Jane Shire Sharp, last name, start with an S, uh, followed by Mr. Carnell Oliver. So Ms. Rachel, name and address for the record, please. My name's Rachel Zavala, uh, believe address on file. Um, I am here, uh, representing DSA. I am a graphic designer. I am not a public speaker, so forgive my shaky voice, but I am here because this means a lot to me. And that should tell you, um, that should be an indicator of how much this means. Um, I'll keep it really short. I just want to urge a, uh, moratorium on data centers. I don't think we know enough yet. Um, and that's pretty much it. Thank you so much. Next. James. Name and address for the record, please. Uh, yes, ma'am. James Shoup. Um, you're good. Uh, 5-1-1-2 Camille Avenue, right over off Cassett. Um, thank y'all for having this again. Truly appreciate it, being able to come together. I would again agree with the moratoriums. Um, I would also agree that depending on the size, AKA the acreage or the wattage, if it could actually, once it gets to a certain degree, actually be brought to a vote to the people that way, no matter the council members, no matter who changes over the years, the people of Duval County and Jacksonville still have a say in whether these things will still be approached in the future. Um, I thought it was very interesting too, with the way that you were talking about possibly data centers in space. I mean, we already see them being used under the ocean. Um, so space would definitely be a good plan for that as well. But I just want to make sure too, that we're not over-inflating the idea of the need for these data centers as well. Mainly because I can't do a Google search in the past year without it prompting AI automatically. And I can only imagine how many uses of AI currently are being over-inflated because of those automatic usage. Which by the way, if you put minus AI on there, it will actually take away, uh, the automatic AI response. But unfortunately, you have to do that for every single search that you do. So I just want to make sure that we don't see this as a need right away and that there are possibly over-inflated numbers. And lastly, how he brought up the fact that yes, AI can be used for good or bad. So could guns. And we have regulations on that as well, making sure that we're applying these laws and these regulations to anything and everything that could have a positive or negative effect. You know, in the end, it is in the hands of the people though, and just, you know, trusting your constituents that we also have a say in this and want to in the future. So thank you. Thank you. Mr. Oliver. Uh, yes, my name is Colonel Oliver. Um, I'm taking it in a position of, uh, I'm not for a moratorium because I'm not looking at this from playing the game of checkers. I'm looking at this as playing the game of chess. If that property tax exemption passes, we're going to lose revenue. So if we're going to talk about additional resources, I want, if we, if we do have a conversation about moratorium, I want two specific carve-outs. One that he mentions, and I think another area is in Cecil Field, they already have the basic infrastructure in place. But with that space corridor stuff, who are going to be the customer base? Because I just don't want to get the money off of the people who are building the infrastructure. I want to see if we can get a share of their profits. Because I want to see if we can do a community benefit underneath the 1866 Civil Rights Act, the 81 section, where a portion of that money goes towards grants for small businesses, home ownership, housing assistance. But it's for those that fall underneath the 1866 Civil Rights Act. It's law in the books, but I want Melissa Nelson to enforce that law. But as far as the regulation piece, um, there's a case that I was paying attention to. And there's a big permitting reform legislation. Once Congress comes back, I want to see if the language of the good neighbor rule could be established. Because I'm scared of Colorado right now. And listening to the, listening to that case kind of scares me. Because you got one state that may want to regulate the whole entire country's, uh, toxic pollution. And that could kill our industry here. But also on top of a good community benefit, when I'm also thinking about it in my mind, it's that natural gas turbine. How do we tie that into a potential deal, where we can get whoever may, uh, I would say, uh, contribute to building infrastructure, there's a benefit that they pay for some of the existing costs that we have, and we can cut the rates for the customers. I'm thinking about pieces moving on a chessboard, not checkers pieces. I'm trying to keep my main pieces. I don't care about the ponds, if you understand what I'm saying. People are not clearly thinking about what we're actually dealing with. And what I see is an opportunity for us to offset what we're going to lose. And I yield my time with that. Thank you so much. We have Melanie Carr, followed by Bonnie Barnard and Dr. Linda Woodard. Good morning. My name is Melanie Carr. My address is on record. My concern about adding additional data centers is with the energy generation. I did note that you said that one of the things we might do is have the data