Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.

I'd like to call the April 13th meeting of the governing body to order and ask the clerk to take the roll, please.

Mr.

Wolf.

Dr.

Aldrich here.

Mayor Collins.

Dr.

Emmons.

Present.

Mr.

Escobel.

Here.

Mr.

Layborn.

Here.

Mr.

Moody.

Here.

Dr.

Ritney.

Present.

Mr.

Seagrave?

Present.

Mr.

White.

Present.

All members are present.

We do have a quorum.

Would you please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance?

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 the governing body would like to remove from the consent agenda?

Mr.

Mayor.

Mr.

Labourin.

Item 22.

Concur.

That item that item deals with the uh the sidewalk.

So we'll remove item 22.

Mr.

Mayor.

Yes, sir.

Item 31C.

That has to do with our city's audit.

Concur.

Okay.

I'd ask if somebody would please remove item 21.

Um, there's nothing wrong with it.

It just happens to uh be on the consent agenda.

We have to approve the zoning before we can do the um all right.

Will I move item 21 also?

Any others?

Hearing none, I would entertain a motion.

All right.

All those in favor of the consent agenda with items 21, 22, and 31C being removed, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, the consent agenda is approved.

Number seven, a public hearing to determine whether compliance of annexation conditions requested by Wyoming Statute 15-1-402 exists for about 1,259.91 acres of land located west of round top road and adjacent to Happy Jack Road.

Before I go to Mr.

White for a staff report, apparently we had a little uh um heart raising incident earlier today.

Ms.

Black and Mr.

Cox saw that their names were on this annexation um ordinance, and that came because we had uh 40 some acres that were uh were brought into the uh into this, but this the county had not updated their maps yet.

And so when our staff pulled that across, uh the Cox Ranch LLC was put on there.

Since then, we fixed all of those documents, and I apologize to them for causing the heart rate to go up just a little bit today.

And with that being said, we'll go to our staff for a quick staff report.

Mayor, members of council counterway planning and development department.

The annexation, uh this annexation is for roughly 1,259.91 acres of land generally generally located west of Roundtop Road and adjacent to Happy Happy Jack Road.

Uh this is an owner land, basically an owner petitioned annexation.

Um so the owner land is the larger portion on the north side of Happy Jack and the little bit that extends down into North Range Business Park.

The city does have land within this annexation that we tied into it.

Uh it's just the water um treatment plan out there.

BOPU was looking to annex that in the near future.

Uh this annexation came up and they asked if they could just add that into the annexation and move this along as well.

But the original annexation petition is landowner petitioned um for the land to be annexed.

Uh that petition was filed with the city clerk on February 17th, 2026.

The petition was certified by the city clerk as containing the necessary signatures according to state statute on February uh 17th, 2026.

Public hearing is being held in accordance with Wyoming State Statute 151402A.

Pursuant to fulfilling the requirements of state statute, staff asks the governing body to consider the following.

The land proposed to be annexed is contiguous to city limits.

Specifically, uh the property is 5.26% contiguous.

All city services and utilities currently available to residents of the city would be provided to the residents of the annexed land.

Extending water and sewer will increase the health safety and welfare of this area of the community.

The area to be annexed is partly inside the urban service boundary and designated with urban transition residential or has no designation by the future land use map.

I should note there is a proposed future land use map amendment that will be coming forward for this project as well.

Uh that will be introduced in two weeks.

This type of development is best supported by being within city limits and connecting to city services.

Certified mailing was sent to all landowners and utilities within the annexed area, not less than 20 business days prior to the public hearing.

According to the city's calendar, 20 business days prior to tonight's hearing was March 16th, 2026.

The certified mailing was sent on March 13th, 2026.

And the earliest confirmed receipt was dated March 16th, 2026.

And then property owners within 300 feet of the area to be annexed, uh, were also mailed public notice within that same time period.

Uh this annexation is accompanied by assigned zoning ordinance as well.

Uh and there is also a proposed zone change for the uh landowner petitioned area that will also run along concurrent with the annexation.

And then, as I mentioned, the future land use map amendment will be introduced in two weeks and we'll basically have final reading the same night as all the other ordinances.

So everything runs together.

With that, I am available for any questions.

Thank you.

Any questions from staff or for from for our staff from the governing body?

Easy for me to say.

Dr.

Aldridge.

Mayor Collins, uh, through you.

Can you tell us how many residents reside in this property that's going to be annexed or is being proposed again?

Mayor through you.

Uh, to my knowledge, none.

Uh the land is completely vacant, is my understanding.

And then we've got the water treatment plan, which the city owns.

Otherwise, there are no residences within that area.

Well up, Dr.

Aldridge.

Yes.

Um, does this include any of the area that we would refer to as Camp Carefree, the Girl Scout camp that is um by the old water treatment facility?

It runs, I think, to the I would think that's the north.

Sorry, I think it's the north of it.

Mayor through you that I so it sounds like it is not.

I heard somebody possibly one of the yeah.

So it sounds like it's not.

I wouldn't know to my knowledge, but um, my understanding is this is vacant land.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions for staff?

Mr.

Moody.

Yep, thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Through you, uh, thank you, sir.

Um, how many residents are within say half a mile of this annexation?

Mayor through you, maybe a just a couple within a half a mile.

I didn't measure the exact distance from the closest corner.

Um, but they aren't within the 300 feet notice radius.

Mayor, sir.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Through you.

Um, my other question is the other residential area I know is county.

Are there plans then to annex them as well?

Mayor through you.

There's no plans for the city to do any initiated annexations out in this area.

Again, this is a landowner petition annexation.

This is not city initiated.

Yes, the city is planning to annex its own land out in this area, but we are not initiating the annexation of the 1000, roughly 1,100 and I think it's 95 acres.

Um, but there's this area isn't 100% surrounded by city limits.

There's no plans at this time to do any city initiated annexations out in this direction.

Mr.

Moody Paul.

Mr.

Wolf.

Um thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh, through you.

Um thank you for the presentation.

What's the proposed uh use of the annexed land?

Mayor through you.

So I don't know if I have a proposed use.

Um, my understanding is a business park.

Uh, so the zoning map amendment that will come later is not part of this discussion particularly, but will be on the agenda moving forward.

Is a zone change to business park zoning.

Uh, the future land use map uh request was to mixed use employment.

And my understanding from our discussion at planning commission, it would be a business park, like a full business park like North Range Business Park.

Could you just sort of describe the next steps that will occur after this public hearing and the timing of those, please?

I'm sorry, Mr.

Mayor, through you, Mr.

White.

Mayor through you.

So after this public hearing, um, all the ordinances except for the future land use map amendment will be introduced tonight and referred to public service committee.

So then next Monday, all those items, basically annexation, assigned zoning, and the zoning map amendment will be discussed at public service next Monday.

They will then go on to second reading in front of the full governing body um following Monday after that.

And that is where the introduction for the future land use map will also be introduced and referred to public service committee.

Then those, as long as everything is approved, will still move on to uh public service committee the Monday after.

And then all four items will be discussed at public service committee, and then all four items would move on to third reading uh the Monday after that.

Um, I should note that at just for council um and also our city clerk and probably attorney to know that we probably will have to um kind of change the rules of order and pull the future land use map off and have that considered because it is a resolution.

It will need to be considered prior to the zoning map amendment, but after the annexation and assigned zoning.

So we'll have to move a few things around to get those in order because the the zone change is dependent on the future land use map amendment.

Uh Mr.

Wolf, Mr.

Mayor, follow up through you.

Thank you.

Um at what point in this process do we have a discussion about what the benefit is to the city of annexing this property?

Mayor, through you, that would be probably next Monday and the Mondays after through the process.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Anybody else in the governing body?

All right, Mr.

White, thank you.

Now, folks, I don't know how many of you uh have been to one of our meetings before, but I thought maybe I would just kind of go through how we do this.

Um we're so excited to see people here.

Um we have two microphones.

If you'll just come up to those microphones, push the button and the green light will come on.

Uh, please introduce yourself clearly so our clerk can know who you are, and you'll have three minutes to address the governing body.

So with that, we'll go to Mr.

White.

Uh Michael White, through you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um couple comments I'd like to make.

Um Mr.

Wolf, Mr.

Moody brought up the fact uh the landowners.

Well, let's make sure we understand that the property to the east of the Cox land is also owned by the one of the family members.

Um, and if I said that wrong, they can correct me.

Number two, uh, the planning commission, I asked the fact that um Connor White said there was two parcels and two owners.

I felt like uh each partial should have been independent.

Um parcel for uh the city water treatment plant should have been brought separately because the owner is actually the public.

The next point I'd like to make is like uh councilman Wolf brought what benefit it is.

Um I'm not sure what the benefit is, except I'm assuming the business parks gonna need uh stuff from the Board of Public Utilities.

The next point I'd like to make is that uh who's gonna be the uh ultimate person to do the fire service.

Um right now we have a new county fire station at the intersection around top and uh happy jack.

Does that change?

If it does, it's gonna probably be past the five miles where you get a decent uh response time.

So these are questions that I had, and I appreciate Connor White's uh expertise on this.

I somewhat think that everything has been presented tonight, where I guess Councilman Wolf made the point that uh to the city that we could address that at the next meeting.

But uh I think that uh we should get everybody the opportunity to voice their opinion and thank you.

Anyone else like to speak to us?

Mr.

Galliotis, welcome.

Good evening.

Uh Sam Galeotis, 8827 Shellback Road, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Um, honorable mayor and esteemed council members.

Uh I echo many of the questions that have already been asked regarding this.

Um I represent the property entirely on the west side of this large chunk of land and to the north side of it.

Um, I I just as a for the record, uh, for something as sensitive as this, I was pleased to learn that uh there was a name SNAFU on the application and the information, but that caused you know, those of us who have limited time to look into these things, uh putting false information out or incorrect information is a little bit frustrating.

And I think for a body such as this, it should be of much higher quality.

Um my questions really surround why do you think this fits?

I mean, Happy Jack Road on the on the south side of it is all industry and uh industrial and everything else, and everything on the on the north side of Happy Jack doesn't fit into that.

You have a huge housing development just to the east.

I am curious about the the piece of land that's separating the two and why those property owners weren't really advised and what the intent of that land is.

Um, but you know, how does this fit into what's going on there?

There's nothing industrial north of uh of Happy Jack Road, and when I go through the documents, um, you know, my questions would center center around the beneficial use to the community.

Um, I really have a big question about, and I'd like these to be articulated if they can, that it's compatible with the surrounding area and the goals.

Uh, and then when you look at the state statutes, I'd really like uh, you know, the representatives here to articulate, you know, how is this a logical and feasible addition to the annexing city or a town?

Because it doesn't seem logical or feasible to me where it's situated at the neighborhood it's in, and those types of things.

I would also ask for somebody to articulate how it constitutes a natural and geographic, economical and social part of the annexing city.

