Okay.

All right, everyone.

Uh thank you for your patience.

We're gonna get started.

Uh city council meeting today's Wednesday, June 17th.

And we're gonna start with an invocation and a moment of silence, please.

Okay, thank you.

And a pledge of pledge of the flag.

And she's gonna public religious stands.

One nation, okay.

Um move on to the roll call, please.

Miss Gerlock, here, Miss Santos here, Mr.

Bender?

Present.

Miss Moda, here.

Mr.

Napoli.

Here.

Mr.

Pungo?

Here.

And Miss Affa is absent.

And um Miss Alpha gave me a message earlier.

She's been admitted to a hospital, and uh she told me it was okay to mention that.

So she is uh unfortunately not gonna be able to be here, but um she definitely wanted to let us know that um she's working on getting back for our next meeting.

So um we're gonna keep moving.

We're gonna start with courtesy of the floor.

This portion of courtesy of the floor is for anything that's not on our agenda.

So if you're here to talk, if discuss data centers, please wait till we get that to that portion of the agenda.

Uh this portion is for anything Allentown related that is not on our agenda.

Uh, do we have any cards?

Yes.

Uh Eduardo Aviles.

Welcome.

Well, my name's Eddie Avilas, and I live in the city of Allentown.

On June 6th, I was arrested for obstruction against the parking authority.

They were doing something illegal.

I stopped them a week and a half later because I came at the senator.

I got charged with obstruction.

During my arrest, I was uh manhandled.

It was um excessive force by officer roe.

During my arrest, another officer came around the car, picked me up.

They had me my hands behind the back.

I said some foul words, okay, which I'm allowed to.

It's under my constitutional right on the first amendment.

Okay.

He goes to proceed to pop my arm, pop my shoulder, okay, slammed me against the car, I had to go to the hospital.

Spent two days in jail, no medical service while I was in there.

That proceeded to call me, excuse my language to everybody in this room.

I did not say these words.

And I don't tell police officers did.

He says, Eddie, you are a fucking faggot.

Eddie, you are a faggot.

Stop.

Those were his words, not mine.

I have to put them on record because this is a federal hate crime.

He said that based on rumors that are based about me in this community.

Okay.

That officer along with the other seven should be reprimanded.

He should be fired.

Officer Rose should be fired.

You guys gotta investigate.

This is a public record now.

WFMZ, I would like to speak to you.

Because this has to go public, and you guys gotta do your job and investigate a right to know.

If I'm blind, call me a liar.

Santos, as City Council President, I'm here to affirm that two of your gay um counterparts here have not reached out to me.

And they claim to be from the community.

I'm not saying their names, but I am CC Girlak and Kali Da Alpha.

You we spoke.

With all due respect, we spoke.

Christian, I thank you for being a leader in this community, and I thank you for being a leader in this community.

These two, I don't know what we gotta do something about it.

If it comes out to what I'm saying is true, and she did not say reach out to me, her being an advocate for the gay community, it shows that she's not here for the people.

Because it doesn't matter if she likes me or not.

I'm still a citizen of the city of Allaton.

And I'm a public figure.

The biggest public figure in this city.

Okay, and I help people every single day in this city.

Mind you, we were in the middle of an outreach.

I had a car full of donations.

Okay.

I had a little, I had a father and a six-year-old daughter who are homeless.

Who for a week we couldn't find no resources, not even from you.

Okay?

To find it, but we did.

We found, but this arrest and this police brutality and his federal hate crime happened in front of that family.

Just so you know.

And he wants, he's giving his verbal statements because he was there.

Issa Sanchez is in Puerto Rico right now.

She is the founder of CSU and Power and others.

Nonprofit in Bethlehem, who I'll be working very close with who I was conducting the outreach with.

Okay.

She's gonna be dropping her statement too.

She couldn't be here in person to give it to you.

I demand transparency, integrity, and accountability.

Okay.

Right now, he swore an oath to the Constitution.

This is a federal hate crime.

And if you look at the body camp and the dash camps, you see that all seven of those officers did not report that crime.

They should have.

They should have reported that officers stood on integrity and had honor, and they had none.

So I demand a full investigation into my arrest.

And I demand that my charges be immediately dismissed.

Okay.

That's all I have to say.

And to the data centers, your bills go your water bills gonna go up five uh uh in five years, 100%.

And your electric bills are gonna go up 100% in five years.

You're ready for that.

Thank you, God bless.

Gary.

Um thank you.

And um and we have another one, another courtesy of the floor.

Okay, Gary Fritz.

Good evening.

My I do uh homeless outreach with Eddie.

Um your name for the record again?

Gary Fritz, F R I T Z.

Um I do outreach with him.

We were doing an outreach on that day.

Um Eddie is correct, they were we had done finished up, went to a local uh pizzeria shop, and in front of a little girl, six-year-old little girl, and her father, and Isa Sanchez.

Um these people witnessed it when they were detaining.

There was no resistance on detaining, and he was jacked up after he was handcuffed behind his back.

Uh, another officer came up and jacked him up, popped his shoulder out.

Um to me, that's police brutality because there was no resistance, and I would more than think it was probably intentional, especially along with the multiple times why he's in handcuffs.

You're an F and Faggot.

You're an F and Faggot.

I find that highly offensive, number one, because I'm also gay.

Um, and especially in Pride Month.

So shame on the Allentown police force that they're even allowed to use this.

I have tried to contact multiple people over the weekend.

I took sent out you to your fit your official uh email, and you have yet to respond.

Candida, understandably, I respond sent an email to her, but if she's in the hospital, I can understand that.

But not getting a response from you, Cece.

I think something's wrong here.

You shouldn't be in the position if you're gonna be just direct it to me.

That's how we're not calling out other colleagues.

Um after he was imprisoned, he was uh immediately thrown in the hole.

Um he specified multiple times he was injured, and they refused to give him medical attention when he was released Monday afternoon.

I am the one who took him to the hospital to seek medical attention, and I'm well aware of what transpired medically there.

I was in the room when they did the examination and everything else.

So my concern is here, I think city council needs to request an internal investigation, bare minimum, uh, an internal investigation.

Tried to reach out to uh the police chief multiple times, who has yet to call me back.

We were in on the let's wrap wrap it up quick.

Okay, the Monday to find out who not the arresting officers are, but all the other officers involved, and no one would give that information.

And as we kept waiting, waiting, waiting, an additional four officers come out in the lobby basically for an intimidation tactic.

I asked that city council request that all cameras from the lobby and all body camps be preserved could because they are gonna be requested.

Um thank you.

Yep, thank you.

And um, on behalf of city council, I did reach out to Chief Roka, and I want to make the following statement.

Um my statement is our understanding is that you did speak with Chief Roka and lodged a complaint, and a member of the Office of Professional Standards reached out to you and took your complaint.

At this time, it's an it's under investigation, so what you just asked for, it has already happened.

It's already under investigation, and unfortunately, city council cannot comment on an ongoing investigation at this time.

So I just want to make it clear according on behalf of council, I reached out to the police department, and they said that the complaint was taken and it's under investigation with the office of professional standards.

So that's where we are.

I can't give any more because we just yeah, so just complain.

Right.

Because we don't know the name.

Yeah, okay.

And that's something that um unfortunately I can help you with tonight.

We we took your courtesy to the floor.

No problem.

That's all I gotta say to you.

You read that letter, this is something new, right?

Um what I've now my response to that letter is I'm demanding from you and every single one of you to demand transparency, integrity, and accountability.

That's the only three things that I'm asked to for.

Okay.

Sounds good, that's fair.

It has to come from each and every one of you, especially you CC.

Okay, all right, thank you guys.

So any other courtesy on the floor?

Yes, sir.

Kyle Ropsky.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

And uh welcome.

Thank you.

Good evening, everybody.

My name is Kyle Rapsky, uh 528 North Burke Street.

I'm chair of Allentown's Environmental Advisory Council.

I'm speaking here tonight to raise awareness and encourage participation by the public in the city of Allentown's first ever climate action plan.

The AC has advocated for the creation of a climate action plan for years here in the city, and now with the support of city council and the administration, that work is finally underway.

The most important part about this plan is that it is rooted in community engagement and public participation.

Climate action plan should and will reflect the priorities and experiences of the people who live, work, and raise their families here.

So far, we have had two out of three public meetings in phase one that were very successful.

The next upcoming meeting in person will be on the south side.

It will be on Saturday, June 27th from 2 to 3:30 p.m.

at the Fearless Fire Company.

If you register beforehand, there are $25 stipend available on a first come, first serve basis.

If you're unable to make that meeting, you can also participate and provide input in various other ways virtually.

Also, residents can suggest pilot projects that the city may test as part of the climate action plan process.

These projects can be physical structure of some kind, a public education campaign, or anything in between.

This is an extra special part of the plan and work with uh in coordination with Small Cities Lab because we're more or less getting a trial run as to see what works and it's before we sink a larger investment into it.

There's also a short survey available to help everybody prioritize strategies for inclusion in the final plan, and we all love a survey.

Uh with that said, if you're a resident of the city of Allentown and you care about your neighborhood, public health, housing, transportation, parks, flooding, extreme weather, or the future of our city, your voice matters.

You do not need to be an environmental expert to participate.

You can find all this information at on the city website at Allentown PA.gov/slash climate action plan or through the Allentown EAC website at Allentown EAC.org.

Again, we have an upcoming meeting on Saturday, June 27th, South Side, Fearless Fire Company, and there's ways to engage online where you can share your input about what we should consider in the climate action plan.

Again, if you care about our environment and care about things in our environment, please come to the South Side meeting where you can share whatever you think to be included in our climate action plan.

So we hope to see you there.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Okay.

So we're gonna continue, we're gonna roll along here.

We're gonna start with I'm sorry, um, Ms.

Garlock, go ahead, sorry.

Yes, sorry.

Um, I would like to make a motion to suspend the rules so that we are able to add a municipal curative amendment to the agenda for consideration.

Um after reviewing Bill 20, I just want to ensure that council has more options to consider.

Um so that's my motion.

Okay, to suspend the rules so that we can then um discuss a municipal curative amendment.

I'll second.

Okay.

So we have a motion by councilwoman Gerlock, second from Councilman Vinder.

And we just take a vote.

Is that correct, Miss Montero?

Yes.

Okay.

Miss Gerlock, yes, Miss Santos.

Yes, Mr.

Bender.

Yes.

Ms.

Moda.

Yes, Mr.

Napoli?

Yes.

Mr.

Punko.

Yes.

Six years and no nays.

Okay.

So that uh that carries.

My point of order.

The only addition is that uh before you speak about this and the agenda is to read into the record the specifics of the resolution.

Should I do that now?

Okay.

All right, so the uh curative, the municipal curative amendment uh resolution, which hopefully everyone has in front of them.

It's coming around.

Um so uh introduced by city council on June 17th, 2026, resolution initiating municipal curative amendment review.

Resolved by the council of the city of Allentown that, whereas Allentown City Council finds the City of Allentown zoning ordinance is substantially invalid, specifically the ordinance does not provide for data centers, and whereas Allentown City Council has determined that it is appropriate to review and prepare amendments to the zoning ordinance to ensure that the city of Allentown maintains a legally valid and defensible zoning scheme regulating data centers and similar high intensity uses.

Now, therefore, be it resolved that Allentown City Council will consider and prepare a curative amendment to the city of Allentown zoning ordinance pursuant to section 609.2 of the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code in order to review and correct the declared invalidity during said period of time.

Any and all applications for any type of zoning permit and or zoning approval for any use and or development related or similar to a data center shall not be accepted or considered.

Being exempt from any stated and or implied time limitation for rendering a decision as may be provided for under the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code Act 247 and or the City of Allentown zoning ordinance until the expiration of 180 days or the enactment of a curative amendment, whichever occurs first.

And that's it.

Okay, thank you.

And uh we'll revisit this later on the agenda at the appropriate time, right?

Ms.

Garlock?

Yes.

Correct.

Okay, just so we're on the same page.

Thank you.

Okay, moving along, we'll start with contract approvals.

R 70 is the authorization for contract with urban design ventures LLC and the estimated sum of 100,000 per contract year for consulting services needed to assist in the completion and implementation of the city's 2026 CDBG ESG home annual action plan and its 2025 to 2029 consolidated plan by completing planning processes, providing guidance and technical advice to city staff, preparing and submitting plans and reports in IDIS and submitting environmental reviews in heroes.

Seven proposals were received.

Contracts shall be for one year with four additional one-year renewals beyond the contract expiration period.

Okay, thank you.

Um any comments from my colleagues?

R 70.

Any comments from the public.

Okay, can you call the vote, please?

Uh Mr.

Bender.

Yes.

Ms.

Girlock.

Yes.

Miss Moda.

Yes.

Mr.

Pongo.

Yes.

Miss Santos.

Yes.

And Mr.

Knappley.

Yes.

Mr.

President, you have six YAs and no nays.

Okay, moving along R 71.

R71 is the authorization of cooperative contracts in an amount greater than 40,000 dollars to provide the city with various goods and services for informative technologies limited limited limited.

Okay, thank you.

Uh any comments from the dyes.

R 71 or from the public.

Okay.

Mr.

Bender.

Yes.

Ms.

Girlock?

Yes.

Miss Moda?

Yes.

Mr.

Pongo?

Yes.

Miss Santos?

Yes.

And Mr.

Napoli.

Yes.

Mr.

President, you have six A's and no nays.

Okay.

Next up, minutes of our previous meeting from May 20th.

Mr.

Bender.

Yes.

Ms.

Girloch.

Yes.

Miss Moda?

Yes.

Mr.

Pungo?

Yes.

Miss Santos?

Yes.

And Mr.

Napoli.

Yes.

Mr.

President, you have six years and no nays.

Okay.

Also, I'd like to remind visitors of the city council are encouraged to park in the government deck next door to City Hall and to see our city clerk for a chaser to pay for your parking.

Any old business.

Okay, we'll move along into reports.

First report, uh, council held an executive session consulting with council on Monday, June 15th, related to active and pending litigation.

City Council will also continue meeting with our local partners to strengthen relationships and improve collaboration and coordination for our residents.

Our next special meeting is with the Allentown School District on June 25th at 5 30 p.m.

in council chambers.

That is a Thursday.

So it's it's an odd day, but Thursday, June 25th, 5 30.

Also, our special meeting with the Allentown Housing Authority has been rescheduled to August 12th.

Budget and Finance, Chair Pungo.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

The committee has not met on June 3rd, and the next meeting is scheduled for 5 30 on June 24th.

Thank you.

Community Economic Development, Chair Gerlock.

Oh, yes, thank you.

The committee has not met since the last council meeting.

The next meeting is scheduled for 6 o'clock on June 24th.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Human resources, administration, and appointments.

Chair Binder.

Thank you, President Abley.

The committee met on June 10th and forwarded an item to tonight's agenda.

I'd also like to ask the city clerk.

I know that we had planned on scheduling a follow-up meeting from the last one, so if we can just work on getting that scheduled, that'll be helpful.

Thanks.

Okay, thank you.

Uh parks and recreation.

Chair Santos.

Thank you.

Uh this committee met on June 10th, and the next meeting is not yet scheduled.

Thank you.

Public safety, Chair Afa.

The committee has not met since the last council meeting.

There are no future meetings scheduled at this time.

Okay.

Public um I'm I'm sorry.

Okay, Ms.

Haf is not here.

Yeah, I'm okay.

Yeah.

Public works.

Uh, we're gonna go back to Vice President Mota.

The committee met this evening and forward and I don't favorably on tonight's agenda.

Okay, thank you.

And rules, chambers, intergovernmental relations, and strategy.

This committee has not met since the last council meeting.

There are no future meetings scheduled at this time.

Um, our controllers report.

Uh there is a travel expense report on attached to the agenda.

If you go on to online to Granicus, which is our software that has our agenda, you're able to access this report detailing travel expenses.

Um we don't have a submission from the mayor, so we're gonna move along to ordinances for final passage.

We'll start with Bill 20.

Bill 20 amends part two general legislation, chapter 660 zoning, article five uses, table 660-4, use table, and section 660-38, manufacturing and industry group, adding the use category, data center use, and Article 14 measurements and definitions.

Section 660-135 terms beginning with D and Section 660-149 terms beginning with R, adding the definition of data center, data center accessory use, and renewable energy.

Okay, thank you.

Uh, we'll start with comments from the dais on Bill 20.

Or do you or do you prefer me starting with the administration?

It doesn't matter.

All right, we'll start with the administration.

So, Mr.

Kane, our managing director, go ahead.

So we make big decisions here that affect the lives of people who live in this community for years, maybe decades after we all leave these positions and data centers and how we treat them, where we locate them, and the safeguards that we put in place to make sure that they operate safely, quietly, and in harmony with our neighborhoods, are exactly one of those decisions.

Last week we had the privilege of listening to dozens of people who are passionate about this issue and who look to us to make the best decisions in order to keep this community safe while planning while meeting the planning, while meeting the requirements of the Pennsylvania municipalities planning code.

Our residents should know that if you take the time to come out and be heard, we will listen to your comments with an open mind.

Um I would like to frame the issue and answer many of the comments that were made in the interest of us making good a good decision here tonight.

This body has before it this evening two courses of action that it can choose between.

On one hand, you have the option of voting to enact Bill 20, which strengthens our zoning code and creates a special exception designation for data centers.

It creates an expanded setback, adds additional layers of safeguards that include an environmental review and hearing before the planning board and places additional requirements on developers who seek to locate data centers in our city.

There is concern that's that from some that Bill 20 doesn't go far enough.

Perhaps it doesn't, but it's something.

It creates a process for a much more exhaustive review, and it begins to provide some safeguards for an application submitted to locate a data center in our city tomorrow.

The other mechanism that you have available to you is to initiate a curative amendment, which a municipal curative amendment, which self-declares.

Well, Council Burst and Girlak just read it.

Uh it self-declares that we recognize that our zoning code is invalid in this area and gives us 180 days to initiate and pass an amendment to our own zoning court.

Our council and this administration thinks that this option is fraught with unknowns and risk that could result in even more unwanted development.

It likely would take the decision-making power out of the hands of city council and the community and put it in the hands of lawyers and judges.

In our research, no community of our size and no community in the Lehigh Valley has followed this process.

The handful of communities that have are small rural communities that don't really compare to the to the city of Allentown, where the third largest city in Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Scrainton, Harrisburg, Bethlehem, Reading, all the cities to which we compare have not followed that approach.

There are some of us that just don't want data centers at all ever to be located in Allentown.

But that train has left the station.

We're required, whether we amend our zoning ordinance or not, to permit this use somewhere.

We can't pretend to permit it.

We can't put so many restrictions on it that it's prohibited in practice, if not in law, we have to create a reasonable scenario.

That's what we're required to do by law.

So there have been five broad areas of public concern with Bill 20 that have been brought to our attention through public comment.

First is the setbacks.

A setback is how far inside the property line an improvement can be located, must be located.

Bill 20 calls for 200 feet, which is one of the largest setbacks in our code.

We got 200 feet from the setback for mining operations.

Um in the interest of brevity.

But we we could consider there was there was talk of a thousand foot setback.

It doesn't make sense for our community.

We couldn't identify one place where there was a thousand foot setback that would make sense.

But if you enact Bill 20, we could quickly amend to go to 500, which is the best that we think we can do.

Um it is important to note that Bill 20 would explicitly call data centers a special exception use, which means no use could be allowed without a public hearing from the zoning hearing board with feedback and review from the planning commission and environmental commission.

That's a new feature under Bill 20.

The second broad concern was noise.

We think that our noise ordinance already provides remedies for any noise that can be heard beyond property lines.

And if we need more specific data center regulations, it's an easy matter of two weeks to amend our noise ordinance.

Um and the bill, Bill 20 also specifically calls for a sound study before and six months after the use is established.

The sound study must assess persistent tonal sounds, hums, and other low frequency or ambient noise and identify recommended mitigation measures.

Third was disp this disposal and decommissioning.

The bill specifically calls for bill 20 specifically calls for an electronic waste plan outlining procedures for safe removal and recycling or disposal of server infrastructure, hazardous materials, batteries, electronic waste, and related project products, which will apply in cases when the data center is updated or decommissioned.

But these these must be considered before any use is approved.