centers generate their own energy. So the question to me is, how are we going to make sure that there's not an additional pollution load for the city of Jacksonville? Because if they're going to do their own energy generation, they might put in a solar farm on top of the data center so that there's very little environmental impact. Or they could stack a bunch of diesel or natural gas generators to generate that power and massively increase the pollution load. And depending on where the data center itself is located, that could impact communities. So that is my question, is that are we going to address how additional energy is going to be generated? And it was also mentioned that you might take a facility that's being deprecated and have the data centers use that facility. Well, does this mean that they're going to keep that energy generation online? Because part of the reason for taking those things offline is because they're using obsolete energy generation. And if the data center just moves in and continues with that energy generation, that means obsolete systems that are creating an increased pollution load will continue to function. Thank you and have a great day. Thank you. Bonnie, name and address for the record, please. Bonnie Barnard, 1276 Nantucket Avenue. We already know about the harmful things that data centers do. And you all are talking about it as if it's almost a done deal, because you're so open to it. Now let's talk about why. They never, when you hear on television, they never finish the story and say why. Let's get to the root of this. I'm, I looked at someone from, from, called Richard Werner. He's a German banking and development economist. And I am quoting everything. This is from him, Richard Werner. We are so close, and it's scary, but it's real. Quote, we are so close to the scariest, most dystopian system. This is what the drive to build all these thousands of data centers is all about, to micromanage the world's population through what they call the new financial world order. AI is really about that. We're heading towards digital control systems, where we have no more control over our liquid assets. It will be programmable, permission-based. So only what the central planners allow you to use your money for at that time and place and location will be permitted. And if you're in the wrong place, it's not going to work. And if you're buying the wrong book, it's not going to work. Your money won't work outside a certain zone, whether it's a 15-minute prison zone or whatever. It is the totalian dictator's dream come true. This is the why. It's all about all the logistics, about constructing and building and all that stuff. This is another thing from Katherine Fitz, who was the Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under George Bush. What the AI centers are for primarily is to build a digital control grid that will manage all the data they have already collected from us. It needs to operate globally. Then it needs local hardware, like the cameras, the cell towers, the satellites, and these data centers. These are all components of the local hardware. Now we're talking about what the real thing is. And this is why Werner said we're so close to the scariest dystopian system. Thank you so much. Thank you, Ms. Barnard. Next, we have Dr. Linda Woodard. No problem, Dr. Linda. Name and address for the record, please. My name is Linda Woodard, and 14098 Summer Breeze Drive East, Jacksonville, Florida 32218. And Councilwoman Holder, I thank you so much for having this initial conversation because I think the community at large is not really up to speed on data centers. I just think we just don't have enough information about it. Even the smartest of us are not smart enough. They say AI is changing every eight days, AI changes, and so nobody's an expert in it. As I was looking through the news and saw on camera that your president is having a summit with all the leaders of AI. And the one leader that had enough nerve to say that AI is dangerous and risky is the CEO of Anthrop. So even the leaders of this technology is saying, you know, be aware and be careful. They are meeting to make the regulations, self-regulations, and determine what the policies are. My question is, are we going to take that information as it trickles down from the leaders that are making that information and making policy about it? How are we going to integrate that into what we're doing here locally? But my question was really to JEA. What will the impact be on our JEA bills? I know mine is going up. And the environmental impact on having a data center in a specific area, and what is the range of that? I know, Dr. Johnson, you said something about decibels, and you may not be able to hear it, but what is the range of the data centers in terms of the water and the environmental concerns that it would have across the community? So that is really what I am concerned about. And I would ask if it's possible that citizens be included on any of these subcommittees, and just not the council people and the general council, so that you have at least a representation from the community. Thank you very much. Thank you. Hillary Leveron, followed by Mr. John Nooney. Hi there, everybody. My name is