And when I looked at the answers to some of these, they basically just answer, like for example, protection of the health safety and welfare of the persons residing in the area where there are no persons.

Um there's not a lot of persons around it.

And it when I read the documents, it basically says, well, it it's for the protection, health, and safety of the people and the residents, but it doesn't articulate the rationale at all on any of those three points.

So um, those are things that I would like to learn about.

Um I'm a fairly progressive guy, uh, but it none of this fits into where it's at right now.

And um, I would really be interested in this map that shows just to the east of the subject properties and between the subject property and the residential district of what's going to happen with that land.

Is that part of this?

Who owns it?

What's the intent of it?

Um, those would all be very important questions.

So if you can answer any of those, uh, great.

Otherwise, I can come back and ask more.

Thanks.

Thanks, Mr.

Galliotis.

Sir, mayor and council, thank you very much.

Um, I'm Barry Meyer at 7713 Barrington Road.

And I also have family that could not make it at 8607 Cox Road.

We're just concerned about how it's going to affect us.

We were so close on the map right there.

Like with taxes, we're also looking at like it's just so close with traffic and that.

And we're also worried that maybe we can be annexed in the future.

Um, really like where we're at.

All the you know, all the fans came up and you know, kind of ruined the the uh the the mountains and that.

And I just don't like to see another building come up, you know, where they'll just ruin the mountains and that.

So personally that's where I'm coming from.

And I just wanted to speak my um aside.

Thank you very much for your time.

I appreciate it.

Appreciate you being here tonight.

Thank you.

Mr.

Love, Mr.

Mayor, members of the council.

Uh took a little reprieve from our last couple of meetings, but I'm back.

Um I just have a few couple, a couple of questions.

Oh, I'm Stephen Love.

Uh, I live in Ward One.

Um, I have a couple of questions for Connor, if that's okay through you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um, I was just curious what um the requirements for upgrades, like uh especially roads and bow poo would be.

Um, it was made pretty clear that hyphanistes want to do anything with their land.

But in the deceleration lane and whatnot, I was just curious what the uh expectations for this particular property were.

Mr.

Love, I don't remember that being a condition of their being able to be a farmer.

Sorry, not I I'm sorry if I wasn't clear, a condition if they wanted to uh expand their business on our property.

Not true either.

Um I know that was the narrative that was put out by the public, but not the narrative that came from us.

So I apologize, sir, but I don't agree with your premise.

So, Mr.

Mayor, if I don't mean to argue with me, you apologize.

But if they wanted more than 25 people a day, they wouldn't have to put in a deceleration lane.

Is that correct?

That's that is correct.

They do not have to put a deceleration lane for that.

If you remember right, they had to have more than was it 10,000 cars a day and they were at 5,000 or 4800 cars a day.

Um, they don't expect that that would happen until 2045 or something like that, if maybe then um so again, that was the narrative that was put out by a lot of people who stood in here and talked to us.

But if you remember right, we tried to push back on that narrative, it's not being accurate.

Okay, I'm sorry if that was my mr misunderstanding.

So there won't be any required upgrades for those properties that you're saying.

Not if it stays as a ranch.

No, if they want to do some development on it, I'm sure that to City Engineer, uh, why dot some other people might have some requirements for them to do some upgrades.

But again, at this point, we have no we have no understanding of what that might be.

So you're saying as long as it stays with that AG definition.

Say that again, sir.

As long as it stays with that AG definition after you guys annex the property.

Yeah, or even if we change it to a business park, as long as there's no development, uh, there's nothing that would cause there to be an improvement.

Annexation does not cause a requirement for improvements.

Only when you're going to develop it to a point that um would become uh necessary by our city engineer or uh our city planners, somebody else that would say in order to be able to do that volume, you're gonna have to do these upgrades.

And again, because we don't know what that is, we can't answer that question.

Okay.

My other question, sorry, my last question for you was um, is there any um is there any uh concern that there will be uh the creation of pockets within the city, not necessarily 100% contained within the city, but that would require um us going through essentially what we went through previously.

You know, I think Mr.

Love, in a perfect world, we would annex a nice great squares so the city would grow um you know in a really uniform way, but that's not the way you do it in Wyoming.

We have uh um I guess the thought that people um who want to be part of the city will come and ask, and then eventually someday in the future, there may be some pockets that start to have those jurisdictional challenges that we've been facing.

Uh so that could happen.

I think probably will happen again in the future.

Uh, we're doing everything we can to uh alleviate that, but um, you know, if one person annexes and the others don't, you know, someday long time in the future.

I mean, it took us 150 years to get the point where we were.

Um, it's gonna take a long time for that to happen again.

So I guess just uh clarify for my understanding is that how pockets get created?

Because it's my understanding that you guys aren't legally allowed to.

So is it the owner initiated annexation that creates those?

That's correct, sir.

I understand.

Yeah, exactly.

Okay, thank you.

Thanks for being here again tonight.

Anyone else?

Please.

Mayor members of the city council, thank you.

My name is Carmen Cook.

I reside at 3221 McKinney Drive, which is in Rolling Hills States, which is east of the proposed annexation.

I have a few questions.

Uh as far as what when they annex this, what are they talking about when they talk about industrial?

Are we talking about putting in solar panels?

Are we talking about putting in more of the tech centers?

What what are they talking about putting in there as far as business is concerned?

Ma'am, if it's going to be a business park zone change, I think um maybe Connor or uh Charles, what would be uh what would be allowed in a business park zone change?

We're gonna try to get you an answer, ma'am.

Thank you.

Mayor through you.

So in the business park zoning just uh zone district, it does allow for data centers, it allows for utility stations, it allows for industrial light industrial uses.

Um so it does allow gas stations, it allows any of the commercial stuff.

I believe we allow hotels, business park zoning is meant to be a mix of our commercial or community business zone district, our light industrial zone district, and a bit of our heavy industrial zone district.

So it has a very flexible kind of zoning for that stuff.

And Connor, if I remember correctly, um, it doesn't allow you to have your impacts go beyond your property lines, right?

So noise and um and that type of stuff should be mitigated towards the property line.

Correct, mayor through you.

Uh that's correct.

Um basically, I believe we do prohibit our like actual industrial uses when it does create large amounts of noise, fumes, smoke, odor, all of that, those are not allowed.

That would be in the heavy industrial.

Yes, that's basically our heavy industrial zone district, but we left those out of the business park zone district.

Did that help you, ma'am?

So the solar parks and the tech centers are not considered like light that light pollution or noise.

My understanding is that they create a lot of noise and they create a lot of light pollution.

Connor is uh a solar farm considered uh in a business park.

Mayor through you.

Your boss is nodding his head, yes.

Okay.

I'm gonna go with what he's nodding.

I was trying to think what we we haven't really had one of those that has come into the city where we've had to evaluate that on what the particular use is.

Um, but when it comes to like a data center, if you want to call that a tech center, yes, those are allowed.

Um, but again, we have noise restrictions on even those.

So if they are producing past the property line, they would end up jumping into our industrial use category, which then makes them not allowed.

Go ahead, Matt.

Well, it's my understanding that the one that they put out by the Walmart distribution center, they had to put a fence up because of the noise.

So, you know, us being so close to that area.

I worry about the noise.

I don't live very far from there.

Carmen, it's something you should be worried about, but we uh we learned a lesson from that.

That wasn't a data center, but it was actually a a Bitcoin mining operation, and they assured us that they would be under the the limits, but they have since then changed all the fans, and we think they're going to be in compliance this year, and hopefully the fences and stuff can come down.

But we were expenses were temporary.

Are we going to be notified as to what is going to go in there?

You know, as uh as the uses go forward.

I don't know what the with the policy once they're zoned by right.

I don't think they're gonna call and tell you what's going on, but we'll try to well we are we actually don't have any say as to what our neighbors are gonna be.

I think that's fair, ma'am.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Mayor, Mayor, can I ask a question?

Yeah, of course.

Connor, sorry.

Oh, sir, go ahead.

Connor, I just had a uh quick question.

When did the owner of the land uh request this land to be annexed?

Do we have a date, an approximate date on that?

February.

I think you said February.

Through you, it would have been around February 17th, because basically once it's submitted to the city, I have to file that with the city clerk's office uh for them to make sure all the paperwork actually meets state statute, and that is basically when it starts the annexation process.

So I want to say February seven around February 17th.

Okay, thank you.

Mayor, uh Mr.

Mayor.

Connor, don't run.

Mr.

Wolf.

Um, thank you, Mayor.

Through you, um, maybe just for the benefit of the public.

Um assuming all of the things that you described in answer to my my prior question occur all up the public service committee meetings and the zoning changes, and this is all approved.

Then we have a piece of land annexed into the city with the type of zoning that you've described.

So if somebody wants to build a data center there, what other involvement would your office have?

Um in the approval of that, and that and also what would the public's opportunity be uh to be involved in that process?

Mr.

White.

Mayor through you.

So looking at the property, say everything that goes through council at this point for this land gets approved, and it's annexed its own business park all of that.

Basically, what we'd be waiting for is a site plan, or unless they do the only thing that would come back to the governing body, I should say, would be if they are to plat the property, create lots, create streets, and all of that.

That would come back before the governing body.

If it's just a site plan for a data center, um that's basically administrative that goes through our office.

We review it to make sure it meets the unified development code for all design requirements, landscaping, parking requirements, all of that.

The engineer department looks at drainage, traffic.

We look at how their accesses work, traffic studies, drainage studies, border public utilities would be looking at uh water sewer connections, how they're extending mains, where they're getting those services from fire department looks at it to make sure it complies with all fire codes and making sure that there's hydrants in the area so that they can also operate out there just in case there's a fire.

Trying to think of other departments involved.

There's we have like 20 some odd reviewers when it comes to site plans, so it's hard to remember everybody who's on it.

Um, but there's various city departments that go into reviewing it, but there is no public process.

It's all at that point, it's a permitted use, and it just has to meet uh the adopted zoning code at that point.

Follow up, Mr.

Wolf.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Mayor, through you.

And so all through that site plan process, then is there any notice provided to the residents or the the nearby neighbors about what what you're doing and what you plan to do as you review this?

Mayor through you.

No, there would be no notice.

Um we do have a website for putting projects up.

I haven't been putting data centers up specifically because a lot of times that's we don't put up their documents.

Um, they're kind of a little confidential in some cases when it comes to the data center documents.

Um but there is a website that we have Connect Cheyenne.

Uh it does allow for us to put up projects.

Um, and that's not necessarily a notification.

Uh, it does allow people to see what's going on throughout the city.

Um, but there's no mailed notice, it doesn't go through a public process, there's no discussion.

It's basically the city reviews it, making sure it meets all the required codes.

Okay.

So, Mr.

Mayor, uh just one follow-up, if I might.

Um, thank you.

Uh, through you.

Um so if the residents are worried about a data center or uh solar farm or Bitcoin mining operations.

Really, am I correct?

