Chandler City Council Meeting Summary - December 11, 2025

The Chandler City Council convened for a regular meeting to address the digital cities award recognition, routine consent agenda items, and a highly contested public hearing regarding the proposed Price Road Innovation Campus AI Data Center. While the council unanimously recognized the city's technological achievements and approved administrative items, the meeting concluded with a unanimous denial of the data center proposal due to significant concerns regarding infrastructure timing, job creation viability, and alignment with the Price Road Corridor general plan.

Consent Calendar

• Items 1-36: Approved unanimously, including Annexation 25-0003 for 11.24 acres of single-family residential at Willis and McQueen Roads.
• Item 9 (Havenwood Manor): Approved unanimously with a specific motion added by Councilmember Harris requiring developers to provide written disclosure statements to home buyers acknowledging potential noise impacts from the adjacent Cynic/Sports Complex and Dog Park (e.g., landscaping equipment, barking, field lighting).

Public Comments & Testimony

• Havenwood Manor Development (Item 9):
  • Megan Craighead (Resident, Okatie/Okatillo area): Expressed opposition and concern regarding traffic mitigation on Basha Road, safety issues due to poor visibility, and argued the development represents a "status quo" of high-priced sticker housing that does not align with the city's vision for community.
  • Monique Fulmer (Resident, Okatie/Okatillo area): Expressed opposition to the development. While acknowledging the builder's plan to honor Eddie Basha, she argued that building $800,000 homes does not honor the agricultural roots of Chandler or the legacy of Eddie Basha, who supported the local community.
  • David Basha (Basha Family Representative): Stated that the Basha family is in support of the Havenwood development, feeling that the city has already well-represented Eddie Basha's legacy. They expressed support for monument signage reflecting the historic Basha store design.
• Price Road Innovation Campus (Items 37 & 38):
  • Overwhelming Opposition: The vast majority of the over 192 comment cards and oral testimony expressed strong opposition. Key positions included:
    • Resource Strain: Residents argued the project would overburden limited water and electricity resources, raising utility bills for residents despite developer claims of cost absorption.
    • Job Viability: Critics argued the project relies on a "build it and they will come" business case, citing a lack of confirmed tenants for the adjacent tech park buildings and a six-to-eight-year gap before the project becomes cash-flow positive.
    • Environmental Impact: Testimony focused on excessive water usage (contrary to "closed-loop" claims), heat generation, noise pollution, and the potential for the project to accelerate climate change impacts in the Phoenix metro area.
    • General Plan Alignment: Multiple speakers and Councilmembers argued the proposal violates the General Plan's intent for the Price Road Corridor to be reserved for knowledge-based, high-job-density uses like manufacturing and R&D, rather than "jobless" data centers.
  • Supporters: A small minority, including the Arizona Technology Council and representatives of organized labor, expressed support, citing the potential for union labor construction jobs, long-term economic stability, and the necessity of AI infrastructure for future economic competitiveness.

Discussion Items

• Digital Cities Award: The City of Chandler was recognized as a Digital Cities Award winner for technology, innovation, and inclusive service delivery. Kirsten Olt (CTO) presented the team, highlighting the use of digital twins, cybersecurity efforts, and enterprise culture changes.
• Price Road Innovation Campus (Item 37 - Rezoning & Item 38 - Development Agreement):
  • Staff Presentation: City Planner David De La Torre and Economic Development Director Micah Miranda presented the proposal. They noted the project includes a 422,877 sq ft AI data center and five speculative tech park buildings. They highlighted the development agreement's rigorous conditions, including a one-inch water meter limit, mandatory closed-loop cooling, underground power lines, and employment penalties for missing job targets.
  • Applicant Presentation: Applicant representative Adam Baugh and CEO Jeff Sigler argued the project de-risks the city through ironclad financial guarantees, including pre-payment for utility relocations, fixed tax revenues, and penalties for delays or missed employment quotas. They emphasized the project's role in attracting high-tech industries (biopharma, aerospace) requiring low latency.
  • Council Deliberation:
  • Mayor Hartkey: Stated the project was "immature" at this stage. She expressed opposition primarily because the applicant could not provide a viable business case for the 6-8 year revenue gap, stating she must vote based on what is "people first" and "voter approved," accusing the applicant of insulting constituents by calling them "emotional".
  • Councilmember Orlando: Expressed opposition based on a lack of clear business viability, specifically regarding the lack of confirmed customers and the long timeline before the project generates income to pay investors.
  • Vice Mayor Ellis: Initially appeared open to the benefits of AI infrastructure but ultimately voted no after hearing constituent feedback, emphasizing the need for infrastructure reliability and future-proofing the city.
  • Councilmember Sinus: Expressed opposition, weighing the long-term benefits against the specific infrastructure demands and lack of utility commitments, noting the project does not fit the 2022 data center restrictions.
  • Councilmember Poston: Expressed opposition, stating the cons outweighed the pros. She felt the project did not fit the General Plan vision for the Price Road Corridor and would break faith with previous zoning decisions.

Key Outcomes

• Motion Denial: Councilmember Harris moved and Vice Mayor Ellis seconded a motion to deny Items 37 (Rezoning) and 38 (Development Agreement).
• Vote Tally: The motion to deny passed unanimously (7-0).
• Rationale: The unanimous denial was driven by the lack of a confirmed business case for the project, concerns over the 6-8 year delay before economic viability, the project's inconsistency with the Price Road Corridor's General Plan intent for high-job-density uses, and the strong mandate expressed by the community regarding resource conservation.
• Administrative Action: Consent Calendar items (including the Havenwood Manor disclosure) were approved. The annexation for the 11.24-acre site at Willis Road was approved.
• Unscheduled Public Comments: The meeting concluded with unscheduled comments regarding public works mismanagement on lead pipe compliance and retention basin landscaping failures, which will be investigated by staff.