Um, we permit this use in two zoning areas right now in Bill 20, IG and IM.

We want to make sure this bill can survive a legal challenge.

When defining a setback buffer, the result must still reasonably allow this use in the city, and Bill 20 would allow cities data centers in IG and IM zoning districts through special exception approval by the zoning hearing board.

This includes approximately 13 to 38 out of Allentown's 34,000 give or take parcels, which is less than 0.1% of the parcels in Allentown.

Um if we limited this to IM, only six to fourteparcels would meet the setback requirements, and we're concerned that we'd be open to exclusionary zoning challenges.

Um, an environmental plan to review the impact of use on utilities and the effective ratepayers of for water and electric.

Um of the things that that was brought up.

Uh so after six hours of public comment and a hundred or so person hours of work, two hours of executive sessions, and three packs of nicotine gum for me, and countless conversations with interested parties.

Here's what the administration recommends.

If we want to provide the most protection and safeguards for the city of Allentown, as we look to thoroughly vet proposed data centers, the administration the administration urges you to vote in the affirmative and pass Bill 20 this evening, and then quickly seek to add further safeguards through follow-up amendments.

Why do we recommend this?

Why not a curative amendment?

Why not a municipal curve of the curative amendment?

Bill 20 has the effect of a curative amendment in the sense that it outlines the that it outlines the process by processes by which we will consider data centers.

Um expect to come up with after the 180 days that you're giv that you give yourself to cure.

Um our council, our attorney who advises multiple municipalities on their zoning code and who has 30 years of experience has advised us that if you did not pass Bill 20, then none of the safeguards in this bill will be in place for the next round of data center applications that could be made.

And we're aware of a few.

So everyone in this process wants more safeguards, right?

The public here that tends today, every member of council, the administration, we all want the same thing.

But to not vote to support Bill 20 is to make the perfect the enemy of the good.

There is a uh also there's a Supreme Court.

There's a common or Commonwealth Court decision, Gallbreath versus supervisors of Northampton Township.

And part of the finding of that of that uh decision was that in the event that a landowner's curative amendment is brought, the mean uh the municipality may not uh undertake uh municipal curative amendment.

And we have we we have a curative amendment proposed by a landowner already, I think of which you're all aware.

Um, if you seek a different curative amendment rather than the amendment that is Bill 20, you will spend a lot of time without the you know instead of in the interest of not rambling.

Basically, you'll be leaving this community unprotected for six months in order to get a few hundred more feet of setbacks and include some language about noise, which is what you'll come up with after a curative amendment.

They're all things we can do more easily, more quickly if you pass Bill 20 and we just quickly amend.

So it brings to mind during the Vietnam War.

Uh there was that old adage we had to destroy the village in order to liberate it.

I urge you not to destroy Allentown's ability to protect itself in order to come up with a better amendment in six months.

Okay.

All right.

Uh thank you.

And um we will take comments from the diet.

Um or can I also mention that we have Jill Seitz from the planning for the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission here with us today as the administration's guesses, she's available to answer questions.

Okay.

Um you have any statement or any mean uh can you can you please identify um the organization and just some background for the public so that they're aware of who you are and who you work for?

Yes, absolutely.

Um good evening, everybody.

Thank you for having me.

My name is Jill Sites.

I am the chief community and regional planner with the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission.

I'm a certified professional planner with the American Institute of Certified Planners.

I'm also a proud Allentown resident.

Um but in my professional role with the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission, we are the uh county planning agency for both Lehigh and Northampton Counties.

We are also the Metropolitan Transportation Organization for the entire region, so a quasi-governmental role.

Um, but specifically in my role at LBPC, I work on land use and planning, and I work with the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code on a daily basis.

Um we review all subdivision and land development proposals proposed by property owners across the Lehigh Valley.

Uh we review all zoning ordinances and saldos uh proposed by our 62 local governments.

And we also review all curative amendments, and all of those roles are identified under the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code state statute as our legal role.

Um in addition, um, over the last year, LBPC has been working um to provide expert planning guidance and training that helps our municipalities apply current best practices to regulate uh land use impacts through that effort.

We've been working with all of the region's local governments to adopt their own data center zoning regulations uh similar to Bill 20, in order to provide for local protections that would protect communities from data center impacts.

And so I have prepared um a few additional remarks, if I can make those now.

Um LVPC did review the proposed uh Bill 20 zoning ordinance amendment.

I understand that our comments were provided as part of the meeting packet.

Uh from a planning perspective, this ordinance is a timely and necessary effort to address the evolving land use of data centers, which carry significant impacts when municipalities do not have clear standards in place.

Data centers raise legitimate land use questions on impacts to public health, safety, and welfare.

The way a local government addresses those concerns is through regulations that say where those land uses are able to go.

Um in Pennsylvania, it is required for municipalities to provide for all land uses within their jurisdiction.

So communities must say that data centers can go somewhere.

Um in addition, local governments can require applicants to identify, study, and mitigate development impacts in accordance with what the state law allows.

Um the city is very fortunate to have an exceptional professional planning staff that developed the proposed ordinance.

And um we know that that was developed through months of research, uh training and consultation.

The city's planning staff attended LVPC's trainings and meetings around data center land use guidance.

We understand that they reviewed best regulatory practices and then worked to prepare an ordinance that really goes the distance in placing the burden on the applicant to mitigate land use impacts.

The ordinance does require applicants to provide studies on environmental impacts, noise and vibration, address utility capacity, heat mitigation, emergency management, visual design, and many other considerations that LBPC is certainly concerned about around data center land uses as well as what we've heard from members of the community.

And where zoning can require mitigation, the proposed ordinance identifies those obligations that are on the applicant within the limitations of what communities can do in Pennsylvania.

Local ordinances do need to be legally defensible, enforceable, and grounded in the authority granted by the municipality's planning code.

And so we also wanted to speak to the um the approach of taking the municipal curative amendment.

A municipal curative amendment is in effect a process that the city can take to declare that its zoning ordinance is invalid, and that begins a process to cure that invalid invalidity.

While a municipality is working to develop that cure, which would ultimately be a zoning ordinance to uh cure the deficiencies within that time period, the municipality is protected from other curative amendments on the same issue for up to 180 days.

But the process cannot stop development applications.

Any developments filed within that time frame would still fall under the city's currently adopted zoning.

The curative amendment process also does not have any impact on development applications that had already been submitted.

And in Pennsylvania, the pending ordinance doctrine does not apply to land development submissions.

So in effect, um any developments that were submitted during that period that the municipality was considering a cure would still fall under the old zoning, and it could not fall under the ordinance that the city was in the process of developing as part of the cure.

Local governments can only directly address land use impacts when their adopted ordinances do contain those clear enforceable standards that they'd like to see from proposals.

And that's why LVPC's comment letter on the ordinance supported the city's proactive approach, and that's why LVPC is urging the city to move forward with Bill 20.

Um doing so would not stop the city from revising or updating updating its regulations no matter how soon or how far in the future from that adoption.

Um we know that data centers, like all land uses, are continuously evolving, and so future updates will certainly be necessary to the city's ordinance.

But based on what is known right now and the content of the ordinance, um this ordinance would put strong defensible standards in place and give the city uh substantially more tools than it has today to address those land use impacts when additional data center developments come in.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

So I will take comments from the dais and uh on Bill 20.

And um would you like to go first?

Ms.

Grolock?

Sure.

Um, so a couple different things.

Um as I looked up exclusionary uh zoning, I saw that there were uh two different types.

There's de facto and there's de jour.

Um and um my understand uh in reading both of the definitions, um it seems as though one would have to prove intent, and there would also have to be like pretty much no place for them to build or very, very limited um uh number of parcels uh for them to build on.

With that said, um everything that has been said, anything we will say, anything the legal team has said, anything our solicitor has said is a legal opinion, and some other attorney could read the exact same thing and come up with a different interpretation.

The only person who could actually give a ruling is a judge.

Not that I want to get in front of a judge, but I yes, it's important to seek legal opinion, but we've all seen that in any situation there are multiple legal opinions.

Um that's why we have courtrooms, so they can argue it out.

Again, don't want to get to a courtroom, but just want to put that out there that even just as we've explored this, I think anyone who I know I've heard different opinions from different people, legal opinions from different legal professionals on different days at different times, and it can be a bit much.

So I so I think we have to uh take that under consideration.

Um I am a proponent of a curate, a municipal curative amendment because it does um it slows down the process.

I know we keep hearing the applications would still be submitted, yes.

And um what I would like to hear is once they're submitted, that doesn't underneath a curative amendment, um, that doesn't mean that that process continues and they go to zoning and they go to planning and they go through the whole the all the steps.

It just means that we as a city have acknowledged to them that we have received their application and we inform them that we have a 180-day curative amendment.

Um so what is your understanding of what would happen?

I'm a developer, I want to build a data center, there's a curative amendment in place, I give it to the city of Allentown, you take it, then what?

Yes, so in the MPC, which I actually brought that here with me, it does say when a curative amendment is being pro is being considered, the municipality is not required to entertain or consider any landowner's curative amendment.

Right.

So curative amendments do fall under that.

Yes.

But land development would still fall under the city's saldo, which outlines a process where once an application is received, the city has a certain number of days where they must respond, they must take action, it must go to these certain meetings, and all of that is outlined in the ordinance.

And the curative amendment process does not affect that.

And similarly, with any zoning use changes, so a zoning application could come forward.

The city already has a process that it legally must follow to handle those applications, and a curative amendment has no bearing on those applications.

So, and this might be for an attorney, um, or you might have been familiar with other uh municipalities.

So in other municipalities that have already went through and passed um this curative amendment, and they have included in their resolutions language that states what we just stated that zoning permitting and zoning approval would not would not be accepted or considered during this 180 days.

Their legal team and these townships reviewed it just like our legal team is, their elected body reviewed this language just like we're reviewing it, and they passed it.

Uh can you speak to that?

Sure.

So and obviously not legal counsel, so um, any opinion that you did really receive from counsel obviously is one thing, but what we do know is what the law specifically says you can do.

And in Pennsylvania, the law is enabling, right?

So the law says what cities can do.

If the law does not say cities, you may you may also not consider land development and zoning applications, then that would be one thing.

But it only says that municipalities do not need to consider curative amendments of the same subject.

And from a regional perspective, we saw this a little bit with the warehouse booms over the last couple decades, where it was a similar situation where you know the the logistics industry was booming, warehousing development wanted to come in.

Um several legal challenges happened that ultimately resulted in those those major warehouse developments out in like um Western Lehigh County, for example, and so um you know it it is ultimately up to the city to decide if they want to take that legal risk, but historically, if the law doesn't say you can prevent development, that's it, there's never been an instance that we know of where a municipality has won when that has been challenged.

Understand.

Um thank you.

Um and I just um the term risk comes up a lot when, especially in context of the curative amendment.

Um I think it's also important to not to acknowledge that no matter what we no matter what decision we make, there's a risk, no matter what we do.

If we pass Bill 20 as is, there is a risk.

There is a risk that during the six months or the three months or the two months that it takes to make these amendments after Bill 20 passes, that data centers will apply under those um not as strong uh parameters.

That's a risk.

Um are there risk with a curative amendment?

Of course.

No matter what we do, but we must, and we, as a third largest city in the state of Pennsylvania and is the largest city in this region, we've got to know the professional way.

We've got to stand on business.

We've got to be about something.

And I feel that if we're gonna pass a bill knowing it's not strong enough, really we're gonna do that.

We're gonna pass a bill knowing it's not strong enough.

When there's another mechanism for us to use to make it stronger.

I don't think we're that body where we're gonna knowingly willingly pass a bill that we know will allow data centers to set up across the street from a residential area near a camel lot for children.

Like really that's not what we should be doing.

Let's take this extra time that is allowed allotted to us by law and do it right.

And even if at the end of it, all we've got are two changes, those are two freaking good changes that we have a dynamite bill, and we will keep our community safer and still be following the law.

Um I am applauding CED, applauding the administration for doing the research as soon as members of the public came in and expressed some of their concerns.

And so, because of that, if we did pass a curative amendment, the timing would be the same.

The research is there, the legal team is there, so it wouldn't necessarily take all 180 days, but at least during those 180 days, there would be some protections, even if it is just from curative amendments from uh landowners, at least there would be some level of protections.

If we go and we pass Bill 20 as is, and then we go back through the process, planning and zoning and public comment, and then it's gonna it's gonna be time that people can come in, a developer can come in and set up the data centers and these current zones.

Some of you on council have expressed concern about having two different zones available and um having what, like 13 different areas, and I understand it's been said, oh well, it's Allentown, so they wouldn't be as small.

Maybe one wouldn't be very large, but 13 of them, that's a lot.

So I think um I think these are all things we have to consider.

Um I am gonna wait to have any sort of vote until after we've heard other options as well, and we've heard from the public and whatnot.

But um, I do strongly urge you, because if you're if if your risk of if if you are avert aversion to risk, and that's what's keeping you from going toward the curative amendment route, there's risk no matter what you do.

So it just depends on what risk you're willing to take.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um Mr.

Pungo, go ahead.

No, I definitely have to, you know, agree with CeC here.

I think I think Dr.

Um Director Kane kind of mentioned this a little bit earlier.

Like this is a tough decision.

And that you know, I think I hope the public understands that we absolutely want to do what's in the best interest of everyone in our community.

We hear you guys, we want to make sure that every decision we make here is the best possible decision.

Uh and and as council personed, I think a lot of us have gone back and forth.

We've sought legal uh, you know, uh opinions, we've kind of tried to do the risk analysis and kind of go through different things.

Uh and I think we've all had our own kind of understanding of the potential risks and potential uh benefits of one versus the other.

Um and I guess I think the biggest thing for me is I know that there is a desire from the community to uh you know have more protections for the community, and I think that's absolutely something we can and should strive to do.

Um I'm curious if there's potentially any more mechanisms.

I I maybe we'll dig into that a little bit more.

I would like to maybe hear some more comment.

Um, but I do have a general question based off of the comment made earlier.

I think the warehouse boom is actually a very like, you know, substantial kind of comparison.

And if I could just ask a question, and it's just you know in the instances where municipal curative amendments were used there, you mentioned, you know, they didn't really have success.

And what were those arguments that were made that kind of led those curative amendments to not be successful?

So in the in, and this is a generalization, but in those instances, a developer came in and said we would like to put warehouses in this location, the municipality said, no, you can't do that, it's not in our zoning, and then that went through the court case process because municipalities must provide for all land uses in their jurisdictions.

And then that went through the court case process because municipalities must provide for all land uses in their jurisdictions.

They were not able to just say, no, we don't regulate them, and then ultimately because they were not regulated in the ordinance, that's why they were able to the developer was basically able to put them where they decided to, because that was curing the municipal ordinance.

So by pursuing this curative amendment route for the entire length of period of time that you're pursuing an amendment, you're leaving the door open with no protections on data centers to come in during that time period.

And and just to be clear, that's not speculation.

That's based off of what occurred previously in other municipalities around us with warehouses.

Correct.

Okay.

Well, and and again, I can this this kind of goes back to again a lot of the what we're tasked here today, um, and then really considering all the different options.

And I know as I've kind of gone back and forth with different things, I I consider the the idea of Bill 20 kind of being the baseline and you know, what can we do to potentially strengthen some of these items that we want to do as quickly as possible, whether that's through some sort of you know, pending ordinance, if we go in and and and you know, beef up some of our noise ordinances to address some of the larger concerns with noise, and if there's something we can do to specifically say we would like the administration to go through and do a revision to the code and strengthen that and and basically put it in writing in the record that the city is pursuing this direction and that we're gonna do more, and that in the meanwhile, even if it's potentially suspending the rules tonight and doing something to back up our noise ordinances or anything that we feel based off of public comment, we have the power and authority to do under city council to say, hey, if bill twenty passes, it also needs to pass, you know, it also per this resolution will need to follow our noise ordinance as in the and kind of beef that up tonight.

I mean, I I'd be willing to maybe do something like that.

Uh but I mean, I just I just think there's so much, and I think we want to do what's best for our community.

And um, yeah, I I definitely, you know, I think we all feel the weight of making the right decision here.

So uh we don't take it lightly.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And uh quickly, I'm I just want to quickly add, um, I want to set the expectations.

When someone has the floor in this room, whether it's one of my colleagues, the administration, uh, or you, the members of the public, all I ask is that we show respect and professionalism and not make interruptions, not um talk over them, make any sounds.

So I just want to put that out there.

Let's just be respectful.

Everyone's gonna have a voice, everyone's gonna have an opportunity to say what they're you know, what they're feeling and what their opinion is, um, so we can get through this.

So thank you.

Um next up, Ms.

Uh Vice President Mota, go ahead.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

We all have a lot of concerns about data centers.

Um we heard about the electricity going up, we heard about the assessive amount of Florida that they use.

Um, and there's more negative um than positive.

Um we all know that with Bill 20, it's only 200 feet instead of 500, right?

The question that I have if we pass Bill 20, how will it affect the Mayus Avenue data center?

Bill 20 has no effect on the AdMaius data center, it's already in process.

So they have nothing to do with each other.

It can't.

At this point, no other action that the city can take can impact the MAS Avenue Data Center.

And I just wanted to make sure that you know that is on record.

If we pass Bill 20, um, how long will it take to amend it?

Do we have to go through the whole process?

That's what I would like to know.

I feel like we can we have Jen from Jen Gomez from planning.

Um hi, good afternoon.

Pardon my uh awkward uh position here, we'll get to see it.

Um if we amend the zoning code, the zoning code has uh a process that it needs to go through.

Um it starts the custom here is to start with introduction at city council, and then it gets referred to the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission for comments and also to our Allentown Planning Commission for comments.

Um those comments are all collected back, it goes to CED, and then it comes back before you.

So that process does take a couple of months, um, which is why we've been at it for a while with uh Bill 20, but um we could certainly start that process as soon as possible.

There are other parts of the code, like the Onoys ordinance specifically that are much much easier to amend.

Um so those are changes that could uh come back very quickly.

Can we expedite that?

I mean, is there anything we can do to expedite that?

Um I think uh if we worked with L VPC and our own planning commission, I think we could try to get that as quickly as possible, and um yes, absolutely.

Um just a follow-up.

I mean I I know the initial one took three months because of how substantial it was.

Is there a chance that amendments could be could be done faster since they're not so extensive?

Is that is that possible or yeah, I think it depends what you're amending.

I I think that the biggest feedback that we heard is um regarding the setback requirement, which I will note that even in a current ordinance it sat at 200 feet, but I it says specifically that the zoning hearing board can require bigger setbacks and bigger buffers and bigger berms, and that's all part of the evaluation process.

So that's not to say 200 feet is the minimum it's gonna we will get it's the 200 feet plus anything additional if it's adjacent to sensitive um uses.

So uh please do read the language regarding that within the bill to see how already, as written, there could be additional setbacks required by the zoning hearing board when they decide on the use.

That said, um, we could come back.

We've evaluated uh the remaining parcels in both IG and IM in every variation of the setback, whether it be 200 feet, 300 feet, 500 feet, 1,000 feet, and we could tell you roughly approximately well, actually exactly how many parcels would be affected based on the different um measurements that would be taken, um, which are measured then from the sensitive uses.

Thank you.

So, in other words, no matter what we do, it may have seven is a done deal.

They have submitted.

Ouch.

I live right across the street pretty much.

And my neighbors are not happy.

I tell you that.

Uh council person is not that it's a done deal.

It's a nothing that we can do tonight will affect the process that it's already going through.

I mean, it still has to be heard by our planning commission, and there are lots of points where where the public can have interaction with with that project.

It's just not this.

Can you can you tell the public when is the next meeting so that they can all show up at the planning?

Yes, um, it is currently not scheduled, but we will get that scheduled and work with the applicant to get something scheduled and make those dates known as soon as possible.

Um, they were previously scheduled and then they tabled.

Um, so we will get all of that um set shortly.

I hope it happens soon because, like I mentioned before, you know, the community and also my neighbors, they're they're they're really afraid of what's what's gonna happen to the neighborhood.

We understand, and I also want to emphasize that through that process, while the zoning may not be in place to address that specific use, all of the city's codes of ordinances are all still applicable.