That their really opportunity is to be involved in this process that you've described for the next few weeks.

Um, and to express their opinions as Mr.

Galliotis um did and and others have, and express their concerns about it.

And those concerns are really directed just to the question of whether or not the property ought to be annexed.

Isn't that is that how that works?

Mayor, through you no, because there is the zoning map amendment also.

So the zoning map amendment is a separate ordinance from the annexation.

That is what actually defines what the zoning is.

So we have the annexation of the land.

So council can choose to either annex the land or not.

If you don't annex the land, then the other ordinances don't matter.

If you do annex the land, then there's the assigned zoning.

The recommended assigned zoning with this project is AG for the uh landowner petitioned.

The city, we're recommending the public for our parcel.

Um, but otherwise the AG would be the assigned zoning, and then there's the future land use map amendment, and then there's the zone change request from the landowner to business park.

So the zoning is what would allow those uses.

So council could still annex the property, still assign it the AG zone, but then not give it the business park zone district.

And then it's stuck in the AG zone, or council could just not annex the land, and then the other ordinances don't matter, as I said.

But um, basically the zoning, the zone change is where probably those concerns about use should be brought up, because that is what basically allows those uses with the zoning map amendment.

Also, I guess the future land use map amendment, because that is basically what would allow the zone change to go forward.

So those would be the two items I would say have to deal with use of the land and what possibilities there are for that land.

And Mr.

Mayor, but Mr.

Wolf.

Um thank you.

This is very helpful.

Uh and so uh the zone change from AG agriculture to business use could occur sometime in the future.

Mr.

Wolf, it's actually gonna happen simultaneously with annexation.

Yeah, mayor through you.

That is an item that is being introduced tonight along with the annexation, and we'll go through the three readings with the annexation.

So concurrently, the only item that is delayed by two weeks is the resolution for the future land use map amendment, just so everything lines up because resolutions only need two readings.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mayor.

I anybody else for Mr.

Moody.

Thank you, Miss Mayor.

Through you, I said uh one question.

My colleague asked it and he answered uh Mr.

White.

Um, you said the data centers don't have any documentation at all.

It's all redacted.

Is it like that for all the other businesses in business park like Magpul and all that, or is it just the data centers?

Mayor through you.

The documents aren't redacted.

Okay, but I do know the city has been asked to not always post those documents.

I can probably and I can let Charles fill in.

We can post a site plan, but I think they're more concerned about the internal building functions.

Mr.

Bloom, do you want to follow up on that?

Yes, Mayor members of council, Charles Bloomplay, and development director.

Um, with our site plans, we do generally have those online with the documentation.

There's some proprietary elements, other site plans that we are obligated not to share that are that are in industry specific items that these folks give themselves different competitive advantages with other folks.

So those ones are the items that we do not post online, but generally we will have the item out there so people are able to see the site plans that are uh are available.

But if there is proprietary information on there, we work with the applicants to ensure that that is not um on public display.

You have more follows.

I just saw your left.

I just saw your microphones on.

Oh no, I have some questions for Mr.

Bloom.

Okay.

Uh when I might.

Dr.

Aldrich.

Mayor Collins, through you.

I have um three or four questions here.

One is can you remind me, um, Connor or Charles, what is the zone that would allow man camps?

Uh Mayor, through you, there is no zone that allows man camps.

We've deleted that from the unified development code.

The only thing we have now is RV campgrounds.

But those even have kind of higher standards.

So we don't have a zone district that allows man camps.

Thank you.

Those are just to make it completely deleted.

Understand that completely.

Mayor through you do Dr.

Aldrich.

I just like to add on real quick to that.

We do have a mechanism to allow for alternative housing arrangements.

It would be through our planned unit development process.

That process would have a significant neighborhood meetings um at the beginning.

It would have uh multiple rounds of consideration by the governing body, uh, earlier round of consideration by the planning commission.

We do have an avenue to allow some type of housing.

However, it would have to be very detailed and it would have a lot of public involvement and involvement at the governing body level.

Dr.

Aldri, I feel like we're getting a little bit away from the purpose of the public hearing here.

Um, do you have any questions specific to the public hearing?

Go ahead.

I wanted to um ask if the information now has been corrected on our website.

Um that was erroneous.

Mayor through you, not yet.

I didn't realize it was incorrect until this afternoon, like an hour before this meeting.

So I've started going through and correcting everything.

Um, so once I get the stamped ordinances back, I'm gonna create all new council packets and kind of redo all the documents I had that had the name in there.

And my last question, Mayor through you is my understanding is that the only way to really control, if you will, um, property that's annexed.

Um, or maybe next to your property is to actually purchase that property.

Is that correct?

Mayor through you.

That's kind of a good way to put it is if you want to control the land, you need to own the land.

Thank you.

Sir, go ahead.

Please come forward.

Would you identify yourself for the record, please?

Paul Cremples, I'm on 2606 McKinney Drive.

Uh, thank you for uh just a quick bit of your time.

Um I understand the concept of if you want to control the land, you got to own the land.

Um, but many of us have been out there for many, many years.

I know we've been there for 40 years.

Uh plus uh many of my neighbors have been there, and um uh I agree with uh Mr.

Galliotis that this is not a fit, uh a business park, uh there uh um uh adjacent to a residential area, plus it creates uh a pocket that you'll have to deal with later on, or we will have to deal with later on that uh uh that you're dealing with those issues right now.

Um Mr.

Crimples, I don't see a pocket.

I apologize.

Well, I think you will see a pocket if you look at that map.

Uh that you'll find that rolling hills now is now surrounded uh to the base to the east, uh uh front range business park to the south.

Uh and now you would have this uh other business park to the west.

Um it's just a matter of time before uh I start going, hmm.

Uh do we want to uh uh start looking at that piece of property and uh to those uh to those residential areas?

It's coming and you know it.

Uh and uh to that I object.

Uh we've been there, uh we live in Wyoming for a reason.

We like the lifestyle, uh, we put up with the weather, we put up with a lot of stuff uh to live here and uh to have somebody else come in.

I'm sorry, especially the wind.

Especially the wind, yes, sir.

Especially to the west side of the uh of the city.

So uh that's my point is uh um uh I think you do uh we'll end up with a uh uh a pocket, but I think it is uh is a bad fit for uh those of us that have lived out there for many, many years.

Good to have you here.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Mr.

Mayor Council, uh Rick Kessler, 3605 Burke Drive.

Um I just have a question that I'm not sure was answered that uh Mr.

Galliotis asked.

If you look at the map uh and uh see what the land use is where the annex annexation is going to take place, um, everything east of Rolling Hills and to the north is all ranch land.

So the question I have is that I'm not sure was answered is that it says the urban development of the area is sought to be annexed would constitute a natural geographical, economical and social part of the annexing city or town.

So my question is how does that happen if most of the property to the north and east of Rolling Hills is ranch land?

So uh I would like to see if if you could uh uh enlighten me on that part.

Thank you.

Anyone else that would like to uh to speak hi, my name is Minda Blevins.

I live at 740.

So I didn't catch your name.

Minda Blevins.

I live in the Rolling Hills neighborhood, and I live at um 7814 Cox Road.

I just kind of want to re reiterate what a lot of our neighbors have have been saying, and I want to um kind of add a couple of things.

Thank you, Mr.

Marin Council.

I apologize.

Wasn't planning on speaking.

Um, it was incredibly stressful, obviously, to think that it was our neighborhood, and then to come tonight and realize that it was not, because I know a lot of us were scrambling, trying to reach out to each other.

And you know, in this day and age, it's very hard to accommodate things when you've got families and you're trying to accommodate the all of those things.

So it was a little um comforting to hear that that is not in fact happening.

It's still very concerning though.

Um, my husband was military for 20 years.

We chose to move back here.

Neither my husband or I are from here, but when he was stationed here, we loved it.

We love this area.

When we looked to buy property, we knew we where we wanted to buy.

And living out on that side of town is an absolute amazing opportunity.

I can't tell you how many times that I sit out on my back patio and I have my coffee and I just enjoy the quiet, the peace, the um the wildlife is something no one has really uh mentioned as well.

Um, between that property, that neighborhood and Kirk Gowdy, we have lots of wildlife.

That is concerning to me to think about what another business um park would do in that area.

I'm also concerned with um the fact that traffic, I don't know if you um don't live in that neighborhood, you may not realize when I-80 shuts down, our neighborhood is absolutely horrendous to get in and out.

And having had teenage drivers trying to come out onto Happy Jack from that neighborhood, it is very problematic and very nerve-wracking.

And when we look at the number of times that I-80 is shut down because of the weather, those semis block that up.

We're gonna add traffic to that, which is very concerning to me.

And I wonder if that's been something that has been considered.

And then I'm also fearful of what happens next.

If that annexes, what about the property?

If we continue to go out, what's gonna happen next?

I I would hate to think that we would be kind of blocked in by all of these business, all these businesses that potentially are going to ruin the residential areas.

And like I said, we all purchase properties out there for a reason.

We love the Wyoming wildlife, we love the neighborhood, we love the peace and quiet.

And I would hate to lose that and kind of be buried with all different kinds of businesses.

Um, thank you.

I appreciate that.

Thanks for being here.

Sam, you can't have two times.

Come on now.

You know, I'm just teasing you.

So I I think it's all of these questions are very pertinent.

And um, but just listening for the people who were kind of be led to believe that there's a process, it's gonna be time before all of this these decisions are made.

Frankly, it's all happening right now.

I mean, if we're if we're being straight about it.

And I go back.

No decisions are being made tonight.

It's a public.

Well, no, no, I mean, if if you annex everything else is stacked up, it's gonna happen at the same time.

All of that.

That's and I understand through you know, many conversations with city people, um, your desire to annex more property and tax base and everything else.

I get that.

But I go back to this is not congruent with the area.

Totally get what's happened south of uh of Happy Jack Road.

It's industrial, it's been that way.

You know, you go out further, you got the landfill, all of that, but north of it this does not fit.

So I I go back to the question I asked, and Mr.

Kessler asks is so what's the rationale?

How is this a fit?

And what's it cost the city of Cheyenne to annex this?

And by the way, I don't even know who the petitioner is now.

I haven't seen that.

Um lastly, I can answer that question.

Okay, it was signed by Joe Cox, who is a trustee of the William Cox.

William S.

Cox Revocable Trust.

That's who's asking for the uh annexation.

Okay.

And then the last thing I I would like to hear an answer on the land immediately to the east of the proposed annexation property, but sandwiched between rolling hills and this proposed annexation.

What it because it's you're changing the use there, and what's that all about?

I'd like to understand that.

Thank you.

Connor, do you want to talk is the land use um amendment that we'll be seeing here in the near future a couple weeks from now?

I was gonna pull the map back up, but the land that's directly east that wasn't in the yellow area, that is basically it's a parcel between rolling hills and this parcel.

That is not part of the annexation.

That's not part of the future land use map amendment.

