Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.

Good evening.

Welcome to the uh March 9th meeting of the governing body.

Welcome everyone.

Madam Clerk, would you take the roll, please?

Mr.

Wolf.

Dr.

Aldrich, present.

Mayor Collins.

Present.

Dr.

Emmons.

Present.

Mr.

Escobel.

Here.

Mr.

Layborne.

Mr.

Moody.

Dr.

Rennie.

Mr.

Seagrave?

Present.

Mr.

White.

Present.

All members are present.

We do have a quorum.

Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Do the flag of the United States of America.

To the Republic for which it stands.

One nation under God, indivisible with liberty.

Consent agenda.

All agenda items listed with the designation of CA are considered to be routine items by the governing body and will be enacted by one motion.

There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a member of the governing body so requests and support by two other members is received.

Any item removed from the consent agenda will be considered in its normal sequence on the agenda.

All right.

Are there any items a member of this governing body would like to remove from the consent agenda?

Yes, sir.

Dr.

Aldridge.

All right.

The senior grandparents.

We have concurrences.

Concur.

Concur.

Okay.

Also, item number 22.

Concur.

Concur.

And item number 26, Mayor.

Concur.

The 26.

Liquor licenses.

Do we have a second concurrence?

Okay, 26 is removed.

Anyone else?

Mr.

Mayor.

Yes.

Number 21.

Concurrent I would ask if someone would remove number 18 because uh the final bat being on the consent agenda would happen before the uh zone change and the uh would be finalized, which would be out of order.

Number 18.

Concur.

Thank you.

Concur.

Not much of a consent agenda left.

Anybody else?

All right.

I didn't entertain a motion, please.

Move by Mr.

Seagraves, second by Mr.

White.

All those in favor of what's left, please signify by saying aye.

Those opposed.

All right.

The consent agenda is approved with 18, 20, 22, 26, and 21 removed.

If you're here for those items, they'll be considered in the normal sequence on our agenda.

Thank you.

Number seven.

Or mayor.

Yes.

I'd like to move to suspend the rules to take.

Um to move it up in the agenda.

Is there a second?

It's a non-debatable motion.

Requires two-thirds.

Item number 22 is a resolution for the pro rodeo hall of fame or association uh headquarters hall of fame.

Uh we have a motion by Dr.

Rennie.

Who's the second?

Okay.

We're asking to suspend the rules.

I suppose to bring number 22 to the next item on the agenda.

Correct.

Um, so all of those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

And those opposed.

No.

The uh motion is approved.

We'll suspend the rules.

Take item number 22 first, please.

Resolution in support of the professional rodeo cowboy association, PRCA and Professional Rodeo Hall of Fame and Museum of the American Cowboy.

All right.

I think we've all read and heard about this item.

It's exciting for the city of Cheyenne.

Um it is an um an expression of support from this governing body uh to Leeds' effort to bring the PRCA to Cheyenne.

Um at this time, we'll go out to the audience and see if anybody in the audience would like to talk to us about this uh effort to this evening.

Catherine and Betsy.

Welcome, ladies.

You got it.

Just pull it down so you can talk right into it.

Yes, I'm a little shorter.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor.

Good evening, City Council.

My name is Catherine Wilkinson, and I am a lobbyist that's been hired for Once in a Blue Moon opportunity.

Um we'd like to speak to you on behalf of Project Blue Moon, which is a very exciting opportunity with the relocation of the PRCA to Cheyenne, Wyoming.

So I'm here with Betsy Hale tonight.

We just wanted to thank you all for your support for this incredible opportunity that we hope will make uh a splash in Cheyenne.

So Cheyenne Leans took the initiative to go out to the PRCA, the professional rodeo cowboy association to see if they might be interested in coming to Cheyenne.

It has been an incredible honor to work with Betsy and her team.

Um, this has been a private, public and state effort to bring this opportunity.

So I'd like to tell you a little bit about the funding and wanted to thank you for your contribution.

So we have Cheyenne Leans, the board of directors has uh voted on $15 million uh to have provide matching funds for this organization.

The state of Wyoming legislature has also provided 15 million funds out of the special tourism and projects reserve account 446, and that passed in the budget and was signed into law by the governor as well.

Um, in addition to Cheyenne Liens and the 15 million for the state of Wyoming, uh, we have about 10 million dollars in private corporate sponsorships that are coming.

We expect more to come, as well as running a six penny ballot initiative that we're hoping that the folks of Cheyenne would like to contribute to.

So we um also are very appreciative of Cheyenne's skin in the game with the support that you are showing to the PRCA.

I will tell you that they've received a lot of offers, but they want to come here.

They see it as a very special place, and it's only fitting that it's in the cowboy state.

So we just want to thank you very much for your support and are happy to provide you any information.

Uh Cheyenne is going to just benefit from this tourism project.

And it's not just Cheyenne, but the state of Wyoming.

So we wanted to thank you for this effort.

And I turn it over to Betsy Hale in case she has anything else.

Welcome, Betsy.

Good evening, city councillors and Mr.

Mayor, Betsy Hale, Cheyenne Leeds, CEO.

First of all, I want to thank you so much for all of your support uh over the past year.

Uh we have been working on bringing this incredible professional uh athletic association, just like the NFL, just like the major leagues home to the Cowboy State.

And we could not have done that and cannot do that without you.

We're not across the finish line quite yet.

But um, this is certainly a model, a business model that Cheyenne Leeds has used for the last 40 years uh by buying land, building a business park, and then finding great tenants.

And so we feel like this association will be the great first cornerstone uh project in the hitching post district.

So happy to stand for any questions.

Betsy, could you tell the audience about the Hitching Post District and uh the businesses that you expect to bring to that area and the businesses you know you that will not come to that area?

Well, thank you, everyone.

Um, and we'll we'll be brief because I know you got a lot going on.

Uh, but we wanted to um look at where is there a location in Cheyenne that could be really mobilized and catalyzed for a district that would celebrate our Western heritage, that we could live true to our our Western way of life and um the hitching post district really is a way for us to honor the Hitching Post Hotel.

It's an it's an opportunity for us to celebrate the legacy of that location.

And so there's about 415 acres here at the intersection of I-25 and I-80 that we'll be building roads down into and um putting up the 35-acre campus for the PRCA.

So I hope you guys can see that and we'll be happy to send that over electronically.

Thank you.

Dr.

Aldridge.

Mayor Collins for you.

I am just curious if you have thought about or done any projections on the amount of uh sales tax revenue that might come into uh the state of Wyoming and Laramie County based on this project.

Laramie County in the city of Cheyenne uh will receive about $800,000 of sales tax once the museum and hall of fame are up and going.

That's on an annual state tax yet, but working on it.

And Betsy, that's on an annual basis, right?

Yes, sir.

Sorry.

Mr.

Woods.

Uh Mr.

Mayor through you, Betsy, Catherine, um, Catherine, I asked you a committee if you could just tell the folks here tonight uh what the what the uh acreage square footage of this project is going to be, if you could just elaborate on that.

Sure, Mr.

Mayor.

Yes, ma'am.

Um the PRCA will go on about 35 acres of land, and then the Hitching Post District should be about 400 415, 415 acres.

Thank you.

Mr.

Moody.

Yep.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Through you, uh, thank you, guys.

Um, Mayor Ms.

Walkers when we first met and I proposed a resolution.

Um, do you propose that there might be other Western brand companies that might actually come here, say like have manufacturers, boot manufacturers, et cetera, with this, because I was envisioning that.

Ms.

Hales.

Mr.

Mayor, through you to Councilor Moody.

Uh, yes, that's exactly what we envision.

Um, restaurants, retail, bars, hotel convention center, equestrian indoor arena, all of the things that would be associated, as you pointed out, um, with this ability to gather in a place that really tells the story of who we are in Wyoming.

Dr.

Rennie.

Did you know?

All right.

Well, ladies, I just can't say thank you enough.

I know uh when you get called this the blue moon, uh, that you thought this is a once in a blue moon opportunity for Cheyenne and just the initiative that went into finding a company and making them a deal they couldn't refuse.

Uh, I love it.

And so we're looking very forward to uh seeing how this works out.

So thank you for your leadership on this, both of you.

Thank you to all of you as well.

Anyone else here this evening would like to speak to uh the opportunity to bring the PRCA to uh our great city?

Sir, if you want to come up, you have to push the button and turn on the light and introduce yourself if you would, please.

Don O'Shine resident.

I was curious with all the millions of dollars already committed and uh requesting more sales tax.

Well, do they have an idea what the total cost of this is going to be?

Um, I think we probably have a good answer.

I've heard that number around 60 million dollars, but uh they're they're nodding my head.

I think the total project will be about 60 million.

Catherine.

Mr.

Mayor, that is correct.

We expect the total project to be about 60 million dollars.

Anyone else in the audience here tonight?

All right, hearing none, I would go to Mr.

Escabel for a motion, sir.

Mr.

Mayor, the recommendation of the finance committee is to adopt and I so move.

Second.

Uh second by the committee.

I'll give that to Mr.

White.

Umments from members of this governing body.

Mr.

Escobel.

It was said that we don't do much to promote our cowboy culture here.

And uh just by what you heard, that's proof that we're definitely putting our money where our mouth is.

And so can't wait to see it and looking forward.

Anyone else?

Anyone else?

All right, hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Those opposed.

By your vote, the city council's uh voted to support and the relocation of the PRCA, the Hall of Fame, and the museum to Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Next item, please.

Number seven ordinance, third reading, creating chapter 8.72 private displays on public property to prohibit the unauthorized use of public property for specified private displays.

All right, we have before us an ordinance that restricts uh private displays on public right-aways, and we'll go out to the audience if anybody wants to speak to that tonight.

Hearing none, Dr.

Ms.

Sigleano, did you want to speak to this?

You know, I'm quick on the gun.

So I just want to say that I oppose this ordinance.

Um, I think it's silly and a complete waste of time.

Um, if it's on private property, let the private property owners deal with it.

Um I I believe at the committee honor.

This is on public right-aways, not private property.

So I'm just saying if if there is a memorial on private property, because I know that that does happen occasionally, let them deal with it.

But on the public right-of-way, um, I believe at the committee there weren't any city employees that thought this was an issue necessarily.

I know um councilwoman Aldridge said that possibly someone had come to her and talked to her from the city, uh, one of the departments.

But um, I just wanted to say I've talked to a few community members and we just think it's a silly waste of time for you guys.

But thank you.

Appreciate it.

Welcome back, sir.

Mr.

Mayor, members of the council, good evening.

My name is Stephen Love.

I live in Ward One here in Cheyenne, Wyoming.

You have heard a lot from me in the last past few weeks.

Um, I hope to make that a permanent happening in the weeks, months to come.

I think it's essential that the voices of the people be heard so that you can all vote with greater perspective in these matters that all affect our lives so deeply, whether the people take time to get up here and talk about it or not.

I'm glad I was here heard at our last city council meeting.

There was an amendment put forward at the public service committee by Dr.

Aldrich that I was very thankful for and felt would have brought this to a point where signing it into law would not have been completely unreasonable overreach.

It would have removed unjust fines imposed in the ordinance.

Unfortunately, the amendment failed to receive a second, leaving this in a state that I find to be unreasonable and unacceptable at this time.

And frankly, without a recommendation by the committee, I think that other members of the council may feel the same.

This item that threatens to impact the people of Cheyenne in a very real way.

This ordinance, if codified, would create unnecessary financial burden on individuals in our community who have lost a loved one.

Please don't tax mourning.

There's enough grief with the loss of a loved one without the government creating more.

Many in our community use these memorials to remember loved ones who met a tragic end on our roadways.

Please remember these community members, our friends and family tonight as you vote on this ordinance.

Don't allow for unnecessary government overreach.

Don't let them be forgotten because one or two members of our community wishes to dictate to hundreds of others how to mourn.

Save your yes for an ordinance that serves the people of Cheyenne better and vote no tonight for all those whose lives have been lost, and there's families who will never stop mourning.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Chelsea, welcome.

You're walking better today.

I am walking a little better.

It's slowly getting better.

So glad to see it.

Thank you.

Um, Chelsea McCourt, uh, Cheyenne, Wyoming Ward 1.

Um, I would like to also speak in opposition of this.

I'm going to reiterate a few things I said at the public service uh committee's meeting.

Um, so despite this perception that these are distracting, there's been studies that particularly looking at one in 2019 and 2011 that show that roadside memorials are not significantly distracting whatsoever.

Um, they do not affect speed of travel, they are not perceived risk.

Um those who thought that they were a distraction when they were looked at like their road behaviors, were not actually distracted.

And so there's this mental disconnect between the physical fact that it really is not actually a distraction.

Um there's also as uh Mr.

Love mentioned, there's not really any um significant complaints or issues that have occurred in the past um via city employees, um, being people actually hit visiting these roadside memorials, they tend to be pretty safe because it's related to death.

And so there's a mental thing about being wary of it.

Um, I know that there were discussions about alternative options.

Those cost money that a lot of times mourning families do not have the opportunity to do it.

They cost time, they cannot be put up immediately.

Uh, that's hard on a family to be able to not have the instantaneous representation of grief.

My background's in anthropology.

That's bad.

I can just tell you basically.

Um grieving people are not going to be looking at the city code.

They're not going to be verifying, especially when they see displays on private property around the town.

They're going to see those and think, hmm, this is a display.

Why can't I have my display out?

Not necessarily realizing that they are in nuanced private areas.

Um it's hard to tell who exactly is putting up the displays.

There may be an idea that this person is doing it, you know, perhaps they think it's the family.

In reality, it's a friend who's hosting the memorial.

Um, there's a question of what do you do when you find memorial and clean it up?

Do you throw away those items that may be significantly uh significant mementos for the family?

Um, there's there's just a lot of problems with the way it needs some modifications.

For instance, looking at Fort Collins, they have a 30-day limit that you're allowed to have the private memorials up for 30 days.

And then at that point, if someone has complained about it, then they remove it, they store the items, they distribute to the family if they so wish.

Um, it just needs modification.

It's bad for us as a culture and as a society for how we grieve and how we perceive death.

And for the individuals who have lost a loved one, it's hard on them.

It's devastating for them.

So I speak in opposition.

Thank you.

I see a lot of people standing in the back, but I see quite a few open chairs here.

We're gonna be here a long time tonight.

So you might as well come find a seat and get comfortable so that we can make it through this evening.

Anyone else on this ordinance?

Anyone else?

Hearing none.

Dr.

Emmons.

Mr.

Mayor, the motion to approve failed at the public service committee.

Therefore, there is no recommendation.

However, for the sake of discussion, I move to approve on third and final reading.

Is there a second?

Second.

Second by Dr.

Aldridge.

Okay.

Members of the governing body, Dr.

Aldridge.

Mayor Collins, um, through you.

Um, I have so many thoughts about this.

But as I was thinking about this, it was not, I would remind my colleagues that have been on the council um for more than a year, um, that we had a similar request come to us um several years ago by a former a council member who was wanting to put up banners for veterans in the public right-of-way um all along Ridge Road and Windmill had talked about doing some uh going towards the VA hospital.

And at that time, this council um, or that council, I should say, um I was um voted against doing that because it was the public right-of-way, and there was a concern about um if we allowed one type of organization or one type of memorial or banner in that we would have to allow all in.

And so I would just like to remind my colleagues that vote that you voted on.

Um, I understand that mourning is um in the individualized, that it's um very dependent upon culture and that it um is something that is important to families and to community members.

Um I'm all about memorials if they're not in the public right-of-way.

If um they would like to do that on private property, if they would like to do that through whatever mechanism families choose, um, that's one reason why we have cemeteries.

Um, but there are also uh additional opportunities for families um that are of little or no cost um and or can be as costly as they would like to, whether it's um from a simple tree planting to a bench to a mausoleum.

Um, so for that reason, I would encourage us to um consider this.

While it may not have been brought by a majority of uh people that we've heard from, um, I think that um as with any piece of legislation we bring forward, um, as people come and talk to council people, um, that's how many of our ideas come forward is through that legislation.

Um, while my colleagues in ward two may not have many of these in their ward uh right now in ward three, um, I can think of five right off the top of my head.

Um, and maybe we just have more accidents in ward three.

Um, but I would encourage my colleagues to uh pass this on the third and final reading.

Dr.

Emmons.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um, so I've been against this res this ordinance since the beginning.

Um, and part of it is I'm just gonna be very honest from an emotional perspective, having lost a child, and um knowing that I wanted to do something to keep that spirit alive.

Every day I drive by the um the memorial that's on nationway twice a day when I go to work and when I come home from work every single day, five days a week.

And I think it does, as Miss McCourt stated, it does help people think about.

I do need to slow down.

I do need to be cautious.

I need to be cognizant of what I'm doing.

Maybe we should look at some uh guidance around what that looks like, you know, if it's close close to a tree or whatever.

But I know that when you lose someone, not only are you dealing with grief, but you're dealing with a significant financial issue.

And there's a lot of people, I mean I was lucky I was able to buy a bench in the library for my son.

Not everybody can do that.

And what we have on Nationway is very inexpensive, very well cared for, very loved, very meticulous memorial for a family, and maybe that's all they can afford.

I don't know.

I don't know what their situation is.

But to me, that's that's very important.

And like we've said, there's no rules around mourning.

It can there's no rules around mourning.

So I would encourage my uh colleagues to vote no on this ordinance.