So everything else within the city's authority can still be applied to that project.

And just using fire as an example, there's extensive fire requirements for the conversion, and they deal specifically with data center uses.

So there's specific provisions included within the fire codes to address that.

There's specific provisions within our saldo for traffic, for um stormwater, for sewer, for um all of the other code requirements, as well as the city's general obligation to protect the neighborhood.

So those will all be evaluated as part of that development with or without this zoning in place or any zoning in place.

Thank you.

Okay, and just for the record, can for members of the public, your position in the city balloton?

Planning director.

Okay.

Um go ahead, Mr.

Binder.

Go ahead.

So just real brief with the planning commission meeting.

I know that unrelated to this uh bill, but if it could be possible for consideration, I know the meetings are generally during the day, and and that's that's understandable.

If it's possible to have a second dairy one in the evening for this type of bill, that would be great to be considered, I guess.

So that maybe people could have an opportunity of coming to either one and then voicing before the vote happens.

I think that would be if if you if you can consider and appreciate that.

But the reality is that people work and taking a day off.

I mean, would it be helpful as you consider that and approach the planning commission if it was a unanimous decision, like um if entire council urged you to do that?

I mean, I think that the entire council is urging us to do that.

Especially, like, do we all urge them?

Yes, okay, yes.

So I I think we can certainly explore it.

And one of the things we've prepared the planning commissioners for is that this might be one or more meetings.

Um we may have to do this a little differently than we've done other meetings.

One of the specific requests we've received is for Spanish translation, so we're looking specifically into that, so we can provide some sort of simultaneous translation.

So all of this to say we are trying to make sure that that process is accessible is as accessible and transparent as possible.

Thank you.

And so on to my other question.

Sorry.

So I know that in the past meeting there was some statements that, and I think this is more towards Miss, but anyone can answer.

Your experience, since you've seen now so many across the counties, I guess my question is where do you feel?

I mean, I obviously a very rural farmland's going to be different with setbacks and that kind of stuff, but where do you feel we compare it with what is on Bill 20 with what you've seen on all of the other ones you've gone through?

Sure.

So the end um as I mentioned, we review all zoning ordinances.

We've reviewed all the data center related ordinances that have been proposed.

And the city's draft ordinance is more comprehensive than the majority of other ordinances we've received.

And I that's why in my remarks I wanted to mention the diligence of the planning team, because all of the land use impacts that we typically comment on noise, environmental, water, electricity, heat is one that not all communities address.

What we found in the uh Bill 20 ordinance is that where the city could impose requirements or uh regulations, it did so ask for the studies that are needed to assess those impacts.

But there's limitations as far as how far communities can go with their zoning, what they can really get away with as far as what they ask developers for.

And even in those instances, the city has still encouraged those things to happen.

So one example is municipalities can't require developers to pursue um sustainable energy sources or or alternative um energy sources, but that is still in the ordinance as something that the city is encouraging and identifying that as something that it would like to see, and that typically does have a positive response from developers, and they're willing to kind of make that happen when they're able to.

But again, there's only so many things that the city can require in its ordinances, and that's been backed up with case law as well as what the MPC says can happen.

But um, in this instance, the city has gone beyond just what the bare minimum is.

Thank you.

And uh, of the other ones that you've worked with, have any of them um also included going through an environmental um in our case we have a commission for it.

Are any of the other ones doing that sort of thing, or is this kind of a unique feature for Allen Zone?

Not many communities have a environmental advisory council, and so um it's something that maybe one other, like a um a highly populated suburban community had done because they had a EAC.

Um, but in that instance and also requiring an environmental um study on the impacts to natural features, those are two that we really like communities to include and and not all do.

Okay, thank you.

And then another question, I guess, with respect to the um extremes of looking at things.

I know there's been uh uh you know questions about doing a thousand feet, doing you know, whatever numbers those are.

Am I understanding this correct?

And I don't know if this is who the answers this question, but um, if we go too far on some of these things, not even from an exclusionary perspective, but they wouldn't block an applicant from coming in.

They would uh expose us to the point where we could the deficiency or the the exclusion is the extreme setback, this the center or the applicant could continue, and that could end up going back more severely than what we would have set at 250 or 500.

Is that a is that a fair statement?

Absolutely, and again, that's something that we saw in the in the examples of the warehouse developments where some communities who preferred not to have warehouses, limited warehousing land uses to the point where they really weren't even feasible to be developed in their communities, and those are very frequently challenged.

But did did they go back to the point where the so we added at a thousand?

It was too exclusionary, they still were approved to be a center, but they fought the um the thousand-foot setback.

Does it then go back to since we said a thousand and that's not okay to whatever the judge decides at that point, or where does that end up landing?

Um in this case, I'll take that question.

I'm Mike Hanzo, the zoning supervisor.

So, in a circumstance where an applicant felt that the setback was too broad for them to be able to meet on their parcel, the most direct course of relief would would probably be a request to the zoning gearing board for a dimensional variance.

It's well established that if there's some kind of criteria of a particular site where it can be used for a permitted use, but for some natural inability to maintain strict technical compliance with the zoning hearing board, the applicant can request relief to allow them to make reasonable use of their property.

If the setback were too large, even if it wasn't legally challenged by an applicant, the likelihood is that we may see a lot of variance requests.

Variance requests do go to the zone and hearing board, obviously, and get put before a public meeting where objections can be taken, but it does add a level of uncertainty where the setback may be decided on a on a case-by-case basis.

The burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the hardship and fairness.

But within Bill 20 is written by requiring any applicant to the zoning hearing board, even though 200 feet is the minimum setback, it already requires some level of conversation on what would be an appropriate setback, it just creates more predictability, it eliminates the possibility that the data center developer comes in and says, okay, this thousand foot setback, I can comply with everything but the setback, I want 750 feet, and here's my very expensive legal team that I can afford who will barrage you with information for hours until you relent to a certain extent.

So it is better to be able to write some a reasonable standard in the ordinance, right?

To be clear, what what you just said was the developer gets to propose the remedy rather than us.

Okay.

And then from for the administration, um just going down the line.

So one of the questions I had without, I know we're talking about timeline, how we can expedite things.

If we have, I know you had mentioned five things, there may be more that come out of this evening, and I know that's kind of a a little obscure to make a commitment on, but I guess my question is could we have a firm commitment that if we schedule a special meeting to because I believe the first step would be for us to introduce that?

Is that is that the in the in the cadence here?

Well, then we present to you, right?

I mean, typically we do prepare an ordinance for your consideration.

If you have something specifically you want put in, feel free to give that feedback to us in advance so we can prepare an ordinance that reflects your um your thoughts.

So in the case of um, just because I'm asking this because I know that you've all have been working on some of these these things already, um if the stars aligned and we said, hey, next week we're gonna do a special meeting explicitly to receive the ordinance and start the process, is that something that would be even remotely possible or two weeks out, or could we get some sort of idea of what that would look like where the process is starting if Bill 20 passes?

So I think it depends on how much you want changed.

So if it's really just replace 200 feet with 500 feet, that's an easy strike through underline.

We could do that tonight.

Uh or I mean we'd have to put it together, but and and bring it back to you.

Uh, once we get into more detailed um requirements than that, like there's uh a lot of good ideas that were brought up.

One of my favorite ones that I that was raised was regarding um decommissioning and requiring an escrow fund.

Certain elements like that uh we don't know yet whether that's legally defensible, whether we can move it forward.

So if we have to do a lot of legal exploration, that's where we run into some unknowns.

But uh changing of a permitted use district or a pain changing of a distance requirement, those are um like simple strike through and underlying changes.

I'll also say that um Kyle Robsky is here from the Allentown Environmental Um Advisory Commission, and they're looking to hear all of the feedback that was received and um uh consolidate it together.

They've got special meetings planned, which I'm sure he'll he'll comment on and give us some feedback.

So simple changes are can be produced very quickly.

Anything more complicated does require a bit of uh a legal analysis to make sure that um it would be defensible and could hold up should this proceed to any kind of future validity challenge, we wouldn't want to adopt something that the courts would rule out as unreasonable and throw out our entire ordinance along with that.

So do you feel that if we take kind of the the two trains on two tracks approach of if if the administration came set back and said, hey, these three things we can do in a week, we can start that process, and then the the two or three that need to be or whatever comes out for things that come out tonight or things that come from council, those could be the ones that might take two or three weeks, and we basically start both those down along the line, it goes through planning at two different stages, and we're just that that's a that would be an acceptable process, if I'm understanding.

Yes, correct.

Okay.

Um, and then one more here.

Oh, yeah.

The other question I had, and this is with respect to the land order, um landowner curative amendments.

And with, and this is in conjunction, I guess, with the curative amendment process.

If someone applied right now, so if an applicant wants to in this case do a data center or whatever they want to do, that's not a known use, and they would would they be required.

I mean, I understand that the city might say you align with this, but would they be required in that case to file their own landowner curative amendment?

Like is that is that kind of like default right now, or would it fall under something else?

Like most applicants, they're only interested in making their project happen in the most expeditious way.

So if there's a similar use, or or they'll approach the planning commission and say, here's my project, here's what I want to do, they'll kind of explore what the ordinance says, what the zoning says, and see what makes sense.

If the ordinance is exclusionary, or if they feel like they just cannot make their project happen, then they will pursue a curative amendment route.

Um it doesn't guarantee them to make their project happen, so it really kind of depends on what the situation is, but that's really what they're looking for.

But a curative amendment is not a required process.

It's an option that the law gives landowners to correct deficiencies in local zoning because communities must provide for all land uses.

A good example is 2401 did not apply by a curative amendment, right?

I mean, that that was just uh they applied both as a uh um for land development as well as a curative amendment.

But the application was an application, the curative amendment was to defend against our change, right?

The yeah, the curative amendment, and I'm not sure if I'm now discussing legal matters.

Um I think so.

Well, they submitted an application that was under just they just submitted an application.

Okay, so I guess and that was I know there was there's confusion on some of these things because that was under the older zoning code and now we're under a new zoning, we all these things happen simultaneously, which makes this a kind of rubric's cube of of decisions.

But um correct, we're going through a transition anyway.

So yeah.

But but speaking directly to right now under the current past, we're in 2026.

If someone wants to apply right now, are we saying there's a place for you under this condition, or in most cases are we saying that there is a bit of a deficiency here and they would need to file a landowner curative amendment?

And in that case, it's the most likely procedure would be that the application would be put in.

Obviously, applicants are also motivated by the path of least resistance as Ms.

Seitz from the planning commission indicated.

A curative amendment is more legally exotic than just simply putting out a zoning application and and seeing how it's interpreted by the zoning officer and how it's how it's interpreted by the municipality.

In most cases, applicants don't want to immediately go to the most complicated procedural instrument they can find.

They'd rather just just get the zoning application out there, take the take the temperature of the municipality and see where it goes.

If they receive an unfavorable interpretation, what's more likely than the curative amendment probably would just be a simple straightforward zoning appeal.

Once again, that's a very familiar, that's a very well-understood process.

I do believe any municipal or any developer's attorney might also be advising them to follow the follow the procedure that's most likely to get them to the desired result with the least work with the least expense with the least time commitment.

We see how much we're discussing a curative amendment at at this juncture.

When the standard interpretive and variance procedures are followed, those are generally cleaner.

So that would likely be the path the develop a developer would take if they wish to pursue a data center, they'd probably be contacting us.

They wouldn't necessarily just slam the city with the curative amendment right out of the gate.

Okay.

And then uh Ms.

So based on that, and I'm not looking to punch holes in any arguments with curative amendments in this process, just trying to understand it.

So the protection in your opinion that we would have is against something that's very rarely used in this case.

Yes, it yes, it is pretty infrequent.

We maybe would review historically we didn't really see very many curative amendments at all.

I think in in the nine years I've been at LBPC, I've reviewed four or five.

Uh cues.

Um landowner curative amendments and no municipal curative amendments.

Okay.

I think that's it.

Thank you.

Sorry.

There's a lot of questions.

Okay.

Thank you.

So and so you you said you haven't seen any municipal curative amendments in your time at the valley planning commission?

No, we have not.

Okay.

Typically, municipalities go through just their regular zoning ordinance amendment process.

Point of clarification, then I thought she was, I thought you were responsible.

I thought someone up here asked a question about the effectiveness.

Council person Pongo asked it about the effectiveness of municipal curative amendments, and then you gave an answer based on the effectiveness of municipal cure amendments locally.

I believe my recollection is that the question was on the municipal effectiveness when challenged through a curative amendment.

Okay.

All right.

So when the municipality is being challenged by a landowner curative amendment.

But we do not have any scenarios, not case law, but any kind of example of a low locally a municipal curative amendment, its effectiveness, its lack of effectiveness.

We have nothing.

So we're that is pure speculation then.

No municipality that I'm aware of has enacted a municipal curative amendment and successfully deterred development or zoning applications as part of that municipal curative amendment process.

Locally.

Correct.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Any other questions or comments from the dais on bill 20?

I just want to pick up Mr.

Bender's train of thought is timing-wise.

So I don't know how the security amendment vote's gonna go.

And if we end up voting on bill 20, I don't know how to vote.

Um so timing wise, if we were to have a special meeting next week, um that'd be I don't know, maybe the 24th, maybe.

Um maybe a different day that week.

Um we're not in session about the following week, um, July 1st.

Um, and then we the next official meeting day would be what the July 15th?

Correct.

And so we would introduce it on July 15th.

So about a month from now, we would ensure finally just get it introduced.

But but we can call uh to Mr.

Binder's point, I think we're here where he was going, and I'm I'm in favor of it if needed.

Um just let me know.

But I we could call a special meeting on the first uh July 1st, or um today's the 17th.

We can do it as early as next Wednesday, Ms.

Montero, is that so then we would have to remove the agenda item tonight that cancels the July 1st meeting?

Um no, because that's that's our city council meeting.

We can call a special meeting.

A special meeting.

And uh, that's something that could be done if if requested by by my colleagues and I'm in favor of it, I would be happy to schedule a special meeting either on the 24th, which is a week from today, or the first, which is two weeks from today.

Gotcha.

And and then so that gets introduced, and then um if it sounds like there are two things that um uh has already explored, like legally, um, and there's one thing with the decommissioning that they would have to explore.

I say we put it on and let them explore, you know, and if we have to take it off, we have to take it off.

Um so then they would be doing that after introduction, and um then it would go to the Lee Valley Planning Commission, and then you all have 30 days to rule.

We'll turn it around quicker than that.

Okay.

Um how I mean, okay.

So then, and then so say it was two weeks, uh, so then now we're looking at like mid-July, and then it goes to Allentown Planning Commission, and they have 30 days.

Are are they able to go quickly too?

So the Allentown Planning Commission meets uh, let's see, the next meeting would be July 14th.

Ideally speaking, we'd love to have LVPC comments before that meeting, um, but we'll just have to work together on the timing.

And we do frequently work together on timing reviews like this with the question.

Can they go at the same time?

Can you both of you go at the same time?

There's different meeting dates.

Can you change them?

We don't have to bring um, especially smaller scale ordinance amendments, we don't have to bring the committee and commission.

Well then that takes a coordination element out.

Okay, so let's just round about we're at July 14th.

It's about a month out, and then it would go to CED, that's my committee.

I'll meet the 15th, and then um it would go back to council, which is also the 15th.

So we could do a CED meeting right before the council meeting um on July 15th.

I'm with you.

Yeah, let's do it.

Point avoid or a public hearing.

What's huh?

It would be oh man, there's always something.

Okay, public hearing.

Could we do the public hearing right after the planning commission, Allentown Planning Commission?

So I do think we'd have to look at a calendar because there's specific legal requirements for when you can host a public hearing and you have to advertise it no more than this, no less than this, and it has to hit the newspaper a couple of times.

So I mean I would give us a little bit of wiggle room to make those um newspaper advertisement requirements.

Who knows the dates?

How long does he take to put it in the news?

Okay, 30 days.

So now we're looking August 15th.

Well, that's a Saturday.

So let's say August 17th.

Um we okay now we're it was looking good for a minute.

Um just real quick just on and not again, we're this is a little off the cover of how fast we're trying to move things, but for the public notice on the paper, do we have to have the actual like the bill's not part of that?

So we can put a notice in 30 days before can we not or no?

We never done that.

I think you have to advertise the advertising.

Okay, I didn't, I wasn't sure if it was included in the advertisement or not.

So okay, never mind.

And to be fair, I think there's some level of again, depending on the route that it goes, there these could be some very simple items that potentially we would have the language, we could do it.

I understand that it still would have to go through the process.

It's not like even though we if we feel it won't change, it's not like we could advertise it before it got approved, but still some thoughts.

I think I think there's a little maybe less complexity, because I do think, like I mentioned earlier, there's some stuff that we could do as councils specifically related to some of the stuff like noise and some stuff that we could like do within a week, two weeks, not even like two weeks again if we do something tonight and and get something in the books, but I don't know.

Okay.

Yeah, um, so then maybe August, end of August, we're looking at it.

Can you can you hold that thought for a second?

Do we is there anything regarding pending ordinance when it comes to the process we're going through once it's introduced and it's in Ms.

Gurlach's committee?

Does it have any standing at that point, even though it hasn't been specifics because it pending ordinance is about giving notice to any potential landowners.

And so my so my question and I was gonna say specifically, I think this actually stuck out to me when Ms.

Seitzwits did earlier.

You did mention that I guess according to the MPC and your you know the L VPC's understanding of it, that the pending ordinance doctrine doesn't apply to land development specifically.

And that was actually through case law a few years ago that that was determined that pending ordinance doctrine wouldn't apply to a land development or subdivision application.

I think we would have to also talk to the legal team because if this is a change of use and they come in for the change of use first, then I believe the pending ordinance doctrine would apply.

But um, I think that we would need to get some legal advice on on that.

I was thinking when it hit Miss Gurlach's committee.

Like to me, that's uh yeah, that was the I'm I'm not speaking about LVPC or the Allentown Planning Commission, but once it hits your committee and we forward it, I thought that would be like the the line in the sand, maybe.

Typically, for a pending ordinance, it's valid when the city's enacted it, described its intent to amend an ordinance and also advertised for a public hearing, then the pending ordinance doctrine would apply.

Um I'm hearing about exceptions for land development submission, so I think we would just need to assess that.

But either way, the zoning would be in place for the use.

So that's meaning potentially mid to end July is if we were starting that point of posting, that would if if effective could start kickstart the the process of holding things to your point.

And there have been plenty of times in CED, we have discussed things that have yet to have a vote from the planning commission.

They've been on the agenda.

I can't tell you that I don't believe we've ever brought anything to CED without a plan.

That's planning commission related that does not have a planning commission action.

We typically do not schedule those until the planning commission has taken action and we've documented that action.

So I dang it, I can't remember the specific.

I just remember, and it was like a couple months ago.

Whatever the whatever the item was, whatever the agenda item was, I remember asking and then being told it's still in the planning commission once it or no, it has to go to planning commission, and then once it goes to the planning commission, then it will come back and we'll have a vote on it.

We just discussed it.

So would just would having it on the agenda as just a discussion item, not an actionable item.

So the pending no, the the pending ordinance doctrine has two qual two two elements that it needs to meet.

And one is that you've announced the city council hasn't announced it's an intent to amend an ordinance, and also that it has been advertised for a public hearing.

Okay, so um go ahead, Mr.

Brennan.

And the uh the publication requirements are a minimum of seven days prior to passage for the MPC.

So I have the newspaper takes a couple days to get that to us as well.

So I have one follow-up question unrelated to the exciting scheduling process we're trying to do here.

Um for consideration related to this bill, but maybe not.

Um I would like to other municipalities explored or have implemented a kind of catch-all um in their zoning code to say when it doesn't, it does this.

Um I know we uh you know I'm just spoken that break briefly, maybe not affiliated to this, but I'd like to at least get it that process evaluated.

I'm not saying that that's a good thing or a bad thing, but I think from when we look at the current data center used in the old zone code, and that had that been in, that would have at least kicked us towards you know, the zoning hearing board for something or or or some other thing.

So if we could just maybe look at that, that would be nice to to explore.

The um the current ordinance does have specifications as to what to do with unclassified uses and how to treat them, and it specifies it goes to a zoning officer interpretation.