That's not part of the zone change.

That property has nothing to do with this annexation that's being left in the county.

Nothing's changing with it, to my knowledge.

Um, the only thing we're discussing is what was highlighted that was petitioned for annexation.

So, to be clear, the the land that's in between the the annexed area and the neighborhood, there is no changes in land use zoning, any any parts of it.

Mayor through you, that is correct.

Not at least in the city.

I don't could be things going on in the county, but it's not part of this, and it's not going through city processes to change anything.

Thank you, sir.

Uh Mr.

Smith, you should be able to unmute yourself, Mr.

Smith, Mr.

Smith.

We can't hear you, Mr.

Smith.

You just muted yourself again.

Now you're on muted, sir.

Mr.

Smith, you just need to unmute yourself and speak.

We'll listen to you.

Well, why don't we take Miss Woodhouse and maybe we can come back to Mr.

Smith uh Jennifer when you can house good evening, Mr.

Mayor and members of the city council, gay woodhouse, 1912 Capitol Avenue.

I am here uh on behalf of Cox Ranches LLC.

Uh and we do appreciate uh we understand that it was basically a clerical error that included them as the applicant and the owner of these parcels.

We understand how that happened based on the website not being changed after a transfer of some of the property that's included in this.

But uh, we do have another issue, and there are a couple that have come to mind for me since we've started.

One of them is you are creating you are creating a pocket, you know, the pocket between rolling hills and this is now it's now a pocket.

It's a large pocket, and then just to the north is rent is land that Cox Ranches still owns that goes up beyond rolling hills and over uh to the round top road.

So they're gonna be part of that pocket as well.

So I can understand the concern of people who are gonna be in a pocket and possibly go through what we've just seen and some other annexations occurring lately.

One of the one of the primary issues with Cox Ranches LLC and Beverly Black and her husband Gordon Black are here to have me express this is they have a mausoleum where they're all their ancestors have been buried, that's up on the top of the hill.

That's up on the top of the hill.

You can see it from Happy Jack Road when you go there.

That is part of part of this property.

And if it's a data center, you know, they move dirt like I don't I it's just hard to imagine what could possibly happen to their mausoleum as this moves forward, and whether or not it's protected, whether or not they're able to have access to it.

I mean, that's a major, major concern for them.

And we need to they really weren't aware of this till tonight.

So uh we're gonna be doing some work as well, but it's a horrible thought that that mausoleum could be removed or certainly the access could be denied.

This woodhouse you're seeing on the annex the area, the land being annexed, the mausoleum is on that part of the ranch.

It is, yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Did we get Mr.

Smith figured out?

I'm gonna try again.

I'm gonna ask him to unmute.

He is on muted right now.

Mr.

Smith, go ahead and talk to us.

Sir, yes, can you hear me?

We can't hear you, sir.

We can barely hear you.

Oh speak a little closer to that microphone, maybe.

Is it very long?

It's getting a little better, sir.

Can you hear me now?

We can.

Beautiful.

Ah, okay.

Okay.

Um good evening, Mayor Collins and members of the city council.

For the record, my name is Charles Miller, and I'm speaking to demand you vote no on the con Cox Ranch annexation and its associated zoning changes.

I have listened carefully to the staff report tonight and the admissions made on this record should alarm every citizen of Laramie County.

First, this annexation fails the basic requirements of Wyoming law.

Under Wyoming statute 151402, you're required to determine that this annexation protects the health, safety, and welfare of the persons residing in the area.

Yet just minutes ago, when Dr.

Al Aldridge asked how many residents actually live on this property.

City planner Connor White stated on the record, to my knowledge, none, the land is completely vacant.

You cannot check a statutory box claiming you are protecting.

Mr.

Miller, just read it.

It says for the people in the area being annexed.

So the future people are going to live and work in the area being annexed.

Is it for the health safety and welfare of them?

Okay.

Um, I'm gonna ask me statue 151402 uh under those circumstances because you're right, there's nobody living there, but there will be somebody living or working there in the future, and it's our job to make sure that it's for the health and safety of the people that are gonna live in that area or work in the area being annexed.

Gotcha.

I'm I'm gonna go ahead and proceed here.

Um you cannot check a statutory box claiming you are protecting residents who do not exist.

Um passing this based on if passing this based on a fiction is an arbitrary capricious act.

Second, you are handing developers a blank check and stripping the public of its voice.

When councilman Wolf asked what the public's opportunity would be to weigh in on a future data center or industrial facility once this is zoned business park, Mr.

White openly admitted there would be no notice.

There is no public process.

It's basically the city reviews it.

If you approve this annexation tonight, you are permanently locking the public out of the process.

You are telling the residents of Laramie County that massive noisy data centers and industrial utilities can be built directly adjacent to their rural homes, and they will never get a public hearing.

Third, the impacts are real.

What are we doing right now, sir?

Mr.

Miller, what are we doing right now?

Um I'm just gonna go ahead and continue.

Mr.

Miller I'm gonna go ahead and continue now.

So you can't say we're not having a public hearing.

We're doing it right now, and people are here talking to us.

So, sir, that's factually incorrect.

Um, I'm I'm gonna go ahead and continue.

I just have a little bit uh more here.

Uh, third, the impacts are real.

Mayor Collins, you admitted yourself tonight that the city learned a hard lesson from the noise pollution of a previous Bitcoin mining operation.

Why are we opening the door to repeat that exact same mistake on a 1200-acre scale next to Happy Jack Road?

This annexation does not fit the neighborhood.

It fails the statutory requirements of protecting existing residents and it permanently silences the public from future development oversight.

Do not trade our quality of life for a 1200-acre blind experiment.

I demand you vote no on this annexation and the associated zoning changes.

Thank you.

Anybody else?

Sir, did you want to say something more?

One more thing that I would like to point out.

Um Paul Cramples again.

Um a short drive west on Happy Jack.

If you would do that tomorrow, you'll find that this piece of property sits on a hill.

So everybody that looks out west, including my property, uh uh is gonna see whatever you put up on that hill.

Uh there is no escaping that.

It's not uh uh basically a ruins the uh ruins the view.

Somebody else had uh discussed that the wildlife uh and the quality of life that's out there.

Um the mausoleum sits on a hill, and that and that's uh that's an issue that you need to deal with.

So I just wanted to point out that that is the topography of that, not just the the plot, but it's a topography uh that that is gonna sit up there where everybody can uh have to deal with it.

Thank you.

Jennifer, is there anybody else online?

Uh March, you should be able to unmute yourself.

Hi.

Um I am a resident.

Can you identify yourself for us, please?

My name is Mandy Shaddock, and I live at 7505 Barrington Road in Rolling Hill.

Thank you.

I grew up in the neighborhood, been there for a long time and back and forth off and on, and I'm back again.

And I would like to say that so many people have brought up great points tonight about the pocket, the environment, and all of that.

Most of us are on well water, and we haven't talked about that or the implications of building something on top of the hill when we live below it.

Cheyenne wants to take on more than it can handle, it seems, in my opinion.

And by annexing this area and wanting to further the infrastructure out here, however, that looks is going to impact not just the animals, not just the people, but ultimately the water.

And as we're looking across the country right now, and even just down south in Colorado, water is an issue.

And what are we doing?

It's cute that we painted uh our water tower with really expensive pink.

It appears to me that Cheyenne is more about the appearances and the facade than it is about the people.

And the people of this area live here for a reason, and they've spoken.

And I have a feeling that you've already made up your minds behind closed doors.

I appreciate you giving us the opportunity to speak, and I hope it works in our favor.

Thank you.

Thanks, Mandy.

Jennifer, anybody else?

Anyone else in the room?

Well, hearing none, the purpose of the public hearing has been met.

And let's talk about the next steps.

Okay.

So this public hearing was to give uh us an opportunity to hear what's going on.

The next step will be next Monday at noon in this room.

The uh public services committee will meet, and it'll be the first step in the zone change, the assigned zoning and the uh annexation.

Uh the following Monday, two weeks from today, would be the second time that we will get together as a governing body to to look at those things.

And that'll be the first official vote of the city council.

And then if it were to pass on that Monday, uh, then it would go back to the public services committee, where again the zoning, the annexation, the zone change, and the land use change would all be up for uh discussion at that public service meeting, and then it would come back to us again the following Monday for the final vote of the governing body if they were to pass throughout this whole process.

So I appreciate everybody being here tonight.

And if you wanted to be part of that process, that's how that would work.

Thank you.

Next item, please, madam clerk.

Number eight ordinance, third reading, amending the official zoning map of the city of Cheyenne, changing the zoning classification for land located north of West College Drive and east of South Parsley Boulevard from PUD Harmony Valley Planned Unit Development to NR3 neighborhood residential high density.

Maybe we'll just take a minute here and let people that are ready to leave, do so, and then we'll catch back up.

So give it just a second.

All right, we have before us uh a six point five uh acre zone change uh from PUD to mixed use commercial that is I believe the the plan is for the building of some apartment units, and we'd open it up to the public to see if they have any comments on the zone change before us hearing none, Dr.

Emmons.

Oh sir.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's neighborhood high density residential.

Mr.

Love, identify yourself.

Uh sorry, my name is Stephen Love.

I live in the right you and me before we uh is it not neighborhood uh NR3.

Yep, it's neighborhood NR3 neighborhood identity residential.

I'm sorry, you said uh I I missed I said I thought I said N R2, didn't or NI3?

Yeah, okay.

So good evening, Mr.

Mayor.

Three to the members of the council.

My name is Stephen Love.

Um first and foremost, I'm always in favor of landowners and the right to do what they please with their property.

I think this is an idea that characterizes anyone who has a true Wyoming first mindset.

I support Wyoming business owners and think we should break down many of the barriers to entry that so many, especially small business owner space.

I would like to address some issues that may come not with these zone changes, but as a symptom of a larger oversight.

This is an area of ever increasing economic growth, with the addition of an $800 million data center, not one mile away, and Cheyenne's newest high school having been completed just 17 years ago.

There's clearly both a public and private interest in the value of this area.

As the city of Cheyenne continues to permit development in this area, I hope you will all remember the importance of parks in our community.

Parks are one of the smartest investments we can make, and the numbers prove it.

A study in Massachusetts calculated every dollar put into green space returns four dollars in natural goods and services.

Children with access to parks show lower obesity rates, and in Chicago or areas surrounded by green space, saw 52% fewer crimes.

Yeah, sorry, the NRZ3.

Oh my goodness.

Should be more than 15 dwelling units per acre.

With all three of these zoning plans that are coming up in the next um couple item points.

Um a total of 46 acres and a potential for at least 692 dwellings exists.

That will leave the current our current municipal options for walkable outdoor recreation in the South High neighborhood stressed in a best case scenario.

So at this time I ask the city to investigate the possibility of a much needed park to survive serve our community and maintaining the current ones in the area.

The biggest necessity in our community south of the interstate is something like Cahill or North Park, a large open space that can be used by all and bring us together as a community.