Mr.

Wolfe.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um I can make a very principled, perhaps legalistic argument in favor of this ordinance, and is this.

Um we tend to focus in all our discussion on the memorials that are there.

Uh, the one on nationway in particular, the other one um which has the helmet stuck up on the stick.

Um, but we need to set aside all of those and all of their appearance, and we need to look at at what this really is.

And what this is is uh decision when one of these morals is established by a private individual or a family to occupy part of the public right of way, and they do that without asking anybody's permission, without you know, saying, okay, you know, is there somebody who can say it's fine to put it there?

No, it just arrives.

Uh and it arrives most often in times of of grief and uh bereavement.

Um, but it reflects basically a decision that I want this piece of property.

I intend to build my memorial here, and I want it defended.

I don't want it taken away.

I want it protected by the city.

So the question is whether or not that is what we want to allow.

And realize that under the current circumstances, without any kind of uh prohibition, you don't have to do this for a person.

You could do this for fluffy or FIDO or whatever else you wanted to build a memorial to.

So um there is maybe a gap in the law that needs to be addressed.

All that being said, Mr.

Mayor, I'm gonna vote no on this ordinance.

Um I don't think it's a big enough issue at this point to take our time and energy and take all the energy it's already consumed.

So thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Anyone else?

Mr.

Leiborn.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

One of the things that's come up in regard to this ordinance is uh our schedule of fines and uh judgments from the court.

And uh I believe I'm correct, and maybe Mr.

Brody can speak to this, that state statute gives us a maximum limit of the ability to invoke a judgment against the person in court, which is uh 750 bucks in six months in jail.

Now, am I correct that that runs across our code in a way that uh doesn't differentiate between, for instance, this proposed ordinance and lowering the fine or um others uh of course, excluding traffic uh offenses that we do have a schedule for, but in general, isn't that uh generally what the judge has the opportunity to review?

Mr.

Brody, uh Mr.

Mayor John Brody, city attorney, uh Councilman Labourne, I would agree that the predominant approach that the city council has taken over the years is to tie um all violations of ordinance to what's called the general penalty, and the general penalty is uh that penalty that you referenced with a ceiling of 750 and six months in jail or both.

I would say the court, um, I'm not aware of the court ever imposing anything near that uh those ceilings, Mr.

Mayor, Mr.

Labor.

Well, that's the point.

I don't want people to think that no matter what the circumstances were in regard to this particular ordinance or many other ordinances that we have, that that is ever going to be the fine, and then someone is going to go to jail for it because that's not the case.

That's in practice, that is not ever happened, at least to my knowledge, on maybe uh someday it might.

But I think the point being if we start going through the our code and saying, well, this is the fine for this, and this is the fine for that, and this is the maximum uh jail time, although uh I think it's very rare that anybody has to serve time in jail unless there's other extenuating circumstances.

So I just wanted to try to speak to that a little bit because I think it would really be a poor precedent for us, and that's why I didn't support it in committee to change that on a up and down basis, depending on the issue.

We have that maximum set.

I trust the judgment of our courts.

I think that our municipal court is never abused any of their authority to throw someone in jail for a minor offense.

But I hope everyone understands my point.

We can't have different fines and fees.

That's really not right for us to be making that uh law for the court.

The court has got to use their judgment, and this is just a matter that goes clear across our code for the maximum, and then the judge probably can consider the offense, consider the past uh rulings that have happened.

So I I just am concerned that we would ever start um doing a fine for this and a fine for that, and really making the court um directing the court.

If there's if there's a violation, I believe our municipal court can handle it, and they always have.

So I just uh wanted to make that clear.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Anyone else in the governing body on this ordinance for uh private memorials on public rights away?

All right, I hear none.

Madam Clerk, will you take the vote?

Mr.

White, yes, Mr.

Wolf.

No.

Dr.

Aldrich, yes, Mayor Collins, no, Dr.

Emmons, no, Mr.

Escobel, no, Mr.

Labourne.

Mr.

Moody?

No.

Dr.

Rennie, no, Mr.

Seagrave.

No.

Uh the ordinance fails on third and final reading.

Number eight, ordinance, third reading, amending the official zoning map of the city of Cheyenne, changing the zoning classification for certain land located north of Prairie Avenue, east of Powder House Road, west of Rue Terre, and south of Story Boulevard from AG agricultural to NR3 neighborhood residential high density.

All right, we have before us now a zone change that will support the construction of a multifamily senior housing development, basically on the corner of um Carlson and Powder House here in Cheyenne.

So we'll go out to the audience.

Is anybody have any comments on the zone change?

Anybody in the audience?

Okay, hearing none, Dr.

Emmons.

Mr.

Mayor, the recommendation of the public service committee is to approve on third and final reading, and I so move.

Second.

Seconded by Mr.

Seagrave.

All right.

Comments from members of the governing body on the zone change.

Hearing none, Madam Clerk.

Mr.

Seagrave.

Yes.

Mr.

White?

Yes.

Mr.

Wolf.

Yes.

Dr.

Aldrich.

Yes.

Mayor Collins.

Yes.

Dr.

Emmons.

Yes.

Mr.

Laborne.

Sorry, I skipped over Mr.

Escobel.

I.

Mr.

Moody.

Aye.

Dr.

Rennie.

The ordinance for zone change is approved on third and final reading.

Number nine ordinance, third reading, amending the official zoning map of the city of Cheyenne, changing the zoning classification for land located southeast of the intersection of South Greeley Highway and East Daisha Lane from AG Agricultural to BP Business Park.

All right.

This is a zone change that will allow for a small expansion to the bison business park in South Cheyenne.

Is anybody here today to talk to this zone change?

Hearing none.

Dr.

Emmons.

Mr.

Mayor, the recommendation of the public service committee is to approve on third and final reading, and I still move.

Seconded by Mr.

Seagrave.

Comments for members of the governing body on the zone change.

Hearing none, Madam Clerk.

Dr.

Rennie.

Mr.

Seagrave.

Yes.

Mr.

White?

Yes.

Mr.

Wolf.

Yes.

Dr.

Aldrich.

Yes.

Mayor Collins.

Yes.

Dr.

Emmons.

Yes.

Mr.

Escobel.

Aye.

Mr.

Laborne.

Aye.

Mr.

Booty.

This zone change is also approved on third and final reading.

Number 10 ordinance, third reading, annexing to the city of Cheyenne, Wyoming, various tracts of land completely surrounded by current city limits.

Situate in western and southern Cheyenne, generally located east of I-25, south of the intersection of Westland Road and Missile Drive, north of West and East Allison Road and east of and adjacent to North College Drive.

All right.

So I see a lot of new faces here today, and that's exciting.

Thank you all for being here.

Many of you have never come and testified before city council before.

So welcome.

The way this works is we have two microphones, one on either side.

We'd love for you to come up and introduce yourself for the record.

And then we'll give you three minutes to uh to testify.

Uh Rob, we run our meetings by Robert's rules of order.

And so in order to keep the decorum in the room, all your comments should be directed to me as the chairman of the committee.

We shouldn't be going after individual council people.

And the same thing for our council.

Those comments should be addressed to me also.

Okay.

And uh we'll look forward to having a civil discussion and love to hear what you guys have to say on the annexations before us.

And with that, we'll start with Mr.

Bloom, uh, who is our city planner.

Mayor, members of the governing body, Charles Bloom Plan Development Director.

Um, just wanted to just give a little bit of highlights about what's going on with this annexation.

This is the tenth of our county pocket annexation.

This is the uh tenth time we've annexed a grouping of properties um based on the city council from 2022's council goal, which was facilitated by the mayor and the chief of staff at that time to to come up with those goals.

And then it's been our task over the course of the last few years to make code modifications and go ahead and uh to make the annexations easier and to go ahead and commence with the annexations.

Um, this property has been one that we um probably had our first interactions with through public comment when uh Mr.

David Nicely uh did reach out to our department and we started talking about concerns and questions because they had just recently had a home occupation permit that was approved by the county um about four months prior to that council goal being done.

That was August of 2021.

But that home occupation was approved in such a manner to allow for farming operations and also a farm stand, uh provided it did not have more than 25 customers daily.

Um, it was noted in that approval that if it exceeded 25 customers daily, it would then need to go through the county site plan process.

Uh, with it being a county development uh adjacent to city streets.

We frequently deal with these uh situations where we work with the county and ensure that they have the most painless uh site plan process they can when you're dealing with multiple jurisdictions because in those scenarios, you you must deal with our city engineering department, no stabs of Tom, it's wonderful department, um, but you still do need to look at access with with county site plans.

Today we had a meeting with the nicely's um and their legal representation, and we did discuss about how that has worked in the past before.

We I called it the tale of two McDonald's.

We have the McDonald's that is located on South Greenley Highway at Jefferson, where they're making a significant investment in that property, and Jefferson is a street that is in the city.

For those of you who have driven on Jefferson, probably to get to the farm stand.

Um you notice back seven years ago, it was uh not a very well improved road was missing, curb gutter, sidewalk on that north side.

There's some drainage issues because of a natural spring there.

Well, the development for McDonald's was uh doing a lot, had a lot of investment.

So at that time it was reasonable for us to require that in the right-of-way, they install curb gutter sidewalk, and they control the drainage that's coming off of their property.

Yeah, you tell the other McDonald's is just a family name of McDonald.

Uh, they're located up on Ridge and Greg Way.

This is one that is presently in development right now and recently has a county site plan that was approved prior to the annexation, which we are continuing to honor because that's what we've done.

And they're on Greg Way, which is an unimproved gravel road.

All they're building is a storage building and a shop.

Uh, it's an expansion of an existing use nearby, not very intense, low traffic counts, not very much traffic that's warranted.

We again coordinate with the county with through their site plan process, and our city engineering department reviewed that application and said, you know, there's no real rational nexus or any proportionality for us to require full street standards.

So essentially what happened with that McDonald property is they signed a uh no protest agreement in the event that the city um moves forward with a local improvement district for upgrade to those roads.

Local improvement districts under the Wyoming state statute.

They are not handed down or demanded by the governing body or the mayor or any person and staff.

They are the direct result of a landowner petition that is sliced and diced in numerous different ways that essentially say 50% of the owners of the land, the population of the land, it can be by frontage, it can be by a law area.

If they petition the governing body to move forward with a local improvement district, then they can do that provided they have a majority.

That is the will of the landowners.

It can't be something that is that is um basically thrown upon them by the governing body without a majority of landowners' consent.

Um that's just very important.

Why I wanted to mention that when we ask someone to sign a um a no protest agreement for an improvement district, that they understand that it's not just the city, it's also the the neighbors that would create the need for that to actually come to fruition in the future.

Um with this um proposed annexation, we've had two properties that are zoned AG that have that have popped up.

Um we've had the opportunity to meet with both of them.

The one that's been the most uh vocal and the most public, and the one that's garnered the most green ever in the council chambers at the same time.

Congratulations.

Um, that's the wild fresh one.

And we've been trying to make sure that we are making this process as easy for them and predictable for them in the future.

Um, knowing that what they they have in the county right now probably isn't exactly what the county approved.

And in talking with the county, there are concerns um that they have identified that they said, yes, we weren't aware that these items were happening here.

But what we want to do is we want to be able to move in, work with them on um continuing the operation of this farm as it is, allow for livestock and chickens and and animals to continue to be brought into the site, you know, provided they aren't constituting a nuisance or creating assessive smells, flies and stuff like that on the site.

Um, we have received the land use documentation form as of Friday.

And then this afternoon, around 11 o'clock AM, we received a very complete and very nice uh site plan drawing packet that was prepared by um Chelsea, which is very nice, um, which we're we're working on, um, making sure that we outline any any issues.

Overall, it looks good.

Um, I believe so far, all that staff has seen that are that are issues is wanting to make sure that we um define what an agricultural pile is.

Is it manure?

Is it feed?

Is it farm parts, like building parts, structure parts is what what is it?

So is it a mixture of all those things together?

Um so we can be sure of what those are.

Um, also, there's a couple of corrections that they had um noted that just need to be made based on the permanence and the temporary umness of the building.

There are a couple of outstanding issues that still do exist.

Um, these are issues that would have existed in the city or the county.

Um, a lot of those are with the occupancy of the farm stand structure itself and how it moved into a position where it has electrical connections without inspections, without permits.

Um, so those are items that we have um detailed or discussed a plan with them on what that would look like.

Um, it doesn't require any removal of sheetrock or inspection of anything in the building.

It's one just to identify any major life safety or health issues that are there.

Um, with that, we're continuing to move forward.

We hope that this uh annexation can be deemed complete today, can be approved today, so we can complete the county pocket annexation process.

Um, but we're open for any questions from the governing body and um look forward to being able to hopefully close this chapter.

Thank you.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Through you.

Uh, thank you, Mr.

Bloom.

Um, I remember I was re-watching the public services committee.

You said you define a little bit of what an urban farm is, but it's only policy and it's not set precedent law.

Is that correct?

Mr.

Bloom.

Mayor through the council Men Moody, that is correct.

Um, in our unified development code, the way our definition are drafted is they are broad catch-all definitions.

Some development codes are very specific.

They will go all the way down to a specific use.

That's a t-shirt shop.

This is a figurine shop, this is a gift shop.

You know, it will say all the different types.

Ours will say this is a retail service.

So if someone comes forward and says we have a t shirt shop, we're like, well, it's going to fit into this category.

And if there's something that is very unclear, we will uh basically create these policy documents that are guides, which will be published on the website that say this is how we interpret it and this is how it falls into place.

Um other items we don't specifically call out include uh churches, those are places of of assembly.

Um like a massage uh studio or something on those lines, those are personal care.

There's all these other ones that just fall into those because we defer to what is the most similar use.

The urban farm was a little bit different, a little bit different operations, different scale.

But through that policy document we put together, we said this is what we've captured as an urban farm from what's been provided by the landowner.

These are the activities that are going.

And we feel all of those activities fall within these two permitted uses, limited agriculture and general agriculture.

Um, and then we added in, and it also includes very limited sales that are ancillary to the overall farming process.

Um that was envisioned to give them comfort that if they wanted to continue to move forward with site expansion in the future, that they would be able to do that without any necessary public hearings or running into a roadblock on moving forward.

They still will have to go through a site plan process, which does look at how any uh expansion or change, like a new building or a massive change in their operation, they'd have to go through to make sure it doesn't have any adverse negative impacts on neighbors.

Those are impacts such as traffic, um, which usually can be mitigated through public improvements, traffic control, deceleration lanes, acceleration lanes, turn lanes, those items, but also it could be items such as if they were bringing in say 45 head of cattle.

That's a different operation where number one, we'd reach out to other state agencies to understand what's appropriate.

Um that could include like like city county health, it could include the Wyoming Department of Agriculture to understand if that is expected to create a nuisance and enhance uh smells and flies and those other items.

Um, so we would have to go through that process to uh make sure that they're not negatively affecting the property owners that live nearby.

So, Mr.

Bloom, what is the effect of your your policy statement?

Then basically that until it's codified, that is the the rule of the city um it in in respect to uh in this case an urban farm.

Mayor members of council, that's correct.

That is the interpretation of the city.

Um that will be posted on the website.

Um it will be one that we'll hang our hat on.

And once a code and amendment or municipal code amendment is made that will supersede that, it will remain in effect to keep that predictability in place for the landowners.

Thank you.

Dr.

Emmons, Mr.

Mayor, through you.

So uh Mr.

Bloom, if I recall from that meeting that my colleague referenced, um in the agricultural zone, which is already codified.

If someone is annexed in and they are zoned in agriculture and they come in with horses or cows or whatever, they would be able to uh continue to have those animals on their property if they're zoned egg.

Is that correct?

Mr.

Bloom, mayor through the members of the council and Dr.

Emmons, yes, that's 100% accurate.

Uh, we presently have um added horses to the incorporated city limits with some of our past annexations, so they would be able to remain.

Mr.

Mayor.

Follow-up.

So just to be clear, it is currently codified.

Mayor through to Dr.

Emmons, yes, it is currently codified.

Thank you.

Anyone else in the governing body with staff, Dr.

Aldridge?

Through you.

I just want to be really clear on this because I asked that question at the committee, and you had said that it was not codified for urban farming.

Um, there's so there is a difference between urban farming and just maintaining what is currently being done.

Is that correct?

Mr.

Bloom.

Mayor through to Dr.

Aldrich.

Um, great question.

But what I was believing I was answering for Dr.

Ammons was specifically graded related to livestock residing on a property where livestock providing on a property is codified that is allowed.

It can be a hobby horse, it can be whatever, whatever you want that's allowed for agricultural zone land.

The urban farm definition per se, the land use that is not codified, and that land use uh interpretation is what's in that zoning policy statement, which said this is what we understand where it is, this is where we understand it falls into place in our use table, therefore it's a permissible land use.

Dr.

question, Amir Collins.

Um if things were to remain the same, if this property remained in the county and wanted to, in your example, go to 47 head of cows, which I I mean that's a lot.

Um, that would also um trigger, if you will, um, changes that uh may have may be called upon by the county as well, correct?

I mean, we're not we're there would be changes required by the county, or there could be things possibly required by the county at that point, um, or by the city if there was a change of use to that degree.

Mr.

Bloom, mayor, uh, members of council, mayor through you to Dr.

Aldridge, members of council.

Um, yes, it would be in the city or the county.

