St. Louis Housing, Urban Development, and Zoning Committee Meeting – July 2, 2026

The Housing, Urban Development, and Zoning (HUDZ) Committee of the St. Louis Board of Aldermen held a special meeting on July 2, 2026 to continue deliberation on Board Bill 49, which would establish zoning regulations for data centers. The meeting featured extensive public comment, a presentation on urban heat island effects, and the adoption of three amendments. After discussion, the committee chose to hold the bill for another meeting rather than vote it out, setting a next meeting for Tuesday, July 8, 2026 at 11:00 AM.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Joe Delea (businessperson, Wards 4 & 6): Opposed passing Bill 49 out of committee, arguing that the sole utility provider, Amran, has indicated the renewable energy credit requirements in the current bill are "on a but unattainable." He urged the committee to understand the difference between bundled and unbundled renewable energy credits and to consult with Amran before advancing the bill.
• Wash App Sid representative: Reported that after extensive work, a general agreement has been reached with the sponsor and expressed support for Amendment 4 and for passing the bill out of committee.
• Abigail Gunther (Ward 7): Expressed support for regulations, stating community consent is important and that if renewable energy credits are not available, the industry may not belong in the city.
• Lauren Fila (Co-chair, Socialist Green Eastern Missouri, Maplewood): Thanked Alderwoman Schweitzer for her work and asked each committee member whether residents should have the right to consent to a risky facility near their neighborhoods, calling the request urgent.
• Lewis Hamilton (Ward 8, representing downtown data center The Globe): Spoke in favor of the bill as amended, expressing confidence that amendments would address concerns of existing operators.
• Ryan Daibo (works in Ward 10): Opposed data centers in St. Louis, citing health and environmental hazards, and urged passage of strong regulations or a ban.
• Henry Eubank (Director of Public Policy, Greater St. Louis Inc.): Argued that the renewable energy requirements (50% pre-occupancy, 95% by year 10) and the public impact agreement (PIA) process act as de facto bans on data center development. He urged the committee to slow down for more fact-finding.
• Tina Sweet T. Peel (city planner, former alderwoman, Ward 9): Opposed rushing the legislation, calling the summer recess deadline "manufactured." She requested a community consent provision similar to the liquor license process and highlighted distrust from past failed development projects.
• Henry Robertson (former lawyer, Great Rivers Environmental Law Center): Questioned Amran's reasoning on renewable energy goals and criticized unbundled RECs, suggesting they do not guarantee new renewable energy investment.
• Mary Ellen Parmenter (Ward 5): Supported greater regulation and community consent, and pushed back on the argument that "AI is here to stay" as lacking evidence of long-term economic benefit.
• Nick Hartzler (Steadfast City, Ward 1): Echoed Henry Eubank's concerns about renewable energy credits and asked that the definition of data centers in Board Bill 55 be tied to the zoning regulations in Bill 49 for consistency.
• Nahela Pittman (R Synod Board): Supported firm regulations, stating that anything less than 100% clean energy is inappropriate and that community consent must be included in writing.
• DC (works in Ward 11): Expressed concern about health and environmental effects, noting insufficient monitoring, vague environmental study requirements, and a risk of setbacks being narrowed.

Discussion Items

• Alderwoman Schweitzer (sponsor) addressed public comments, emphasizing that the regulations are not a ban (micro data centers are exempt from renewable requirements) and that the city must meet its comprehensive plan and sustainability goals. She stated she does not regulate Amran and that the community should not face unchecked proliferation of data centers.
• Elise Schaefer (Missouri Coalition for the Environment) presented on urban heat islands, showing data that data centers increase local temperatures by an average of 4 degrees within 10 kilometers. She noted that the number of 100-degree days in St. Louis has doubled in the past 30 years and is expected to double again in 30 years, and that heat impacts extend far beyond the proposed setbacks (300 feet for standard, 600 feet for major data centers).
• Alderman Browning asked Schaefer whether micro data centers pose the same heat threat, and she confirmed the distinction is well-addressed by the bill.
• Alderwoman Boyd raised concerns about existing environmental injustices in the city and cautioned against using the heat presentation to create fear, while noting that other environmental issues (COVID, tornadoes, cancer, asthma) have not received the same attention.
• Alderman Cone expressed frustration with the rushed process, noting that Bill 49 was introduced less than two weeks ago and that 11 amendments had been proposed in 48 hours. He requested more time for deliberation, citing ongoing concerns from constituents and unanswered questions about the renewable energy credits.
• Alderman Aldridge thanked Schweitzer for working with existing data centers but stated he would vote "present" on the bill due to remaining concerns about the renewable energy credit requirements. He asked for more time to understand the economics of unbundled vs. bundled credits.
• Vice Chair Sanye argued that the distrust from residents stems from the city's approval of a major data center without proper process. She cautioned that failing to pass regulations on the floor would further erode public trust and urged a clear timeline if the bill is held.
• Alderman Browning moved to add himself as a co-sponsor and opposed further delay, noting that recent success on the Rams settlement bill showed the board can compromise.
• Alderwoman Schweitzer agreed to hold the bill in committee and schedule another meeting for Tuesday, July 8, 2026 at 11:00 AM. She asked members with outstanding questions to submit them by the end of the day on July 3.

Key Outcomes

• The committee adopted three amendments to Board Bill 49 (all by unanimous voice votes of 6-0):
  • Amendment 9: Addresses applicability for existing data centers (non-conforming uses), expansions, and structural alterations. It specifies that new facilities must fully comply, while existing facilities are grandfathered but must meet certain conditions when expanding or altering, including noise/vibration controls, electronic waste disposal, and reporting on renewable energy use (no minimum requirement for existing centers).
  • Amendment 10: Clarifies that standalone fuel storage must be screened with masonry; generators with integrated fuel storage are subject to different screening requirements.
  • Amendment 11: Specifies that generator enclosures may include sound-attenuated or soundproof enclosures as standard from the original equipment manufacturer.
• The committee did not vote on advancing Bill 49 to the full board. Instead, chair Clark Hubbard announced the bill would be held in committee for further discussion, with the next meeting scheduled for Tuesday, July 8, 2026 at 11:00 AM.
• Committee members with unanswered questions were asked to submit them to Alderwoman Schweitzer by the end of the day on July 3, 2026.