That's how it's written currently.

Okay.

Um we've heard through all of this some discussion that instead of defaulting this to default it to the zoning hearing board.

Um it that's a a bit trickier of an item because you don't want to have a ton of zoning hearing board agenda items either.

But um, I think it was Upper McConji had some really great language that I liked from their code that said in cases where it's more intense or where a use cannot be decided, the zoning officer then can forward it or should forward it to the zoning hearing board.

So it kind of gives uh second level of review.

So I think language like that could be incorporated.

Okay, perfect.

Thank you.

That was more later.

So I just want to correct the record.

So for the June 3rd public hearing, um, the legal ad hit the paper on May 17th, and then May 27, so two weeks.

Okay, uh, thank you, uh Ms.

Ortega.

Any other comments from the dias on bill 20?

Yes.

My only last comment is I would like to hear public comment.

Of course.

That's next.

So okay, so we're good here.

So now we are going to move to the public comment portion of the agenda.

Um, I believe everyone who wants to speak left a card with Ms.

Ortega, so take it away, please.

Kyle Robsky with the Environmental Advisory Council.

All right.

Good evening, everybody.

Uh my name is Kyle Rabsky, and I'm chair of Allentown's Environmental Advisory Council.

Uh we've heard a lot here tonight, and I'll again express my appreciation for the level of engagement here in Council Chambers about environmental protection.

I don't want to reiterate um the EAC's previous comments regarding this bill.

The EAC has formally submitted letters that are attached to the agenda and available on our website, Allentown EAC.org.

I do want to highlight that in response to the significant public engagement surrounding Bill 20 and our desire to meet our purpose as defined in our establishing ordinance as a volunteer advisory body to the city council administration and its residents.

The AC has developed a strategy to further address community concerns related to data center regulation regulation.

At our upcoming virtual meeting on Monday, June 22nd at 5 30 p.m., we will review a supplemental letter on recommendations related to data center regulations, informed directly by recent public feedback on Bill 20.

As part of Muellenberg College's Office of Community Engagement Summer Internship Program, the EAC has been fortunate to work with an intern who has spent the last two weeks analyzing comments submitted to the EAC and shared publicly at previous meetings related to Bill 20.

That work continues tonight, as Noah is here taking notes.

Thank you, Noah.

His analysis will directly inform our supplementary supplemental recommendations, and we hope also serve as a valuable resource for city staff as they review community feedback.

Our goal is to build on the momentum of this discussion, strike while the iron is hot, and provide the administration with additional recommendations as quickly as possible, as many of our council members suggested here tonight to ensure Allentown's data center regulations provide the strongest feasible protections for residents, environmental resources, and public infrastructure, given that zoning amendments take months or weeks to move through the review processes.

There's no time to waste in any proposed changes.

Again, I just want to say thank you, Council, for your time here tonight.

Thank you to our amazing city staff and guests for um uh for being engaged and also for the public for showing up.

Uh we hope to see you all at our upcoming virtual public meeting on June 22nd at 5 30.

Again, this is Monday of next week.

We're trying to act as as fast as possible.

Um we also hope and encourage everyone here uh to share their comments and engagement towards our climate action plan that I mentioned here earlier tonight.

Again, this is a plan that we will reference and use in the long term.

So if you care about a specific issue that is related to our climate and environment, it is on you to please be engaged and inform our plan.

Uh Allentown PA.gov slash climate action plan.

So thank you.

Thank you.

John Shively.

Hi, John Shively.

I'm not really a public speaker.

I don't really have all the words.

But I know for a fact this isn't uh the right bill.

I know that there is a better way.

If the right bill was activated, there wouldn't be there wouldn't be this data center, and that's you know, these guys said over here, these guys are trying to intimidate you.

That you know, there is if you try to block it, they're gonna push you with uh uh lawyers and whatnot and legal action.

I say, you know, don't let that scare you.

There is a better way to do this, and I think you guys have the way.

I think you guys are already finding that battle.

And I hope you do it for the people and not like you know, there's shit, they're sitting on some shoes in this room, and I guarantee there's a dollar bill attached to it.

That's all I had to say.

Thank you.

Madeline Robinson.

Hello, council persons.

Thank you for your time and service tonight.

Um, I'm gonna be honest, I got up here with a sheet of paper that I wrote about Bill 20, um, and I don't really feel great about what I wrote about that anymore.

So I think in summary, what I really want to say is that I don't know how you would vote on bill 20 tonight.

I don't know how you're gonna vote on the curative curative amendment.

Um, but I really hope that if you do you know, pass bill 20, that it is true that we will act as quickly as we possibly can to make the amendments that are going to bring stronger protections um through the administration, through you know, all the right legal processes.

Um I think it's a hierarchy of urgency um whether or not we you know weigh your options in terms of being protected now versus being protected in the future.

Um, I just really urge you to consider um making the best choice and making sure that you do follow through on the promises to you know make stronger restrictions for data centers, make stronger requirements um if it is something that goes through a bill 20 tonight.

Thank you for your time.

Paul Progen.

All right, I'm on the clock.

Well, Paul Progen, uh, thank you for your time, and thank you for your legal speculations.

Uh I understand there's time frame confinements that are involved in the entire issue, sequence, precedence, law.

However, this seemingly relative difference between uh what's been brought up as warehouse and warehouse development doesn't seem to correlate properly with um data centers.

Their uses on open building traffic coming in and out as traditional, whether it was two or three hundred years ago or most recently, has nothing to do with the data center.

The social problem that's facing us and throughout the nation is completely unaddressed as far as zoning goes.

Having said that, I did have a question in regards to what decibel scales being utilized to determine the zoning ordinance language as regards frequency allowance or restriction.

Is that an answer that you can provide?

So nor very quickly, normally we don't do this, but I I want to do it because I want to make sure that we have the conversation.

So um can you please answer that, Ms.

Gomez?

Sure.

Um, the noise or excuse me, the noise part of the data center ordinance references a few things.

It references an acoustical study and it references our noise quote and it references how and when it's measured.

So both at the application stage, six months after the application stage, and it references our noise ordinance.

Our noise ordinance is measured in DBA, which I believe is insufficient to address data center uses and the hums and the ambient noises.

That's why we include additional language about assessing low frequency um sounds, other ambient noises, hums, tones, those types of things.

So that language is already in the data center ordinance that they need to meet both the DBA requirements of our noise ordinance and also these other more qualitative type standards.

I think in terms of where and how we could improve it, is potentially to adopt a DBC level measurement within the noise ordinance or potentially specifically within the data center code.

Right now we don't have that measurement, um, and I think it would be a good thing moving forward.

Thank you for that.

Um to my understanding, a I guess they were calling a C weighted designation.

Is that the DBC?

So the yeah, I have to reference my notes here.

Um but uh the ambient lawyer, yes.

Uh I'm actually I'm not a sound expert to be honest.

We are our noise ordinance is enforced through our health department, and um we worked with the health department in order to get some of the language, and we've um talked to our health department as well in terms of revisions to 400.

And so the the DBC is certainly the element I think most sensitive to data centers.

Okay.

So traditionally, can you give them an extra 90 seconds just um due to Ms.

Gomez answering?

We can give you some extra time.

Yeah, thank you for due to due to her portion of it.

Yeah, it's okay.

Okay, so traditionally an aid with A-weighted scale as far as decibel measurement goes had been used, and again, we're entering new territory completely that involves uh a reorganization socially of how we accept these data centers in our communities.

Uh I mean, I would suggest that if you're gonna have a data center, just put it underground.

Demand a new ordinance completely or a new zone completely as regards data centers and put them in appropriate positions to where they're not going to impact the community around them by virtue of the noise, the heat usage, the electric usage, the water usage, all of this which seems to have been addressed in this bill 20.

Having gone through Bill 20, I would say that there are numerous red flags of loose language.

Uh that may be pushed upon probably an unwanting community.

I had gone through it and I highlighted a lot of different things.

I would it is my opinion that this curative uh amendment, and correct me if I'm wrong, if it went into place, you could still take Bill 20, bring it to the curative amendment, make adjustments to it, and bring it back to the table before any time frame that would be elapsed 180 days.

Is that correct?

Um sorry, I'm not um we don't know exactly how long it would take, it would depend on us and and the administration, so that's a tough question to answer.

But regarding your concerns, if we have a meeting to discuss amendments, we need you there, especially with the sound.

So uh if that's something you're passionate about, um, if we have a special meeting to determine potential amendments, I would encourage you to come to that meeting so we can hash that out and try and make it the best we can.

So uh just keep an eye on our schedule for those meetings.

So thank you for your time.

I'm passionate about the whole situation.

And uh unfortunately, it feels as though a gun has been held to the community's head.

I don't think that Vietnam was a good reference.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Uh my name is Michelle Lindsay.

Uh, thank you for your time, everybody.

I've never had the unenviable task of writing a bill, but I have written a lot of corporate policies.

And one of the things that jumps out at me as I read this bill is the lack of criteria and the lack of specificity.

So in the corporate world, we have this idea of smart policies, they have to be specific, measurable, actionable, um, relevant and time-bound.

I don't see any of that in this bill.

Uh so um if you have the meeting for the amendments, I will definitely try to be there.

Um, but I do have a couple of suggestions.

Uh, for example, we can take a look at the bill that was recently passed in Oklahoma requiring that any use of um and the bill was HB 2992 for reference, any use of electrical above 75 megawatts must be fully funded by the data center.

We can re look into requiring that their cooling systems utilize rainfall collection and not to drain our public drinking water supplies to cool the data centers.

If I can use rainwater to to water my garden, they can figure out how to use rainwater to cool their data centers.

The remediation trust, as I mentioned last time, we need to get some sort of trust or escrow in there and establish that they need to pay before they break ground, and that a specific percentage of the revenue.

I'm floating the number 10% of the revenue every year gets paid into it because I don't see these things sticking around for more than 10 years.

Section 2A, that is one of the few things that does have something specific and measurable in there, the 200-foot setback, and that is not nearly enough.

We can take a look at other communities throughout the country, not just here in Pennsylvania, not just in Lehigh Valley, and say what are other communities doing to protect themselves from exploitation by these data centers.

So thank you for your time.

Catherine Hoffman.

Oh, let's meet.

Well, I recognize that this is a much more complex process than I thought it was going to be, and I appreciate all your attention and your thought about it, because I think it's a really important issue for our country, and there's communities all over that are grappling with it.

Um I just want to remind everyone that water is a shared public resource.

Yes, yes.

We'll speak this way though.

We all share and are going to share in the effects of the heating environment, but the big the big users of data centers disproportionately profit from these mega data centers and the AI process they run.

So there's an imbalance there.

It's public resources, and they're asking to utilize them and point of order.

Ma'am, could you use the microphone so everyone can hear you?

You have to speak in the microphone.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Thank you.

Okay.

So anyway, um, something I noticed that other people had noted too, and I'm really glad you're considering having a meeting to amend Bill 20 as much as you can.

Um something I notice is there are several phrases in here.

Um, for instance, underwater and sewer usage.

Um, it says the applicant is strongly encouraged to utilize water efficient cooling technology that minimizes the use of water for cooling.

Again, water is our shared resource, and the bill says strongly encouraged.

That's not a regulation, that's not strong language.

Um, and another power under power supply.

It says that are encouraged to make good faith efforts to maximize use of renewable or clean energy for electrical.

I mean, that's again to encouraged.

Um I also wanted to point out, and I'm sure you're aware that these data centers are going to be paying taxes, and most municipalities need tax revenue.

So you have to balance public good with your tax revenue.

And I hope that you can be wise when you do it because obviously a subject that really arouses all of us.

We don't want our water polluted, we don't want our electricity generated for things that don't benefit us, we don't want our land taken, and many data centers are out west now.

And what does the West have?

Serious drought and water issues, and data centers use enormous amounts of water for cooling.

So for all those reasons, I'm glad you're going to have another meeting to um consider Bill 20.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Jean Gerding.

Jean Gerding.

Welcome.

Hi.

I'm sorry, I am not a public speaker.

Um, but my big thing is it's a red flag when you're trying to do this in a hurry.

And if you don't get this bill and get some teeth into it, your next data center that's going to come in is going to um be under that.

And if you then come up with these amendments, they're gonna go.

No, we're gonna stay under that ordinance, and if you can do like the 180 days you should do that, and really look at what is going on with these data centers, these data centers, because you're gonna be responsible for the future and the future for generation behind me and the generation behind that person.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Julie Vitale.

Welcome.

Thanks.

Okay.

Uh Julie Vitalia, 721 West Green Street in Allentown, Pennsylvania.

Uh, years ago, the NRA threatened to sue Allentown for two very reasonable gun laws.

And as an educator at the time, I had seen far too much gun violence, and I spoke up because I believe we should have the right to make laws that keep our children safe in our community.

And if I had a chance to speak about that again today, I wouldn't have said it was our right.

I would say it was our responsibility to keep the people in Allentown safe.

Whether it is the National Rifle Association or a data center developer, we have the responsibility to set ordinances that protect people, particularly the children in Allentown.

They deserve a future of health, wellness, clean water, clean air, reasonable sound control in our beautiful city.

So I ask, why can't we table this bill tonight, attach stronger amendments, and advertise the new stronger version immediately?

Um we have plenty of good changes to consider.

Uh with the pending ordinance doctrine and advertising this stronger version uh version.

I don't understand, I don't know, but I would hope that would continue the uh pending ordinance and ensure that the city is legally protected from new applications while we take the time to get it right.

Um, here are some examples of stronger amendments.

The community right to know clause, um, require data center developers to give it 180 day or whatever we want to pick, uh public notice to each impacted household before filing permits or breaking ground.

Um all these uh disclosures must contain plain language, multilingual, show direct community impacts like noise pollution, light pollution, air pollution, water, etc.

Um, we know that one's planned for the Mayus Avenue, and the community made it pretty clear a few weeks ago that they were caught off guard and felt entitled to a warning for something that has such a potential to dramatically change their community, their schools and wildlife spaces, and we want to know about data centers as soon as possible so we can voice our concerns.

Uh second would be a mandatory peer review reports, um, require independent third-party um review of noise, thermal, hydrological data funded by the developer, but chosen entirely by the city.

You know, all engineering vendors must provide formal conflict-free uh conflict of interest disclosures and the raw non-propriority data sets and modeling inputs to be made accessible for independent community um experts to review.

And I had a whole other list, but honestly, it sounds like Noah from the AEAC is on it, and I would just say why don't we use his?

Um, you know, and in addition, we just talked about some tonight.

You know, I I think 500 feet doesn't sound sufficient, but it certainly sounds better, and that escrow account seems pretty good.

Uh, I don't see anybody disagreeing with that.

Um, if we made substantial changes using these and NOAA's research and republish the bill for 30 days, I hope that would restart or extend the pending ordinance for 30 days, and then we could use time to re to fine-tune it and then publish a strong final bill.

I don't envy the position you're in.

You can you can finish.

Okay, all right, and thank you and the AEC AEAC for your time you spent on this.

It's incredulous that these technicalities are standing in the way of our responsibility to protect all that is sacred in Allentown to the people, the land, the wildlife, the water, the air, and the future of this community.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Welcome.

Thank you.

It is obvious that you really care, and that is very comforting.

It also feels like this train has left the station with many citizens in South Allentown not really aware of what's going on.

Now I know there's a tremendous amount of work to think through everything you've been thinking through, scheduling extra meetings and everything you have to do.

But where data centers have gone in where the community has felt that it was rushed or snuck in, or they were just asleep at the wheel because there was not enough comprehensive communication alerting people.

It's across the street from Camelot.

There is going to be a revolt, a public revolt.

How could such a decision be made?

So what I'm asking you to consider is not just wait for a public hearing to really help educate people, get their input and questions more, which I know you've already gotten a lot of, but I think it's just a small percentage of us so far that are really really aware of what's happening.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Hello.

Thank you for your time.

In terms of a lot of the regulations outlined, like many people have already said with the uh 200 foot setback and just needing a much stronger regulations and language for water use, noise, electricity use, and uh public notice, which was mentioned, which I uh also strongly agree with.

Um so I know that there's been a lot of discussion tonight about what to do about that in terms of um the municipality and it delaying the vote.

Um so if you do decide to delay the vote or just uh vote in Bill 20 and add in amendments, just continue to make adding in those amendments a top priority and listening to the concerns of the community uh because we really care.

So thank you.

Thank you.

William Graffi.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Good evening, members of the council.

Uh, my name is William Garecki.

I live on 3124 Pearl Avenue, South Allentown, Pennsylvania.

Um I've come before you prior, but I just like to restate I am a 21-year-old lifelong resident and current employee of the Allentown School District.

I'm speaking on my behalf and not their behalf.

Um firstly, I just want to say thank you for your extra attention once more towards this.

As many people in the room have said, I do not envy any of you in this decision, but I also echo the perspective that it still feels like this is completely under the rug.

And I'll tell you, as a 21-year-old in the city, nothing makes me want to leave more than hearing verbiage like the train has left the station, there's nothing that can be done, it's not in our hands.

Because from our perspective, it is.

You you are the representation of what we want, and if you take an action like just passing it anyway, that action seems to be taken out of fear.

There have been many cities who were sued by data center developers, and I think that you have the same fear of those legal repercussions, and that's understandable.

But if a change can be made, it really should be made.

Um I don't really know how much value this will have, but as a just personal anecdote, recently as of last night, my father told me that I had to start paying rent to live in the house because of our electricity and water going up, and presuming that I stay housed in Allentown, then I continue to benefit the Allentown School District, then it would become more and more expensive for me to live.

If specifically the MAS Av data center was put into place with the current bill.

And I appreciate you guys talking about having that meeting.

And particularly Mr.

Brinder mentioning having it earlier in the day.

Hopefully, so that we could attend if there was a contributing for that.

That's all I have to say.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Alicia Ruth Ross.

I have a quick question.

Can I switch places with someone who has to leave before I do?

Um absolutely, yeah.

Um Joel Atkinson.

Okay.

Do you have his card?

Yeah.

Okay.

Um, thank you.

Uh my name is Joel Atkinson.

I'm a member of the Lehigh Valley chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America.

I'm very concerned with the construction of data centers in the Lehigh Valley, like many residents here and council, uh including in Allentown.

Uh we know these data centers will impact the well-being of our communities with unclear, if any, upsides.

Uh demand for water and electricity will increase as has been noted.

And we know these data centers will affect the quality of life in our communities.

And we need municipalities like Allentown and across the valley to listen to constituents and stand together in implementing strong safeguards and regulations around data center development.

Everyday people should have control over how their local economies and infrastructure develop.

And we know most people are deeply skeptical, if not outright hostile to data centers, it being developed in their communities, both locally and nationwide.

Economies and infrastructure should be developed for the benefit of the people living in those communities rather than for the benefit of greedy tech firms who seek to dominate our lives, our government, and our pocketbooks.

Finally, it is worth pointing out the fact that uh it is mandated for us to zone for data centers, regardless of the democratic will of residents.

This shows us who this democracy is really meant to benefit the capitalist class.

I appreciate the universal concern from council about data center developments and the concern uh expressed by other officials here.

Uh you have heard your constituents and you're responding to them, and I would encourage you to continue to strengthen uh these regulations uh regarding data centers.

Nonetheless, I would like to see council support the curative amendment uh and push for the strongest protections we can have.

I'm grateful for council's time.

Uh thank you all.

Thank you.

Alicia Rathall.

Alicia.

Oh, sorry, I couldn't hear welcome.

Thank you.

Uh hi, I'm Alicia Ruth roff.

I live in downtown Allentown.

Uh, thank you, Council, for your careful consideration of the proposal tonight.

Uh I am asking council to please vote no on passing Bill 20 and instead pass Councilmember Gurloch's proposal to enact a 180-day municipal curative amendment to put a halt on consideration of any new data center proposals made within that time.

Um I know that everyone in this room is concerned about new data center proposals coming in if nothing is in place.

But that is why we need this curative amendment.

This has been enacted in other places in Pennsylvania.

It was enacted up in Hazel Township in Luzerne, it was enacted in Ben Salem.

There's even a statewide bill, SB 1359, that's being proposed by Senator Moose to do this statewide.

Um this is a legal option and it it does work.