The county was clear that if it exceeded the 25 customers and their approval, that it would trigger a site plan.

Thank you.

Anyone else for staff?

Mr.

Bloom, thank you.

All right, folks, this is your turn.

Um, so again, if you want to come up and introduce yourself, um, and we'll uh we'll look forward to uh hearing your testimony.

We'll stay as long as we need to hear all of you, and we look forward to it.

Thank you.

Tommy, welcome.

I'm Tommy Nicely, 200 Walters Scheid, Y Fresh Farm.

I'm here to ask you to exclude my farm from annexation.

I would like to start by offering the first olive branch.

I'm sorry.

I'm sorry that I have used blanket statements that the Silling City is unwilling to work with us.

In reality, it probably has only been a handful of individuals that have exacerbated the difficulty of this situation.

We had our first meeting with city officials a few hours ago.

Meeting with, I think I counted six department heads.

Yes, six.

That is how complex annexation is and how it affects so many aspects of our lives and even future planning.

I took comfort in finding the department heads to be genuine individuals that appear to be willing to work on a solution.

Three stood out to be not only approachable, but solution-minded individuals.

Mr.

Cobb here is one of those.

Umfort and was encouraged.

It was nice to see that I believe Cheyenne has the leadership that if they are given the time and adequate preparation and the information that they require, that they will be able to find a very constructive way forward that is not only beneficial to our farm, but to the city of Cheyenne.

Even so, as of today, we are still unclear of all the regulations we will be under, and how I can continue to farm as we have.

It's unclear if we even have the right to farm.

We need time to figure it out, and so does the city.

We've repeatedly stressed that we want to find a way forward, but let's do so properly.

Clear, well-written urban farm ordinances, or even changes to the ag zoning, not only need to be written, but they need to be publicly debated, and then they need to be adopted before annexation can occur.

I do believe we can find a way to be incorporated into Cheyenne.

However, today is not the day.

More time is needed, more work is needed.

Mr.

Bloom even said that the work is not done.

You just awarded one million dollars to the PRCA.

I believe the state is going to award them 20 million to help move their headquarters to Cheyenne to quote live true to our Western way of life.

Unquote.

We are living true to our Western way of life.

We do so happily, and we do so for free.

We encourage our farm supporters to live true to our Western way of life for free.

And I encourage you, the city, to live true to our Western way of life and proceed carefully.

Please don't annex my farm.

Sir, okay guys, I appreciate your support, but honestly, we don't do that here, okay, please.

We're gonna listen respectfully and uh one way or other because we can't boo the people you don't agree with.

So thank you very much.

Please, sir, come forward.

Welcome.

Um, thank you very much, Mayor.

Uh, members of the city council.

My name is Michael Jordan.

I live here in the city of Cheyenne.

Um I own a business in Cheyenne.

I own a couple of them.

I also know a couple of agricultural businesses throughout Wyoming as well as a couple of states.

And today I stand before you just not as a citizen as the company that owns B-friendly company.

I stand for you today, not only as a citizen, business owner, and defender of the way of life, but cursely under siege.

We were told that progress requires annexation, but I'm here to remind the body of the progress without protection of our food and our right or merely slow motion, surrender of our liberty.

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are I'm here from the government, and I'm here to help you.

That was Ronald Reagan's most famous quote, originally delivered in August 12th, 1986, specifically addressing American farmers argue that the agriculture industry is a problem and can be caused by government imposed policies.

Our argument today is anchored in the highest law of the land under the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution, the right for life.

It is suggested that is mandated to include the right of sustainability, maintain of a homestead, and you're not justified on a map through your unconstitutionally deviating and conquering Wyoming rights of their liberty and their property rights.

The federal government recognizes the gravitude of this legitimate under seven United States Code Castro 4201, the Farmland Protection Act policy.

Federal industries are requiring to minimize the conversion of farmlands to non-agricultural use.

Why is Cheyenne moving to restrict the federal government and moving forward on this and incorporating not incorporating the USDA, the AIPI, and FMSD grants that allow this to happen?

Look at our state statues alone, the Wyoming State Statue 111401 through 1114014.

The Wyoming Right to Farm Ranch is our property legal shield that protects the forever guarantee, the right for farmers to engage in agricultural operations that are protected by very pillar of this community.

The state law is clear and established farms cannot be declared a nuisance and should be in the city show choose to expand along with the Wyoming Food Ag Right and Act of 114901, which provides our community without governance or outreach that these laws are insured and our plain rights of food production and producers remain free.

Right now, the Laramie County zoning section two, A1 and A2 protects any liability of farm.

Comprehends explicit calls the protection of rural land and the perma of urban development.

And yet here we are.

Well, the city supposes the draft the urban farm category for UDC Article 5.

Mr.

George Lee on the rounds.

Yes.

Your time is up.

Could you conclude for us, please?

I certainly can.

Um I hope that uh it's kind of funny on this date that you know you guys went on this because this is the last date he could file for uh 100,000 dollar grant that you've now held him out of that he can't get.

Uh council members, you have the power to uh uh honor the annexation of properties, but we have the spirit of HB 76 that forces you to say you can't do this anything for a nuisance at previous urban farms.

And I appreciate your time, and I hope you vote against this annexation.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, sir.

Ma'am, did you want to speak?

My name is Roxy Hovel, and I own track number seven that you guys are trying to annex.

And we just want to, I don't have a whole lot to say because you guys have already heard everything we've said, but I just wanted to get up here and let you guys know that we are still opposed to this.

Um, we still don't have clear writing of exactly what we can and cannot do to our property.

And I just wanted to let you guys know that you guys approving this data center that's going in on college has actually destroyed everything that we have ever planned for this property.

So I just wanted to let you guys know that this is affects our entire life and our future.

And so that's really all I have to say.

That like just hope that you guys really can consider this and uh and not vote us in to this annexation since you've already destroyed everything else.

Thank you.

Ma'am.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor and Council.

Thank you for taking the time to listen to us.

My name is Laura Lee, and I live in the Saddle Ridge neighborhood with my family here in Cheyenne.

We've known the nicely's for a while, and we've been a Y Fresh customer.

Um, we've gotten to know the people in the area well.

We're concerned that in the city's reply to question 123, the Wyoming Right to Farm and Act Ranch Act does not apply to Y Fresh.

As you know, farms are by nature loud and contain things that may be considered nuisances, such as smells and noise.

Why fresh has dogs, sheep, chickens, and they have livestock guardian dogs who are trained to protect their animals.

City codes have rules about noise and nuisances that Y Fresh could undoubtedly violate.

If the state law does not protect YFRESH, they will be fined and penalized frequently.

Nowhere does it say for certain that the act supersedes city codes.

And again, I wanted to reiterate what Tommy said about living true to our Western way of life and being able to go and get the products that we feel like we're on little house on the prairie when we go and we get our milk and our honey and everything else that we get to get.

That's I'm a retired nurse and I'm uh very into researching all of the nutrition, and I highly recommend all of their products.

Thank you for your time.

Thanks for being here tonight.

Ms.

McCoy, how are you?

I'm good.

Thank you, Mayor.

My name is Patricia McCoy, and I live on the South Side.

I'm here tonight because I'm a frequent shopper at YFresh.

I rely on their farm stand for my family's needs, and I want to voice my strong support for them.

I've followed the recent discussions regarding their annexation, and I'm concerned that some of the city's requirements don't align with the reality of how this local business operates.

As a customer, safety is important to me.

I've taken my kids there when they are little.

I understand the city has expressed life safety concerns over electrical inspections.

However, it's my understanding that YFresh has met every county requirement to date when it comes to electrical.

Even when not legally required, they went out of their way to have their work done by a professional engineer and reviewed by a licensed electrician.

As a member of the public, I appreciate that they've gone above and beyond what was asked of them to ensure their customers are safe.

Secondly, I'm concerned about the city's intent to perform excessive inspections.

We all know how I feel about inspections.

But this one is specifically regarding septic systems.

To anyone who visits the stand, it's clear this is not a permanent building.

It's a mobile structure on skids, similar to a food cart or an RV.

It isn't even connected to a septic system.

Treating a mobile farm stand like a permanent commercial development seems like an unnecessary hurdle for a small business that provides such a great service to our neighborhood.

Finally, I am troubled by the idea that the city might use the farm stands transition as a reason to inspect every private building on the property.

These buildings that the public, including myself, never enters.

Using a small mobile farm stand to trigger invasive inspections of a person's entire private property feels overreaching.

I value YFresh as a community asset, and I hope the council will work with them in a way that is fair and grounded in the actual nature of their setup.

I want to see YFresh continue to thrive in our city, and I hope you'll consider a more common sense approach to these inspections.

Thank you.

Sir, welcome.

Thank you.

Good evening.

I'm Scott Borsma, currently of Douglas, Wyoming.

Friends of Niseleys for over a decade.

I've moved to Wyoming in part because of the Food Freedom Act and the opportunities it provided to people to start small business with the customer being the regulator.

I mean, what kind of thing is better than that than the freedom to just go look in the eye, go inspect the operation on their own.

And they've provided businesses for several others around.

And through their stand allowed us to support it.

If those of you with businesses on the council were facing the unknowns that they're facing, I don't know how they can handle it and hand up to the stress right now.

I am a better speaker than this, but it just aggravates me to know when that we're in this position.

I ask you to please at least give them an extension and not annex them tonight.

Thank you.

God thanks for coming down.

Kathy Sigliano.

Good evening, Mayor and members of the council.

I'm here to speak tonight about the situation involving Y Fresh Farm Stand and Forced Annexation being pursued by the city.

What has been most disappointing to many of us in this community is not simply the policy discussion around annexation.

Reasonable people can disagree on policy.

What has been troubling is the tone and conduct that several members of this body and even our mayor have directed towards this family.

This is a family-run farm stand that has done nothing but work hard, serve the community, and provide provide fashion fresh local products to residents.

Yet the way that they have been spoken about in meetings and in public comments has at times reduced them to from being neighbors and a small business owner to just obstacles.

That is not the kind of treatment that reflects the values of Cheyenne.

Whether someone supports annexation or not, basic respect should never be optional.

Public officials have a responsibility to treat residents, especially those who are simply trying to run a small business and steward their prop private property with dignity.

What we have seen instead are dismissive remarks, accusations, and characterizations that have felt personal rather than professional.

Those are not just business owners on a map or a line on a zoning document.

These are our these are members of our community and they are our neighbors and they deserve fair treatment and civil discourse.

Government should never look like it is bullying the citizens into submission, especially when those citizens are simply asking for freedom to operate their business and maintain control of their own private property.

This situation has left many residents asking a simple question.

If hardworking local families can be treated this way, what is the message that is being sent to the rest of us?

Cheyenne should be a city that supports local agriculture, small business, and respectful dialogue, not one where families feel pressured or disparaged when they stand up for their property rights.

I urge this council to reconsider not only the path forward on annexation, but also the tone, conduct that has been brought to us up to this point.

Our community deserves leadership that ref reflects respect, fairness, and humility.

And I just want to say, um, Mr.

Wolf, you um through you, mayor, when he was discussing the memorials, he made great points about um not wanting people to just come and take the property.

And that's just what we're asking.

And I think that's what the nice lease are asking.

Thank you, Kathy.

Hello.

Hello, my name is Becky Borg's um Scott Bursman is my husband.

And like you said, we're from Douglas, Wyoming.

We also have a small farm and um sell products at a local farm stand that is within the city limits of Douglas.

Um, I'm just here to also support the Niseleys.

Um, I guess I'm a little I feel like saying that there's plans in place, but we don't get to know what they are is a little hard to swallow.

I guess at the very least, I would ask that you don't annex them at this time.

Um, and like the lady just said, um when you discuss the memorials and you talk about mourning, this is a type of mourning.

They're losing their way of life.

Um, if you annex this, and I just um it needs more time at the very least.

And um, I just hope each of you will take a second and say, can I can I give a straight face to the Niz Leagues and say we did the we did the best that we could.

I think it needs more time and encourage you not to annex them.

And if you still want to do that, then I would encourage you all to give them more time, please.

Thank you.

Thanks for coming, Becky.

Representative welcome.

Thank you, miss.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh and counsel before us, uh Jacob Wassenberger, Ward One.

I think I've probably hashed this out several times before.

And I'm sure you guys have heard me echo this, but when our founding fathers have said it very clearly, one who trades liberty for security deserves neither.

And one of the interesting things is as far as this annexation goes, that's one of the big things that I keep hearing about on this topic is that we're concerned for the safety.

And quite frankly, I mean, if people want to have the ability to make those choices for themselves, I mean, let the citizen do that rather than then our government doing that.

Um I mean, uh the free market will take care of those type of issues.

And it sounds like they're doing a really good job.

I look forward to getting a chance to uh talk with them a little bit more about this particular issue.

But uh, you know, I mean, as a as a mayor and a city council of a city, I I think you know that'd be a really prideful thing, especially for the state of Wyoming.

That, you know, hey, welcome to Cheyenne.

We've got a farm in our city that's, you know, and they are their own independent farm.

I mean, we just showed how much pride we've got for having the rodeo team come here to Wyoming.

I I think that'd be something pretty cool to have a lot of pride that we've got a we've got an independent farm here in our in our city.

That's you know, welcome to Wyoming and the cowboy way of life.

So I would just like to ask the body to please vote no on this uh annexation because I mean, just the message that I get from the people when I go out and talk to people is pretty clear that it's just not something that they really favor.

And I'd really appreciate the body to take that into consideration that uh that it's just not been something that a lot of people have been favorable of.

So uh please allow people to have their freedom.

And uh please uh also realize that that's what our founding father said is when you trade liberty for security, you deserve neither.

Thank you for your time.

Representative, thank you.

Thanks for your services, section.

Sir.

Welcome.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor, City Council.

Um, my name is Gary Pugh.

I'm resident of Cheyenne of Ward One.

Wyoming believes in rights, not just in words in law.

1979, the state passed the Wyoming's Right to Farm and Ranch Act.

It declares that the rights of farmers and ranchers shall never be shall be forever guaranteed in this state.

Not permitted, not licensed, not approved, guaranteed.

Wyoming fresh farm operated on that land before the surrounding neighborhood was built.

Under Wyoming law, that history matters.

A farm that produces or predates a change in the surrounding land use is protected.

That isn't an argument, it's a statute.

But the city of Cheyenne, in its written response to Wyfresh, it said that the right to farm act does not appear to cover the activities of Waifresh.

The city has decided on its own that this farm is not a farm.

Think about what that means the moment annexation occurs.

The city has said livestock are a right in an ag zone, but its official responses use the phrase approved livestock.

If something must be approved, it is not a right.

Wyoming fresh has been told it must file documentation and keep updating it just to have a year on and year off birds.

Rotating animals between seasons is about a basic as farming gifts.

If you need ongoing permission to do something, it's not a right, it's a privilege, subject to revocation.

Consider free speech.

You don't need a permit to write a book.

The moment government requires permission before you exercise a right, it stops being a right.

Now consider the Wyoming Constitution, Article One.

Section seven says that excuse me, absolute arbitrary power over the property of free people exists nowhere in a republic.

The legislature has already declared agriculture vital to Wyoming's economy and guaranteed farm rights forever.

A city cannot override that declaration with declaration without a zoning map change.

Article one, section six guarantees due process before any property is taken away.

And the right to farm is a property right.

Article 19 commands the legislature to protect stock owners.

Annexation that quietly dismantles those protections directly defies that command.

So here's the concrete ask.

If annexation proceeds, the zoning classification assigned this property must grant full, unrestricted, conforming use rights to every agricultural practice already underway.

Any framework requiring YFresh to seek approval for standard farm operation, excuse me, contradicts Wyoming law and sets up this farm's elimination by paperwork.

Wyoming law is clear.

The question is whether this council intends to honor it.

Thank you.

Hello again, sir.

Don Odom, Cheyenne.

I'd just like to start with saying any or when we look at the news these days in the last few years at all the health issues, Americans and Wyoming Nights have from industrial farming and upside down food pyramid that we were fed for years.

Um any thing that inhibits or limits uh our ability as Cheyenne residents to eat local fresh safe food is just flat out wrong.

And I would really ask that you vote against this, and I have a couple more reasons to add.

Um some of the language on this is just not clear enough.

Whyfresh has been told that you would probably not ever need off-site improvements if they were to expand on their on their private property.

Probably is not good enough.

There's no definitive quantifiable uh language that really protects them.

They could make an investment in their farm, and then the city decides, well, I think we will require these improvements.

It's subjective, it's unfair, and in my opinion, it's unconstitutional.

Thank you for your time.

You got the memo on the green today, I see, ma'am.

Welcome.

Um my name is Danelle Pew, and I'm a registered voter and resident of Cheyenne's ward one.

The nicely family has farmed this land for years.

They have fed their neighbors.

They have been good stewards.

Something that is rare in the city.

A living piece of working ground that this community can see and touch and eat from.

When they learned annexation was coming, they did not fight.

They asked questions.

143 of them.

They attended every meeting.

They came to this chamber and asked politely, then urgently for written answers.

They could rely on the city gave them hedges.

It gave them, it's our belief.

It is our understanding on the question of connecting to the sanitation system alone.

They were told three different things in the sync day.

And now the council is posed to approve this forced annexation.

Here's what is true.

Zoning violations in Cheyenne can be criminal offenses.

Under state law, a municipal court can impose fines and jail time per violation.