The schools are currently our only option.

However, this is not viable for parents of toddlers as these are generally restricted to the public in many ways during school hours.

Aside from the schools, the only real option in South Cheyenne is the South Cheyenne community park.

However, this is not an option for many people who live south of the interstate for many reasons, including the danger of sending kids several miles to the park, even with older children.

Not to mention its proximity to the unhoused shelter.

From an economic standpoint, the property values in our community have the potential of decreasing due to project Cosmo.

And a large green space could help remedy some of that burden placed on homeowners as well by slightly increasing home values.

In conclusion, I'm glad to see the council supporting business in our community.

I hope to see even a greater degree of support to our families, especially in underrepresented neighborhoods.

Thank you.

Mr.

Love, I love that comment.

And you know, it's our goal to have a neighborhood park within 10 minute walking distance of everybody that lives in Cheyenne.

I think we're about 85% of the way there now.

And um since uh I've been on the city council, I'm trying to think of the number.

It's like seven, eight, or nine, something like that parks we built.

And we need to continue to do that.

So thank you for your comments.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

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.

White.

Comments from members of the governing body.

Dr.

Aldridge.

Um I did want to just note that uh talking about uh green space and um parks was one of the things that did come up at the public service committee.

And I know that the developer did have some um considerations of that when they presented that to the public service committee.

So I would encourage um the public maybe to go back and watch that recording.

Anyone else?

Hearing none, Madam Clerk, would you take the vote?

Mr.

White?

Yes, Mr.

Wolf?

Yes, Dr.

Aldrich, yes, Mayor Collins, Dr.

Emmons, yes, Mr.

Eskabel, aye, Mr.

Laborne.

Aye, Mr.

Moody, aye, Dr.

Rennie, yes, Mr.

Seagrave, yes.

The ordinance 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 south of West Allison Road, west of Walterscheid Boulevard, and north of Grand Harmony Boulevard from PUD, Harmony Valley Planned Unit Development to N R 3, Neighborhood Residential High Density.

All right, before us now we have a 25.17 acre uh zone change to go from uh PUD to NR3.

This would allow for some smaller lots and smaller homes that have more affordability, and we'll go out to the audience to see if anybody has a comment on 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 ISO move.

Seconded by Mr.

Seagrave.

Comments for 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.

Eskabel.

Aye.

Mr.

Laborne?

Yes.

Mr.

Moody?

Dr.

Rennie.

Yes.

The ordinance is approved on third and final reading also.

Number 10, ordinance third reading, amending the official zoning map of the city of Cheyenne, changing the zoning classification for land located north of Allison Road and west of Waltershide Boulevard from AG Agriculture to NR3 neighborhood residential high density.

All right.

This is a 14.47 acre zone change to go from PU did NR3 for a future mixed-use commercial development.

We'll go back out to the audience for comments.

Hearing none, Dr.

Emmons.

Mr.

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

Second.

Seconded by Mr.

White.

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

Hearing none.

Madam Clerk.

Dr.

Rennie.

Dr.

Rennie, are you there?

Yes, sorry.

I had trouble unmuting.

Yes.

Mr.

Seagrave?

Yes.

Mr.

White?

Yes.

Mr.

Wolf.

Dr.

Aldrich?

Yes.

Mayor Collins.

Dr.

Emmons?

Yes.

Mr.

Escobel?

Aye.

Mr.

Laborne.

Yes.

Mr.

Moody.

The ordinance is approved on third and final reading.

Number 11 ordinance, third reading, amending the official zoning map of the city of Cheyenne, changing the zoning classification for land located northwest of the intersection of East 29th Street and Central Avenue from MR medium density residential to NR2, neighborhood residential medium density.

All right.

We have uh a half an acre that is um currently zone MR to uh change to MR2 or NR2, excuse me.

It's an existing row of townhomes under one ownership, and they want to split it into individual lots so they can be sold off.

And so we'll go out to the audience to see if they have any questions.

Anybody all right, Dr.

Emmons?

Mr.

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

Second.

Seconded by Mr.

Seagrave.

Any comments from members of the governing body on this zone change.

Hearing none, Madam Clerk.

Mr.

Moody?

Aye.

Dr.

Rennie?

Yes.

Mr.

Seagrave?

Yes.

Mr.

White?

Yes.

Mr.

Wolf.

Yes.

Dr.

Aldrich?

Yes.

Mayor Collins?

Yes.

Dr.

Emmons?

Yes.

Mr.

Escobel?

Aye.

Mr.

Labourne.

Why?

Yeah.

Ordinance is approved on third and final reading.

Number 12, ordinance third reading, vacating Frank Court and a small segment of a previously vacated alley north of Rock Spring Street, City of Cheyenne, Laramie County, Wyoming, located east of North College Drive and north of Rock Springs Street.

All right.

This is an ordinance to uh vacate or remove an underutilized street that just serves one property and they have a different entrance.

We'll go out to the audience and see if anybody wants to speak to the vacation of this street.

All right.

Dr.

Emmons.

Mr.

Mayor, the recommendation of the public service committee is to approve on second reading and ISO move.

Second.

Seconded by Mr.

White.

Comments from members of the governing body on the vacation.

Hearing none, Madam Clerk.

Mr.

Leyborn.

Aye.

Mr.

Moody.

Aye.

Dr.

Rennie.

Yes.

Mr.

Seagrave.

Yes.

Mr.

White?

Yes.

Mr.

Wolf.

Yes.

Dr.

Aldrich.

Yes.

Mayor Collins.

Dr.

Emmons.

Yes.

Mr.

Esquebell.

Aye.

This ordinance is also approved on third and final reading.

Number 13, ordinance, second reading, amending section 13.20.050.

General Prohibitions and Section 13.20.070 local limits of chapter 13.20, wastewater treatment and disposal of the code of the city of Cheyenne, Wyoming to revise local discharge limits and related provisions in compliance with NPDES and WPDES permit requirements.

I tried to read this and it was a little hard on me.

I had to look up at things every time, uh about every paragraph, but uh it's an update of our wastewater regulations, and we'll go out to the audience, see if anybody has any questions.

Mayor Collins, member of the council.

Matt Bulow, Cheyenne, Wyoming, Board of Public Utilities, Water Recommendation Division Manager.

So what this is, the easiest way I can put it is everything that comes into the two wastewater treatment plants is a pie.

Everyone that comes in has a piece of that pie, and this is just limiting everybody that could send us possibly something bad into the wastewater treatment facilities.

One protect the citizens of Cheyenne, protect the workers of the wastewater treatment plants, and you protect the users of the downstream of wastewater.

I'd have to answer any questions.

Thanks for being here, Matt.

Anyone else in the audience want to speak to this ordinance on second reading?

All right.

Hearing none, Dr.

Emmons.

Mr.

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

Seconded by Mr.

Seagrave.

Any comments by members of the governing body.

Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed.

This ordinance is approved on second reading.

Number 14 ordinance, second reading, amending section 2.76.040.

Designation of downtown development district of chapter 2.76, downtown development authority of Title II administration and personnel of the municipal code of the city of Cheyenne, Wyoming, to expand the downtown development district.

Well, we have some good news.

We have uh business, I guess Snyder Foods that's asked to be incorporated into our downtown development authority um district.

Uh anybody in the audience want to speak to that?

Sophia.

Mayor, through you.

Um, my name is Sophia Mays, Executive Director of the Downtown Development Authority.

Um, this is an ordinance to amend the city code to include the property at 2100 Snyder Avenue, also known as Snyder Food.

Uh, this ordinance follows the resolution that council passed on February 23rd, 2026 to support this expansion.

The signed resolution is attached in the council packet provided to you all.

210 Snyder is contiguous to the downtown district boundary along Snyder Avenue.

The property owners began the petition process for inclusion into the district in November 2025, with the DDA board approving the petition and recommending inclusion to the governing body at its regular meeting on January 15, 2026.

Inclusion of this property would include all adjacent rights of way, including but not limited to Snyder Avenue on the east, West 21st Street on the south, and the adjacent alley on the north side.

Property has long been home to Snyder Food, a locally owned and operating store serving the West Edge area.

Inclusion of this property advances the DDA statutory purpose to prevent blight and support property values within the downtown district.

Inclusion would include would excuse me, inclusion would allow DDA programs to be utilized, allowing infrastructure and property improvements to the area, improving functionality and visual appeal while supporting private investment in the downtown built environment.

DDA staff recommends approval of the ordinance before you, and I stand for questions.

Thank you, ma'am.

Any questions for staff?

Anyone else in the audience want to speak on the uh expansion of our downtown development district?

I hear none.

Dr.

Emmons.

Mr.

Mayor, the recommendation of the public service committee is to approve on second reading and ISO move.

Second.

Seconded by Mr.

White.

Comments from members of the governing body on this ordinance.

Mr.

Mayor.

Mr.

White.

Just through you, I just wanted to uh remind my colleagues.

It's been a while.

Uh, but the owner of this uh business was very enthusiastic back in January uh when we heard from him on the resolution and uh really wanted to be uh included in the DDA district and um just talked about some exciting things that he may have going on for this particular piece of property.

So I'm very supportive of this.

You know, I think uh the thing that's amazing is people who are in the DD DDA district actually pay 20 mils more in property taxes than anybody else in the city does, and those dollars go back to improving the DDA.

So asking somebody to tax themselves so they can improve downtown is something.

And he was fully aware of that and and still very supportive in uh asking us to uh do this for him.

So that's wonderful.

Thank you for the story.

Anyone else in the governing body comments?

Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye, aye.

Those opposed.

This ordinance is approved on second reading.

Number 15 ordinance, second reading, appropriating money for the Reed Avenue corridor project.

All right, this is an ordinance that would earmark five million dollars to invest in our Reed Avenue project, if and when the Burlington Northern Railroad tells us we can do that.

And so we'll go out to the audience and uh I'm gonna guess Mayor and Council.

Uh for the record, Sophia Mays from uh the executive director of the downtown development authority as well.

Uh again, the downtown development authority at their March 19th regular board meeting signed a letter of support.

I apologize.

I I uh failed to send it to the entire council, but the finance committee did receive a copy of that signed letter for this ordinance.

Um, this project, the Reed Rail project is a catalyst project in the downtown plan of development.

We are supportive as an organization of this project and the five million being um committed to this uh depending on the uh agreements with the BNSF.

Um we're very confident in the talks that we've heard from the director cobb as well as um uh with BNSF.

And um we we also think that the the improvements to this area will transform the West Edge.

Um, as outlined in our 2018, I believe is when it was adopted.

2018 uh West Edge area wide plan.

Thank you.

Thanks, Sophia.

Little guy's doing great.

Goodness.

Uh and Westby from 714 West 20th, West the Edge Brewing.

Um, Mayor and City Council members.

I just wanted to say once again, I appreciate all the work that's gone into this project and just how much it means to us that we invested our money into this property specifically for hopefully this project going through.