I I really I do want to say I appreciate the significant amount of proactive work that the planning commission has put into Bill 20.

I'm really genuinely glad as someone who lives in Allentown that the city cares about the people who live here and want to protect us against data centers because uh we we know the developers don't.

Um but Bill 20 as it is just will not do that.

We're not we're not just concerned about um the setback, the noise levels and decommissioning requirements.

There are other other considerations that I don't think Bill 20 takes into account.

Um I know the it doesn't require uh the data centers to reuse and recycle the mass the massive amount of water they use.

The water could be discharged back into the environment at higher temperatures with contaminants.

It doesn't require an annual water usage report.

It doesn't have strict rules or requirements around how much of the energy use, which you know is massive, uh be renewable, only that efforts should be made.

Uh, you know, there's there's more, but I've clock clock sticking.

Um I know folks are thinking that uh passing something is better than nothing, and that we can amend it once passed, but uh we don't have a guarantee that it's gonna happen.

And even working on on best faith, it sounds like it's going to take a really long time.

And in that long time, Bill 20 would green light data center proposals like the one on MAS Avenue, which is right around 200 feet from apartments and Camelot for children.

Um I know that Bill 20 wouldn't retroactively apply to that proposal, but it would set a standard.

It would say that proposals like this are fine and fit within the city's standards, and just really put a nail in the coffin for that.

Um I'm asking council to follow the example of Hazel Township, Ben Salem, and others.

Please be brave.

Thank you.

Like, please listen to us, your community, and vote in line with us.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Mark Miller with Cam Lot for Children.

Welcome.

Thank you very much.

Um, my name is Mark Miller.

I'm on the board of Camelots.

I'm a volunteer.

My shirt says staff because it fit.

Um more importantly, though, behind me there is a gray shirt who represents a father of a Camelot kid, and a blue shirt who represents an actual Camelot kid who graduated and now comes back and volunteers on campus for them and all the rest of the Camelot community.

I'm here to read a prepared statement.

Camelot for Children supports responsible economic development and recognizes the important role technology and innovation play in the Allentown and Greater Lehigh Valley community.

However, we are against the placement of data centers without adequate and comprehensive due diligence to understand and mitigate the potential harm to people, animals, and the environment, and to prevent increases in utility costs and utilities strain to meet the significantly expanded demand for power, water, and other requirements.

In Camelot's case specifically, it is unimaginable to place a large data center a mere 200 feet from our indoor and outdoor campus on West Emmaus Avenue, where for over 40 years, children with serious chronic and terminal illnesses have come to find joy, friendship, and support.

This is not about opposing development.

It is about choosing the right location.

Unlike the warehouse project originally approved for this site, a data center represents a fundamentally different use with potentially significant impacts related to noise pollution, servers and cooling systems, energy consumption, traffic, construction activity, and long-term quality of life for our children, volunteers, staff, and neighboring properties.

We therefore call upon Allentown City Council to reject the current drafted center ordinance, pass a curative amendment, seeking 180-day comprehensive pause on data center proposals and use the time to comprehensively study the situation with additional subject matter experts and research best practices from other municipalities toward crafting a stronger ordinance that facilitates economic investment while protecting Allentown citizens' wildlife and environment.

Similarly, we will call upon the Allentown Planning Commission, perhaps at the Julia July 14th meeting or thereabouts to reject the land use amendment of 2401 West of Mayus because a switch from a warehouse to a data center is a fundamentally different use, requiring a new submission and thorough review process, ideally guided by a new strong ordinance.

Camelot will continue advocating for the children and families we serve as well as our South Allentown neighbors and respectfully urge city councils and subject matter experts to do the same.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Fresh air, clean water.

And that was the big thing that everyone told me was that Lehigh Valley has some of the worst air quality in the U.S.

I'm sure you know that.

So I'm just asking you to really consider what this is going to do to our environment, to our children.

So the people who are still alive, right?

Because this is going to continue long after we're gone.

Our water is going to get pulled from us.

We're going to have water shortages.

We're going to have kids getting sicker.

Tons of kids in the Alltown School District have asthma.

You know, there's just a whole slew of problems that we're already dealing with that this is going to exacerbate.

And I do think it's really telling that you mentioned Vietnam, which is probably our most unpopular war to kind of advocate for something so seriously unpopular.

It's really telling that you know that this is going to harm us.

It's just going to create so much more problems, right?

Like I'm mentally ill, and the noise that emits from these data centers is going to spike that, right?

Because if I have to hear, ah, all day long, I'm gonna go insane.

Um that's all I really had to say was that I really think that you guys need to consider what this is going to do to the citizens of Allentown and not just putting money in someone's pocket, right?

We're already in a place where people can't afford to eat, people can't afford to stay housed.

Um people have been removed from their homeless encampments, which is crazy to begin with that they're in homeless encampments.

So I really want to know is if you actually think this is going to make anything better or benefit anybody.

Um thank you very much.

Thank you.

Uh point of order, Council President, as courtesy of the floor continues.

This completes, just to note this completes the speakers who provided an Allentown address.

So our next speaker is Jenny Marceau Kresloski.

Better.

I have some things to hand out first.

Could we just stop the clock while I do that?

Sure.

Uh Ginny Marcel Kurzlake, I am an or a senior organizer with Food and Water Watch, nonprofit national nonprofit, and uh I'm speaking in that capacity tonight, as well as a Pennsylvania resident.

Um I've handed you uh members of council some um maps that I'm going to refer to.

So if you just hang on to those for now, um I first of all thank you for this careful consideration you're giving this.

It's a very important decision.

Um passing Bill 20 would be a big mistake, and um it does not strengthen your zoning ordinance, and I'd like you to allow me to walk you through some of that, and I'm going to draw on some of the stuff that we heard earlier.

Um, right now, your current zoning ordinance does not address data centers, but under your current zoning ordinance, there is a pathway for data centers to be considered, and your zoning officer and others alluded to this that under section 660-35 D2, and I'm gonna quote your zoning officer is authorized to assign the use, and this is a use that's not identified, um, to the most similar and thus most appropriate category based on the actual or projected characteristics of the principal use or activity.

Well, we know that hyperscale data centers um are would fall under what you call your high impact industry, described under 660-38D as having, and again I quote the high potential for adverse land use impacts related to community appearance, public safety, environmental impacts, or nearby residence quality of life.

We know that's this would be a high impact industry.

And under your table 660-4, these high impact industries, which would be data centers, would be restricted to your IM district only, and they would be treated as a special exception, they would go to the zoning hearing board.

So the first map you have, I went and colored in because you have a very colorful zoning map.

Every piece of your IM district, it's in the dark black.

Okay?

So that's where right now data centers would go, but it would have to go through the zoning hearing board as a special exception.

Okay.

Um, if you were to go and pass bill 20, you would be opening the door to data centers, not just in the IM, but in the IG district, and that is page two.

I did these maps so you could just see, because I created it first for myself.

I want to see, well, what does it look like?

You can see it opens up a whole lot more land.

You do not need to do that.

There was a reference made to, well, maybe we have to worry about how much land we give or what percentage of our land mass is dedicated to a use.

There is no legal requirement for that.

You are just required to give some land for this use.

Okay.

So that top map you have is more than sufficient to address this use.

This is what I want to make really clear.

We heard earlier that if you were to pass bill 20, it would not impact the proposed data center at 2401 West DMAS Avenue.

It absolutely would.

It would green light that because what we also heard was developers like to go with the easiest route.

The easiest route for them is if you pass bill 20, they can withdraw their amended application right now where they're trying to do a switcheroo on the use, which will be hard to put through.

Or their landowner curative amendment that they filed.

The easiest pass is withdraw both of those, submit a new application under bill 20, but a bing bada boom.

The land is there.

If you look at the first top map, you'll see if I can point, you might even know where it is yourself.

But on this top map, there's a little cutout here that's not included in the dark black on this map.

It is.

That's 2401 and West of Mayus Drive.

You pass bill 20, you're opening the door for that.

No, no ifs ands or buts about it.

Um I just want to oh, can I I'd like to touch on the municipal curative amendment really quickly.

It does hit pause for 180 days for the consideration of all data center applications.

And this is because municipal curative amendment hits pause on both the pathways that are available right now to data centers in Allentown.

The landowner curative amendment that is clearly spelled out and it's been acknowledged.

But what they didn't mention was that also under 609.2 is there are there's also a halt to any considerations by the zoning hearing board.

So a data center application during your municipal curative amendment could not go to the zoning hearing board for special exception.

So all both those pathways that are available to a data center right now would be halted for the 180 days.

And this would allow you time to develop a better data center ordinance.

Okay.

So you can do that.

And I also want to say it's not just rural areas that have passed this.

Montur County used a municipal curative amendment.

Multiple municipalities in southeastern Pennsylvania that are very populous.

Uh my own, um, it has that right now.

So this is an unusual thing, but not at this time because of this brand new use.

Uh so I'm just closing.

I urge you to vote no on bill 20, pass a municipal curative amendment.

That would be the absolute best thing to do.

The next best thing would be what uh was suggested vote no and then work as fast as you can to improve it.

But the worst thing would be to vote yes on bill 20.

Thank you.

So did the administration get these maps?

Do you have them?

I'm just curious if I don't know.

I know this is off the cuff, but I'm do you have any data on the amount of properties or or something that can help us understand the IM versus IG.

Is that something that's out there?

Yes, absolutely.

We have um using our GIS maps, all of the IM and IG parcels maps.

We also limited this data center ordinance specifically limits it to large lots.

So for anything over 50,000 square feet, it limits it to five or eight acres depending on the zoning district.

So not all IM and IG land would be available, it would just be those lands that have sufficient size.

But what we've done is we've mapped all of the sensitive receptors, which um I will just say pause for a second, is one of the um misunderstandings of our ordinance.

The the bill regulates against residential use groups and civic and institutional use groups, and those groups are defined in the zoning ordinance elsewhere.

So it's not just residential and child care, it's schools and churches and hospitals and daycares, and I think like 15, 20 different uses.

So if you go into the city standard zoning code, you'll see all of those uses because we did want it to be as broad as possible.

Um, but we've mapped all of this sensitive receptors, including all of the parks.

You also have to stay away from the park.

We've mapped it all within the city and drew 200 foot boundaries around it, 300 foot boundaries around it, 500 foot boundaries around it, 100 foot boundaries.

We've then identified every single parcel to be able to see clearly which ones would be able to meet regulations under different standards, and we have that maps uh available if you want to go through them.

Okay.

Okay, thank thank you.

Um continue.

Um we actually have we have real numbers if uh second.

Are you actually have numbers with you?

Yeah, we've mapped all of those that could go in fully developable and then partially developable, and then those that touch it but probably couldn't be developed.

So we know exactly under each zoning district um the development likelihood.

So yeah, 25.

So out of just under 34,000 developable parcels in the city of Allentown.

We have identified 13 to 38 in the IG district, and if we i in the IG and IM district, and if we only include the IM district, we have there are six to fourteen.

So just to be clear, so I'm sorry, um IM is six to fourteen parcels.

Is that yes?

Is that what we're doing we're doing?

Yes.

And then if we combine it with IG, it's 13 to 38 parts.

Yeah, so Ig at 200 feet is seven to 17.

And we have different categories of those that are fully like you can develop the entire lot, and then those that you could develop a portion of lot.

So seven would in the IG would be entire lot developable with 17 a portion of it.

Um then in the IM it would be six entire lots and eight partial lots, and there's uh seven additional lots within those categories that it just touches on, and so it would only allow a little bit.

Okay.

All right, thanks for that info.

And that's out of uh let's say 33,000 um plus almost 34,000 parcels in the city.

So it doesn't matter.

Isn't it too many?

Yeah, okay.

So we have a tree.

So um okay, thanks for that information and even I've spoken a lot, but I have to ask a question.

No, it's fair, it's fair.

This is the time of the order.

Um if bill 20, looking at these maps and listening to what was just said, if Bill 20 would would have already been in place, say a year, two, three years ago, would the developer at the Mayus Avenue site be able to apply and be considered based on just the language of Bill 20?

Yes.

So they could apply.

Oh, they could apply, but it would have to be pushed significantly back, so they could not apply in the way that they are requesting.

It's exactly 197 feet from Pimla.

Exactly.

So yeah, I mean, is the proposed data center on Emaus Avenue?

How far is that from a uh special population?

I forget the exact term.

A sensitive receptor.

And is that looked up, if I may, in addition to just the purely numerical aspect of the setbacks, it's also important to remember the whole the whole host of studies that are included in Bill 20 as well.

If that MAS Avenue proposal were to come in under Bill 20, we would have the authority to require a much more rigorous slate of technical studies with stronger teeth behind them to require those studies than we would under the current code and under the current ordinance.

The Bill 20 would have a provision that does require that any study be verified by the city a third-party consultant of the city's selection, so there would be more protections in place to be able to touch on on some of those topics as the noise and the environmental impact than regardless just of the mechanical issue of the of the setback, that's not far from the only development control that would be available.

Much appreciation.

Would it is it far like it would it meet the threshold, or would they have to apply for a variance, or what would have to happen?

So they uh they're they're proposing it pretty close to the street as it comes in to meet the current industrial setback requirements through the electrical substation.

I can tell you that we're opposed to that.

Um, but it would need to be pushed back a minimum of 200 feet, and then it would have to go through the special exception process, and through that special acception process, the zoning hearing board can add additional setbacks that's specifically in Bill 20 that the zoning hearing board has the specific discretion to require additional setbacks if it's determined to be too close to what we're we're we're calling essentially a sent a sensitive receptor.

So it would be minimum 200 plus more, all of which would be evaluated and assessed as part of the public hearing process, the environmental review, the planning commission review.

So it would it would have to be much further back.

Okay, so what I'm hearing is based on what's written, potentially yes, but there could hopefully be more deliberation uh to push them further.

It would be correct.

It would be more deliberation.

There would be a lot more discretion in terms of um requiring shifts back and a process to require it.

So I believe that it would be a different result than what is being proposed today.

It's already built order isn't this only built?

The building is there?

Hold on.

Point of order, listen, everyone's gonna have their opportunity courtesy of the floor.

Hold on.

Um, oh just I think that's kind of my uh concern that if there's a if the proposed uh data center um on Emaus Avenue would would qualify just based on like the how the parcel was zoned.

Um and yes, I know they'd have to meet you know more requirements in terms of reporting or whatever, but just like in in terms of being able to apply that's concerning because under bill 20, as is, that means other places could apply like that close to apartments and homes and sensitive areas.

Um hopefully not within the 45 days if we can somehow get 45 days, but um that it's just concerning.

I I just wish that the answer was, oh no, if we pass bill 20 and if uh Emayas Av would have applied under Bill 20, there's no way they can set up.

I wish that could have been the answer.

If I may, there's another piece of this too, which is the special exception process that I think is worth considering for a moment.

So reading from the zoning code book, Section 660 115 F, review and approval criteria for special exceptions.

These are the factors that the zoning hearing board would need to take into consideration, hypothetically, if confronted with this application for 2401 Mayus Avenue.

Under the new code, it would need to go to the board for a special exception.

That's an absolute and there's no jurisdiction or there's no interpretation, there would be a public hearing before the zoning hearing board.

Reading from the code.

Enacting on requests for special exception approval, the zoning hearing board must consider whether the proposed special exception is general conformity with the comp plan and whether the proposed special exception will result in land use and development that is generally consistent with and not detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood area.

The zoning hearing board may not approve a special exception application if it determines any one or more of the following, that the requested special exception would result in a trim significant traffic safety hazard, that the requested special exception would create a significant public health or safety hazard, that the requested special exception would cause substantial negative impacts upon an established residential neighborhood, or that the requested special exception application does not comply with applicable use specific standards or other applicable regulations of the ordinance.

If a proposal were to go to the zoning hearing board and significant community opposition came out, while that's not necessarily grounds for denial, as the board will remind you, it's taken considerably on a legal record, taken down word for word by stenographers.

If an individual becomes what's is granted what's known as party status by zone the zoning hearing board, then they have legal standing if they believe the board erred in the conclusion they made to appeal it to court.

So it creates a very specific legalistic framework where or a conversation around the use can be had and where there's specific criteria.

Yes, you may be looking at an IM zone.

Yes, you may be looking at the 200 foot setback.

There may be a location where the code says it's acceptable, but the special exception process acknowledges that there might be a site-specific nuance that says, no, this is not an appropriate use for uh for a data center and a quasi-judicial board and the zoning hearing board is determined that.

Sorry to ramble for a minute, but I do think that's that's important information for everyone's education and consideration.

Okay, thank you.

Can you ask a question about that?

Um I'm gonna I want to continue with Kirsi the floor, just to be fair for everyone else that's waiting.

So um we're good, guys.

Um follow-up, yes.

So just to follow up on the Emmaus Avenue one, because I know we're not discussing that in this case, but in the scenario that was presented here from a strictly business perspective, where they are in the process at the planning commission being the basically the uh the step that I'm understanding that they would have to reapplying, and at one, I don't know.

Can you can you can you apply under zoning code pullback then apply under the new zoning code?

I don't know if that's technically okay.

And I guess the other question is would it even make sense in this case given how far they are with the process and the stipulations in Bill 20?

That's much more onerous.

There uh I I don't have the my computer's loading not loading fast enough for me to measure it on the current plans.

The um the aerials show a previous building that was there um prior to the new construction, which was set back at 130 feet, so that's where the previous building was from the property line.

Of course, there that would be measured from the other use as well, so add about 50 feet to that.

Um but what they actually want to do is come forward um closer to the sidewalk with a uh essentially an electrical substation.

And again, um we're we will object to that when it gets to the planning commission process.

But to answer your question, um I don't think they would want to come in under Bill 20.

I think that it would be a much harder development approval for them.

We'll still look at all of the impacts uh as we review that proposal as well, because we we uh do want to uh and will be advocating for residential compatibility to the greatest extent that we can, but it would be a lot easier for us to do if we had this review process in place where we have really specific review standards in terms of process with commitments to the environmental advisory commission.

So I don't think it's it's quite apples to apples, but it would certainly be a much harder path forward, and they could the zoning hearing board, as mentioned previously, would have specific discretion to require more than 200 feet if needed next to um sensitive uses, such as as um schools and residentials.

Okay, and then just one other on this one, because I know you have the the map that was presented to us, and I know this is it's a sorry, it's hard to read, but um the highlighted sections just because there's two large ones, and one of them is the Queen City Airport, correct?

Correct.

And the other one, the baseball stadium, I think if that's correct.

If I'm looking at it correctly, I'm not sure where where it is, but yeah, to be honest, I don't think that these are um these don't these don't match what the GIS map produced.

We can the GIS map.

We can okay.

So I just I just want to basically understand.

So like like some of the larger ones, and I'm not trying to you know shoot down any arguments, but but just for clarification, like it's an airport, so we would that wouldn't have been considered in your number when you were presenting the we did continu the airport.

Like if you look at two of the biggest land uses on this map, so one of them, this one right here, that's the airport.

So that's the biggest, the biggest land area.

This one right here is a rail yard.

Um this one, um, I think maybe I don't have a bunch of smaller lots combined.

I'm not sure, because again, I don't think these maps reflect the limitation that's put on, and and I don't know because it's black and white, we just got it.

But um, but we have limitations that says within the code that you have to be a larger lot, so over five acres or over eight acres, depending on the zoning district.

So I don't know if these maps have gone to that level of detail analysis or if it just covers it over the zoning districts, like the IM and the IG zoning districts, you know, I just don't know.

But that's what it is.

It's it covers the whole district.

Okay, so then it includes in that scenario, it would include some lots that wouldn't be developable under Bill 20.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

Okay, so we're gonna continue.

Yeah, say a bit um just to be fair, I want to make sure everyone's heard.

So let's continue with curves to the floor for members of the public.

Douglas Grickton.

Welcome.

Hi, thank you.

Um my name is Douglas Garrichton.

Uh I don't want to rehash about data centers being problematic.

I really just want to talk about tonight's vote.

Um you keep uh voice and concerns about leaving yourselves unprotected in the interim if you pass a curative amendment.

Uh you guys keep delaying the vote.

Um I'm I'm really just gonna ask you to not delay it again.

I'm gonna ask that we pass the curative amendment.