Hillary Leveron. My address is 6231 Bartolf Avenue. I want to start by saying Councilwoman Holder, thank you so much for hosting this meeting, and to all of y'all for being here, including all of y'all. Thank you so much. This is a crucially important topic for us to all be having. I am a little nervous. I am a behind-the-scenes person, so forgive me if I stray a little bit. I would like to start with my key objective, saying that I would absolutely urge for an immediate, at least temporary, moratorium on any further data center build-outs until there can be much further discussion about it. Not to be rude, but as I sit here today, I hear a lot of pants down conversation, frankly. A lot of pants down. And much of that is by design, right? The rollout of this technology locally, but across the country and across the globe, has been absolutely rapid fire. And for what reason? Why? We must always pause, and we must always ask why. Now, I appreciate that some folks have taken the angle of how can we possibly make sure that our community is benefiting financially moving forward with this. I appreciate that very much. I personally would like to point at the idea of what are we using AI for currently? Because we hear a lot about the future. We hear a lot about how it's going to solve the climate crisis. We hear a lot about how it's going to solve these medical mysteries and unlock all this scientific exploration. What are we using it for now? We're using it for civilian surveillance. We're using it for price gouging shopping? Surveillance shopping? Really? I mean, these are the kind of things we're being inundated with. As someone else mentioned earlier, you can't do a simple Google search anymore without immediately getting the AI. Like, it's every part of our life just overload with it to get us so used to it. Well, we overlook the environmental build-out impacts. We overlook the struggling energy grid throughout this nation and locally. Mr. Pope from JEA, you already said many times, currently JEA is unable to answer the need without doing further build-out. And as all of the folks here that are getting JEA bills, we're getting letters every day saying, you know, we're having our rates uptick so that we can do the infrastructure repair and that is needed for us moving forward. Are we now going to be on the line for paying for these data centers as well? Like, there needs to be a pause so that the whole thing can be looked at more thoroughly before we race ahead. And I just want to close with that. Thank you very much. Ms. Leverona, you did not sound nervous at all. Thank you. Lastly, we have Mr. Nooney, name and address for the record, please. Sure. Hello. I am John J. Nooney, 8356 Baskin Road, Jacksonville, Florida, 32216. And I just want to say welcome to the city council. Thank you. Councilwoman Holder, you're at large, you know, representing the entire city. And, you know, uh, I'm just going to start off. I just want to say amendment three. And, uh, and I wrote on here, Monet Holder, data center park on Pottsburgh Creek in district four, CPAC three, school board district three, next to a no array FEMA house. You know, I've been to lots of meetings in other counties and the discussion has been the size of the data centers. We hear of the large data centers. What is the size of the smallest data center currently in operation in the country? Now I've heard of closed loop systems with reclaimed water. So what is the size, location, developer of the smallest data center in the country? Now, I hope that there will be a follow-up by this committee that can be shared with the Northeast Florida Regional Council. That's seven counties. They're even here in the room. They should even have a seat at the table. And the point is, it can be an immediate revenue generator. And, you know, the feedback that I've had or heard from other counties is that these things are in people's back yards. So what is the size of the smallest? It's a national issue. So anyway, I just want to applaud you for having this. And I hope at the next meeting, we'll have answers to what is the smallest one that's currently being used in the country. Thank you. Thank you so much, Mr. Nooney. And Mr. Pope, just to reiterate, because I heard two questions about the impact on JEA bills or the surrounding areas, you did mention that there would be a large load tariff implemented by JEA. Is that correct? Yes, ma'am. Our large load tariff is under development. It will ensure that data center developers or any large load customer pays for their own infrastructure and does not impact customers and other rate classes. Thank you so much. So that concludes public comment. And we'll begin wrapping up this meeting. I think to reiterate, this will not be the last conversation that we're having in the last time that not only we continue to hear your concerns in hopes of addressing them, but working with my colleagues on the council to just concerns, get the research that we need to make an informed decision, whether it's a moratorium or not, and making sure that we are protected locally if and when data centers come into our area. So I thank you all for being here today. And we'll keep you posted on our upcoming meetings. We are adjourned.