And I know that the um railroad can be the railroad, and it's causing some problems.

But I just love seeing this process go through, and I'm happy to be a part of it.

Thank you.

You know, I think the railroad is gonna be uh the railroad, and they've been uh they've been a good partner, they're just slow, they are very deliberate in their processes, but we've been making very steady progress.

And we just want to say thank you to you and your family for your investment.

You were the first, you and uh um Dave Tubner were the first two to really jump on the vision that we have here.

Thank you for that.

Anybody else?

I see your hand.

Who do you have, Jennifer?

Uh Mr.

Smith, you should be able to unmute yourself, or I'm sorry, Mr.

Miller.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Okay, good evening, Mayor Collins and members of the city council for the record.

My name is Charles Miller.

I'm speaking on item 15 regarding the Reed Avenue corridor funding.

I'm looking at the text of this ordinance, and it is a textbook example of misplaced prior priorities.

The ordinance admits that the Reed Avenue project was cut from the six penny tax ballot due to funding limitations.

So instead of letting the voters decide, you are bypassing the ballot and pulling five million directly out of the city's general fund reserves.

On top of that, later tonight, you're spending another 650,000 to buy private properties on Reed Avenue.

Um, you're pulling over 5.6 million dollars out of our reserves for a corridor project.

Yet the board of public utilities admits that we have 28,000 service lines made of unknown 25 homes exceeded the EPA's absolute maximum action level for lead.

Um sorry, excuse me.

If you have five million dollars sitting in the general fund reserves to build a corridor, you have five million dollars to replace toxic lead pipes.

You cannot claim poverty on public health while writing yourselves a $5.6 million check from the reserves for discretionary real estate and corridors.

You spent federal COVID relief money on flux surveillance cameras instead of safe water, and now you are draining the reserves for Reed Avenue while leaving thousands of families playing Russian roulette with their tap water.

I demand you vote no on appropriating these reserves for Reed Avenue until a plan is fully funded to address the lead crisis in the city.

Fix the lead first.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

All right.

We'll go to uh Mr.

Escabel for a motion, please.

Mr.

Mayor, the recommendation of the finance committee.

Second reading, and I saw a move.

Seconded by Mr.

Labourne.

All right.

Comments from members of the governing body on the ordinance.

Mr.

Escobel did nope.

Mr.

White, go ahead.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Just to address one of the comments that was just previously made.

This project was not cut from the sixpenny ballot due to insufficient funds, as was suggested.

It was cut from the six penny ballot because it we did not have enough money allocated to city to include all of the city projects that we wanted to on the ballot.

So I think an important distinction needs to be made there.

Secondly, this project is a long time coming.

We've experienced numerous delays due to the fact that as the mayor alluded to, the railroad works on its own specific timeline.

However, we've never been closer to uh seeing this project succeed than we are now.

And the most recent conversations, direct conversations, I might add, that we have had with the railroad have been very um positive and constructive.

Essentially, um they've agreed to it.

We don't have anything in writing yet.

And this ordinance specifically references that that no funds will be allocated until there is a um final written agreement.

However, they essentially have given the green light um with the condition of some closures.

And while the closures are certain to be inconvenient for some folks, those closures are of the utmost importance to the railroad um for safety of additionally, the most recent uh conversations have seemingly come up to uh uh with a solution for west side pedestrian access as well, while not perfect.

Um it will be there.

And so um I'm pleased to support this.

I appreciate the investment that's been made.

Uh, the millions of dollars in capital investment that we've seen in this area, the owners of the businesses have long awaited uh some movement on this project, and we seemingly have it.

So the fact that we are putting our skin in the game, as those folks have already put their skin in the game, and the fact that the final sentence of section two specifically states that no fund shall be expended from this commitment until a final agreement with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad has been reached.

Makes me happy to be a co-sponsor and happy to vote yes on this.

Dr.

Aldrich.

Mayor Collins through you.

Um, I would just like to point out that the voters actually did vote to support this project in 2017, is when this project first started.

So the idea that this has never gone before the voters is um not accurate.

I also um would concur with my colleague from Ward One that um I believe it's really important that when the voters um put a task before us or a project before us, that we make the commitment to complete that task and to follow through um with that.

Um I did um I do believe that it is for um the Burlington Northern is concerned about safety for their employees and for um the trains coming through.

But I really believe that this is um an important factor for safety for our community members.

Um, and I'm not saying that it's any more or less important than um lead pipes, but I do believe that um public safety is public safety and having safe crossing and safe access um on the west edge of town is just as important um as taking care of our lead pipes.

And I will be a yes vote on this tonight because I believe that um this resolution actually um dedicates this funding only if uh we get the final approval from the Burlington Northern um railroad.

And uh there's been a lot of progress, although it's been slow, I think, um, being made just because as the mayor mentioned, that's how the railroad functions.

Um but I believe that if we were to um not go forward with this, that any money that we have invested as a community and as a city um would be lost and we would be back um at square one and all of the money we've invested in this so far, we would be basically starting over again.

I'm not willing to take taxpayer money um and throw away the work that's been done just to start over again on a new process uh down the road.

So for that reason, I'll be a yes vote tonight.

Anyone else?

Yes, ma'am.

Dr.

Monsieur.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um I'm gonna be a yes vote on this for two reasons.

And and to be really honest, I've struggled with this, but I I come to this side, and there's two reasons that that I want to say.

One is this weekend this weekend, many of us had the opportunity to listen to an amazing speaker whose name I can't remember.

Chess Chester McKee.

Justin McKee.

Justin McKee.

Who is very important in the rodeo world, much more important than I know about.

But he was an amazing speaker who spoke highly about Cheyenne being a community that's willing to take some risks and to stand out and to be progressive and to move forward and to embrace the opportunities we have.

And I think this is a huge opportunity that we have.

And is it gonna cost some money?

Yes, it is.

Is it an investment?

Yes, it is.

And it's gonna turn around um on the backside as far as resources coming into the city.

So after I listened to Mr.

McKee, I thought, you know, we are that community, and we do need to embrace them.

We need to remember it, and we need to be okay with that.

If and like I say, we need to embrace it.

The second thing, the reason that um I'm gonna be a yes, and I wanna respond to the the caller.

In my day job, I do public health every day, 24 hours a day.

And I would raise 14 kinds of hell if I thought we had lead pipes that were not being taken care of so we could do this.

So I hope the caller and anyone else in the community understands that our water is safe.

We monitor it.

Bopu does an amazing job with it.

I look at lead levels on kids and adults every day.

It's not there.

So I just want to put that out to the caller and anybody else that's listening.

We do have good safe water.

And this is an investment in the community that we need to make.

So thank you.

Jennifer, is that Dr.

Rennie, please?

Dr.

Rady.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um I am gonna be a no vote on this, but I want to back up a little bit and just explain why.

Um, first of all, I think I'm the only council member here that was or still on the council that was present when this when the Reed Avenue Corridor and the West Edge improvements were first proposed by Gene McDonald and Matt Ashby, and then council my colleague Councilman White and I were the only ones, I think on council um present now that we're advocates for getting this on the sixpenny ballot in 2017.

So I've been an advocate and a proponent and supporter of the Reed Avenue project.

Um almost a decade.

Um but I don't like the timing on this.

I think that one um you know commits five million, it's an ordinance, not a resolution, so it commits five million dollars by law and does not give us any flexibility if we happen to have an emergency later on.

One of our other colleagues has advocated that he wants to add an additional four million dollars for stormwater drainage to the budget this upcoming year, and we and we haven't even seen your budget yet to see where it goes, Mayor.

So um, so from a fiscal standpoint, I don't think it's prudent yet to be doing this.

And in addition, you've already given us your assurances or pledge that if the NSF came through, you would look for funding to to further the um project.

And I do want to add, I want to echo what my colleague from Ward 3 said a little while ago.

This was approved by the voters in 2017.

And at the time um when we proposed it, we knew that the the monies allotted wouldn't be enough to do the entire corridor.

But we also knew that it would get the planning done and get us a good start on it.

And we also knew that at some point we would have to come back for more funds.

So as I said, Mr.

Mayor, I I've always supported the project, but I do not support the timing of the ordinance.

Thank you.

Mr.

Wolf.

Uh Mr.

Mayor, thank you.

Um I I'm gonna vote strongly in favor of this.

Uh been on the council about four months since really the first project that um I um I dove into uh um the very first meetings at um at uh Westby property to talk with the landowners um there and the investors uh and uh I think um I think this is ready to go.

I applaud our city engineer, uh Mr.

Cobb has done a um incredible job with this and thinking it through and working through the details.

Um very appreciative of Mr.

Cobb and the mayor for the work that they've um continued to do with the railroad.

Um and um and I think we we are ready to move this forward.

Uh and we owe it to the voters to um to proceed with it.

We owe it to the people who've made uh investments there already, and we owe it the community and the community and that part of uh Cheyenne is really changing for the better.

Uh and um I think we would miss an incredible opportunity if we don't uh follow through with this.

And so I'll be a yes.

Thank you very much.

Mr.

Escobel.

Mr.

Mayor, through you.

Uh in 1908, if that city council had the vision of what this would be like, uh, we probably already have this project done.

But not only that, it's the private investments that's been made by a number of uh families in this community, and they have a vision as well.

And I think this is our way of showing our commitment as well to not just the voters uh but the private investments that have been made.

And for you, those of you out in the audience who wonder why 1908 is important.

In 1908, the Cheyenne City Council gave the right-of-way of Reed Avenue to the Colorado River or Colorado River.

I'm thinking water, the Colorado Railroad.

Um, because it back in those days, if you think about it, we didn't have semis and we didn't have interstates, goods came by rail.

And so they built warehouses along there, and the trains brought the goods that that we needed here in Cheyenne.

Things have changed in those warehouses, they're now under underutilized.

And uh, and so that's why this project was was brought to to pass.

Mr.

Labourne.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I speak in favor of this action.

And actually, uh certainly I think we need to reflect on going even further back than uh 2017, which is when the voters approved the initial funding for this.

Let's go all the way back to when this building was built.

And uh along that way, let's take a look at some of the other things that have happened uh in this neighborhood uh in the more recent past, the library, the Board of Public Utilities building, the uh recently the uh uh medical building there at uh uh nearby.

So the children's museum, uh health works is the word I was searching for.

So it's it's all and of course above all the uh department complex going in uh practically caddy corner from us.

So there's a whole movement to the disadvantaged neighborhood, and certainly uh the ability to revitalize those buildings as the Westbys have done is uh really a worthwhile uh goal because you're there's a rebirth factor there.

This this is an unusual project, but I would point out that it is the greenway connection to our downtown, and it's gonna be a non-motorized improvement to that infrastructure, just like a road.

So I think that when we look at this, we need to consider what has happened over time and what is going to happen over time as this continues.

There is a and has been a uh movement among property owners uh to take advantage of this.