Um if you pass Bill 20, you cannot pass a legally defensible curative amendment afterwards.

So it'll no longer be substantially invalid.

Uh I I'm exhausted coming to these things.

I spent hours and hours over last weekend canvassing for people door to door to go to the vote for the umayus Av Data Center and the Planning Commission had it postponed at the last minute.

I would like to say that if Bill 20 really had no impact on Langan engineering getting their data center approved, um, then why would they cower last minute when you guys decided to postpone it?

The reason is because they need bill 20 to pass, so these lower restrictions can allow them to get their data center through.

What they need is for you guys to pass Bill 20 so they can get their data center.

Otherwise, they would have just showed up.

The reason why they didn't show up is because they're afraid of the power we will yield if we have a curative amendment.

The other thing I want to discuss is um the gentleman to the left of me uh mentioned that there are some places that did pass a curative amendment, but said that that will not work here because those are smaller communities.

Allentown size makes it strong against these legal opposition.

So the people most vulnerable are the small rural communities, or maybe they don't have the resources with a curative amendment to stand their ground.

Allentown does.

The other thing I wanted to mention is to kind of echo what um Jenny mentioned about why data centers are so different than a warehouse and why it requires its own proposal.

Um I've I've worked at a warehouse and I've also worked in corporate IT.

I'll tell you that a forklift lasts ten years.

Uh, and the uh electricity needed for a warehouse does not exponentially increase every three years.

Uh graphic process units for data centers get thrown out every one to three years, and the next generation consumes substantially more electricity.

We can't base it off of the legislation for warehouses.

This is a completely different animal.

The amount of resources they need exponentially increases every two years.

So please protect us.

Please do not delay it again.

Please just pass the curative amendment tonight.

Please, thank you.

Hi, thanks for your time.

Uh the following statements are sourced from the World Resources Institute.

Uh, even a mid-sized data center uh consumes as much uh consumes as much water as a small town, while larger ones require up to five million gallons of water every day.

As much of as much as a city of 50,000 people.

Uh a conventional data center, such as thinking about cloud storage draws as much electricity as 10,000 to 25,000 households, according to the International Energy Agency.

Data centers are among the reasons ratepayers nationwide have seen their electricity bills increase at twice the rate of inflation the past year.

A single modern AI data center can use as much power as a hundred thousand homes.

Mid-sized facilities can use up to three hundred thousand gallons of water a day, while large facilities can consume as much as five million gallons daily comparable to what a small town uses.

Data center construction, rooftop cooling systems, and backup generators can be disruptively noisy.

Smaller diesel generators report reportedly reach 85 decibel levels that can harm hearing.

Larger industrial units can approach 100 decibels, equivalent to a motorcycle or a jackhammer of a view of more than 1,200 U.S.

data centers found that even the largest employee fewer than 150 permanent workers, sometimes as few as 25.

Now that I stated that, I want to get a little more emotional.

The data center that's going to be built is in the same area as the nonprofit organization known as Camelot for Children, which provides care and support and programs for the disabled children of our community, many with health problems, many on the autistic spectrum, and many other neurodevental neurodevelop my God.

Neurodevil.

Yeah, disorders that will be I've been up since 5 a.m.

That will be affected negatively by the center's noise and the pollution it will cause.

An annoying hum from the data center for us is a deafening sound for our neurodivergent children.

There is also a public high school where children will also be affected by the pollution and noise of this data center.

Children are the most vulnerable in our society, and it's up to us, the adults, to provide a healthy environment and safe future for our children.

It'll drain and pollute our local watershed.

And with the worsening weather conditions over the years, including the trial from two years ago, we cannot allow anything as harmful as a data center to take valuable resources required for basic human life and environmental life as well.

Today, electricity bills are higher than ever.

The average working class families are struggling to choose between rent, groceries, and other bills.

This data center will harm the wallets and overwhelm well-being of the hardworking citizens that call the Allentown area our home to approve a data center is to approve the destruction of this to approve the destruction of the environment of the beautiful state of Pennsylvania.

Place out the citizens who call the Allentown area their home and will harm the health and well-being of our most vulnerable people in our community.

I ask you, Council, to listen to us, vote for our best interests.

This is what we voted you in for.

No to data centers, yes to our environment, our well-being, and our children's future, and shame on you for using the more as our interest.

Welcome.

Thank you very much.

Appreciate uh everybody's time this evening.

It's a lot of passion out here tonight.

So uh it's great to see, right?

Um I used to live in Allentown, freshly moved to McConji a couple years back.

Uh been around the block with a couple of these data center arguments, and uh the kicking the can down the road approach gets exhausting, as somebody else mentioned.

Um but what I'm hearing tonight is an opportunity to uh sharpen our acts here.

Our tools make Bill 20, have a little bit more teeth, a little bit more protections for the people here.

Uh and I think that's something we have to take advantage of, right?

Uh woman mentioned previously smart contracts.

Language is make or break.

And sadly it's up to interpretation, and usually favors those with more money.

And we're up uh, you know what, creek without a paddle when it comes to the amount of money that's funding these data centers.

So I think it's a tremendous opportunity to ensure we're protected now and set the precedent moving forward, because the language of significant, the language of May, the language that's open-ended that leans in favor again of those with more money.

Uh we're the ones that get impacted.

We're the ones that are told it's it's not that bad, right?

It's not that much more electricity.

PPL, we I was at that meeting uh up in Northampton a couple months back.

Overwhelming um frustration with that, and it is anyway for the price hikes.

They're already making record profits, right?

So there's so much money here that we're up against that we have to make sure the language we use to defend ourselves and our environment is the best we can come up with.

And if that's if that's what it is, you know, we thank you for that.

But there's a lot of people here that have a lot of information, and like you mentioned, President, um, they can be a benefit to the council.

Tonight, I found out a day and a half ago about this meeting, thanks to whomever posted it on Reddit.

Right?

No announcement, like somebody else mentioned, these things kind of just sneak in under the radar for how major of an impact we're looking at, not only now, but setting that precedent that they got away with a fast one this time.

They're gonna set the precedent of what is significant moving forward.

Is brown water significant?

Can it be worse?

We're gonna find out.

Unless we set the language now, we set the precedent of what we allow here.

You have you hear what we have to say tonight.

I might not live within the city bounds anymore, but this was the first city I lived in as an independent adult.

I lived over on Auburn Street.

It's amazing.

You all have so much heart and determination here.

The jobs won't be that great in data centers, the environmental protections.

Uh we need to set them up because we're on an uphill battle here.

So I appreciate all your work that you're doing.

And I thank everybody that came out tonight.

Thank you.

So that ends our curves view of the floor portion.

Um, so um we're gonna keep moving.

Um do you have anything?

I just wanted to see uh procedurally.

Um I would like to have a vote on the curative amendment, just procedurally, let me know what I need to do to make that so currently under consideration is Bill 20.

And so if there would be a majority of everyone to pause Bill 20, table that and bring it back, but it would require a majority because right now that's under consideration.

Okay, so what do I what type of motion do I because I made a motion earlier to suspend the rules to add the curative movement to the agenda, so it's on the agenda.

Um it's under the resolution section.

Okay, so then um I would request to move the curative amendment resolution to uh vote on now.

Um first would first you'd have to make a motion to table.

The table bill 20, then we'd have to untable it.

Okay, so I make a motion to table bill 20 until after we vote for the curative amendment.

And you need a second.

I'll second that.

Okay, just to be clear for our solicitor, we're not doing any unintended consequence.

We can come back to bill 20 if needed.

You can untable it.

Okay, just making sure.

Point of order.

Do we need four votes to untable it?

Yes.

Like whatever the number of votes, but to bring it back.

So we would need to be voted to be untabled to be then voted on.

So the unintended consequence of that is that it potentially could not be even voted on.

Tonight.

If the curative amendment passed.

Or didn't.

And then but I mean, no, I mean I because I'm telling you right now, I'm um I'm not supporting Bill 20, but I will support to untable it so I can vote no on bill 20.

So I'm a vote.

I'm sure and those who are gonna vote yes on bill 20 are going to vote to untable it, so it will get on table.

I don't think that's a yeah.

If a person voting against bill 20 is voting to untable it, it's gonna be okay.

Yeah, it's a yeah.

Okay.

We just want to make sure like we understand everyone understands it.

So is everyone good behind the dies?

On this so what is the first so the motion is to uh table Bill 20 until after we vote for uh the curative amendment uh resolution and it was seconded by uh councilperson Santos.

And we need four people to vote yes, or if not, then audio scurative amendment, and we go to vote to we untable bill twenty and then we vote on it.

Okay, so um call vote on on the motion.

Ms.

Garlot.

Yes, Miss Santos, yes, Mr.

Bender.

Yes, uh Ms.

Moda, yes, Mr.

Knappley, yes, and Mr.

Pungo.

Yes, Mr.

President, you have six years and no names.

So we have uh the the MCA the curative amendment on the on the dais right now, and um any comments from the dais on that.

I mean, one last time.

Uh once again, I would encourage my colleagues on council to vote for this municipal curative amendment.

I think it's been acknowledged by the administration, it's been acknowledged by us that what we have could be stronger, and this is an opportunity to make it stronger.

There are risks again, no matter what we do.

Uh, there are risks to having people in this room right now, someone could sue us.

Like there are risks no matter what.

So at least with a hundred uh hundred eighty day um opportunity, we would have some level of uh an extra layer of protection in terms of like landowner curative amendments.

Um so again, I would encourage you to vote yes.

I think uh at this point I've kind of made my case um for those who are specifically concerned about that email site.

It sounds like with Bill 20, they would stand a chance of setting up, and they will.

There is a reason.

Um maybe there's some behind the scenes stuff that we don't know about, but the timing is kind of interesting that we delay a vote and then they pull out uh the mayor site pulls out and delays their uh I don't know, maybe there's other reasons, but it is interesting, and I don't want us to set up it, I don't want to set them up necessarily to just say, oh yeah, well, you know, we'll just do some of these reports, maybe the ones that are not required necessarily.

Um so yeah, I don't know.

Uh just consider that as you vote that what the implication could be on Emayus Avenue.

Okay, any other comments from the dais on uh Ms.

Santos, go ahead.

Thank you.

Um I think we can all agree there's been a lot of information that we've taken in these past weeks and even just today.

Um as council persons, we need to make decisions with our people's best interest at heart, and I appreciate the work that went into boot 20, but I think it needs to be stronger.

So that's why I'm supporting the curative amendment instead.

Other municipalities have done it.

Um the people we represent are literally begging us to do this, so I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Any other comments from the diet.

Mr.

Pungo, go ahead.

I started today kind of talking about the difficulty of this kind of decision.

Um I can respect everything we've heard up until now.

I think you know what stands true to me is that there's one thing that is certain in my mind, it's that I don't have a single perspective that has been fully supported by all parties about the curative amendment.

I think there's so much uncertainty behind it.

Some folks will say yes, some folks will say no, some lawyers say yes, some lawyers say no.

Um some districts are similar to ours, some are completely different.

You know, again, even just the understanding from our local planning commission, I just in good faith in trying to serve the people of Allentown, I don't know that I can take that risk on a maybe, and I would like to work diligently to vote to strengthen Bill 20 after a passage.

And again, we already ran through the timeline.

That's the whole thing we were discussing earlier in this meeting about getting something done by August and trying to get something in the books, trying to make sure we can expedite this as soon as possible.

I think there's tools we can use for our noise ordinance to set some of these parameters for some of these more critical items.

I think there's things we can do.

And honestly, I think I could not vote for the MCA and be happy with myself if something were to happen and it were to be challenged, and then all of a sudden data centers get free reign in Allentown, and that for that reason, I just can't support it.

And so I believe me, I want to I want stronger regulations.

I want our folks to feel like they are being protected, and I just don't know that that's a guarantee.

What is a guarantee is if we pass Bill 20 tonight, we have something.

And I would like to just say I think again, as part of the review process, there is that required zoning hearing board.

And yes, it's important for the people to come out and voice their concerns about the health and safety standards that this poses because that will help the zoning hearing board make those decisions.

And on top of that, these surveys, they don't live in a vacuum.

It's not just like, okay, well, if it's far enough from the building, then that's fine.

Well, if the noise survey says this is going to be too loud, well, okay, yeah, maybe it met the initial distance requirement and we add it a little bit, but you know, based off of the noise or the heat or anything else, there could be more reasons to say, hey, this just isn't a suitable site.

I think we take it for granted that this, like just because it could work means it's going to happen.

That's not the case at all.

The train has not left the station, the bell is ringing, and I think there's an opportunity for us to give the people something, and I think I don't want to risk our opportunity to provide some protection for maximum protection, especially since we've already heard there are so many other factors that go into this legality.

We can't restrict, we can't say people have to do certain things per law.

So I know there are a ton of ideas, and I think we're gonna take every idea that's legally allowable for us to enforce, but I think there's also a misunderstanding of how far some of these things we can take.

So again, I I just can't put the risk of the folks here in Allentown in I can't take that vote in that way.

So I will not be voting for the MCA.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um Mr.

Brender, go ahead.

Sorry.

Thank you.

Um I think to I don't want to keep reiterating things for everyone, but um, no one up here is taking this decision lightly.

Um and I think a lot of people have said yes, it's not, it has not been an easy process to even get to where we are right now.

Um, I do want to note public comment, emails, um community meeting feedback.

This is super crucial in not just this, but refining our codes at large.

Um, so a lot of the the even the comments someone made about uh how we're advertising things, how we're making notifications.

I mean, that that can be impacted and folded into zoning, not just related to data centers, but how we do that for other things.

So I just want to encourage people, you know, this process is super crucial.

Um a lot of people come out when there's a lot of hot topic issues, but you know, this is a sort of engagement that really helps us as a city, you know, all of us get better.

Um so with respect to this, this the MCA and also the bill.

I'll just do all this now so I don't have to do it twice.

But any case, um, as you've heard just in in dialogue up here, there's an immense amount of nuance when it comes to these decisions.

Um through I I know that multiple people on the on the diocese have have met with lots of people.

I've met with subject matter experts, some in this room, you know, some who are in our zoning, various attorneys, people with um on a planning commission.

It's been a lot of information.

Um I'm not professionally I'm not a land use person, so um, it's been a learning experience for me throughout this this process.

Um I also understand there's a lot of limitations, I think to just what some people have have stated.

Like it it would be great to be able to just say, hey, we want to do all these things.

But the municipal planning code clearly outlines what we can and cannot do.

We have to be able to provide use cases in the city, and we have to do it at a set amount.

That set amount, I think is is is something that could be you know explored.

But some of these things we can't just ratchet up just for the sake of doing it.

We have to be very strategic in what we're doing, and I think that's what the administration and the planning commission have done so far.

Um I'd also like just to kind of note that through where we are with Bill 20, if you haven't um, if you've if you're jumping in kind of where we are right now, this has been a multi-month process.

This has not just been a um it was delivered yesterday, and I I don't know if I could just you'll ask quick.

Do you do you remember when this started on on when did the morning call article come out?

Um May 17th.

Yes, right.

The uh the bill was first introduced by city council, I believe, in in March.

I have those dates on the previous slide, but so there was the the introduction before city council in March.

Um it went to Lehigh Valley Planning Commission, both at the comprehensive planning commission meeting, and then it went to the full planning commission meeting over at L VPC.

Then it went to the Allentown Planning Commission, and then it went to the um the Allentown CED community economic development committee meeting.

So after all of those meetings, it took that much time to get it ready to be advertised, and then when it was advertised, um, which I believe was May 17th off the top of my head, but but don't quote me.

Um that is uh we started getting a lot of feedback on it.

Yeah, so I I'm only calling that out to say there is a pretty long arc of work to get to where we are.

I a hundred percent agree with everyone that it there are many more things we could strengthen this bill.

And I think a lot of those examples have come up with people tonight, last week.

I know council members here have voiced many things that we could do.

Um they seem to be distilled down to let's just say less than 10.

Um I don't know out of those items that we're talking about that we are going to get to a point where there's a significant change in what Bill 20 has now to what we can apply on these.

My concern comes into if we try to effectively pause that process, we are gonna end up going through a long arc to get to pretty much where we are right now, with some strengthening.

And I and I I would support that, and I think we're all under that same same vein here.

But ultimately, what I don't want to do is pause and then get some type of person coming in, some type of question to council person pungo's statement.

I've heard five different answers when it comes to the the curative amendment.

I never thought I would say the word curative so many times in my life in the past week and a half, but it's been it's it's challenging because there are there are a lot of experts and a lot of opinions and a lot of thoughts and a lot of case law, and we're trying to navigate that.

Um so one of the things I do want to also say with the curative amendment process is that it requires us, council, to deliver a past bill within 180 days.

So I know a lot of we're all talking about pausing, we're all talking about protection, that kind of stuff.

There's a lot of work to get that bill passed through here with 180 days because it it's a body still ready to help already.

Excuse me.

Point of order, excuse me.

Hold on, someone has a floor, uh, let's let him speak, and then you'll have an option of courtesy of the floor.

Thank you.

And I appreciate all the engagement, that kind of stuff.

But the the challenge still comes into the fact that it needs to still go through that whole cycle, and there is a lot of work, and that is one of my large concerns with exposing the city to something happening where we don't get through that in that 180 days.

And it is one of the one more time, folks.

You will have an opportunity, everyone will have an opportunity to speak at the appropriate time.

Okay.

We're just let him speak first, and then we'll have courtesy the floor.

No one misses a chance.

Thank you.

So just in closing, uh I will say very truthfully, I went back and forth on this 15 times.

Um, and many of my colleagues can because I you know, I've I've been you know, try to lament like what what what you know questions that I've been putting out there for this, and and it's it's a it's a challenging one, but I think at this point the safest route for us as a city is to put something through and then actively work aggressively to make the few changes we can do right away, and then the longer changes because we get to a point where we have a process in place, we have a bill, we have protection sitting here, and then we can make um those changes going forward.

So I unfortunately, and and I I I would love to support this, but I I you know I I can't support this at this point because I can't run the risk of us having not having something that's in place right now and something falling through in the long run.

So I I I truly appreciate everyone's feedback.

I truly appreciate everyone's time, but like that's that's one of the challenges where I am right now.

So thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Um any other comments from the dias.

Um Ms.

Moto, go ahead.

I really like the fact that um with the accurate amendment, we can wait 180 180 days, but at the same time is not a for sure thing.

I mean, there's a lot of planning uh that goes with this uh with this legislation.

Um but I'm um at the same time, I'm just so disappointed because I feel that I was that we were that most of us were blindsided.

I mean, uh, we just we recently find this out about the data center and all the negative that that goes so low with the data center.

And uh like I mentioned before, uh I got a lot of phone calls, a lot of emails.

I mean, I live almost right across the street from the the data center on Emeus Avenue, so my neighbors are not happy, my community's not happy, and I'm not happy.

Um this is a really hard decision, a really hard decision.

Um but the reality is that I have to go with the for sure thing, you know.

Um we just have to work really hard and and make Bill 20 better.

Thank you.

Okay, um, any other comments from the dais.

Okay, we're gonna move to courtesy of the floor portion.

This is your opportunity to speak about the curative amendment and only the curative amendment.

So um we can't discuss things that don't involve what we're what we're discussing at this moment.

So I hope that makes you know it works for everyone.

So we'll start cursing the floor.

Um we don't have to work off cars at this one, so you can just come one at a time.

And um, it's okay.

Welcome.

That's uh Ginny Marcel Kurzlik, food and water watch.

Um this idea that 180 days might not be enough.

180 days is plenty of time.

Everybody, everybody's doing it.

Um you're not starting right from scratch.

There are there are really two key things that you need to improve in this bill to make it not a bad bill, because it is a bad bill.

Number one, restrict this use just to the IM district.

You're you that complies with your zoning.

Your zoning identifies the IM district for high impact uses.

The IG district is only for low to medium impacts, and that is not what a data center is.

People have been talking about that.

So, number one, restrict it to the IM.

You're also restricting the number of data centers you'd be stuck with, which is clearly what you want and what the people want.

Why would you add it to the IG district where it's inappropriate and increase the number like double the number of potential data center projects?

It doesn't make any sense at all.

And then the other thing that I think is the strongest thing to do is it restricting to the IM, that's number one.