Tommy nicely stood at the microphone and she said that she did not want to be the first person jailed for moving a caterpillar tunnel without a site plan.

This is not hyperbole.

This is the city's code.

The family tried, the process failed.

You failed them.

Wyoming law gives citizens a remedy.

Under Wyoming law, a certified referendum petition suspends this ordinance and puts this question to the voters of Cheyenne, where it belongs.

We will circulate the petition.

We will reach the threshold, and we will give the city's voters the chance to do what the city council did not protect their home, save their farm.

Thank you.

Mr.

Brown.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor, and thank you, City Council.

Xie Brown Ward 2.

I'm here to uh respectfully ask that you vote no on this annexation, or that you table this thing for at least the next one to two years.

And the reason I say that is because, and even uh Mr.

Bloom made one of my points that I was going to make.

There is no codified definition of what an urban farm is.

There's no clear definition of what one is.

And with all the questions that are still out there that haven't been answered, and the maybes and the buts and this might happen uh coming from from the answers they're getting.

Uh it seems like we're just kind of trying to make up the rules as we're going along.

Almost like we're flying by the seat of our pants.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is just not good governance.

So, what I recommend is that this needs to be taken up with the legislature to provide statute to have a clear and concise definition of what an urban farm is and what urban agriculture is.

And Wham could work with the legislature on this, and also to find or define what the rules are and have parameters and a framework to work in so that everybody knows the rules.

The council knows the rules, the city departments know the rules, and the people that own family farms and the own urban farms and dairy barns know the rules.

Now, folks, ladies and gentlemen, most of you on here know my feelings on annexation.

If ever if people are for it, proceed.

Go ahead.

But if those are against it, I believe it is incumbent upon this body to not only listen to the people, but do the will of the people.

And I think the will of the people out here has spoken very loud and clearly since the beginning of this.

So, ladies and gentlemen, I urge no vote or that this thing gets tabled for a year or two so we can get the rules clear, concise, and everybody knows what rules we're playing by.

Thank you.

Good evening.

Hi, pull that down.

There you go.

Thank you.

My name is Tatiana, Mr.

Mayor, city members, council members.

Thank you for listening to us today.

Um, I drive up from Colorado.

Can you pull that as close as you can because we're having a real hard time hearing you?

Yeah.

There you go.

That's much better.

Sorry about that.

Do you want me to repeat myself?

No, okay.

I just wanted to um I drive up from Colorado to come to the farm stand.

I have some food allergies that don't allow me to drink like regular milk or eat egg from the store.

And thanks to YFresh farm and all the farmers that contribute to that farm stand, um, able to have uh milk and certain eggs and other produce.

Um point I wanted to talk about regarding this.

Um one of the issues with annexation, if it were to proceed as the fencing.

So the fence is the first line of defense against predators and YFresh fence, um, has been damaged by the city, and that was promised to be fixed back in 2024, and they're now on just now starting to work on fixing it, and they confirm that that won't be done by the proposed annexation date.

Um, after annexation, if it were to proceed, YFresh is limited in what it can do to ward off predators.

Uh, many like last resort solution, such as use of firearms are not allowed within the city, and if um primary means of protection fails, livestock is defendless.

Um, Yfresh will have to will have fewer options to defend livestock from predators after annexation.

The current vent, even if it was fixed, would need to be improved to make up for these lost options.

So electric fence, which is an economical option, it's not allowed in the city without specific exception.

Whyfresh does not have these exceptions.

Making a taller, better fence, uh, better like defended fence will cost about uh 50,000.

Um I would like to add my family moved in 1996 to America from Ukraine for looking for a better life for hope, a better future.

And I love that there's farms out there that are looking out not just for themselves, they're actually looking to feed other people, and they're allowing what 50 other farmers to sell their own product there at their farm stand.

Um, so it doesn't make them any money.

It feeds the people of Wyoming and Colorado, um, gives us hope.

And if there was something like a famine, God forbid, like we will be grateful for farmers who do the work and allow us to have access to food.

Thank you.

Tatiana, you're amazing, your English is amazing.

Thank you.

Congratulations.

Thanks for being here.

Thank you.

Sir, hello, government.

I mean, government, the mayor, I'm sorry about that.

Uh mayor and the whole body of the of the uh people, you know.

Uh I'm Brian Pixley here, and I'm gonna why blank say I'm I don't want you guys uh annexing these basically for these poor people, you know.

I I constantly say on Facebook, constantly, constantly, you know, don't pass it, don't pass it, you know.

You know, the people are speaking, you know.

Let people get what they want and let the let them have what they want as no on why fresh.

So zero.

Thank you.

Thanks for being here.

Hi, ma'am.

Mayor and city council, my name is Verena Booth.

The growth of YFresh and the hard work of this family has clearly demonstrated our community is seeking local produce and products.

40 years ago, Shade Smith started a farmer's market in Cheyenne to encourage locals to continue to grow food, to have some place to sell their extra and make Cheyenne more self-sustaining, all of which are very wise.

Now Cheyenne has two farmers' markets, but they're just during the summer months, and then on the south side.

Yfresh is open five days a week year round, and is fueling our local economy.

My concern, and I think the concern of the nicely family is that their family business upon annexation is subject constantly to approval for one thing or another, and those regulations can change.

The city record responded with written information, and yet with each question, the city seemed to leave an open door for themselves to approve or close this business.

This has and will continue to be a source of anxiety for the nicely family, the producers and the consumers, and the unknown additional financial cost will continue to be theirs.

The reason that there were 147 questions and responses is that it the reason it took so much time.

The reason that this has been a struggle is because a farm and a city are two different entities.

There's more than that.

But they said if they voluntarily cease the use of a continuous period for a continuous period of one year, after which the use may not be re-established under such and such a code.

So what if a disease decimates their livestock or their crops or their health problems and their family for a year?

Do you think they could begin again?

I'm sure that they could, but only with approval.

The second way, and the city went out to clarify this.

Any change in intensity, location, or expansion of the operation would trigger a site plan requirement.

Approved by the Board of Adjustment and an unknown fee.

How can you grow a business without changing intensity or expansion?

What if the city decides they want a different use of this property?

Then they just don't approve something.

Don't force annexation.

Let them stay county.

They run a clean operation because that matters to them and to their customers.

They know how to do this.

This is a wholesome enterprise.

Cheyenne should be supporting.

We benefit from this pocket of county in our city.

When you try to convert a farm to a city, it doesn't work for either side.

Thank you, ma'am.

Welcome again.

Obviously, I'm uh in support of the YFresh family.

Hope the city council, I hope this governing body can still do their best to work with this family.

Um, but I want to talk about something that I haven't heard anything or anybody stand up here and talk about.

It seems like there's this rift between governing bodies, civil servants, and its people.

We've heard I still to this day, I haven't heard one person stand up here and support you guys.

It's you guys as a body at a governing body against all of us.

What does that look like to everybody?

Now, there's a lot of people that probably don't follow politics, they probably don't watch this as much as other people, but I'm absolutely appalled and shocked that we have a governing body, and Mr.

Mayor, I'm going to call you out on it.

When you sit here and say that Roberts rules supersedes Supreme Court constitutional law in 1964, Sullivan versus New York Times, the criticize our representatives, including if that use older language, regardless if you like it or not, you work for us.

And I'm not going to sit here and go into anything else.

I'm trying to make a point.

Not saying that you guys have been totally nose or stick your nose up.

I know that you guys are doing work, but it's also been very clear that you guys also had a goal when you got into office, Mayor.

You very clearly had a plan from start until now that no matter what, hell or high water, you're going to annex these properties.

You were going to annex these pockets.

And when we can't even clap, that's ridiculous.

Tapping takes up a few seconds.

I get it.

There should be some decorum.

But to sit here and tell me that I can't criticize somebody and that you want to take away my right, it's the same thing that we see when you don't listen to the right of the people that are asking for this annexation to stop.

If I want to sit here and say Pete Lebourne's a snob, I'm going to say it.

If I want to say that Mr.

Wolf is condescending, I'm going to say it.

And if not, then you can take me to court.

So I'll ruly.

Excuse me, this is my this is my time, Mr.

Mayor.

All due respect.

I have 52 seconds.

The point that I'm making is you guys put a rift even more.

We respect that you guys have a tough job.

We really do.

But you don't clearly listen to the voice of the people, it pisses me off.

And I don't have to cater.

Play governing with anybody.

I'm a human being.

I'm going to speak what I feel.

Stop this.

Thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

Hi.

I've never done this before.

Um, I'm Colleen Shazitz.

I've known Tommy since we were in third grade, and we grew up together in this great city of Cheyenne.

Um, and she's one of the kindest people I know.

I ask for transparency, cooperation, consideration, and at the very least, more time for the nicely's to work with you and to you for you to work with them in a calm, clear manner.

Please don't pass this annex tonight.

Give this situation more time.

Thank you.

Thanks for being here.

Representative.

Well, we have all we might have a quorum of uh Laramie County's House of Representatives here today.

The corporations committee.

Do we do you guys notice this meeting or Mr.

Mayor?

Thank you.

Mr.

Brown, welcome.

Gary Brown, House District 41 and resident uh Ward Two.

Um had several of my constituents get a hold of me in the last week or so.

Very concerned about this situation.

Um, as you know, my my district in the heart of Cheyenne, these people travel out to farm for or white fresh to uh to do business there, and and they've been very concerned about that.

I had one of my constituents wave me over today when I was passing through the neighborhood, and I won't use his language, but he wanted me to come and express his concern about this.

And he said, you know, he told me, he said, Gary, he says, I'm really very concerned about what's going on in this city right now because it seems like we have nothing to say anymore.

And he said, maybe what we need to do is a complete change.

And I told him, I said, you know, that's up to you, and it's up to you to to to talk with your neighbors and like that, whatever you want to do.

But the thing is, this farm is part of Cheyenne, has been forever.

And I heard earlier from Mr.

Bloom a concern about possibly moving in.

Um, there'd be a problem with moving in 40 head of cattle.

Well, if you know anything about ranting and farming in Wyoming and Colorado, you know that that land would not support 40 head of cattle.

It just doesn't happen.

So that is a ridiculous thing to even be bringing up.

So I think that's a little bit beyond the pale.

So my thing is we just need to um step back, take a look at this, give these people a chance.

They've been there for a long time.

Just let them go on about their lives and do the business they've been doing.

They support this city.

So thank you.

Appreciate you being here.

Another member of the corporations committee, representative.

Welcome.

We do not have a quorum.

Okay, just checking.

So good to have you here.

Thank you.

Um, and I just used 10 seconds on that.

So remember that when I go 10 seconds over.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor and members of the council.

I'm pleased to be here.

My name is Ann Lucas, and I represent Wyoming's House District 43 in the Wyoming legislature that includes parts of wards one and three.

I've heard a lot about this issue, of course, not from just the media, but from my constituents, from people all over the city and the county.

What's happening here tonight is an issue that goes to the heart of the relationship between citizens and their government.

What is happening here tonight is not a boundary line on a map.

It's about a small local farm that's been serving this community and my family, growing foods, supporting local producers, and now facing the possibility of being pulled into the city limits against its will.

And with that comes city regulations, zoning restrictions, possibly new taxes, and even the possibility of criminal penalties if the farm doesn't conform to city codes.

That should concern everyone.

I think it concerns a lot of folks here this evening.

And I've heard this again and again and again, and so have you.

Because annexation is not strictly administrative, it is a government expanding its authority over people who don't ask for it.

The question tonight is a simple one.

Who does government serve?

The planning department does not elect you.

The machinery of government does not elect you.

The people elect you.

And the people affected by this decision have been showing up meeting after meeting, asking you to slow down, reconsider, and listen.

I'm asking you to do the same.

Property rights are one of the most fundamental principles in Wyoming.

When government reaches out to take jurisdiction over someone's land against their wishes, it should only happen with overwhelming justification, not simply because it's convenient or desirable for the city.

In Wyoming, we believe that if someone is working their land, feeding their community and minding their own business, government's first instinct should be to leave them alone.

Local government works best when it remembers its proper role.

You do not work for the government.

You work for the people.

And tonight I ask you, please remember this.

Who you work for?

Because the people of this community are watching, and they will remember whether their city council stood with the citizens or with the expansion of government.

As we say in the House, I am on and against this.

I encourage you to be against this also.

Thank you very much.

Thanks for being here.

Ms.

Johnson, welcome.

Well, thank you, Mr.

Mayor and City Council.

I would just like to say that our constitution allows us to own property.

The Fifth Amendment gives us the right to own property.

Whatever regulations or zoning regulations you put on this farm will be a taking.

You're taking away their ability to make a living.

It's going to cost them money.

It's one way or another.

Whatever rules you have is going to influence their income.

And that's a taking, according to the Fifth Amendment.

I don't just say this is not ready for prime time and maybe a year or two to get all figured out, but I would put this on hold for now.

Thank you.

Thanks for being here.

Welcome.

Hi, I'm Richard Lyle.

I live in the incorporated area of the city of Cheyenne.

I am not a representative of any organization or any organized uh group.

Pull that microphone up, Mr.

Oh.

Okay.

I'm opposed to the annexation for several reasons.

First of all, the city did not reach out to the residents before they put together the uh plan of annexation.

They were working on this from 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025, without talking to the affected residents.

Um there's a question as to whether or not they've come the city has complied with the mandatory statutory requirements of giving notice to the residents, and that the that notice should include maps and other required documents.

Um now the annexation plan should be looked at.

Uh you look look at the within the four corners of the written plan.

It's not what uh Mr.

Bloom says or what uh members of the council think or speculate to.

It's got to be in the four corners of the plan written down, and uh you can't just say conclusions, the facts, there must be evidence stated that supports the facts.

Now, this annexation plan.

Well, one issue is protection of wildlife.

The plan is stated in the uh supplementary um statement from uh city planning is under discharge of firearms and livestock protection.

Discharge of firearms within the city is prohibited except in designated ranges.

Alternative wildlife and nuisance animal control measures are available.

Contact information for the police department um was given to the uh uh property owners.

What does that mean?

What are these alternatives?

They're not stated in the plan.

What are they?

Poison.

No, that's not a good, you know.

Putting up signs, well, the coyotes don't read the signs.

What they're trying to raise chickens, provide eggs, you know.

You have to keep the coyotes away from the chickens.

Now, I have a suggestion here.

The city could pass an ordinance which would allow residents in an aggreg designated agriculture zone to use firearms if they register in advance, so they're not just somebody coming into the neighborhood, that they specify which firearms are using, so they're not using uh you know an AK-47 or something, and that they can only use them for the defense of against predators, not for target shooting, not to celebrate the 4th of July.

You know, thank you, Mr.

That is something could am I up?

Yeah, okay.

I I would just like to uh say that we all live in Wyoming, and what we do is Wyoming's we look out for our neighbors and our friends and their welfare.

Thank you.

Thanks for being here.

Representative Mr.

Mayor, members of the council, uh Daniel Singh, representative from House District 61.

I'm not a member of the corporations committee.

Uh, but I just wanted to take a little bit of time.

Uh, I've spoken before about annexation, and uh, in the time since that conversation, I've thought a lot about this issue.

Um, it's not as clear cut as a lot of us would like it to be.

There are simple realities when it comes to the administration of government services, such as uh the main example is public safety, whether it's fire or law enforcement, and I recognize the complexity of those issues, and those aren't things that will go away overnight.

Um just to be perfectly clear, I I would ask that uh that this body consider tabling this motion as it's written right now, this agenda item, uh, and give it a little bit more time to bake in the oven.

Um, and I appreciate uh you, Mr.

Mayor and Dr.

Rennie and Dr.

Aldrich and uh Mr.

Moody and everybody else who I've seen during this uh budget session who made themselves available to um share their perspective on various issues with members of the legislature on things that would be impactful for the city.

And uh just know that when you guys spoke to me, I listened and we ended up with things that benefited our community as a whole.

And I'm I'm hoping that we're able to work together on this, not in the spirit of us versus them, but as we move forward to finding a practical solution, we can walk together with a policy that's our policy.

That's a we policy, not an us versus them policy.

And I'm hoping that we're able to do that.

Uh and really, I've been since since the beginning of this testimony.

Uh I can only really think about one thing, and that was uh McDonald's.

Uh and uh just uh we had the analogy with McDonald's, and uh I'd like to say that you know, when I go when I go to McDonald's, I'll go, I'll drive through the drive-thru and I'll uh I'll get myself a big Mac, okay?

And uh, if I if I go in and I open the bag, I'm back on my couch, uh, and I open up, I take a bite of this Big Mac, and they forgot the sauce.

What's going on?

I I would be upset if I didn't have the sauce in my Big Mac.

And I'm afraid that this policy doesn't have the sauce, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh, we need to work on it just a little bit more.

Uh, table this for the time being, and uh, we can find a practical solution.

I think that the members involved are amicable to working together, and it just really is a matter of time.

We can come out with something that uh that as the entire state looks as looks at us, looks at Cheyenne to find a solution.

How are we going to move forward?

What are other cities going to do when they find themselves in similar situations?

I would hate for us to hastily try to find a solution that isn't quite there.

And I ask for your favorable consideration.

Well, yes, listen to the people, yeah.

So I went I went to McDonald's, so we'll finish that to commercial.

I had a cookie here for later from McDonald's.

So thank you.

Sir, welcome.