And it's going to be over time something that's very worthwhile.

I do want to respond to one of the concerns that was raised in committee, and that was the question of gentrification.

Well, gentrification might happen somewhere.

I don't know where that is or how that happens, but that's a process where people that live in the neighborhood are priced out.

This is not the case here in Cheyenne.

This is not the case in West Cheyenne.

In fact, just the opposite is happening.

We're seeing properties that uh are being rehabilitated due to cost.

We've seen that we rezoned uh west there of Snyder, so that it was easier for people to do that.

We're working on the either re excuse me, rehabilitation of some of these damaged properties or their removal.

And I'd point out that uh there's a number of vacant uh parcels and lots in that area that are adjacent to the streets, have water sewer, power connections that are just waiting for further investment, and those people are making those investments.

So it isn't a question of pricing anybody out, it's a question of elevating the whole neighborhood, including the people that currently live there and the people that are going to want to live there.

So it's a it's a real big step for Cheyenne to take on something like this, has been very difficult and frustrating.

But as the chairman of the Reed Avenue Steering Committee, I applaud uh Mr.

Cobb's determination here through time that we see this through.

And I think the council ought to follow up on that tonight.

And uh we'll we'll see what happens here.

Uh obviously nothing until the the final agreement, but uh more than anything else.

I see the investment that's happening on the west side here, and that's happening along that corridor as being the ultimate proof that this is basically a uh it's a stretch, it's a different idea, but it's one that's gonna bear fruit.

So uh thank you.

Anyone else on the governing body?

All right, we have an ordinance on second reading to appropriate five million dollars to the Reed Avenue.

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed.

No.

Mr.

Moody and Dr.

Rainey or no.

The ordinance is approved on second reading.

Number 16 ordinance, first reading, amending the official zoning map of the city of Cheyenne, changing the zoning classification for land located south of I-80, east of Southwest Drive from County LI Light Industrial, AG Agricultural, and AR agricultural residential to LI Light Industrial.

We'll refer this one to the public services committee.

Number 17 ordinance first reading, pursuant to section 2.2.2 planned development regulating plan or development master plan and section 5.6.2 PUD, Planned Unit Development District of the Unified Development Code, amending ordinance number 4524 by modifying certain standards of the adopted district, planned unit development PUD for sweet grass, located southeast of the intersection of College Drive and Avenue C.

We'll refer this one to the public services committee.

Number 18, ordinance first reading, annexing to the city of Cheyenne, Wyoming, land west around Top Road and adjacent to Happy Jack Road.

We'll send this one to the public services committee.

Number 19 ordinance first reading, amending the official zoning map of the city of Cheyenne, establishing the zoning classification of AG agricultural NP public for land annexed to the city of Cheyenne, located west of roundtop road and adjacent to Happy Jack Road.

This one will also go to public services committee.

Number 20 ordinance, first reading, amending the official zoning map of the city of Cheyenne, changing the zoning classification for land located west of roundtop road and adjacent to Happy Jack Road from AG Agricultural to BP Business Park.

Dr.

Emmons, your committee's going to be busy.

This will also go to the public services committee.

Number 21 resolution authorizing the mayor and city clerks to sign a final plot for 2900 Central Avenue Town Homes, City of Cheyenne, Laramie County, Wyoming, located northwest of the intersection of East 29th Street and Central Avenue.

All right, this is uh the final plat for the zone that we did just a couple minutes ago uh to take the one large slot and split it up into the existing single townhome lots.

And uh, we had to do that first before we can do the plat.

So that's why we took it off the consent agenda.

Uh we'll got to the audience if anybody wanted to speak to this uh final plat.

Hearing none, Dr.

Emmons.

Mr.

Mayor, the recommendation of the public service committee is to adopt an ISO move.

Second.

Seconded by Mr.

Seagrave.

Comments from members of the governing body on the uh final plat.

Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, this final plat is adopted.

Number 22 resolution approving and adopting the city of Cheyenne crosswalk criteria and guidelines and confirming the authority of the city engineer to implement crosswalk treatments.

All right, this is an update to our rules regarding crosswalks to give our engineering department maybe a little more flexibility in the sighting of crosswalks.

Anybody in the audience want to speak to that?

You don't have to.

I'm gonna hold you to that one.

Welcome back.

It's good to see you.

Push the button, introduce yourself, please.

My name is Carol Davenroy.

I live on Spirit Lane in Cheyenne.

Thank you.

I haven't been here for a long time.

Um, I just well, I want to thank um Mr.

Cobb and Mr.

Amon for their persistence in getting this going and done.

And I know it was a huge project, but I also wanted to thank um Mr.

Tom Seagrave, thanking him for his support and some of the other um council members as well, Mr.

Laburn as example.

But um Mr.

Seagrave did at the public services committee asked Mr.

Eamon if the if Gardenia would qualify for with these um criteria that have been developed.

And uh Mr.

Amon answered in the affirmative.

So I'm I just want to get that on the record.

And he also asked Mr.

Amon for a time frame.

Thank you, Mr.

Seagrave.

And the time frame is this summer, probably late summer, but I think he said late summer, but nevertheless, the summer.

So, yay, we may be getting, well, hopefully getting a crosswalk.

So I want to thank you very much for your work on it.

But it isn't done until the fat lady thing, so I'm waiting.

She's warmed up though, Carol.

Thank you.

Thank you for being here.

Push that button.

There you go.

Mr.

Mayor, Council members, Bonnie Joe Cruz.

I also live on Spirit Lane.

And I'm going to do exactly the opposite of what my debate teacher, who was a very strict nun, taught me in high school.

Shame on me and shame on you and the rest of the people of Cheyenne that it took the death of a young boy to get a stoplight by McCormick High School.

My husband and I had three kids that went to McCormick over 40 some odd years ago.

Never once did we ever think about there would ever be a problem of them crossing this street.

We've progressed cell phones, black hoodies, going to school early.

Is so that you can look out and not spend so much time looking in the small rear view mirror.

I want to thank you, Mr.

Mayor and Council members for addressing this task.

The need of crosswalks in our city, as you said, Mr.

Mayor, we have grown so much.

Tonight you can all go to bed and think if what I have done today saves one life, saves one person for a permanent from getting a terminate disability.

You can sleep without nightmares.

Thank you.

Sister Rosita was the one that got after me.

So I remember those days.

Thank you.

Anybody else?

Anyone else in the audience?

All right.

Dr.

Emmons.

Mr.

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

Second.

Seconded by Mr.

Labourne.

All right, folks.

Anybody in the governing body want to speak to this uh crosswalk criteria?

Mr.

Laborne.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um really appreciate all that went into this.

The uh manual of uniform traffic.

What's the last uh part of that acronym?

Devices.

Uh obviously is there for a reason.

Uh, we want to have uniformity in our uh traffic control.

And yet it really wasn't based on something that was effective here.

So this is something that I think is uh very important and very worthwhile, not only for the long-standing issue uh there on Gardenia, but throughout the city as well.

There are this is really something that is part of uh a better understanding of how we achieve that vision zero uh goal that we've adopted, which is an end to traffic related pedestrian deaths, and so although we've had too many, um, I think we're headed in the right direction.

And I do have a question for uh Mr.

Cobb, Mr.

Mayor.

Mr.

Cobb, do you want do I want to understand that the action we're taking tonight is uh the recognition of the existing report, but that you'll be looking at these situations in other places uh with a more um lenient and realistic approach.

Mr.

Cobb, I'm not sure lenient and realistic is the words you're looking for, but uh sir.

Mayor, through you to Councilman Laborne, I would say, sir, that we are looking at trying to yes, the answer is yes, that we're looking at all crosswalks in a different way now, but I would say it aligns better with our population, our climate, and our use.

Um, not more lenient.

Does that make sense, sir?

Yes, thank you.

And it is uh something we'll be I I expect that uh other people that have these issues in their neighborhood will look on what has been the uh very determined and long-standing effort of uh these individuals uh to seek that sort of uh improvement.

So uh thank you for what you've done, and I look forward to our continuing discussion.

Mr.

White.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I just wanted to number one, thank um City Engineer Cobb and Mr.

Eamon uh for all the work uh that they did on this.

This issue is very important to me.

Uh and Mr.

Laborne and Mr.

Mooney as well.

We've the three of us have been working on uh traffic safety for the last couple of years.

But I really wanted to thank Miss Dana Boy and Miss Cruz for spearheading this.

You you sorry, take it the wrong name.

Sorry, I want to thank Ms.

Dana Boy and everyone else who spearheaded this because you were the drivers.

If if it hadn't been for the two of you, I don't know that we would have gotten here.

And I know it wasn't quickly to you, it wasn't quickly for any of us here either, but I don't think we would be where we're at right now without you two.

And so while I can appreciate manuals and warrants, manuals and warrants to me shouldn't take the place of common sense.

And I think because of your efforts and because of the effort of the consultant that uh we enlisted to study this, I think we're in a much better place than we were before you took up this flag and carried it across the goal line.

So you all should be really commended.

Please know, and I know that the process was frustrating for you.

I've I've been in Mr.

Cobb's office numerous times about trying to get a crosswalk or or flashing lights or wherever uh for an area in my ward.

So I do understand uh how um endless uh it may seem, but uh you you folks are the reason that we're where we're at now, and I think we're in a much better place than when we started.

So thank you.

Mr.

Moody, yep.

Thank you, Ms.

Mayor, for you.

And I do want to echo both my colleagues that spoke.

Like I said, we are some that's passionate about it, and I agree.

One child, even just hit by a uh car or pedestrian is one too many.

I've been saying that carpent on that since we had our city goal last year with traffic safety.

But I did want to say with this plan here, I do want to see more evolved, and I wanted to ask Mr.

Cobb, is there a chance we can include that all crosswalks have thermoplastic?

Not only would it be from a safety perspective, but also a fiscal perspective, because to me they last longer and they're more visible when compared to the paint.

Mr.

Cobb, can you talk about your painting plans?

Mayor, through you to Councilman Moody.

Um councilman, I I agree with you that in most cases we do want thermoplastic.

And I think Mr.

Eamon had reiterated that same comment to you during committee.

Um there are occasions where we cannot use it, and we have good reasons.

Um, for instance, just what we we spoke that one of the questions came up with Mr.

Labourne about Yellowstone.

Um obviously we have a major maintenance project coming where we'll eventually replace all of it with thermoplastic, but the timing is not now.

So again, I prefer to do that not really in the manual to specify it.

We do that on a project by project basis where it makes sense and let us use our engineering judgment to to make those kind of decisions, sir.

All right.

Thank you.

And then I'll just say uh Ridge Row by Classical Academy, if that can be looked at.

I've actually been in contact with them.

That is a major, and they're just asking, can there please be a crosswalk or even a new as a new name, but I still use the one a hawk system there just for the safety of our children?

Mayor, through you to councilman Moody, we we definitely will look at it, sir.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

All right, hearing none, we have a resolution on changing our or adding to our crosswalk criteria.