But after that, increase the setbacks and looking at your your map, as I did on the GIS map, uh you can you can increase it from 200 feet from sensitive receptors without any risk of being exclusionary.

Those are the two big things to change.

Noise ordinances, um water use, all these other reports or surveys that have to be done, which let's be honest, those are things that the developer does and submits to you.

We've all seen traffic studies.

Um those are things that are nice to have, but those are performance standards and nebulous things.

I heard uh this woman's she's not here now, but who spoke really well about measurable, um measurable things to have.

So those are nice, they take those those are things that take a lot of time.

But increasing the setbacks, restricting this to the IM, you don't need anywhere near 180 days to do that.

But those are key things to protect your people.

So I hope you vote number one, no on Bill 20, and what I'm supposed to be speaking about, yes, on the municipal curative amendment.

Thank you.

Hi again.

Um I just want to reiterate there's a reason why Langan Engineering had the Allentown Planning Council move it, and it's because they wanted Bill 20 to go through.

Another thing I want to say, several of you have voiced concern that if you pass Bill 20, maybe in a you know a couple weeks you could just get something changed, like from 200 feet to 500 feet.

The people who want that, or the people you have to rely on to do that for you or the same people who rub polled us and changed last minute to vote on the data center on Emmaus Avenue.

I trust you guys.

I I respectfully and professionally do not trust the Allentown Planning Commission when I spent my entire weekend canvassing door to door to get people to show up to that vote, but then because Bill 20 was delayed, which thank you for delaying it that day, uh, Langan Engineering didn't want to show up.

So if you guys come up with something that is as as simple as, hey, let's just require it to be 500 feet.

The people who are the people who would have to help you do that are the same ones that are rug pulling and squashing our efforts to try to defend against these data centers.

The biggest way to fight opposition to data centers that these developers use is by delaying last minute.

And by delaying last minute when we try to get people to come to these things who have jobs who have to take off of work.

That that's that's what silences opposition.

So someone who blatantly enables Langan engineering to squash opposition through the delays, like the Allentown Planning Commission.

I don't I don't trust them.

Please don't put everything in their hands by passing Bill 20.

Please give yourselves the six months.

Maybe you don't need the whole six months.

Please pass the curative amendment.

Do not put everything in the hands of the downtown planning commission.

Thank you.

We'll continue.

Just remember curative amendment only.

We're discussing it at this point.

Thank you.

Yes, curative amendment.

I've grown fortified by my community in the last hour and a half and also grown something of a spine for myself.

So I am actually gonna read what I wrote about the curative amendment.

Um, specifically the curative amendment that Representative Gerlock has proposed tonight.

To reiterate, my name is Madeline Robinson.

I am uh Allentown resident of College Drive in the West End.

A sincere thank you to the EIC, the EAC, City Council, and other advocates for all the work you've done so far on interpreting and progressing these protections for the public.

However, I am scared, I am worried.

Without further definition of what data centers can and cannot do in our community with specificity, Bill 20 as it stands, is a bait and switch for the people of Allentown to believe that they are being protected through this bill when they are in fact being threatened with a danger, we are being fed with a spoonful of sugar.

This danger includes that in Bill 20, there are special exception guidelines permission for permission for data center construction in the kinds of districts that the proposed project at AS AV MAS AV is currently in.

This allows for permission for data centers to be loopholed and backdoored into reality in the future.

I understand that we are eager to pass Bill 20 to add at least some basic guidelines for future data center use for your future data center center zoning usage.

But we need to reconsider and recenter this on what Bill 20 means for the one currently in development.

As a gentleman before me said, there's a reason that the developer pulled out of that meeting due to public comment and public backlash.

They wouldn't have done that if they didn't believe that change was possible due to this bill passing or not.

Please, council people, I encourage you to enact the 180-day curative municipal amendment to pause data center applications and approval.

Reconsider, rewrite, and fortify a bill that demands stronger requirements and restrictions on any and all data centers.

We need strong protections now and in the future, not just out of ASAV, and not just through Bill 20.

Please pass the curative amendment and then protect us.

Thank you for your time.

Hi, my name's Thank you for mentioning your name.

Thanks.

Corinne Lalick.

I'm a South Allentown resident.

Um I wanted to start off by quoting, I believe it was Jennifer Gomez at the last city council meeting about this, when you said we worked on this for six months and nobody said anything.

You can speak to that doesn't make it okay.

That doesn't make it okay.

You're you're they're they're telling us at the MAS Av project, there's there's this little line in this piece of paper that lets these people, these same people decide what the setbacks is to protect them, to protect the children from Camelot, right?

A little line.

Sorry if I don't trust these people to do that for me.

Like this is the best that they could come up with.

I printed it out.

I printed it out for everybody here.

Like I'm an artist, right?

I don't speak legalese.

I literally like don't do this at all.

And the fact that a data center was going up in my neighborhood, I have spent countless hours researching what a municipal what the fuck a curitable.

I've spent so much time trying to figure out what a curative municipal amendment means.

I'm an artist.

You're a city council, this is your job.

There are people here who are a lot smarter than me who do this for a living who are telling you to go with the municipal, municipal curative amendment.

And it is so unbelievably frustrating to hear you say, I want to protect the people of Allentown, but I can't do this because I don't know, or this or that, or I blah blah blah.

You have had time.

Right.

I started learning about this when the morning call article broke.

Like what, a month ago.

So do your do your job.

You have 180 days.

Look at what I've done in a month.

I started a petition against the MAS Av Data Center.

3,500 signatures.

I have emailed every single one of you about it, which, and I've also emailed Jennifer Gomez.

I've emailed the Allentown EAC to try to keep this from happening.

And the people that I trust are telling me a municipal curative amendment is the best way to do that.

And sorry, I don't I don't trust these people at all.

Like I don't trust them to be the voice of reason to protect to protect us to protect people from these data centers.

I I don't you don't have our best interest in mind.

I'm sorry.

Like the municipal curative amendment is the way to go.

There's a reason people are doing this.

There is a reason that there are people here asking you to do it because I've been spending the last month of my life trying to figure out how to keep this from happening in my fucking neighborhood.

Final word.

Thank you for your time.

Uh point of order of any other individuals coming up.

We appreciate your passion.

But if you could please follow our council rules, we really appreciate it.

Thank you.

Well, I'm an artist.

This seems completely odd to me.

You spent the time to come up with Bill 20.

You've created something of what seems to be, or at least you're admitting to, a reasonable outline to go forward with.

However, if you go forward with it, you admittedly need to change some things in it or reinforce what seems to be loose language and red flags of problems that would occur or you would allow to occur.

And all that time that you've done that work, you're fearful of bringing Bill 20 into a curative amendment and do the finality that you need or you propose that you will implement if you pass Bill 20.

It's odd.

It's silly.

It seems stupid.

More than anything, though, it seems to play to fear.

And the problem with playing to fear in a situation where a new item such as the data centers present.

Is that the structure itself is not being organized from the beginning?

You've you've got the data center is not a warehouse.

The function that occurs in it and the impact that it has is completely different than a warehouse.

You've got the footprint in front of you.

You've spent the time on it.

Go to the curative amendment, bring that footprint in, look at the points you already discussed, reinforce them properly in the curative amendment and bring it forward to the public.

If that can't do that in 180 days, you don't deserve to be sitting on this council.

Hi, uh my name's Owen LeVan Euler.

I'm not actually a resident of Allentown, I'm a resident of Sladington.

Um, but I'm with Food and Water Watch.

Sorry, I'm gonna fix this real quick.

Um so I wasn't planning on speaking tonight because I'm not from Allentown.

Um, but you know, since graduating I've spent a lot of time coming in and out of Allentown and honestly going around the Lehigh Valley doing the work that I'm doing with food and water watch and also my other job too.

I work two jobs, hi.

Um and you know, I could be spending my time in a lot of different ways.

Um, you know, I don't have to be here tonight.

I haven't had to come to any of these, actually.

Um, you know, I could be spending time with my partner or my family or my friends, or hell, having a moment to myself for once.

Um, but I'm here because you know what this squabbling tells me is that you know, this is how fascism wins.

You know, this is how the powers that be keep us distracted from what actually matters, you know, protecting our communities.

Can you can you speak to the curative amendment, please?

Yes, I'm going to.

Thank you.

So, as it was going to get to.

Um, this curative amendment, uh, I understand your apprehension.

I really do.

Um, because I'm not gonna pretend to understand half of it either.

Um, but what I have learned over the last several weeks is that this would guarantee you the time to come up with a solution and to actually come up with protections.

I I understand that you think that Bill 20 in its current form would be a guarantee for it at least something, but I don't see that as it is, because there's nothing in this bill that is strong language that is defendable by the city or by any organization or person in the city.

All it does is help out developers and corporations that don't have our interests in mind at all.

They just care about themselves.

This curative amendment would allow you guys to actually put in that language to protect us.

Sure, it might take some time, but uh all of these back and forth amendments that you wanna do after you pass Bill 20 in its current form, we don't know how long that's gonna take.

You could you could say that it would be August at the earliest, sure.

But I mean, what happens when December rolls around and we still don't have amendments on the table?

I mean, we can't even wait until September.

Like the these projects are going in, whether we like it or not, unfortunately.

And you know, there should be more protections for us to fight back against these projects because we don't want them here.

And this is this is your chance to do that.

This is your chance to win good favor, and this is your chance to actually stick to something.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Um, my name is Jasmine Davis.

I am not from here, I'm from Delaware actually, but I've been in Allentown for the past five years for school.

Um I have a background in forensic science as well as crime science and pre-wall.

So I don't understand the political side of it, but knowing the terminology that has been brought up as um an issue for this um bill.

And to the concerns that were addressed by um everyone that said that they did not want the uh carable amendment.

Curative amendment.

Um would the problem of it being challenged in court not be the same if Bill 20 passes without the curative amendment.

Because looking at it from a court side from the court side, if a bill has a bunch of should would coulds or other like suggestive language to this side's point of view from earlier, if a data center has a high enough legal team, they can still challenge it.

They can still fight against it just as you are afraid of happening if you don't pass Bill 20.

So I think that the curative amendment does allow you the time that is that can be useful.

It's been less than 180 days since the March proposal that they had originally.

So if you have double that time, you can make it double as strong.

It's not a we're afraid or we're scared of um not having anything you place.

If we have something in place and it takes longer to make these amendments to it without the curative amendment, then what's the point?

What is the point of having it in the first place?

If you are worried about the query, if you're worried about the legality of it, then sit down and make it stronger.

Don't pass something because of fear.

What has ever what good has ever come from us being scared?

Really?

That this bill presents.

There is nothing.

So please keep that in mind.

You are going to be challenged regardless.

So do it in the favor of the people and of the environment.

Thank you.

Hello again, Alicia, uh downtown Allentown resident.

Uh I did not have a chance to write this down, so please bear with me.

Um I wanted to directly address uh something that council person Binder brought up, which is a concern that 180 days as proposed in the municipal curative amendment would not be enough to get a bill passed.

Um I would ask, would we not then have that same concern about amending Bill 20 if it was passed as it is?

I I've heard uh comments from today saying that you know, we're we're trying with the curative amendment, we're trying to bypass good for the sake of perfect, but I I don't see it that way.

I see it as trying to get something good in lieu of something, the bill that could harm our community.

Um I'm so sorry, I know I had something else to say, and it is gone.

Um take a couple seconds to say yeah.

Yeah, no, it's gone, gone.

I apologize, but thank you for your time.

Sorry.

Um Mr.

Brain, go ahead.

If it if I can just real quick on that one, just for the the timing and what I was saying.

So I I think the could the concern I'm I'm saying on that is we can do something and then do two consecutive things which will be short time or short amount of time to be able to pass.

We from the cadence of, and I'm this my first year on this one, but like we have a budget time coming up, we have a lot of like this would put us right in the middle of a lot of other things, and I'm not saying that that's inconvenient or convenient, but being realistic about it.

I'm just trying to understand the timing of it, and that's where my concern comes into with that 1080 days.

I'm looking at it more as we can go do something now, take care of a lot of the short things immediately, and then give time to be able to focus on the longer things at which would get us to that point.

So I just wanted to clarify that was my concern with me with the 180.

So thank you.

Um I I have a comment on that.

If you're already well, but but this is to address that.

If you were to pass bill 20, you can't point a border.

I'm sorry, I have other folks that have been waiting.

I just I have to be fair.

No, I'm I think it's okay.

You can't very quickly go and and change the zoning.

If you vote on bill 20, you're allowing this use in the IG, you can't quickly remove it from the IG.

That's like a big zoning ordinance change.

And in the meantime, your green lighting 2401.

Got it.

Thanks.

Um, Mays, can we have someone who's next who hasn't spoken on a curative amendment?

Could I possibly have 30 more seconds?

Yeah.

Okay, no, that's that's you might you got it back.

Um go ahead.

Okay, thank you.

Yeah, the I think just the uh the other thing that I wanted to say was, you know, I I get that most of us just found out about this very recently, even though you said it's been in the works for a while.

Um the thing I'll say there is if the community is not finding out about these things until very like until very recently, it to me means the method of communication is not sufficient for the community to get engaged.

Thank you.

I'm gonna be keeping time.

Uh we're having some IT issues right now.

So I'll just let you know when you have 30 seconds.

Okay.

Okay, thanks.

Thank you.

Travis Feller.

I didn't fill out a card.

I can with from address if you need it.

Um thank you for your time and your service.

Um so I'm I've been listening and I was here, you know, for the last meeting.

I've done some of my own research as much as I can to try and understand, you know, the topic.

Uh, from what I've heard from experts here, uh, that uh I trust their expertise, I trust their experience.

Um the MCA, I'm gonna say that because it's a lot harder to say the full uh full phrase um does not propose applications.

So I I keep hearing people uh believing that it will be a complete blanket of protection for 180 days.

That's not what I heard though, um, from the expertise.

Uh what I heard is it prevents uh landowner curative amendments from being filed, um which also was stated as being unlikely and and not highly a used process.

So um the MCA is not a comprehensive protection.

The 180 days only is for the landowner curative amendment.

And using the example project that people reference 2401, which I'm in from Allentown.

I I've lived on the South Side, I live on the West Side now.

I would not want to see any data centers here personally, but as it's been stated, we have to allow it.

So I think we need to put some structure, some some guardrails in place, and I think that's what uh Bill 20 does.

Um the speculation that the project uh deferred the meeting because we were gonna pass this curative amendment, and that's gonna protect us for 180 days.

And um the curative amendment for the MCA does not protect us because they've already filed their own curative amendment.

So it doesn't apply.

The the current zoning code won't apply, Bill 20 won't apply.

And if Bill 20, if they elect to remove their application and reapply, from what I understand, our authorities actually have more control than they do today under the current zoning code because they can enforce additional setbacks for things like Cam Law and other reasons.

So my takeaway is Bill 20 is our our best bet at this very moment.

Uh the curative amendment would would not provide sufficient protection, and I ask you to to vote yes on Bill 20.

Um lastly, uh, I agree with uh what the previous woman just stated, I was thinking the same thing, which is uh I think maybe as a city we we need to amend the way me we communicate.

Obviously, newspaper is probably insufficient these days, and um maybe some form of electronic communication would help.

So thank you.

Welcome.

Hello.

Uh my name's Kevin Fulliger.

I'm actually a neighbor from uh Bethlehem, and I've been here at the previous meeting, sat through this entire meeting, and I've seen a lot of everybody going back and forth, different ideas, can't tell what they want to do, a lot of uh damned if you do, damned if you don't, kind of uh situation that we seem to be in.

I don't envy your positions, as it's been said many times here tonight, and I personally, as somebody observing all of this, feel that there's been too much haze, too much fog, not a lot of clear and concise things.

So I'm here to ask you that if you're unsure of what to believe and what is accurate and what is not, go with your gut and listen to the people.

All of us here, more or less, are in support of uh the curative amendment.

And I think if you can't trust what you've been told, you should at least trust your people.

All of us are gonna be the ones who have to deal with it, you included.

So I'd say go with the people's vote.

We want to get rid of amendment.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Hi, my name's Olivia Schaefer.

I've lived in Allentown for the past five years.

I don't usually do this kind of thing, so I might be a little shaky.

Um, I just have a couple bullet points that I wanted to address with you.

So as was stated before, if there was sufficient time for this Bill 20 to be written and brought in front of council and brought in front of us since March, how are some council members not thinking that six months will be enough time to amend a re an already written bill?

I don't agree that excuse me.

I don't agree that passing amendments after passing Bill 20 would actually provide us with the same protections as taking the 180 days to actually rebuild this bill in a way that is stronger.

We're saying, you know, a curative amendment is not a guarantee.

Neither are the amendments.

We just went back and forth for how long talking about how quickly can we do this?

Put the 180 days in place.

And then you have 180 days to work on it.

I don't see why we're preventing ourselves from more time to address the issues that again, as stated previously, are being brought to you by your constituents.

People who elected you to these very seats that you are sitting at.

If nothing else, as was said by the gentleman before me, listen to your constituents.

We are here telling you to pass the curative amendment to take the 180 days and strengthen this bill.

Thank you.

No, I didn't think I had to come up here twice to beg, but here I am.

So you're saying you want to protect the people of Allentown, right?

And can you repeat your name one more time just for the record?

Elliot Miller.

Thank you.

2319 Almred Ev.

You say you want to protect the people of Alentown, right?

But then you're saying 180 days is not enough time, so you're gonna go ahead and pass a bill that will let data centers just run amok.

Um without all this language you keep talking about that you're so concerned about.

You're so concerned about the language, you're so concerned about this bill and what they have the right to do, what they don't have the right to do, but you're saying 180 days isn't enough time.

School children, school children have 180 days to learn an entire grade's worth of stuff, and you can't learn about a curative amendment, you can't learn what these data centers do.

You can't learn to fix the language on this bill.

You're telling me that if school children can do that in 180 days, you educated adults cannot.

That makes me question your integrity.

It really does, because you councilwoman Gerlock, she's saying curative amendment.

We need more time, we need to review this.

And you guys are like, well, let's pass a bill, and then we'll just undo it later.

But they have lawyers.

And I know that you're afraid of a lawsuit.

I know you're afraid of what's to come, but you have nothing to fear but fear itself, as one wise man once said.

Okay, so I really don't understand what you're afraid of.

You're afraid of a big bad lawyer.

You have a whole city of people to protect by passing this curative amendment.

You can go over everything.

You have so much time, infinite amount of time to learn, infinite amount of time to educate yourselves, educate others, communicate with your constituents who are here begging you to pass his curative amendment.

We're begging.

I I know you all have jobs, I have a job, but this is also your job.

I don't want to have to waste any more time coming here, begging for fresh air, begging for you to pass an amendment, begging for you to take us seriously.

You have 180 days, and I really suggest that you use it.

Thank you.

Have a great night.

Okay.

Hi again.

Um once again for the record.

My name is William Garecki, 3124 Pearl Avenue.

Um I just want to say thank you again for still taking the time to really think on this.

Um, and just wanted to speak on always behalf of myself, hopefully behalf of my fellow residents that no matter what decision you go with, we're gonna keep showing up.

And uh I really do hope that this does inspire like what a lot of people were saying, just more advertising, I guess, about these meetings and bills and whatnot.

Um, some like social media presence would be much appreciated.

Um, I will say on like the younger end.

And um yeah, I guess like I feel like there's a lot of not understanding, but if we did go with the MCI, we're just I I it feels like the sentiment is that we would just throw up our hands and then you know if developers want to come in and do things and we couldn't do anything about it because we don't have a bill written, but that just based off of the impact of the people or the amount of people that are here today.

I just don't deem that to be true.

I just I don't know.

I'm in agreement that both are risky, and if you do pass it, people are gonna show up and they're gonna be angry.

If you go with the MCA, people are gonna show up and they're gonna be more in positive support of you.

I don't know.

I mean that could be my bad like bias because I'm here for the 180-day period, but yeah, I guess is what I gotta say.

Is either way, I'm still showing up.

I hope other people still show up.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um so it's gonna end our curves to the floor portion.

So um, Miss Ortega, can you call it I'm sorry?

Oh, I'm sorry.

Um coming up Quinn Allen, since you insist on it's for the rec for the record.

