Hastings City Council Worksession – October 19, 2026

The Hastings City Council held a worksession on October 19, 2026, at 6:00 PM in Council Chambers. The meeting included a presentation on data centers from State Senator Dan Lonowski and a discussion on proposed regulations for e-bikes, e-scooters, and hoverboards. No formal votes were taken, but the council provided direction on next steps for e-bike regulations.

Consent Calendar

• The agenda was adopted unanimously on a motion by Huntley, second by Anderson.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Michelle (4820 West 12th Street) described nearly witnessing a fatal crash involving two children on e-bikes at Third and Baltimore. She expressed concern about e-bikes, one-wheels, and scooters driving recklessly, and noted the death of a woman on an electric scooter at South Street and Hastings Avenue. She questioned liability and the city’s responsibility.
• Caroline Kemp (1006 Glenwood Avenue) spoke in favor of safety but advocated for education rather than additional restrictions. She noted that both her sons use e-bikes and cited driver inattention as a broader issue. She suggested partnering with Central Community College to offer free or low-cost e-bike safety courses.
• Nathan Cummins (1006 Glenwood Avenue) supported e-bikes as a safer alternative to bicycles for his two 14‑year‑olds commuting to school. He emphasized that responsible parenting and training can mitigate risks and asked the council to preserve e‑bike access for students.
• Bob Rodenbeck (615 North Briggs) asked for an age limit on helmet requirements and requested that e‑bikes be kept out of the middle of the road.

Discussion Items

1. Presentation on Data Centers – Senator Dan Lonowski

Senator Lonowski presented an overview of data centers in Nebraska. He noted that there are currently 39 data centers in the state, most concentrated near Omaha and Lincoln, with three near Grand Island and a planned Bitcoin mining center in Kearney. Average home energy use is 30 kilowatts per day; data centers consume gigawatts (1 billion watts). Existing facilities in Nebraska use about one gigawatt. The largest providers are Google and Meta. Benefits cited include property tax relief for local schools (e.g., Springfield Platteview built a new middle school without raising levies) and community investments (STEM grants, hardware). Downsides include high water consumption (some centers using three times the claimed amount), noise (especially fan-cooled facilities), air/light pollution, and minimal employment (typically fewer than 200 jobs). Senator Lonowski emphasized that data centers are coming regardless, and communities need to prepare with regulations on water usage, energy self-generation, and cybersecurity. He mentioned LB 1261, which protects ratepayers from increased costs if data centers generate their own power. Council members asked about employment, tax revenue, and the feasibility of requiring data centers to produce their own power. No action was taken; the presentation was for informational purposes.

2. Discussion of E-bike, E-scooter, and Hoverboard Regulations

The council reviewed proposed amendments to the existing ordinance (enacted November 2025). Key points raised:

• Enforcement challenges: Chief Story stated that with only five to seven officers per shift, enforcement is difficult. The council discussed that officers cannot easily catch e‑bikes that weave through traffic.
• Age restrictions: Council debated tying age limits to Nebraska’s school permit age (14) or agricultural permit age (13). Councilmember Consbruck noted that young riders often lack identification, making age enforcement impractical.
• Helmet requirement: Most council members supported a helmet requirement for riders of any age, noting it is easily observable. City Attorney Jesse noted that a helmet rule would likely be a secondary offense (like cell phone or seat belt laws), and the type of helmet (bicycle vs. motorcycle helmet would need to be defined.
• Reflective vests and lighting: The existing ordinance requires front and rear lights at night. Suggestions were made to also require reflective vests.
• License/permit and insurance: Council considered a city-issued permit with a fee to fund education and education. However, Chief Story noted that the police department is not a DMV and issuing licenses would add administrative burdens. Insurance requirements are likely not feasible because no insurers cover e‑bikes are currently not recognized as motor vehicles.
• Education: Councilmember Rowan reported that he spoke with three e‑bike riders who said they would require helmets and reflectors and that they also thought helmets should be required. Mayor suggested creating a training display at the public library with an e‑bike stand to teach road rules and safety. Council also discussed using online safety courses (costing $20–$120) which could be required or offered to for education.
• Data: Council asked for a count of e‑bikes parked at the middle school and high school to assess usage. They also considered whether to survey student opinions.

Key Outcomes

• No formal votes were taken on either agenda item; the worksession was for discussion only.
• For e‑bike regulations, the council directed city staff to bring back a revised ordinance that includes:
  • A helmet requirement for all riders (age to be defined).
  • Reflective vests or other high-visibility gear, especially for nighttime riding.
  • Enhanced education partnerships with schools, the library, and possibly Central Community College.
  • Explore creating a city permit or certificate program that ties to a safety course.
  • Investigate enforcement tools such as secondary offenses for observable violations (e.g., no helmet).
• The council will review data on e‑bike numbers at schools and consider further input from the public before finalizing amendments.
• The data center presentation was received as information; no immediate action was taken. The council may refer the topic to the Utility Advisory Board for further study.