Jerry Ditto, Ward One.

I have a general disinterest in politics.

Up until two weeks ago, I had no idea who the mayor or the members of the city council were.

However, I saw a post on Facebook that got me interested in this specific issue.

And in order to educate myself, I watched the city council meeting that took place on the 23rd in its entirety twice.

Good for you.

To say I am disappointed would be an understatement.

It is apparent to me that the city has not taken into account the complexity inherent in operating an urban farm.

It would be bad enough if a lack of understanding were the only issue, but it is clear that the city is unaware of this ignorance.

This is not an insult, but rather a statement of fact.

Councilman Lay Warren remarked that a question about whether leash law would have pride would apply to barn cats was not, and I quote, serious.

This question was cherry-picked because it is easy to point and laugh and pretend that it is naive or ridiculous.

In reality, this question is serious enough that there's an entire initiative in the city code that delineates what a community cat is, and which laws regarding pets in general do or do not apply.

Mocking a layman's lack of familiarity with city code is not a good look.

Councilman Wolf remarked that a large number of hours had already been spent on this issue, and that this time would be better spent on the other.

Again, I quote 65,000 minus two inhabitants of Cheyenne.

Not only is this statement a gross misrepresentation of the number of people that will be affected by this annex, but again, it illustrates a measure of ignorance.

Councilman, this is quite literally your job.

However, frustrated any member of this council might feel, I can assure you that the nicely's and their patrons have been experiencing that frustration tenfold.

It has taken time for the citizens of Cheyenne to become apprised of the situation, and every day more becoming aware.

We will not stand idly by while the livelihood of hardware.

Simply because the city council is too impatient to complete its annex before the city code is updated to protect their right to farm.

There are 245,500, give or take words in the city code, and the word farm appears twice.

In reference to farm machinery and its exemption from registration requirements.

And Mr.

Nicely had mentioned something that uh struck me.

Our Western heritage.

And uh we have more data centers coming in, and I think we're sort of losing that uh Western heritage.

And we have a uh we're not New York, we're not Denver, we're not even Fort Collins.

And we have a Blue Moon project that came in here to help contribute to our Western heritage.

Well, we have a green shirt project out here that wants to continue our Western heritage, and I think that's really important.

So the uh question would be what's the hurry as far as pushing all this way through?

So if we want to have a blue moon project, uh and we have a green shirt project, let's continue our Western heritage here with an urban farm that people will come and say, this is really Wyoming.

This is really Cheyenne.

We don't want to see all New York City moving here.

We don't want to see Fort Commons moving here.

We want to keep Cheyenne as Cheyenne.

I appreciate your time, and I thank you uh for my ability to speak.

Thank you.

Ms.

McCort, welcome.

Hi.

Uh Chelsea McCord again.

Um I hope that the amount of speakers, just the sheer number, help illustrate to you how important this is to the community.

Um, when annexing the territory, as you guys probably well know, uh Wyoming statute 1512402 requires a few conditions to be met.

The first of those being, quote, an annexation of the area is for the protection of the health, safety, and the welfare of the persons residing in the area.

I believe and I hope that it has been illustrated to you throughout this whole process that this annexation without significant changes, does not fulfill the stipulation.

Annexation imposes on YFresh a number of procedurally complicated rules and regulations.

To date, the city has not yet faced the problem of incorporating an urban farm.

We truly appreciate that they are willing to work to adapt, modify, and explain the rules to us.

We, as in WhyFresh, are also willing to compromise to try to fit within those rules and stipulations.

But that does not dismiss the fact that those compromises and those solutions have not actually been put in place yet.

We are hearing from you guys, trust us, everything will be fine.

And I truly personally believe that it could be fine, but there are things that factually need addressed.

I am more sure about this now than ever, having met with the city department heads earlier this morning.

There is a potential to help create something wonderful.

But the thing that we need to create that is time.

That is the one specific element that is missing from this whole process is time.

And that is the thing that you, City Council can provide for us.

Um, incorporating an urban farm was always going to present an issue to you guys, whether it be now or later.

This is not a two-person issue between the residents of the farm and the city of Cheyenne.

It is a community issue.

This is an issue Cheyenne will continue to face as it continues to outwardly expand and ever increasingly butt up against rural agricultural lands.

So let's just address this now.

If you are listening, if you have listened, you are aware there are problems.

You are aware that there is an issue with annexing YFresh as it stands today.

So if you choose to proceed, you are ignoring those facts, and you are ignoring the loud voice of the public.

They support Y Fresh, and they are aware of these problems.

The entire purpose of you guys of the city council is to listen to the voices of your constituents and make decisions based on what is best for them and what they want.

So do that.

Thank you.

Good evening, ma'am.

Welcome.

I've never done this before.

So pull that microphone down a little bit.

There you go.

Hi, my name is Carol Adkison.

The first thing I'd like to say to you guys is this is my first time, so I may be stumbling.

I have been watching this unfold and unfold.

I never get out of my chair.

I never do nothing.

Guess what?

It's time to do something.

When my country says it's time to eat healthy, Senator Kennedy says it's time to eat healthy.

His fighter, Mike Tyson, who's in his quarter.

God wish we could have Tyson here.

Because these guys are our Tyson.

Okay.

They want us to eat healthy.

They want us to eat food that's not bought out of a grocery store that's rotten by the time we get it home.

They want us to eat food that's not sprayed with pesticides that nobody can tell us what it is.

I have a brain injury, and it's very important for me to eat those kind of fresh foods.

So when you guys, as you, whichever ones it is of you, because I don't know which ones it is.

Decide that you make the decisions for my health, my well-being, the children in our community, the people in our community.

I think you've went too far.

Okay.

The other thing I have to say, again, Senator Kennedy and Mike Tyson are going after schools for the way they are feeding our children.

Why you, as city council members, are not going after and supporting the people that want to live better lives.

It's just a question you should ask yourself in the mayor tonight when you go home.

Thank you.

For your first time, you did great.

Thank you for being here.

Good evening.

Welcome.

All right.

So my first time also.

So I apologize if I mess up.

Um, actually, not a city resident.

I live in the county.

Um, my husband and I own a couple businesses here in Cheyenne.

We do a lot with our state.

Identify yourself for the Hannah Fields.

Hannah, welcome.

Yeah, thanks.

Um, so I've known the Nicely's for a long time.

Not only are they amazing farmers, they're amazing people, um, former foster parents as well, which is a great benefit to our community, um, on top of everything they do in the farming world.

Um, I'm here tonight to respectfully voice opposition to the proposed annexation of the local farm property.

This land is more than just open space on a map.

It represents agricultural heritage, local food production, and a piece of our community's identity.

Annexing and developing this land would permanently remove farmland that has served our area and a lot of us for a long time now.

Um, Mr.

Bloom addressed the traffic pattern in the area, and that does bring up the question of has there actually been a traffic pattern issue?

Um, just something that came to mind.

Um, I was in Fort Collins with my children yesterday, and rough feedlot in Fort Collins is just off of Harmony Road on Ziggler Road in a very suburban area.

There's schools there, businesses there, everything.

Um, I can't say how many cattle they have.

I didn't stop to count, but they have a sizable amount of cattle on a property that's smaller than what the nicely's have.

I don't think they plan on putting in a feedlot.

Um, but I do think it's worth noting that there are ways for even cities like Fort Collins to make this work and we're Cheyenne and not Fort Collins, thankfully.

So I think that there are ways for us to make this work as well.

Um, growth and development are important, but they should be balanced with thoughtful preservation of the spaces that make our community unique.

Once that farmland is gone, it can't be replaced.

I encourage the council to carefully consider the long-term impacts of annexation and to prioritize solutions that protect agricultural land while planning responsibly for the future of our community.

We're excited to celebrate the Wyoming Cowboard cowboy culture, you know, as evidenced by this big PRCA thing coming in.

Um, but that culture wouldn't have been possible without the pioneers, the farmers, the homesteaders, the business owners, and the community.

That is also worth celebrating.

Cowboys are great.

So are the rest of us.

Victory Farms might be making a comeback, you know, way the world is going.

Um, so why are we blocking people who are paving the way for that?

These are the people that are teaching the rest of us how to grow gardens.

They're teaching the rest how to feed our families, how to raise our chickens, how to do all of this.

Um, we're all Wyoming proud and that Wyoming way of life is what we want for our children, and that includes freedoms to live, how we feel is best for our families, our community, and to use the land we're stewarding to benefit all as WyOFresh does.

Thank you for your time.

Thanks for being here.

Mr.

Love.

Mr.

Mayor, members of the council.

My name is Stephen Love.

I live in Ward One.

I'm saddened that we're here today.

Um, I think so many people have been fighting really hard for this.

Um I wish it could have been resolved before now.

I think the only reason that you see the members of the public fill fill the room today wearing green is because of an overzealous agenda that is being forced down the throats of citizens of Cheyenne and the county alike.

This is not a partisan issue.

This is not an issue for one or two people.

This is a shining example of systemic overreach by the council.

The council as a whole, and I know there has been members in opposition, but as a whole, has passed woefully unpopular ordinance in the last several months and years, not limited to flock cameras, administrative warrants, many others infringing on our rights.

Let's make history and put a stop to that tonight.

No one wants this annexation for pocket four.

The nicely's have been over backwards, trying to provide you with information about how they could reasonably proceed.

And that information has fallen on deaf ears.

They were not just wanting a stay of execution for YFresh so they could ask questions.

They were hoping to find a way to survive as a business and a farm with this annexation.

Well, you answered the questions, and one thing seems clear.

Under the current rules and regulations, they may not survive.

And if they do, it will be because of pure pure determination and grit of their family and community, not with any help, I assure you from this council.

So at this time, I would ask that the council remove pocket four from this annexation.

It was represented that there was there would be time, money, and man hours involved in removing them.

And the subtext that it would be was that it would be inconvenient to the city.

So that I say, good.

Fantastic.

Do your jobs.

That is what we pay taxes for.

We would not pay taxes if it was easy.

We would get by on volunteer work, but it's not easy.

That's why city employees are paid a salary to do the inconvenient, difficult thing.

If you can can't find it in your heart tonight to do the reasonable thing and remove this property from annexation, at minimum delay this annexation until zoning regulation that properly completely and formally protects these people's way of life, people's way of life can be codified.

That is a formal recognition of an urban farm zone and the protections that it would entail.

The current AG designation comes up well short of what is needed to run a farm.

As you vote tonight, please consider all the testimony you have heard from your constituents and community members from the county alike.

No one is in favor of this ordinance.

No one vote to remove parcel four.

Uh vote for the livelihood of the nicely's.

As Dr.

Aldritz has said, it's time to throw the baby out of the bathtub.

Thank you.

Welcome, sir.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor, City Council members, city staff and audience.

My name's Glenn Connor.

I live on 1304 Broken Air Road.

I've been before this panel here for many, many years.

And you can see the gray hairs on the mayor, but you can see them on me too.

So we've we butted heads more than once over annexation.

I've gone 26 years annexation free.

So I just want to state it for the record tonight.

I know the mayor's looking at me like, well, maybe we should just step out the back door here.

But anyway, I take him to McDonald's and buy him a shakes.

What I do.

So they're green right now.

They're shamrock shakes.

That'd be perfect, wouldn't it?

There you go.

Anyway, I'm here tonight to support the farm.

I feel that this farm is one that uh, you know, they've been in operation for years.

There's no sense in in changing the the regulations out there and and forcing these people to pay higher taxes, forcing them to tie into city water and sewer.

I know eventually I'm gonna have to.

I'm surrounded.

I'm 75% surrounded right now.

The mayor's notes, I read the mayor's minutes all the time.

75 to 100%.

So I'm 75% right now and on Southwest Drive.

I'm I'm kind of out by the animal shelter.

So you can see the dilemma that I'm in too, because I'm retired now.

You know, I'm looking at $14,000 tap fee, probably another six to seven thousand dollars to hook up my water and sewer because when I put my home on the property, I didn't place it on the property where I thought the city water lines and sewer lines would come through.

So it's gonna be a big burden for me in the future.

People say, Well, you can recuperate that from the sale of your home.

I don't want to sell my home.

I've lived in Cheyenne all these years.

I love this community, you know.

But I'm going before a panel here that I never ever had the opportunity to vote for.

Is that not un-American?

I mean, if it's if if I'm wrong, somebody stand up and tell me right now.

But to me, I've I've been before these people for years.

Will I become one of these members up here?

I have family members that may run in the future.

They're young now.

They've talked about it.

But I I'm looking at why what's the big hurry?

Dr.

Ryan, you you said, sir, that we're in a big hurry.

We have a time frame here.

What's the time frame?

And why do we have to do it right away?

I would I would work with these people for a long, long time and have everything planned out.

You you've put the cart before the horse again, and I've said that many a times down here.

You know, I I just feel that let's give them some time and look at this from a standpoint of it's going to affect them.

I get three minutes.

I have 20 something seconds left to convince you to vote no tonight.

And it's going to affect them for the rest of their lives.

So go home with that tonight.

You know, all of you, everyone in here, go home with that.

How's it going to affect me?

Thank you for your time.

Thanks for being here again.

Go ahead, ma'am.

Thank you.

Hello.

My excuse me.

My name is Betty Keatley, and I've owned two businesses in Cheyenne for about 25 years.

And I'm a producer for whitefresh farms.

In addition to everything that everybody says about how great the place is, there's reality, the fact that you have an agenda that you want pushed that you came in that you wanted to create, absorb these pockets.

Your constituents in your city have shown you they did not agree with your agenda.

Therefore, your agenda needs to change.

We could have a thousand people in this building.

We don't feel like we're heard.

They've shown up week after week to tell you they do not agree.

I have not heard one person stand into any of these podiums and say they agree with your agenda.

So I'd like you to consider that when you make this vote.

Thank you.

Ms.

Woodhouse.

Mr.

Connor's here now, you're here.

I feel like it is old days.

Yes.

We're back to 1990 something.

Uh gay Woodhouse, I am representing WhyFresh Farms and the Nisleys.

I I think wonderful things have been said tonight.

And I don't, I could not say them better, really.

Especially Glenn Connor, I believe Gary Pugh had the legal arguments down, you know, so there's nothing new to say there.

But you know, today, you know, we well, first of all, I want to talk about the questions, the 143 questions.

And I wanted, you know, I think some people misunderstood that they were like willy-nilly questions are not particularly important.

They were well organized.

They were organized by topic, and and then they were sub subtopics within them.

Each one of them, the nisleys felt this is an important thing to know.

Well, some of them may have been and were answered bulk in bulk, two or three could be answered together, which is appreciated.

But then we got the answers last Monday, and we went through them as quickly as we could.

We reviewed them.

We met on Wednesday.

We had a long meeting where we tried to identify, and I did identify nine major areas that we still had questions about.

And um, and we had a great meeting today with the city.

I mean, they were very we we did have all the people who showed up were very respectful and gave us information.

And some of the information that they gave us was actually, you know, it's still the kind of the cart for the horse thing because like adding in the urban definition that, but not quite in the code yet.

You know, it's gonna be in the code later, but it'll be we'll follow it.

You know what uh Mr.

Bloom said, one of the great ones that we heard is that there could be and will be a proposal to have them allowed electric vents.

This is great.

I mean, that solves a lot of problems, but it hasn't been done.

You know, it hasn't been before you.

I know we have a sponsor for it, but it's I don't know if it's written or not yet.

But you know, that's a that's a good thing.

So um there were several items that still when I left.

Well, another point before that.

Um, oh gee, I'm running.

Okay.

Um the the site site flat.

I mean, they put their heart and soul into that, and they did it by layers of each type, like mulch and and permanent structures and all that.

And and and Mr.

Bloom thought it was a great side plan.

There's a few things that'll be worked out, but you know, they really dug down and did all the things they need to do, but it was almost it's it's a defense mechanism.

Are is that all they're ever going to be able to do?

You know, what are what exactly is gonna roll out after, you know, if this is annexed tonight?

And those kinds of things really there are so many things that just could be addressed ahead of time and could be taken care of that would allow them to sleep at night.

I don't think that they've slept at night for a month.

You know, it's very difficult for them.

I mean, they are worrying about the thing that they've dreamed about, the thing that they love, the thing that they live for, just like we all have.

We all have things that we dream about, including the mayor wanting to annex all the county pockets.

So, you know, you must understand that.

But you know, it's really, I just feel like we need to have some more time.

We need to get some of these things done and codified.

And so there's not a question.

They're in code.

So please postpone as long as you can.

Thank you.

It's good to see you again.

Good evening.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor, City Council, Tamra Trajill, Ward One.

I've I was asked for you guys to table this since the beginning.

We've actually had this discussion back in 2022 when you guys brought the data centers and all of the South Side was coming here to talk against annexation.

Um there's a couple things that I just we already know the decision.

If it's already brought this far, then we know where we're going.

However, you guys can table it.

You guys can also pull this parcel out.

I know there was discussion um in the last meeting with uh councilman label when he questioned about pulling this parcel out, and the city attorney said unique situation.

Well, let's remind of the unique situation in February of 2021, when the city council approved the annexation and rezoning of approximately 532 acres owned by Loomis Livestock and ARP and um Hammond Hardware.

You guys were able to do it then with the rezoning of about 258 to 260 acres for heavy industrial and the rest to agricultural re uh retention.

And then as of April 2025, an additional expansion of roughly 200 acres was proposed for annexation.

