Lamar council rejects data-center NDA, directs staff to draft 24-month moratorium

The Lamar City Council voted unanimously Monday to reject a proposed mutual nondisclosure agreement related to data-center discussions and directed city staff to draft a 24-month moratorium for council consideration in about six weeks.

The council did not enact a moratorium. It directed staff to prepare one after the Aug. 24 meeting, putting a potential review around early October. No specific release or hearing date has been announced. The council’s next regular meeting is scheduled for Sept. 14, but that meeting has not been identified as the date for the proposal.

The Aug. 24 council recording shows Councilmember Brent Bates making the motion to reject the proposed agreement and direct staff to prepare the moratorium. Another member seconded it, and the motion passed unanimously. The available transcript does not reliably identify the seconder, provide a complete attendance list or establish a named roll-call tally.

Project details remain undisclosed

The council record establishes that Lamar had received inquiries from companies interested in coming to the city and was considering an NDA with an unnamed larger corporation. It does not identify a company, developer, operator or formal project.

A local report described the Big Timbers Technology Campus as a potential development site if a data center were approved in the future. The report’s account of the discussion did not establish that a data-center application had been submitted or that Big Timbers was tied to a named developer.

The report also described a proposed framework for “Community Benefit and Responsible Data Center Development Standards,” including possible standards for water resources, utilities, fiber, noise and light pollution. No parcel number, capacity, acreage, water demand, electric load, cooling system, construction schedule or infrastructure agreement was identified.

During public comment, residents opposed to potential data centers raised concerns about water use during drought, electricity demand, utility rates, noise, air pollution, farmland, wildlife and transmission infrastructure. Speakers also questioned how many permanent jobs such facilities would create and asked the city to require environmental studies and disclose confidentiality agreements.

Those comments identify issues the council may need to address if a project is proposed, but they do not establish project-specific impacts. The meeting record contains no verified estimate of water consumption, power demand, wastewater volume, emissions, noise, job creation or construction cost.

What the moratorium could do

A moratorium generally functions as a temporary land-use control while a city studies or develops rules for a type of project. Colorado land-use guidance recognizes local governments’ ability to use moratoria for planning purposes but cautions that a moratorium generally cannot impair an already established statutory vested property right.

The effect in Lamar will depend on the ordinance or resolution staff drafts. That document will need to define what qualifies as a data center, whether existing applications or approvals are exempt, when the moratorium takes effect, whether it covers annexations or related infrastructure, and what studies or standards staff must prepare before it expires.

A future proposal could also undergo reviews involving water supply, wastewater, electric interconnection, transmission or substation needs, traffic, noise, air quality, land-use compatibility and environmental permits. Which reviews apply would depend on the project’s design and the city’s existing procedures.

NDA rejection and transparency

Rejecting the proposed NDA does not disclose the underlying communications or establish that all project-related information must be released. A private agreement also cannot automatically make public business confidential.

Colorado’s Open Meetings Law generally requires public meetings when a quorum or three or more members of a local public body, whichever is fewer, discuss public business or may take formal action. The law limits executive sessions to specified subjects and requires the body to announce the statutory basis before entering one.

Colorado’s Open Records Act summary describes public records broadly while recognizing exemptions that may apply to legally confidential information or trade secrets. Whether particular data-center communications are public would depend on their contents and the applicable exemption, not solely on whether an NDA was proposed.

The next significant documents are the draft moratorium, any proposed NDA or council packet, and whatever information the city makes available about a potential project. For now, Lamar has rejected the confidentiality agreement and begun preparing a broader policy response without publicly identifying a developer or formal proposal.