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed.

This resolution is adopted.

Next item is number 31C on page five.

Professional services agreement between the city of Cheyenne and McGee Herman Pies, LLP doing business as MHP Assurance Services LLP for auditing the annual financial statements of the City of Cheyenne, Wyoming, and its Board of Public Utilities.

All right.

We have a uh a contract here to extend the services of MHP uh to do our annual audit.

We'll go out to the audience.

Does anybody want to talk about uh our choice of MHP for our auditor?

All right, hearing none, uh that would be Mr.

Escobel, I believe.

Mr.

Mayor, the recommendation of the finance committee is to approve and the amount not to exceed $148,000 and $600 for a period of three years.

And I so move.

Second.

Seconded by Mr.

Moody.

Comments for members of the governing body.

Mr.

Labourne.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Well, the point I want to make is that we're fully accountable for our funds here.

And not only are we fully accountable uh as through the treasurer's office, we're fully accountable through the audit.

So if anyone has questions about any sort of funding mechanism or taxes, where they go, what they do, uh that's totally and absolutely open for anyone's inspection.

And it is furthermore documented in that audit.

So um sometimes we hear people suggest that we have a uh some sort of a slush fund or some sort of unaccountable system.

Not true.

And furthermore, uh, I can assure anyone if they want to know anything about our financial expenditures, our treasurer's office is ready to answer them in a timely manner.

Thank you.

And I'll just add on to that too.

All of our audits, our audits call of our most of our grants on a regular basis.

So not only does it cover our general fund revenues, but uh all of our grants also.

So thank you for that.

Anyone else?

All right, hearing none.

All those in favor of the professional services agreement, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, that professional service agreement is approved.

Next item is number 32A on page six.

Contract modification number one to contract number 8169 between the city of Cheyenne and JTL Group Inc.

doing business as Knife River for the 2025 city overlay number one project.

All right, this is just an extension of our um our current city overlay uh project in their Cheshire Drive.

We'll go out to the audience.

Is anybody have any questions on this uh contract modification number one?

Hearing none, Mr.

Escobel.

Mr.

Mayor, this item was reviewed under other items for the agenda at the April 7th, 2026 Finance Committee meeting.

Therefore, provisions of Title II of the city code have been met.

Mr.

Mayor, the recommendation of the finance committee is to approve in an amount not to exceed 217, 150 and 20 cents.

And I saw a move.

Second.

Seconded by Mr.

White.

Any comments from members of the governing body?

Yes, yes, sir.

Dr.

Aldridge.

Mayor Collins, I am uh wondering if um we might be able to have an explanation of um maybe what it sounds it looks like from the description of changes that this was um when it was originally the bid was let that there was not communication between a couple of our departments about what was going on.

And so then that resulted in this modification of almost a quarter of a million dollars.

Let's get you an answer.

Doug, welcome.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh Doug Klon City Construction Manager.

Uh through you, Mr.

Mayor, Dr.

Aldrich, that's correct.

We we did not have the timing down as to when the street and alley division wanted to do their portion of Concord and it did not overlap the way that it should have.

So that's the reason for the gap.

We we want to fill that and not leave um gaps as we do these maintenance projects.

And so now we've um in the past year, we have a better system set up where we meet with the with those departments in addition to the Board of Public Utilities, and we're trying to coordinate all of our projects so that we don't have these gaps again in the future.

Follow up, Dr.

Aldridge.

I just um I I just have seen a couple of these change modifications coming through, not just for street and um repairs and maintenance, but um we just had one recently on some work or a plan that was being done for City Hall.

And I just I really am concerned that we continue to see modifications, and these are ranging in the 200 to quarter of a million dollar range, and that um I want to make sure that we're being fair to all of the people who are bidding in the process.

Um, so if we can I appreciate the effort to communicate better so that we might be able to, when we let these bids to actually be letting the bid for the work we actually want done and in its entirety, not in where we're going to have to piecemeal and come back for these modifications.

Thank you.

Anyone else on the governing body?

Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed.

This contract modification is approved.

Next item is number 35A on page eight.

Voucher report.

All right, is there anybody in the audience or in the governing body that would like to speak to vouchers?

Next item.

35B designation of the official voting delegate and alternate delegate for the city of Cheyenne at the June 4th, 2026 Wyoming Association of Municipalities Summer Convention Business Meeting to be held in Laramie, Wyoming.

Annually, we have a Wyoming Association of Municipalities um conference, and we have to designate uh a person to be our voting delegate.

Um that's what this is designed for.

Is there anybody in the audience who would like to speak to that topic?

Okay, hearing none, Mr.

Escobel.

Mr.

Mayor, the recommendation of the finance committee is to designate Dr.

Mark Green as the official voting delegate and Mayor Patrick Collins as the alternate delegate and I saw move.

Second.

Seconded by Mr.

White comments on the uh motion of Dr.

Rainey as our delegate.

I'll just say real quick.

Yes.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Through you, um, I was an abstention, non-I or na just want to make sure no conflicts of interest, and there are no conferences of interest, so I'll be an I vote.

Thank you.

Any other comments?

Hearing none, all those in favor of the designation of Dr.

Rainey as a delegate, myself as the alternate, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, this uh designation is adopted.

Number 36, other business.

All right, is there anybody in the audience here today that would like to speak to us under other business?

You guys sat through a long meeting to talk to us, so welcome.

Do have do me a favor, push that button.

Good evening.

Bring that microphone up so it points at you and introduce yourself.

Uh my name is Noel Letter.

I'm a representative for the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters.

Um, I'd like to speak tonight um on tax fraud.

Um, construction tax fraud is stealing the future of our roads, bridget bridges, and public transit.

Billions of dollars um meant for infrastructure repairs are lost every year because of dishonest um contractors who exploit workers and dodged uh taxes.

Um, this April 12th through the 18th, the Western State's Carpenter's Local 208 is taking a stand.

Well, hardworking taxpayers wait for potholes to be fixed and highways to be repaired.

Corrupt businesses are pocketing money that should be feeding or funding these critical projects.

Strong infrastructure requires fair labor, honest business, and it's time to stop tax fraud to ensure roads, bridges, and transit systems are built the right way.

It is time to stop tax fraud to ensure roads, bridges, and transit systems are built the right way.

The future belongs to those who build it, and it must be built without tax fraud.

Sir, are you making acquisitions that that's happening in our community?

Yes, sir.

You want to be specific?

Um, I've been on projects before where we found cash pay.

Undocumented workers being paid on the table.

Okay.

Thanks for bringing that to our attention.

Yeah, no problem.

All right.

Thanks, guys.

Have a good evening.

Mr.

Miller, you should be able to unmute yourself.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Mr.

Mayor, members of the council for the record, Charles Miller.

I'm here to conduct a systemic audit of tonight's agenda, specifically the structural misalignment of capital that favors commercial expansion and administrative luxury over the physical safety of our children.

Tonight you are moving to expand the downtown development district for Snyder Food while the DDA's own amended budget allocates 130,000 for a communications plan and 45,000 for planters.

Concurrently, ordinance 11 strips $5 million directly from our general fund reserves for the Reed Avenue corridor.

Most audaciously, item 23 asks taxpayers for 22 million dollars to remodel this building and that your building and another 10.4 million uh for a pool.

That is over 37 million dollars in discretionary spending on tonight's docket alone.

Now let's look at it at the at the verocity index.

Mayor Collins on February 6th, you told this community that lead remedial 50 million dollar problem.

You use that figure to justify winning for federal handouts.

Um, I'm sorry.

Um while 28,000 service lines remain of unknown material and our water supply sits in a state of unmanaged liability.

To make matters worse, just minutes ago, members of this council attempted to put on the record that our water is safe.

That is a demonstrable falsehood.

The Board of Public Utilities' own data from September 2025 explicitly shows that three out of 25 homes tested exceed tested exceeded the EPA's absolute maximum action level.

There is no safe level of lead.

While you find millions for vibrant corridors and office renovations, you are concurrently moving under item nine to relax the concentration based local limits for lead in our wastewater.

You are literally making it easier for lead to persist in our environment while you beautify the surface.

Do not tell me the money isn't there.

You proved the pots of money are fluid when you diverted 146,300 in ARPA COVID relief funds, money intended for public health into a no-bid surveillance contract for flock cameras.

The general fund is the ultimate safety net.

Using it to bankroll $5 million for Reed Avenue while claiming insolvency on lead pipes is a choice.

It is a choice to prioritize infrastructure vampirism over public health.

Liability is not segmented.

When a child in IN suffers cognitive decline, the Manel liability law will not just name the utility board.

It will name the city council for its persistent custom of prioritizing commercial landscaping over safe drinking water.

Reallocate those general fund reserves to the lead pipe replacement fund immediately.

Fix the water, then you can talk about the flowers.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

All right, how about from the governing body?

Dr.

Aldridge.

Uh Mayor Collins, thank you.

I would just like to remind uh members of the public that we will be having council and coffee in Ward 3 this Saturday from 9 to 11 at the East Side Dosbog.

Um, as our um regular monthly uh council and coffee.

I believe that we are now on number 65 of these that we've held over the last five years.

So would welcome um public comments and thoughts.

Mr.

Escobel.

Mr.

Mayor, uh, when I got to go tour our water treatment plant, it's state of the art.

We we have people from other countries that are coming here uh and getting advice on what they can do over there to make their water fresh and clean, like we have here.

Uh I commend the Board of Public Utilities for everything they're doing.

And and I know there are some older homes that we still have to fix, but uh they're on it and they're you know it's gonna be expensive, but we're still getting it done little by little.

Mr.

Moody.

Oh thank you, Smary.

Through you.

Um, I won't be at the council and coffee this uh coming Saturday.

I'll be out of town, but you can always reach me or my colleagues from War 3.

Thank you.

Anyone else on the governing body?

Dr.

Aldrich.

Mayor Collins, uh, through you.

I'm sorry, I forgot to remind everyone that this uh Friday night is the uh fur ball on Friday, uh April 17th at Little America.

Um, and so I hope to see everyone there in order to support the Cheyenne Animal Shelter.

Speaking of Friday night, war is gonna be here.

And if you're not gonna go to the fur ball and you like rock and roll from the old days, um come to Civic Center at 6:30 or 7:30, Jason, 7:30, 7:30 for an unbelievable concert.

So um anybody else in the governing body?

Mr.

Seagrave.

Mr.

Mayor, pursuant to Wyoming statute section 164405A7.

I move that the governing body meet in executive session to consider or receive any information classified as confidential by law.

Is there a second?

Second by Dr.

Ral Dridge.

All those in favor of going into executive session, please signify by saying aye.

Those opposed.

All right, we're gonna take a five-minute break and then we'll come back and do this.

Mr.

Love, hang on just a second, would you please?

We are adjourned.

By the way, when we come back, we're just gonna adjourn and go home.