So there is already president to pull that apart.

So if you need to, thank you.

Sir, welcome.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you for the time to speak.

I appreciate it.

I've served on multiple boards, and I don't enjoy being on your side of the table.

So I and I know all of you are actively trying to put effort in to make the best decision for the city of Cheyenne.

I appreciate your time.

My name is Cody Smith.

I've lived in Wyoming all of my 46 years.

My family first came to Laramie County in 1907.

I'm very proud of my heritage here in Laramie County.

I have three quick points.

First of all, I I assume you're probably starting to get the idea, but I'm not sure the council fully understands the community surrounding this farm stand.

I mean, it's it's more than just an eight-acre plot of land with some chickens.

It's you know the people that come in there that can't eat food out of the grocery store.

It's I mean, it's there's there's a lot of them.

The people that market their farm products through their through the farm stand.

I I don't know how many there is, there's quite a few.

We started my wife and I started an ice cream business several years ago, and it's actually turned into quite a quite a big deal.

We have 30 locations across Kimball, Scotts Bluff, Douglas.

Cheyenne has been our hardest place to be able to sell stuff, and I think that's partly on the the number of regulations and the corporate the corporateness of Cheyenne.

But our ice cream business started in the farm stand here.

You know, we we started making in our home, and it was under the Wyoming Food Freedom Act, we were able to sell it and it's grown into a big thing.

And I think you know, it with the farm stand gone, we wouldn't have that opportunity, have had that opportunity, or it would have been harder.

So anyway, I just want you to fully understand the implications of a decision tonight and the number of the people will affect is is a lot.

Second thing is under the current circumstances, and Tommy and may not agree with me, but I believe it will be the end of the farm stand.

I mean, it'll be death of a thousand cuts, regulation after regulation, over it may not be immediate, but over the next year or two, it will close.

I mean, they they won't be able to operate under the current set of circumstances.

So know that an annexation tonight will inevitably be an end of the farm stand and the community and the people who serves and is whether you know, if you don't like it, don't go there.

But for the people that do go there, it's a big part of their life.

My third comment before I quit is my challenge for you tonight is why does annexation have to be a negative thing?

Why don't we not annex tonight?

Go back, do our homework and come back in whatever amount of time so that it's at a positive thing for this annexation, make it a deal that these people would like to be a part of the city.

This is an opportunity to join the city with all the great opportunities we have, rather than be in this apparently quite negative, hard feeling situation that we've developed.

So anyway, thank you guys for time.

What's the name of your ice cream?

Josie's creamery.

Just had my first one, the chocolate.

It was amazing.

Did you?

Well, very glad to hear that, sir.

That's good.

Thank you.

Well, it's because of the farm stand.

So thank you.

David, welcome.

David Nicely, 200 Walterscheid.

David, could you pull that microphone down so it points at you?

David Nicely, 200 Walterscheid.

I've been praying for you all tonight.

Um, I know making decisions are sometimes hard.

Um today we met with the city um department heads, I think six of them, and uh and uh several of them were extra um good to deal with.

Um, some were more neutral.

Um but what I'd say is I'd like to propose a way forward.

Um uh great man who did a lot of great things said once, he said, I don't pay attorneys to tell me I can't, I pay them to tell me how I can.

And I feel like the city council and the city staff heretofore have been trying to tell us why we can't continue to do what we've doing in the way we're doing them.

And the way forward I'd propose, though we've been almost mocked for 147 questions, is to have the city council and the city staff put forward some questions for us because what we discovered collectively today in the first grand meeting, if you will, between us and you all, and that's remarkable that in six weeks with multiple meetings at the last possible minute before the final vote, we have a meeting to come to some agreement.

And we've been I I haven't been begging because I I don't beg, but I've I've been imploring you to do that.

We discovered that some of the answers that were given were given without complete information, is even what we're doing.

So why not go back, propose to us a list of 147 questions?

I don't know where that number came from, and we'll answer them.

Because we discovered today that you all are annexing us, and and you don't even know what we're doing or how we're doing it or why we're doing it.

Um I don't know that they don't care.

I I think it's it's a cruel system.

And they believe maybe at least one of you all believes that government could be could should be just blind and blind in its cruelty.

A couple of you all have told us to sell and move somewhere where we're wanted.

Um but the reality is um we can have a great thing.

Miss Ash and I at the at the end afterwards right at the final point, she said that our farm should learn to trans should transition to learn to live in the city.

And I countered and said the city should transition with us and learn how to host a farm.

Somebody else said this can be a great thing.

You ought to be proud to have a farm in your midst.

Um, we could sell and move.

We've been offered money.

Um, the number one objection we get um to our social media posts is you could just sell and go somewhere else.

And it's not about the money.

Um, honestly, um, you know, to live true to our Western way of life, my wife said it it's not gonna cost you a thing.

Well, it's costing me something financially.

We're not making any money.

I I think we'll prepare a tax return that says we're losing money.

And I'm happy to do that because I feel like God has called us to the ministry of allowing people to eat.

Um I feel great about connecting with people, serving people, loving people.

My wife, my wife can't get out of the farm stand when she goes down there to do something.

Um, people are all over her asking her questions about growing things, about health, about her knowledge of biology and science.

Um, so we can have a great relationship.

Just my modest proposal is do some homework.

Ask us some questions.

I'm shocked.

I I've sent email after email after email imploring you all as a city council to interact, and you by and large don't interact.

Um I don't know whether that's because you don't care, aren't interested, or there's some reason.

Um beyond that.

I don't I don't frankly understand.

Finally, in your first answer to our first question, the question was why March 9th?

And the answer was that you have initiatives and projects that would be held up.

And I asked Miss Ash about that today, and she said, well, the staff is taking up so much time dealing with this issue that we feel like we need to get it out of the way so the amount of time and cost goes away.

Well, with no urgency, a little more relaxation, a little more homework, a little more thought.

We won't be quite so defensive, and maybe we can come to some agreement.

Maybe some trust could be built.

And with a little trust, we could get somewhere.

As it is, we're like two rail cars butting together because the knuckles are closed and it will never go.

I can simply lift a pin, and you can simply lift a pin, and we'll tell you the knuckles open, they'll merge together, and they carry a lot of weight.

So let's do it.

Go back, do your homework, write 147 questions.

Live a little, write 152 questions.

We'll answer them.

Ask what you want to ask.

We'll ask you why you're asking.

You tell us.

That's that's respectful kindness.

So let's do it.

Let's do it.

I you know, I'm I might even object to the person who said, um, don't answer, we're we're opposed to annexation.

I don't know whether I'm opposed to annexation.

You know, I feel like a bride who's been kidnapped, taken to the altar, asked to say yes to marriage without anybody trying to persuade me.

So persuade me.

A little sweet talk.

Don't take me to McDonald's.

I'm sorry.

Anyway, thank you.

Sir Wade Blunt, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

I'm sorry, I didn't get your name, sir.

Oh, Wade Blunt.

I'm sorry, Wade Blunt, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Um, Mr.

Mayor, members of the King City Council, we have heard from our countless, I've lost count of how many people have gotten up and spoke tonight.

Um, anywhere from uh customers who regularly uh frequent why fresh to members of our legislative body if there is questions or if this if this this process, if there is still so much doubt or so many unquestioned uh sorry, unanswered questions, I implore you, Mr.

Mayor and the city counselors, step back, take the time to listen to to the nicely's please, because again, we the people we the people vote.

Well, I can't say I'm I live in the county, but people have voted for for every one of you on the body.

We the people, and I asked just please listen to the people, postpone this, do some more work.

Because how much when is enough?

If it's the night, if it's why fresh tonight, what's what's it gonna be next next year?

Who who's who who do where does it stop?

Thank you.

Jennifer, you have anybody online?

Oh, like wait a second, Mr.

Nicely's here.

I didn't see him hiding back there.

Welcome, sir.

Uh, Mr.

Mayor, members of the council.

Uh as I said when I first appeared before you all.

I apologize for interrupting you, but can you introduce yourself for the record, please?

I am Richard Nicely, son of David and Tommy Nicely.

Perfect.

Thank you so much.

When I first appeared before you all, I said that think of us not as an ugly grain space, but to think of us as a marriage or or a marriage gift to Cheyenne.

But like any marriage, it will take time.

And so far, I feel like both parties have been turning our plows into our plows into swords.

Why can't we turn back to turning our swords back into plows?

And that would first begin is if what I hear from my parents is true, and I hope it is true because they're my parents, and I don't want them lying to me.

Is that while we have gotten some of our answers, some of our questions answered, we have not gotten all of our questions answered, and worse yet is that the and some of the answers that we have gotten are worse than what we would have thought.

I feel like to turn this back would be either removing us from the annexation or just a simple postponement.

You could just put one or two city council members in, and their whole job is to just or not city city staff.

Their whole job is to answer our questions and to get us and to answer our questions that work for both us and the city because ultimately in a marriage, both parties have to put in work and effort.

If only one party puts in work and effort, the marriage is not gonna work, and it will ultimately end in a divorce.

Now, in this case, we don't have an option for a divorce, and so both parties will just die unhappy till the end of their days.

Thank you for your time.

Let's start there.

Uh Micah S.

You can go ahead and speak.

Uh Micah Sutton, Cheyenne resident.

Uh I'd like to speak on the site plan.

Uh that will be required of them.

Uh site plans must be resubmitted every time things change from how they were previously.

Site plans can cost anywhere from 100 to 1800.

Regenerative agriculture requires constant movement and change, which is something that YFresh practices.

At least 80% of the buildings at YFresh move twice a year or more.

One example of this would be their caterpillar tunnels.

Uh they have two of those that they move three times a year.

They would need to submit a new site plan each time they are moved.

That would be a minimum for two tunnels three times a year of $600 of yearly expenditure.

And those are not the only moving structures on their property.

For YFresh, the entirety of the land is used for many different agricultural practices.

They are they layer one over another in regenerative agriculture.

And typical site plans are two pages and relatively simple.

The first submission of Y fresh a site plan required 20 pages.

This illustrates the difficulty of creating a single site plan, let alone constantly changing or updating the plan.

Please uh consider the public feedback that you've received throughout these many meetings and vote to postpone this annexation.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Ma'am, did you want to speak?

Please come forward.

You were hiding behind the pillar.

I didn't see you till just the last second there.

You you have to turn you have to turn that on by pushing the button.

That light will turn green here.

Push it again.

Push it like you mean it.

There you go.

Hi, council members.

My name is Jerry.

I am here on behalf of my friends Roxy and Casey, who own Parcel 7 that is being discussed in this annexation.

Um, one of the things that I think is really awesome with them is they're wanting to restore the barn on that property.

It was one of the original dairy farms in this town.

So I really think that this annexation is not it's not something that's gonna be good for them.

And I just I want to see them being able to succeed on what they want to do.

And I think with the annexation, it will put new zoning restrictions, regulations on that property.

Um property rights and fairness matter deeply in our community and forcing annexation on property owners who do not want to be a part of the city setting it it sets troubling precedence.

But I'm just wishing that you guys would reconsider and thank you for your time and listening to the community.

Thanks for being here.

Sir, please.

Uh my name's Dakota Titus in 2015 East 15th Street.

Um I prepared a small speech for you guys.

Um not a public speaker, so I apologize for the muttering.

Glad you're here.

Um ladies and gentlemen, council members and fellow citizens.

The United States of America was founded by men who understood something deeply about human nature and power.

They knew that liberty is rarely lost all at once.

More often it disappears slowly through small concessions, quiet expansions of authority and policies justified in the name of safety, convenience, or efficiency.

Here in Wyoming, that principle carries special meaning.

The state was built by people who valued independence, personal responsibility, and local control over distant authority.

Wyomingites have never been comfortable with power that grows quietly without clear consent of the people.

Benjamin Flanken warned us plainly, those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Franklin wrote these words as a warning because he knew that governments, even well-intentioned ones, are always tempted to expand their reach.

George Washington reminded the young nation, government is not reason.

It is not eloquence.

It is force like fire, it is dangerous, servant, and a fearful master.

These words are not anti-government, they are pro-liberty.

They remind us that government must always remain accountable to the people who created it.

And that principle matters today, right here in our own communities.

When citizens see expanding surveillance through systems like flock cameras, when they see administrative warrants that bypass traditional judicial oversight, and when they see communities facing forced annexation without the clear consent of the people that live there, people begin to ask a simple question.

Who is our government serving?

Is the people is it serving the people who elected it, or is it serving the convenience of government itself?

Thomas Jefferson reminded us the price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

Vigilance means asking hard questions.

It means expecting elected officials to vote in the interest of their constituents, not in the interest of political comfort, administrative convenience, or personal advantage.

And when elected officials forget that responsibility, forget that responsibility.

Warned the nation about the dangers of power when he wrote, there's danger from all men.

The only maximum of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.

The founders designed our system with this understanding.

Power must always answer to the people.

Wyoming has always had a frontier spirit, not the lawlessness of the frontier, but the independence of it.

The belief that communities should govern themselves, that citizens should be heard, and the government exists to serve the people, not manage them.

That belief is not outdated.

It is the foundation of our republic.

Thomas Jefferson put it plainly.

When the people fear the government, there's tyranny.

When the government fears the people, there's liberty.

Which brings me to the words that helped ignite the spirit of the American independence.

In 1775, Patrick Henry wrote before the Virginia Convention and declared, give me liberty or give me death.

And those words were not a threat.

Just work.

Nice job, Johnny.

Jennifer.

Uh Jordan Weisdorf, you can unmute yourself.

Thank you.

Jordan Wisdorf, can you guys hear me okay?

We can.

Thank you for having me this evening.

Good evening.

My comments are in opposition to the annexation item before the council.

This annexation highlights a deeper issue that many residents are feeling.

A growing lack of trust in this body's decision making when annexation moves forward, despite sustained public opposition to it reinforces the belief that outcomes are predetermined and that public comment exists to satisfy procedure, not to influence results.

That concern is heightened by the fact that this council is currently making long-term decisions affecting new residents while including at least one member who was appointed, not elected by the voters.

While I understand that appointments may be legal, allowed legally allowed, legality is not the same as legitimacy in the eyes of the public, especially when trust is already strained.

For many residents, this annexation feels like another example of decisions being made for the public rather than with the public by a council that appears increasingly disconnected from those it represents.

I want it clearly on the record that opposition to this annexation is not just about boundaries or services, it's about confidence.

Advancing annexation under these circumstances further erodes trust in the mayor and this council and deepens the divide between city leadership and the constituents you serve.

Thank you.

Jennifer, do you have more?

Ken Williams, you can unmute yourself.

This is uh Ken Williams.

Uh I live in the county, and I am disgusted at all of you except for Mark and Mr.

E.

You guys should not do this.

Where is the win-win in this?

There is no win-win in this, Mr.

May.

Zero.

Zero win uh win-win.

If you guys work with these people, then there is a win-win.

This is Wyoming.

And I've said this before in front of the council when Johnson was there about the uh plastic bags.

We are not Colorado, we are Wyoming.

You guys gave 50 million 50 million dollars to help out the PRC.

Why don't you give some money?

Why don't you guys give some money to help the nicely so they can uh do what they do best?

Mr.

Nicely, I apologize for this council.

This cancel is out of order, just exactly like the mayor told you.

I'm done.

Jennifer, any more.

Ken Henderson, you should be able to unmute yourself.

Can you hear me now?

We can, sir.

Thank you.

I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you.

Um it's been my it's I'm been my business to uh my name's Eric Henderson.

I am a resident of Laramie with property interest in Cheyenne, born and raised in Cheyenne, and trust in government.

I don't think it's ever been less in our world.

And if you are not persuaded by business coming from Colorado, if you're not persuaded by the youth that have spoke to you this evening, if you're not swayed by the unity these people, the nicely's have drawn about.

I'm gonna I'm gonna call, I'm gonna call uh each one of you individually, and I and I I want the opportunity to understand where you truly come from.

It doesn't feel like Wyoming that I grew up in until tonight, and I hear people bound together for these great people.

I heard uh an area seven, I heard an area four.

Both of those, the dairy, the dairy barn.

I would ask you, do not annex either one of these two properties.

Not enough work has gone in to justify changing these people's lives forever.

I ask you to establish a trust.

Look to preserve the history of what founded our country and this, these type of ag these type of historical places around our town.

Don't change it.

Don't make the legend what it used to be.

Let it live on today.

I appreciate your consideration.

Please support these people who have asked for your support to give them time.

But I'd ask you to preserve it long, long, long, long forward as building my building everybody's businesses has been uh my entire business for my entire career.

I would ask that you give these people that opportunity.

And I love the aspect, I love the perspective that they should want.

Each of them should want to come into the city.

The benefits so outweigh being in the county.

That's the right time for annexation.

Thank you.

Any more?

Uh Sarah, you should be able to unmute yourself.

Good evening, members of the council.

Thank you for this opportunity to speak today.

My name is Sarah Morgan.

I'm a holistic health practitioner and a member of this great community in Cheyenne.

I live in Orchard Valley, and I'm here today to express my strong opposition to the annexation of Wyoming Farms.

Local farms are more than just land, they're part of the health resilience and food security of our community.

Access to fresh locally grown food plays an important role in supporting public health.

Many people today are actively seeking food that is grown close to home with fewer chemicals, fewer preservatives, and greater transparency in how it is produced.