Um so as I said last time, you sworn an oath to the constant sworn an oath to uphold the constitution.

And I reminded you and I'll remind you again of amendment number 14, section one, where laws all ordinances or bills should not be passed if it deprives the citizens behind me of the life, liberty, or property.

Can you speak to the curative amendment part of the conversation please?

Yeah.

Well, I am and the constitution fits this.

And so I would suggest that you uh you know take the extra time 180 days, six months, a year, I don't care how long, to fix the issues that seems to be a problem in this bill and make it stronger, so it doesn't deprive people of their life liberty or property, or otherwise I'll take you all to court and sue you for their suffering if they if a data center comes up and it makes the citizens suffer.

And I'll share that and I'll share all that money with them.

Thank you.

Okay, so um Mr.

Ortega, we're gonna call a vote on the motion by Ms.

Gerlock.

I it's not gonna change the vote.

I know people are already said how they're gonna vote.

I just did want to read it into record that and the municipal planning code uh number three, it says upon the initiation of the procedures as set forth in clause one, the governing body shall not be required to entertain or consider any landowner's curative amendment.

We know this filed under section 609.1.

This is the part left out, nor shall the zoning hearing board be required to give a report requested under section 909.1.

We'll get to what that is, or 916.1, subsequent to the declaration and proposal based upon the grounds specified in the resolution required by the clause.

Now, if you're wondering what is 909.1, 909.1 in the municipal planning code, section 909.1 uh says jurisdiction, the zoning hearing board shall have exclusive jurisdiction to hear to hear and render final adjudications in the following areas.

It lists several of them and then it lists one that we keep talking about tonight.

Applications for special exceptions under the zoning ordinance.

So this is this municipal planning code is saying that the zoning hearing board is not required to um to hear special exceptions.

It's in the municipal plan municipal planning code.

I'm re I obviously I'm not reading it.

So can you speak to that so the sections that are referenced under the curative amendment for uh municipal curative amendments, as you mentioned, section 909.1, 916.1, it does say under the jurisdiction of zoning hearing boards substantive challenges to the validity of any land use ordinance except those brought before the governing body in pursuant to that section that it came from.

So when I read that and tell me what your interpretation is, when I read that, my interpretation is that the zoning hearing board does not have to hear cases of special exception based on the municipal planning code.

Is there a different interpretation?

So I'm reading that the jurisdiction falls to substantive challenges related to the zoning hearing board's jurisdiction.

Hold on, she's speaking.

I know we're in between.

And 916.1 also speaks to the validity of ordinance, substantive questions.

So these are speaking to landowner or municipal challenges to the ordinance.

906.2.

So just a question, Mr.

Pungo.

Related to that.

So I know under bill twenty, that's where we mandate the zoning hearing board, like uh a special exception approvals.

Under our current code, that is not currently required for a data center, correct?

That's correct.

It is.

I explained.

Right now, ma'am, ma'am.

Someone else is speaking.

Sorry, asking.

Someone else has the floor, please.

That's exactly my question.

So my question is Mr.

Hanzo.

Do you mind confirming or denying that?

I am sorry, I was reading the code.

Can you repeat the question, please?

Sorry.

So I know Bill 20 specifically makes the special uh exception use case for the zoning hearing board to hear it specifically under bill 20 for data centers.

Under our current code as currently written, it do would we require a data center to have to have get a special exception from the hearing zoning hearing board.

Under our current code, there could be circumstances depending on the interpretation, depending on the scale of the proposal where if it was a moderate if it was deemed to be moderate impact, then it may not even necessarily need to go for a special exception.

The bottom line is there would be a large variety of interpretive work that would be needed to determine whether or not it's a special exception.

Under the current code is written right now.

I can't give a straight or a simple straight answer that under all cases the special exception application would be required for for a data center.

And I'm talking broadly about any type of facility from the smallest co-location all the way up through the hyperscale.

It's fairly clear that the more intensive types of data center likely would require a special exception application, but as we've seen, defining specific types of data center is a matter with controversy.

So again, just kind of following this train of thought.

Then we revert back to our current zoning code.

To your point, you cannot confirm or deny whether or not there would be a zoning hearing approval required.

It depends on the case per area.

Is the that essentially also means there is a circumstance where a data center could get approved without needing a zoning hearing board, which yes, the MCA would deny, well, not allow for this interpretation, but if it was allowed to be approved without a hearing, it could still go through.

Yes, there are circumstances where it could be approved without a without a hearing.

Obviously, if I issue an interpretation, any act of the zoning officer is subject to appeal.

That's uh well-established right under the MPC, but there would be a right under the structure of the current code where the zoning office could could issue an interpretation of a certain facility is by right.

A small one.

Thank you.

Did I answer your question?

Did I answer your question?

It did.

Okay.

Okay.

Um so I think we're ready to call the vote.

Um, Ms.

Ortega, we're gonna be voting on the motion by Miss Gerlach.

Um, I mean it I voted on the planning coordinates.

It's a resolution to still vote.

It's all you're we're voting on the resolution, not the motion.

The resolution, yes.

I'm sorry, resolution.

Okay.

So this is the resolution initiating a municipal curative amendment review.

Mr.

Bender.

Um Ms.

Gerlock, yes.

Ms.

Moda, no, Mr.

Pungo.

No.

Ms.

Santos, yes, and Mr.

Napoli.

No.

Mr.

President, you have two yes and four nays.

It fails.

Okay.

Absolutely.

Okay, so we're gonna we're gonna be moving along.

Um when's the opportunity to uh untable uh so uh the exact language is we need a motion to take from the table.

I'm sorry, untable make a motion to take from the table.

Okay, and I'll second it.

So we'll call a vote on a motion to untable bill twenty.

Uh Mr.

Bender.

Yes, Ms.

Gerlock, yes, Miss Moda.

Yes, Mr.

Pungo, yes, Miss Santos, yes, and Mr.

Napoli.

Yes, Mr.

President, you have 60As and no names.

Okay, so Bill 20 is back on the dias.

Ms.

Monterrey, we did we did public comment.

Are we covered on that?

It's time for a vote.

Okay, cool.

Just making sure I didn't I'm not missing anything.

So we are gonna vote on bill twenty.

Um call the vote, please.

Okay.

This is on Bill 20.

Uh, Mr.

Bender.

Yes.

Ms.

Gerlock.

No.

Miss Moda.

Yes.

Mr.

Pongo.

Yes.

Miss Santos.

No.

Mr.

Napoli.

Yes.

Mr.

President, you have four years and two nays in passes.

Lincoln Engineering, thanks.

Hey, hey.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

You really should.

I hope you never have another night's sleep again.

Good night.

Good freaking job, man.

Okay, we're gonna move along to the city.

Um let's see.

This kills people.

Uh Bill 43 is next up on the agenda.

Yes.

Bill 43 amends the 2026 general fund budget to provide for a supplemental appropriation of $50,000 from Bloomberg Philanthropies to administer a third round of the Youth Climate Action Fund.

Okay.

Any comments from the dias on Bill 43?

Um any comments from the public.

Okay, we'll call the vote.

Mr.

Bender.

Yes.

Ms.

Gerlock.

Yes.

Ms.

Moda.

Yes.

Mr.

Pongo.

Yes.

Miss Santos.

Yes.

And Mr.

Nakoli.

Yes.

Mr.

President 6A's and no nays.

Okay.

Moving along, Bill 44.

Bill 44 amends the 2020 amends part one of the administrative legislation.

Chapter 12, authorities, boards, and commissions, Article 15 Council of Youth by updating its purpose and practices.

Okay, thank you.

Any comments from the diet on Bill 44?

Or from the it was moved favorably from oh yep, my committee.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Bender.

And any comments from the public.

We do have a comment.

Okay, perfect.

On Bill 44.

Ellie Vet Baez.

Jack.

Juventus.

Welcome.

Hi, thank you.

Um everybody.

My name is Jay Liebet Baez.

I serve as a youth president of the Healthy Love Club for Turning Point Lehigh Valley.

I had to emphasize on the Lehigh Valley.

The club's mission is to eliminate teen dating abuse in the Lehigh Valley in Northampton County.

And I support the city's effort to allow young people to be heard more.

And as a youth myself, I wish there was more opportunities for me to feel like the city cared more about the youth and for the city to acknowledge the youth more and make spaces for them.

It would be an amazing opportunity for the city to personally engage with the youth and make them feel heard with this bill.

And I appreciate your time if you're hearing me.

Quick and easy.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I realize that it's late, but you know, we have some people involved with this initiative who have spent a long time waiting.

We have uh we have Brayley, who's our violence or violence prevention coordinator.

We have MJ from the police department, Avery from our office.

Um, this is uh 30 percent of the city of Islandown is under 18, and this is the way that we think that we can give them a voice.

Uh we're gonna use this model legislature, we're gonna use this ordinance to to try to reform, you know, to try to look at other uh as we reform other boards that haven't had life that haven't been all that active.

We're gonna try to reactivate them using the same mechanism.

But I'd like to brilliant opportunity to talk about about this initiative, if you don't mind.

Oh, for sure.

Um by the way, nice to meet you.

Um we've heard your name a few times, so it's great to see you in person.

Thank you.

That's a good thing.

Um, I don't know if I should say good evening or good night.

Uh, but um before I begin, I want to I want to acknowledge the pain that our city's carrying.

Uh recent acts of violence have impacted families, neighborhoods, and our entire community.

Uh we mourn those we have lost, and we stand with those who continue to grieve.

Um, this moment reminds us that the work before us is needed.

Um at the same time, we must be honest with ourselves that the challenges facing our youth did not emerge overnight.

They would not be solved overnight.

Violence is a complex issue rooted in many factors such as trauma, disconnection, uh lack of opportunity, and fractured relationships.

Um there is no single solution, but um this is a very meaningful steps.

Um over the last several months, our city has been working alongside incredible coalition of partners.

Some of them are in this room here, uh, community organizations, schools, service providers, faith leaders, outreach workers, residents, and young people themselves.

We had J speak here.

Um, and we began to sort of build a comprehensive violence prevention strategy for the city of Island Town.

One theme was consistent in every conversation with our young people.

Young people want a voice.

Uh the violence prevention plan we are building cannot succeed without youth leadership.

If we're serious about reducing violence, uh we we must create it with youth sitting at the table.

Uh it creates a structure for young people to advise, inform, and help shape the decisions to impact their lives.

Uh it also creates a bridge between City Hall and our next generation of leaders.

Uh we're not engaged, we're not just doing engagement, uh, we're doing it with them, right?

So I stand before you today as someone also with lived experience.

Years ago, I was also a young person navigating my own challenges.

Um, and what changed the trajectory of my life was not a policy, it was a person who was a basketball coach who chose to invest in me and a group of knucklehead kids running around the South Bronx in New York City uh to mentor us to see that we could do more.

Um the power of engagement works, the power of relationship works, the power of one adult believing in one young person works, and so I asked you city council to imagine what becomes possible when an entire city chooses to show up for its youth.

So tonight I think Allentown has a great opportunity to send the message to every young person.

We see you, we value you, your experience matters, your ideas matter, your voice belongs in this city.

Um, and the greatest investment we can make is not in just programs, um, but it is in people.

So I respectfully ask for your support in this ordinance um and your continued commitments ensuring that youth uh are not only included in in our vision for say for Allen Town, but our active partners in helping us achieve it.

So thank you.

Okay, uh thank you.

Uh appreciate that.

Any other comments from the public or the dais?

Um go ahead, Mr.

Bender.

I just want to say I know this was a long evening, and I just thank you for for presenting and and sticking with it.

I know it was a lot, so um, but I appreciate that.

And it's great to see the engagement.

Okay.

Mr.

Pungo, go ahead.

And look, man, I really resonate with your vision.

I love that.

I think it's so important for us to engage people where they're at.

You know, there's so many families who don't get the opportunity to get involved, and you know, parents that are working overtime to provide for their kids, and then you know they just need that right person.

So I love this.

I I would love to see this grow and expand in our city, and I think there's just such a great opportunity when we all just take time out of our days to invest in people.

So I appreciate that.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, uh, we will call a vote on bill 44.

Um, Bill 44, Mr.

Bender.

Yes, Miss Skrlock, yes, Miss Moda, yes, Mr.

Pungo, yes, Miss Santos, yes, and Mr.

Napoli.

Yes, Mr.

President, you have six years and no names.

Okay, on to Bill 47.

Bill 47 amends the 2026 capital fund budget to provide for a supplemental appropriation of 649,000 one hundred thirty-nine dollars and fifteen cents from the acquiesced film forming films class action awards to offset the cost of any PFAS remediation systems.

The city is required to install under federal and state regulations.

The three million settlement payment will be made in eight more installments through 2033.

The first settlement payment from BASF is in the amount of 190,684 dollars and sixty-two cents.

Additionally, there was a settlement payment from TICO in the amount of 458,454.53 cents.

The total of these sources thus far is six hundred forty-nine thousand one hundred-nine dollars and fifteen cents and represents ninety-five percent of TICO and BASF settlement claims.

The total amount of settle funds the city has received thus far through its participation in PFAS affirmative litigation is three million seven hundred and seventy-four thousand nine hundred and sixty-five dollars and twelve cents.

Okay, thank you.

And this was this came out of our public work committee, uh, Vice President Mota.

Yes, and he passed uh favorably.

Okay, thank you.

Uh, any comments from the dias on Bill 47?

Or from the public.

Okay, can you call a vote, please?

Mr.

Bender.

Yes.

Ms.

Gerlock, yes, Miss Moda.

Yes, Mr.

Punko.

Yes.

Ms.

Santos, yes.

And Mr.

Nappoli.

Yes.

Mr.

President, you have six years and no nights.

Okay, next up, Bill 48.

Bill 48 amends the 2026 Trexler fund by authorizing a supplemental appropriation in the amount of 322,955.50 to the parks and recreation department to support the operating and capital budgets.

This is inclusive of the city match required in the agreement, which needs to correspondingly increase 18,280 and 50 cents to follow the six percent match requirement.

This is part of the 2026 Trexler Capital Project Allocation.

Okay, and this came out of our parts and recommendation, Miss Antos.

Yes, this was forwarded favorably to full council.

Okay, thank you.

Uh any comments from the day.

Or from the public.

Okay.

Mr.

Bender.

Yes.

Ms.

Girloch?

Yes.

Miss Moda.

Yes.

Mr.

Pungo.

Yes.

Miss Santos.

Yes.

And Mr.

Napoli.

Uh yes.

Mr.

President, you have six years and no nays.

Okay.

Um on to our consent agenda.

We have five different different uh parts to it.

If anyone has any questions or wants to discuss, um, go ahead, Miss Gerlock.

I wish I would have noticed this earlier.

I think I need to re um abstain on R 74.

Um he is what like the business manager for IBW, they've given me enough money, and I don't feel comfortable voting.

That's fair.

Um, thanks for bringing that up.

Um other questions or concerns from the dais on any R72, 74, 75, 76, 77.

Under Santos, go ahead.

Sorry, under that same sentiment, I also have to abstain from R74.

Okay.

We probably have to what color.

So that means that it um I don't um Miss Montero, any any thoughts on R 74 and uh concerns?

Uh I mean she she can choose to understand, but I mean we still have that's just a personal decision.

That's fine.

Yeah, what I mean is like we still for the five of us can vote, whatever happens happens.

Go ahead.

Yeah, so within our own rules, it does state that uh if there's a request to remove an item, we can do that from the consent agenda so we can extract that and vote on that individually.

Okay, yeah, fair enough.

So let's do that.

So we'll let's remove it from the consent agenda and we'll vote on it separately.

So Ms.

Santos and Miss Gerlach can abstain um just to get we get that right.

Is that is that okay?

Yeah, okay.

So now I'm sorry, sorry, no, you're getting it.

Yeah, so for the consent agenda, we are now down to four.

It's R72, which is the sewer planning module for 1418 to 1420 walnut.

Then we're gonna jump to R75, Holly Ettinger for the Allentown Neighborhood Improvement Zone appointment, uh R76, Carmen Danaskis, and shifts and says for Allentown neighborhood improvement zone, and lastly R77 Thomas Shaughnessy for a CETA appointment.

Um other comments from the dais or from the public on those four.

I would like to I would just like to make note that both Paul Anthony and Holly Ettinger were here and they were here for like two or three hours, but we we never got to.

I'm sure they were here to you know to say I did see them and uh and I I understand why they couldn't stay.

Okay, um, no comments from the public, and we'll call the vote on those four.

Okay, so for the consent agenda, Mr.

Bender.

Yes, Ms.

Gerlock, yes, Miss Moda, yes, Mr.

Pungo, yes, Miss Santos, yes, and Mr.

Napoli.

Yes, Mr.

President, you have six years and no nays.

Okay, next up is R74.

Um, we're gonna vote on uh Paul Anthony appointment for the Allentown Neighborhood Improvement Zone Development Authority.

A point of order just curious in this scenario, how many people can abstain for it to still carry you need a majority to vote, have it go through.

Right.

So in the situation of a tie three three, doesn't the prevailing how that were a tie as a no?

Ties and no.

Oh yeah.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

So um any comments from the public on R74, the appointment of Paul Anthony to Indesta.

Okay.

Um can you call the vote, please?

Mr.

Bender.

Yes, Miss Gerlock.

I abstain.

Miss Moda.

Yes, Mr.

Pungo, yes, Miss Santos.

I abstain.

And Mr.

Napoli.

Yes, Mr.

President, you have four y'as and two abstentions.

Okay, moving along to resolutions for final passage.

We'll start with R78.

R 78 authorizes the submission of a formal application for funding from the safe streets and roads for all implementation grant opportunity in the amount of approximately 10 million dollars with a 20% city match requirement for safety upgrades to the Emmaus Avenue corridor.

Okay, thank you.

Um any comments from the the dyes regarding R 78 or from the public.

Okay, Mr.

Bender.

Yes, Miss Gerlock?

Yes, Miss Moda, yes, Mr.

Pungo, yes, Miss Santos, yes, and Mr.

Napoli.

Yes, Mr.

President, you have six years and no nays.

Okay, next up is R79.

R 79 authorizes the cancellation of the July 1st, 2026 regular council meeting.

Any comments from the dias.

So we're canceling the regular council meeting, but we could still have a special committee meeting.

100%.

Of which something could be introduced according to law, like it could be introduced and set forth.

Yep.

Okay.

And that's what we talked about.

I mean, we told the community that that was what we were going to do.

So yeah.

So that's we'll we'll continue that conversation, but I'm happy to help in any way I can in getting that scheduled.

So Mr.

Brain.

Just to kind of nail that in is that like I I want to make sure that we don't leave and then tomorrow and then it just continues on and we forget.

So like I think part of it is is really just making sure that we schedule something on our end and that the city has uh ordinance produced.

I know that's work, but I believe I believe that I I think I heard tonight that if it's just the matter of the setbacks, that's a pretty simple item to item to uh produce.

I mean if that you know for example I think it would be helpful.

I'm gonna just say I know we're I don't know where we are in cadence here, but like it would be helpful to know like here are the things we could do immediately.

Okay, and we're gonna do those, and then here are the things that we need a little more time on, and then we move them.

That's that's how I I'm understanding I would like to see.

So you have our ironclad commitment.

Okay, and I think if there's also anything to do, like I said, noise ordinance, that's something we control.

So if it's introducing something prior to then, or would that have to be introduced before then or I mean feel free to reach out to us too and make suggestions, you know?

We'll we'll we'll we'll be in touch with what we think and yeah.

So I guess my thing is if we're gonna make a change, like say to like the noise ordinance, is that something that could either be introduced then or would have or to be passed then or well, I mean, there's always you can always wave your rules, you do it often.

Okay, so you push the button off or so um okay.

So, but yeah, I think we're all in agreement.

We're we're all in agreement.

Um we we will get those meetings scheduled as soon as possible.

I think there are many of us that are pretty uh um ambitious on that, so I don't see that falling through the cracks.

Um I I believe we can get that done pretty quickly.

We have Genesis, Ms.

Arte, you guys can help us.

Frank Cain, you'll play a part, the administration, CED.

This is a team effort, so we'll get it done as soon as we can.

Um so we're still on R 79, um, authorizing the cancellation of our normal city council meeting.

Any other comments from the public?