When we lose farmland, we lose that direct connection between our community and the food that it nourishes it.

Annexing farmland for development may bring short-term expansion, but it can permanently eliminate agricultural spaces that are increasingly important for sustainable food systems.

Once farmland is gone, it is rarely recovered.

As a practitioner focused on wellness and preventative health, I see firsthand how diet and food quality affect people's lives.

Protecting local farms helps preserve access to fresh foods and supports farmers who are working to produce healthier options for our community.

This decision is not just about land use, it's about long-term community well-being, environmental stewardship, and protecting local food systems for future generations.

I respectfully urge the council to oppose the annexation of Wyoming farms and to prioritize policies that preserve agri agricultural land and support local food production.

I also want to point out an important contradiction.

Our state often speaks proudly about protecting the Western way of life and supporting Wyoming agriculture.

At the same time, we see policies and investments meant to strengthen agricultural systems abroad, including significant funding directed toward international agricultural development.

Yet here at home, we are considering removing productive farmland from our own community.

If we truly believe in protecting the Western way of life and supporting farmers that are that commitment should begin here by preserving the farmland that feeds our community and our neighbors and sustains our local economy.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you, Sarah.

Uh Bobby Ecker Malthy, Mothi.

You spelled it on mute yourself.

Can you hear me?

We can.

Thank you.

I am Bobby Ecker Mothy.

Thank you for pronouncing it properly.

It doesn't happen often.

I am in Ward Two.

I have no dog in the game other than I vote for my council member and my mayor.

I have a lot of questions.

Why is this annexation being so pushed?

Is it more than a pretty map?

Where are the pro-annexation people?

Because I have yet to hear a single person say, Yes, we want this to happen.

I have heard from other property owners who are included in this annexation, said we don't want this.

Before it was open to public comment, it was said 50% of the people want.

What do they have to gain from it?

They're not speaking up.

So why are their opinions so important?

The family who owned Whalefesh owned the land before the city encroached.

I do feel like, as a property owner in the city, we have to respect those who own land outside of our city.

When they choose to sell the land, it should be up to them.

In Fort Collins, there is such a farm that has said when there were no longer any family surviving family members who wanted to work the land.

It became city property.

And our children here in Cheyenne go to Fort Collins to learn about farming in this Fort Collins owned farm.

Yet we want to decimate this farm here in Cheyenne, which could grow and can be such a resource.

And again, where are the pro-annexation owners?

I would like to know where these people are and who they are.

Because I'm pretty sure if we look down on it, they are somebody who doesn't actually live here.

They only own land here.

Thank you for your time.

And please do not annex this land.

Have a wonderful day.

Thank you.

Jennifer, do you have any more?

Mr.

Miller, you can unmute yourself.

Did you like that?

Can you hear me?

We can, sir.

Um further record.

This is Charles Miller.

I'm testifying remotely to formally object to the third reading of ordinance PUDC 25278.

I've listened to my neighbors tonight.

Uh Richard Nisley offered you a marriage, but you are treating his family farm like a fast food drive-thru.

It is a bitter irony that you casually eat McDonald's cookies on the dais while forcing a local farm into a marriage with no option for divorce.

Before I enter my formal warning into the record, I must correct Director Bloom.

He just testified that this farm is capped at 25 customers and requires a site plan to exceed that limit.

Please be advised that under Wyoming Food Freedom Act Statute 1147103.

Local municipalities are expressly preempted from using zoning or site plans to throttle direct to consumer agricultural sales.

What the planning director just described as an ultra virus act, it is illegal.

I'm speaking via audio tonight to form to enter a formal legal warning into the public record.

The moment my time concludes, I will transmit an email to the city clerk and this council containing a document um that's placing you on notice that an affirmative vote tonight exposes the city to immediate procedural liability and litigation based on four fatal flaws.

Flaw on statutory statutory avoidance.

Wyoming statutes 151404 mandates the city shall provide a written summary of foreseeable changes to landowners prior to the public hearing tonight.

Tommy Nisley, Michael Jordan, and Roxy Hovell all testified they still lack clear written regulations.

Skipping this mandatory prerequisites makes this process void ab initio flawed too.

Material misrepresentation.

Your annexation report certifies service costs based on generic residential data for commercial agricultural operation.

It is mathematically and legally impossible to accurately price what you cannot even define.

This renders the report materially false under statute 151402, which requires annexations to be logical and orderly.

Fatal flaw three.

Anna Marie, you should be able to unmute yourself.

Anna, we can okay.

But as it stands right now, I don't see how that's going to work.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Anna.

Joe Pavlika.

I'm not sure.

Uh, you should also unmute yourself.

Thank you.

Uh, this is Joey Rain Pavlika with uh Lucky Buffalo Farm Stand.

To annex or not to annex is not why I'm speaking.

What I am going to speak about is the three hours that I spent with Tommy and Chelsea yesterday.

The heart that we have for this community is greater than anything, really, that is going on here.

We hold space for people so that we can make a living.

Or really any family for that matter.

I'm a small business.

We hold space for over 103 vendors in our farm stand.

I know Witz End does as well.

We have 307 made, plus we have summer markets, winter markets, and all of that is done out of love for our community, our vendors, our farmers, and uh uh being a small business owner.

It's all about the feeling.

You know, we get we get lost in the politics, but what is created is what I'd like for people to focus on as well.

It's not just um the rules and regulations, although important.

Uh I'm a business owner.

I know that there's rules and regulations and costs to a business, but there's so much more to that.

And I'd like for you all to take a step back and do what David and Tommy has asked for, and and they've reached out an olive branch, and let's make this a positive thing.

Uh Cody Smith said it uh very well.

Why does this have to be a bad thing?

Let's come together as a community and make this a good thing.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Joy.

Adrienne Crater, you should be able to unmute yourself.

Adrian, are you there?

Yeah, I'm just unmuting myself.

No worries.

Yeah.

So I don't understand why the the whole annexation thing is at least you have someone in your priority when you're not even keeping up with scheduled projects that have already been paid for, like the stoplight at Van Buren and Del Range.

That's a year past due.

One year past due, but then you want to put this family out of business.

And Kathy uh Sigviano, she she said pretty much everything I wanted to say about the council right off the bat.

But I'm just reinforcing why what is the point of annexing these people's business when you're not even keeping up with the projects that are past due.

Thank you, Adrian.

That's it.

All right, is there anybody else here in the room right now that would like to come and speak before we close public testimony and we give it back to the council for their opportunity to talk about it?

Yes, sir.

You got to come up to the microphone and introduce yourself.

Are you going to are you here to talk about the annexation?

You have to turn the microphone on.

Tell us who you are.

Um my name's Ronald Stringer.

Hello, sir.

Um there by Meso Drive where you guys are annexing that bridge on Messenger Drive and uh uh the car lots road is whatever that name of that road is Westland Road.

Six tons of trash underneath that bridge in the creek.

I've already cleaned up three tons and they can't make hauled it off.

Thank you.

They keep dumping more trash in there, and it needs to get fixed.

You guys are gonna annex, you know, get that problem fixed.

It's in the creek.

Have a good day.

Thank you, sir.

Thanks for doing that.

Anyone else?

All right, we'll close public comment then and I'll go to uh Dr.

Emmons for a motion if she's ready.

Um, Mr.

Um, just a quick recess because I have to go to the bathroom.

Ladies and gentlemen, if we could bring the meeting back to order, please.

Ladies and gentlemen, let's get back to order, please.

Thank you.

Did we lose Mr.

Leyborn?

Oh.

All right, ladies and gentlemen.

We're back in order.

Thank you very much.

Hope you enjoyed your comfort break.

Um we're back to the uh uh the governing body, and I believe Mr.

Moody asked for the floor.

Yes.

Thank you, uh Mr.

Mayor through you.

Uh Mr.

Mayor, I move to amend by uh substitute uh number ten um prepared uh March 2nd, 2026, 82 a.m.

If I can have a second, I'll explain.

Second.

All right, we have a substitute dated March 2nd.

Okay, go ahead, sir.

All right, thank you, Mr.

Mayor, through you.

Um this is similar to last week, but it is a little different.

It does take out uh wild fresh.

If you look at uh the uh second page there, it does uh take out uh parcel four and then renumbers it accordingly.

Parcel six is there, that's the old parcel seven.

It still keeps it uh uh two tracks there, one of them being the uh Coca-Cola distribution, but takes out the ad place, the dairy farm.

And I understand there's been a lot of work by the planning department, but we've heard from our constituents they do not want these properties annexed, and they're still lingering questions about what an urban farm is.

It's not statute, it is policy, and they need time.

This will give them plenty of time, and then we can even mend it to where it will be desirable to be in the city, and I ask for favorable consideration.

All right, I think I know exactly what you guys are gonna say, but uh I'll ask you if you want to come up, but uh Miss Sigliano.

I'm sure you could read my mind.

Um yes, I would uh greatly appreciate and agree with Mark's um amendment, if that's what it is, I'm not sure.

Um I apologize to the dairy farm owners um for not speaking on their behalf tonight as well, but I am in favor of this.

Thank you.

Mr.

Nicely.

Well I can obviously say that I'm in favor of all I gotta ask you again, just to remind you to tell your me who you are.

Hello, I am uh Richard Nicely.

I am the son of David and Tommy Nicely.

Welcome again, sir.

Um I would just like to say that I am of course in favor of all agriculture.

And I believe that agriculture is a fundamental for civilization.

And as I think it is right now, it is not desirable for either um the one-third of parcel seven and parcel four, which is us, uh, to enter the city right now.

Now the city can change that, and I for one will probably be keeping as much as an eye as I can on that.

Because I plan to die here, I plan to raise my kids here, I plan to marry here.

I use the word marriage, and I will stand by marriage.

Because ultimately marriage is consent by the two parties.

Now the city has already voiced their consent.

We still have not gotten our consent.

So for right now, I would like to turn down the betrothal.

Thank you.

I would first like to thank Councilman Moody through the mayor for his thoughtful proposal proposal.

I do agree with it and I yield my time.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I think it's pretty clear that Chelsea knows what I'm saying.

Chelsea McCorrect.

Sorry, have it.

Okay, anyways.

I I think that it's pretty clear that most people in this room are going to support this amendment.

Um, I wanted to speak in particular about this option as opposed to something like postponing.

If we postpone, we're just going to be showing up here every two weeks, and no one wants to continue to hear my voice or everyone else's voice over and over and over again.

Repeat the same things that you have heard.

Um, so this just removes it, gives us the time to work through what we need to.

And then once we've worked through all these things, which we want to work through, it allows us to then be annexed at that point.

Um, regardless if we're annexed tonight, I think that we have a lot of motivation to continue to work on bringing the definition of an urban farm to Cheyenne.

Um, so it's not like this is not going to be a possibility in the future.

Annexation is still possible.

This gives us a sufficient time without having to just keep reiterating points over and over again.

So thank you.

David nicely, 200 Walter Shed.

I'm sorry, you didn't recognize me.

It's okay, please.

David Nicely, 200 Walter Scheid.

I think I've mentioned before, um, because of what we're doing, um, we're meeting people regularly who want to do what we're doing.

And I think it's fact that if the city continues to grow, and I'm reading that it will that you're gonna continually come against folks who've started the same thing or want to start the same sort of thing that we're doing.

So it makes sense, as I said before, to figure out how we can do what we're doing within the city, and have a good relationship to define this in a way that works, a marriage that works, and and I'll go on record to say that uh Richard's pro-marriage, and um he's uh looking.

Um so and I'd be happy to to to grill her and uh and review our financial statements, but um a good relationship with us.

Um can be a good thing, and it can make it easier, not harder to go forward.

So I'm just gonna maintain again the resources of the city will be conserved by this.

Anyway, thank you, Mr.

Love, Mr.

Mayor, Mr.

Mayor, members of the council.

My name's Stephen Love.

I uh live in Ward one.

I'd just like to voice my support of this amendment.

Um there was some concern.

I believe it was the 23rd uh the last council meeting that this would create uh or a similar amendment would create pockets.

Um, however, I'd like to remind you that somehow these were 100% surrounded.

So we've already created pockets, we're not creating pockets, we're just delaying annexation for these.

Um, I support the amendment.

Thank you.

Jerry did a ward one.

Excuse me, Mayor.

Sorry.

Um, I just think I think it's obvious by the number of people that showed up here tonight and voiced their concerns.

It's apparent what the citizens of Cheyenne want.

They're fully in support of wife.

And I would ask that you listen to them.

Thank you.

Don't welcome.

Donnie Career, um, ward three.

Mr.

Mayor said council, thank you.

Um, see what's going on here.

Since it's needed started, man, it feels good that we're laughing not as council or city, but as a community.

That's how it should be.

When we started off this meeting, Mr.

Mary, you had some things you want us to follow.

I appreciate you guys humoring me the last time I stood up here.

This is what I like to see.

There's laughter, people are clapping.

We're not so divided as what everybody wants us to be.

You know, society would say it's you guys versus us.

I pray that that's not always the case, and I hope it's not.

I really don't.

I know you guys are doing a hard job.

But I want this family to succeed.

And we kind of lose that ability when we stop talking.

And we're still talking.

We really are.

I don't have anything personal against anybody up here.

Might not like certain characteristics.

No more than you guys probably don't like my characteristic or my swagger.

But that's that's so good when I look out here and I see the representation, the green shirts, the comedic relief that we all need.

And it's good seeing you guys laugh too.

For the ones that laugh.

So I support this.

Thank you.

Sir.

Dakota Titus Ward One.

Um, I want to thank you guys for having me up here again.

Um, and through you, Mr.

Mayor, I would like to uh I'd like to thank Mark for um opening up the opportunity through this amendment um to really show on the people of this great city.

Um those of you that are gonna stand with us, and those of you that are not gonna stand with us and that insist on standing against us.

So thank you.

Representative.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I'd like for first to say you know the rules, you gotta introduce yourself.

I certainly do.

Uh Gary Brown, House District 41 representative.

I'd like to remind us all that all of us that are elected, we're here elected by the people.

We're here to represent the people.

And uh that's should be first and foremost in our minds at all times.

And so I just want you to think about that as you make your decision tonight.

And I would thank Mr.

Moody for this common sense um amendment that that he had made.

I think this is a real step forward for us to look at this and and do what's right for the people here and do what's right for this family and and to make it uh available for the community to go forward with what we're doing here.

So thank you very much.

Ms.

Woodhouse.

Okay Woodhouse attorney for uh what fresh and the nice lease.

I just wanted to read, you know, that 151406 D says no annexation shall create an area which is situated entirely the boundaries, but is not annexed.

So no, you can't create a pocket, but you didn't.

There was a pocket, and you didn't the create means what it means.

You did not create it.

And if you don't, if you follow uh councilman Moody's amendment, you will not be creating a pocket.

So I heard some misinformation about that last time we were discussing it.

So I it's not true.

You are not creating anything.

Thank you.

Anyone else want to speak to the the substitute before us, which would remove uh parcel four and the agricultural part of parcel seven.

Yes, ma'am.

Charles Miller, you can unmute yourself.

Mr.

Miller, you got that unmute button figured out.

Can you hear me?

We can, sir.

All right.

Um, for the record, Charles Miller.

Um, I'm speaking in absolute support of Councilman Moody's substitute amendment number 10 to exclude parcel four of the Y Fresh Farm.

Councilman Moody just correctly stated on the record that your urban farm classification is not statute but mere policy.

Passing his amendment to exclude the farm is the only way this council can avoid the statutory liability that I outlined in my previous testimony.

Um, during the recess, I transmitted my formal legal analysis to the city clerk and the mayor's office.

But I must place three final pieces of your own written documents into the live audio record right now so that no one on this dais can claim ignorance before the final vote.

Um, first the map restart is a legal fiction.

If the city attorney attempts to claim you cannot carve out parcel four tonight without a total restart of the maps, your own municipal history proves otherwise.

Your UDC appendix K and your past actions regarding the High Plains Business Park, Swan Ranch, and the sweet grass PUD.

Prove you routinely amend boundaries mid-process without declaring the process void.

You possess the inherent legislative authority to pass this amendment right now, claiming otherwise is an abuse of legislative discretion designed to force the vote.

Excuse me.

Second, the hidden infrastructure plans.

Do not tell the public that annexation changes nothing when your own engineers are already mapping their dirt.

I am looking at the official Walterscheid Boulevard reconstruction plan.

Your engineering blueprints explicitly target this property, literally labeling it why fresh on the schematics.

Table six of that plan demands 1,203 square feet of their land for additional rights of way.

Page 33 dictates installing 1,310 linear feet of 24-inch storm sewer pipe and a massive drainage network directly impacting their boundary.

You are trying to annex them now to force them to surrender land for citywide infrastructure later.

Your written confession to stripping state rights in your official written responses to the farm's 143 questions, specifically question 123.

The city explicitly wrote that the Wyoming Right to Farm and Ranch Act, quote, does not appear to cover the activities of YFresh.

You have put in writing your intent to strip their state protected agricultural rights the moment they are annexed.

Council Ben Councilman Moody has just handed you a legally safe exit ramp.

Take it.

Pass substitute number 10 and exclude parcel four.

If you vote to defeat this amendment, the legal analysis sitting in your inboxes right now will serve as exhibit A in district court.

Thank you.

Anyone else in the room?

All right, hearing none.

We'll turn it to the council now.

Uh comments from members of the governing body.

Mr.

Escobel.

Mr.

Mayor, honored for the substitute.

As I said last week, when the owners of those two parcels are comfortable with everything going forward, then I'll be comfortable with everything going forward.

I've tried to uh do some things recently to help them.

Uh I've offered to take a dump truck full of compost out to the farm.

Free of charge for them using council contingency money.

I've offered to bring the mayor's youth council out there to help them do some planning and cleanup.

Uh so we do want them to succeed, but I don't I do believe they need more time, so on and for the substitute.

Anyone else in the governing body?

Mr.

Wolfe.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh, through you.

Um at the risk of being accused of being condescending.

Um guys.

And uh I would uh I would like to compliment the nicelies um on their young son and daughter.

Um I just had a wonderful conversation with Richard and Richard.

I only have one piece of advice about public speaking.

If you're talking about the episodes in life that you're really looking forward to, I wouldn't start with I plan to die here.

So um I'm gonna vote in favor of the substitute.

Um we've listened now to a hundred witnesses over the course of several meetings.

Um the man who really persuaded me was the man who owns Josie's ice cream, uh, which I love.

And if you haven't had their coffee ice cream, you're missing something.

Um, you know, I wasn't elected, I was appointed.

Uh but I have tried to listen to all of you.

I know there are lots and lots of efforts that the city has made, and I appreciate all the efforts.

Uh, Mr.

Bloom and his staff and the chief of staff and the mayor and everybody else who spent time on this.

My thinking about it has evolved.

Um, I had uh an initial encounter with the nicely's um that um was kind of an hour of yelling at each other, and then we kind of settled down and uh we're able to talk.

Um all of you think that all of us up here are cold hearted.

Uh we disregard what you're thinking.

Um you distrust us.

Uh it pains me to see that.

Um, but I um I think the time has come to see how the nicelies can continue as residents of the county, and if they want to come into the city at some point, we can entertain that.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Ms.

Leebourne.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I have a couple of questions for the uh sponsor of this substitute.

Um, am I correct?

May I proceed?

Please ask am I correct in understanding, Mr.

Moody, that with the removal of these uh from the uh ordinance, that would be the end of uh any sort of consideration or future action in regard to this issue before us that'd be over with until such time as it could conceivably re be restarted by someone somehow, Mr.

Moody.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Mayor, through you.

Uh yes, sir.

Um, as I'm aware, if we uh don't annex him and we put it out, I think it's a two-year wait, but I could be mistaken, Mr.

Mayor.

Um, I don't believe that that's the case, Mr.

Moody.

Um, that's only if uh if they're not a pocket.

Okay, but but you would have to start the process of.

Thank you, Mr.

Leyborn.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Well, this has uh certainly been a uh unique situation, and one that I think has uh educated a lot of people.

I hope it's educated some other people besides me.

But I speak against this uh substitute for one reason.

We've made this progress that we heard tonight.

I know that there was a meeting today that I wasn't aware of till I got came down to the meeting tonight, where these issues were discussed.

I believe I don't want to put any words in Mrs.

Nisley's mouth, but she seemed to suggest that uh there was communication, and uh certainly knowing all that's involved here, I believe that it's only appropriate that we continue to work this process through.

If we drop it, where do we go?

Where do we go back to it?

Who's gonna want to start this up again?

Yet um, as I've maintained throughout this, I think it's important that we work through this issue so that not only can uh their farm continue in the city, but that we would have that ability to regulate other similar operations, which seems reasonable to me anyway.

So I don't believe that this is the proper approach.

I believe that it taking some time here, um, whether it's uh there's some legal a lot of legal questions getting raised here that uh may or may not be correct.

Um, but I believe that it is correct for us to continue down this road, and I would surely like to see us come through with some sort of agreement that would that would work because I've heard it suggested that that was possible.

And again, I just really feel like we would be putting this out there.

I I can't I can't believe that anyone would uh particularly these two parcels would come forward with a uh request for annexation.

I mean, so then where are you?

Um so I I totally believe that uh there's some good energy in this room and and some good ideas, but basically going and ending this at this point, not to say that it can't be ended later, but this discussion, this knowledge, this learning, we never faced anything like this before.

And uh I think that it's important that we continue to some sort of a resolution that is more recognizable as a benefit not only to the people who are here tonight, but to the city as a whole.

So we understand uh some of these factors better.

I certainly do, and uh I do I do want to uh apologize.

I probably popped off when I shouldn't.

And uh, but I'm not the only one that did that.

Let's let's get together.

Let's work this through, and let's let's find a way to have a farm in the city.

uh some of these factors better i certainly do and uh i do i do want to uh apologize i probably popped off when i shouldn't and uh but i'm not the only one that did that let's let's get together let's work this through and let's let's find a way to have a farm in the city let's find a way to allow other people to follow their efforts with their property but uh i really believe that we'd be better off to resolve this and it seems to me from what i heard at the meeting today which evidently involved uh just about everybody that was responsible and i understand that uh there is the opportunity to further clarify the elements in the UDC so I speak in opposition to this as uh an end I think we need to follow on through to a conclusion that benefits both our people that make our policy and I and I I do want to close with this Mr.

Mayor um these annexation actions that we took over the past several years that weren't nearly so controversial because they didn't have this type of an issue we're to the long term benefit of this city as we grow so um I think it's important that we continue the spirit I'm seeing here at this hour and um move on to work through those issues and clarify in the code exactly what it is we're talking about thank you Dr.

Aldrich Mayor Collins through you thank you um I um going to um via yes vote tonight on this uh subs proposed substitute um I do want to set the record straight on a few things one um the comment was made earlier by Mr.

Nisley I believe that um there had been a not much response from the council members um I believe that every time I've been contacted I've responded and I want to make sure that um we don't paint every the entire council with the same brush um I also Mr.

Love mentioned uh throwing the baby out of the bathtub actually I don't think I ever said that I think I said I you shouldn't throw the baby out with a bath water um I would never advocate throwing a baby out of the bathtub just make sure that got correct corrected um and there was also a comment made that there's been no one in opposition to this and you're correct I have not seen one person at these meetings in opposition to this however we did receive an email this week from someone who believes that this land should be this should be annexed.

So please know that um and I understand that that's one person but you know what each of you are one person and one person deserves to be heard just like everybody else um because at the end of the day we represent all constituents and so um if you were that only one person I would want to hope that we would be listening to you as well um there was also a comment made that there's uh farmers markets only on um during the um summer there actually is a winter farmer's market so I wanted to make sure that people knew that um there was also a comment made about effective residents not being not being noticed um by Mr.

Lyle actually I believe that we have followed all of the notification policies for those that are being as are being annexed um to my knowledge that's a question we commonly ask of our staff um there's also a question about predator can predator control and that no solutions were given if you look at question number 34 um that actually there were um I believe five or six given there um so I just want I I want the other last thing I want to say is I know that in talking with Tommy and with David nicely that they're not opposed to annexation.

What they've been asking for this entire time is more time if this even if this substitute fails tonight I still believe there is a way forward um and a way to continue this conversation um so I don't think that um their urban farm idea is going to go away I think that this council will continue to proceed with that and um I believe that and as my commitment to Tommy was on Friday when we spoke Friday afternoon I will continue to work with this um family to address the issues and concerns they have um should this annexation go forward so um I will be a no vote I mean we I will be voting for the substitute tonight um and if it's not successful I will be hoping to be able to delay this or postpone it so that we can continue the conversation anyone else in the governing body Mr.

I'm gonna vote no on the substitute because I believe there's uh other actions coming up that would uh perhaps postpone and keep the action moving forward as councilman laborne discussed.

I would hate to see this just stop because it's it's going to happen again, and I think we need those ground rules.

I need I think we need to develop those.

So if we vote for the substitute, it all goes away.

If the if the substitute fails and we find a way to uh postpone at least a portion of it, um, I think the action keeps moving, as councilman labor once again said.

So I will be a no vote on the substitute, and I will um consider the um postponement if it comes forward.

Thank you.

All right, anybody else?

All right, we have a substitute for us.

Oh, Mr.

Moody.

Yeah, but thank you, uh Mr.

Mayor Through, and thank everybody for your testimony.

I urge my colleagues to vote aye.

Our constituents are saying take them out.

This will not affect the other parcels.

We heard it will not create a county pocket.

So I do urge my colleagues to vote aye.

You know, let's just take the two part of seven out and all four out just to make it easier and give them time to define one urban farm is thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Anyone else?

All right.

The motion before us would be to remove uh parcel number four and the agricultural part of number seven.

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Those opposed.

No.

May I see the hands of the nose, please.

Dr.

Rennie, Dr.

Emmons, Mr.

Seagrave, Mr.

Labourne, and myself.

The motion fails.

Um, we're back on the main motion.

Mr.

Mayor.

Ms.

Mayor, I should move.

I would uh move to divide the question.

Is there a second?

Second.

We have a motion to divide.

Mr.

Mayor, the motion to divide is non-debatable.

Right.

And I'm guessing, Dr.

Aldridge, your motion didn't uh divide would be to remove um seven or the agricultural partner number four.

And four, yes.

Thank you.

So that's Michelle Aldrich.

And who is a second?

Dr.

Renny?

Oh, Mr.

White.

All right.

The motion is to divide, uh, removing item number or parcel number four and the agricultural part of number seven.

Um, and we'll consider those separately.

All those in favor of motion to divide, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Those opposed.

No.

I see the hands of the nose.

Mr.

Seagrave, Dr.

Raney, Dr.

Emmons, myself, and Mr.

Laborne.

Okay.

That motion also fails.

Mr.

Mayor.

Sir.

I uh move to amend um very uh easy amendment.

Uh let me give you guys the sheet before I and if I can ask for a second, I'll explain.

Very simple.

Mr.

Moody, you have the floor.

Yep.

Uh so what I want to do is um motion is in uh page four, and for everybody in the public, you have a substitute be page three on section seven, right before the end.

It says that this ordinance shall be in full force on effect as publication, cross house publication, say March 10th, 2027.

Is there a second?

I'll second for the sake of discussion.

I need I hope we'll have an explanation.

Mr.

Moody, would you like to explain?

Yes, uh, thank you, Mr.

Mayor, through you.

So we heard the uh public services meeting that to delay it, we could not do it for certain parcels.

This does it for the whole ordinance is to be fair.

So that is why I'm bringing this up because there was an attempt to bring us up public services.

This is for the whole ordinance to delay it by one year.

Give them a chance to define when urban farm is, give a chance to define other questions that are not answered out of those 143.

And that's why I asked for your favorable consideration.

All right, we'll go back out to the audience.

Um, the motion is to uh delay the full force and effect until um March 10th of 2027.

Mr.

Nicely.

As I understand the amendment, um it's a future effective date, which is effectively declaring us married, whether we consent or don't consent on a future date.

And I object to that as disrespectful to my rights to say yes to matrimony.

Um it's just it it doesn't at that point there's no incentive for the city to work with us and to persuade us.

It simply drags out the discussion.

The legislators here spoke tonight asking for a delay of a year.

This is not a delay, this is a future effective date.

We may never get to the point where we want to be married.

Um and so I think it it's a worse amendment than approving it and then dealing with the consequences of approving it.

So I'd speak against it as worse for us.

Um so that's that's my thoughts.

Ms.

McCord.

Chelsea McCourt, Ward 1.

Uh, first a quick appreciation for Councilman Wolf and for Councilman White for uh listening to us um in what we are trying to express.

Um this proposition, to be clear, I think is better than just proceeding with annexation full force, but I don't think that this is still a great solution.

Um but the way that this solution is proposed is you're coming to us and saying trust us, we will continue to work with you to make sure these things are codified.

We can try to trust you, but in asking us just to not be annexed, we are doing the same thing to you guys.

We are saying trust us, we will continue to work with you to develop urban farming.

So if you're gonna ask us to trust you, you need to also trust us.

And so I guess I'm neutral on this to be honest with you, because I do think it's a better prop uh option than just straight up being annexed with problems, very clear and very present.

But it also isn't a guarantee on our end.

And it also, what if something comes along the line and it's a more nuanced issue that takes longer than a year?

There's a lot of problems with it.

So thank you.

Mr.

Mayor, members of the council, I'm Richard Nicely, so that the mayor doesn't have to remind me.

Um I would end.

But I feel as this is a lesser of two evils, because if we are going based off of incentive structure, then if we're straight out annexed right away, then there's also no incentive for the city to answer our questions per se.

Um whereas if there is a delay, maybe of a year, and I would consider that going off of incentive, there might be a little bit more, or if not, then if we you believe in natural human goodness, then either way they both can succeed.

And I essentially would reiterate to like say that I am not a saying what my dad is saying.

I am a separate human being.

Sir one.

Um I don't agree with the idea that uh a postponement of this annexation would preclude any further discussion.

Uh uh, both of the nicely's and have expressed a willingness to continue working with the city.

David said, send us questions, give me your questions.

He's expressed a willingness, um, almost an eagerness to continue working with the city.

And I think to suggest that delaying this annexation would preclude continuing to work together is disingenuous.

Um this is better than passing the motion.

Um, in my opinion, it would give them time and they wouldn't be in violation of any number of things immediately.

Um, and so I'm in favor of this.

Uh it's unfortunate that the parcel wasn't removed, but I'm in favor of this.

I think it's better than proceeding.

Thank you.

Yes, Jennifer.

Uh Mr.

Miller, you can go ahead.

Testing, testing.

Can you hear me?

We can um for the record.

This is Charles Miller.

I'm speaking in absolute support of Councilman Moody's new amendment to delay the effective date of this ordinance to March 10th, 2027.

First to the city council because you just defeated the surgical option to remove the farm.

This one year delay is your last remaining shield against the statutory liabilities sitting in your inboxes.

Director Bloom confessed on the record today that the urban farm classification is uncodified policy.

You can legally not cannot legally annex a business into a regulatory ghost.

This delay gives your staff the time to actually draft the law and fulfill your statutory duty under 1514 to provide written foreseeable changes.

Second, my messages to David and Tommy nicely.

If this council passes this delay tonight, do not spend the next year trying to fit a round peg into the city's square hole.

Do not wait for the city to trap you in a home occupation definition that permanently caps you at 25 customers a day.

Use this year to permanently shield your property.

David, you testified earlier tonight that God called you to the ministry of allowing people to eat.

I advise you to make it official.

Use this year to legally charter your farm stand and community gathering space as a neighborhood assembly and an agricultural ministry.

Director Bloom already admitted on the record today that the city's land uses are very broad and that the city does not specifically define a church beyond a general assembly.

Use the city's own broad UDC definitions to secure robust First Amendment protections.

Furthermore, formally structure your operation as a private agrieducility to protect the classes you teach and finally ensure every single transaction is explicitly anchored to the Wyoming Food Freedom Act, which the state legislature guarantees is exempt from local licensure and permitting.

Council pass Councilman Moody's delay to 2027.

Give yourselves a year to write the actual code.

David and Tommy, take their year and make yourselves legally untouchable.

Thank you.

Jennifer, do you have any more online?

Anyone else in the room want to speak?

All right.

We'll go back to the governing body.

We have a motion before us that would delay the full effect, force and effect until March 10th of 2027.

Comments.

Dr.

Aldridge.

Mayor Collins, um, through you.

I am going to be a no vote on this tonight.

I believe there is a better way forward.

Um I agree with the nicely's that this just puts them in an untenable position.

Um, and it does remove the motivation um from both sides to come to some sort of an agreement.

Um, so for that reason, I'll be a no vote on this amendment with uh uh proposed amendment to follow.

Mr.

Moody.

Um Mr.

Mayor three base one nicely say urge my colleagues to vote no.

Thank you.

Sounds like that's the end of that.

All right.

So we have a motion before us, the full force and effect, March 10th, 2027.

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Those opposed.

No.

No.

No.

It's unanimously uh fails.

And we're back on the main motion.

Mr.

Mayor, I would like to make an amendment.

Dr.

Aldridge.

Uh, Mayor Collins, I would like to amend um this uh ordinance with uh a postponed date certain um three months from today, uh, which would be whatever that is.

Uh it's a June 9th.

Um it uh according to Robert's rules of order.

I believe we can do a postpone of it uh to date certain.

Um it does require a higher threshold of numbers of votes um for that action.

So that would be my amendment.

Maybe second.

Let's see if we can find that date for the next that council meeting.

Um June 8th.

Sorry, June 8th.

Yep.

Would you uh I will amend my amendment to be June 8th.

And are you okay with that?

Yeah, okay.

Second So we have a motion to um to postpone uh this amendment this whole ordinance to uh June 8th of 2026, giving us three months to work on it.

Um we'll go back out to the audience.

Um we'd love to hear from you.

Yes.

Um, Mayor Collins, the reason I'm asking for a three-month uh postponement is I think that that will give us enough time to get the fence finished that needed to be repaired, that it will also give us the time to get the urban farm um definition codified.

And I believe that it will give us time and motivation to get um the questions that may remain or have sprung up from the answers answered um before that time when we would then um postpone it, reconsider this, and then we would have an opportunity to vote on it again.

Roxy, did you want to speak?

Mayor Collins.

Yes.

Can I ask for clarification?

Yes, ma'am.

Sponsor.

So are you saying that we that they would be annexed and go, we would set the whole annexation for all the for three months.

Yeah.

For all pieces that we've been dealing with.

The entire ordinance.

For three months.

Okay, thank you.