Menomonie City Council approves re-zoning for proposed data center, daycare

CITY OF MENOMONIE COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
Menomonie City Hall 800 Wilson Avenue
1st Floor, City Council Chambers 7:00pm
Monday – August 4, 2025
Pledge of Allegiancn 

Over 100 citizens attended the meeting. 

   1. Roll Call
   2. Approval of Minutes
   3. Public Hearings
       a) Public Hearing regarding Proposed Ordinance 2025-05, an Ordinance rezoning certain lands along CTH B between 650th Avenue (also known as Eagle Point Road) and 690th Avenue from Agriculture (A) to Restricted Industrial (I-1).
       b) Public Hearing regarding Proposed Ordinance 2025-06, an Ordinance rezoning certain lands along 21st Street Northeast and 7th Avenue.

      c) Northeast (Menomonie Alliance Church) from Single Family Residential (R-1) to Local Commercial (B-2).

Please consult the video for the public hearings on these items. Several of the speakers asked for a referendum on the building of a data center.  Almost all of the speakers spoke in opposition to the data center, but not necessarily against the annexation or re-zoning. Ten of the speakers spoke nominally in favor of the annexation and zoning on the basis of economic growth.  An attorney from Quarles spoke in favor of the ordinances as a representative of Balloonist, LLC. A representative from Xcel Energy spoke to provide a viewpoint that the data center would not influence the availability of electricity or the costs of electricity for existing customers. Katherine Frank, Chancellor of UW-Stout  also spoke in favor of the resolutions. 

The second public hearing was for a daycare center that will be in the existing Alliance Church facility (Item 3c). A citizen in the area spoke out against re-zoning the area to commercial. A representative from the YMCA spoke in favor, stating that if the daycare center closes, they would request re-zoning of the area to residential use. People asked for a variance rather than re-zoning the area. Others have proposed removing the four houses from the re-zone, which, as we understand it, would be illegal as it would be considered spot zoning. 

The hearing lasted 2 hours and 30 minutes. 

   4. Public Comments (other agenda items only).

There were no public comments.

   5. Old Business
       a) Proposed Ordinance 2025-04, an Ordinance annexing certain lands along CTH B between 650th Avenue (also known as Eagle Point Road) and 690th Avenue from the Town of Red Cedar and establishing a temporary Agricultural (A) zoning – discussion, possible introduction, possible waiver of the first reading, possible waiver of the second reading and possible adoption.
       b) Proposed Ordinance 2025-05, an Ordinance rezoning certain lands along CTH B between 650th Avenue (also known as Eagle Point Road) and 690th Avenue from Agriculture (A) to Restricted Industrial (I-1) – discussion, possible waiver of the first reading, possible waiver of the second reading and possible adoption.

Data centers are allowed in the I-1 zoning, which is what is being proposed. I-1 is the most restrictive of the I zoning classifications. e

This zoning and annexation is intended to facilitate the potential development of a data center on this property. Several additional steps would need to be taken before construction of a data center could begin. 

The data center will use approximately .03% of the irrigated farmland in Dunn County. The proposed water use is 75,000 gallons of water per day on average. The water would be supplied from existing municipal water supplies. 

Existing electric utilities in the area would provide the electricity, and discussions are taking place between the developers and the utilities.  The first phase would be the south half of the property, which would have an assessed value between 24 and 90 million dollars. The low end would make them the second-highest taxed property in the city. It would generate 1.1-3.6 million in property tax per year. 

If a TID was created these numbers would change. The city is not required to do an environmental assessment for the annexation and rezone, but one will be done before construction could start as part of the notification of intent permit.

This vote is only for the annexation and re-zoning, and would not approve the construction of a data center.

 A motion was made by Jeff Luther to table this for 90 days. Legally it would need to be approved by Oct. 18.  It is currently not possible to do a referendum on this item according to counsel. 

After that Jeff Luther made a motion to deny the annexation.  There was no second to the motion. 

Cody Gentz made a motion to postpone the item to the first September meeting, which was seconded (this would be the September 8th meeting). 

The representative from Ballonist spoke in favor of moving forward and that delaying it at this point will not help. There is at this time no site plan or construction plan, and he encouraged the city to pass the zoning and annexation.

Realistically, it would be some time in October before a possible TID and approval would take place. The company is currently not planning to start construction before 2027 The motion to postpone until September failed with 3 votes in favor. 

A motion was made to approve the annexation as written. The first reading was waived by voice vote.

The second reading was also waived by voice vote. 

A motion was made to adopt the ordinance and seconded. There was no discussion. It passed by roll call with Pickard, Gentz, and Luther voting no. The annexation passed. 

A motion was made to adopt the ordinance for the rezoning and seconded. The first reading was waived by voice vote, as was the second reading. 

A motion was made to adopt the rezoning. It passed by roll-call vote with members Luther, Pickard, and Gentz voting no. The ordinance passed. 

       c) Proposed Ordinance 2025-06, an Ordinance rezoning certain lands along 21st Street Northeast and 7th Avenue Northeast (Menomonieo Alliance Church) from Single Family Residential (R-1) to Local Commercial (B-2) – discussion, possible waiver of the first reading, possible waiver of the second reading and possible adoption. Note that the four lots included in this rezone are not buildable because they are all partly on the parking lot of the church.

The mayor and councilperson Brennan expressed concerns that the people in the neighborhood would not have expected a rezoning in their neighborhood to commercial. 

The first and second readings were waived by voice vote. 

A motion was made to adopt the ordinance. 

A roll call vote was taken with Brennan, Erdman, Sutherland voting no - it passed 7-3.

   6. New Business
       a) Proposed Resolution 2025-13, a Resolution Requesting Exemption from the County Library Tax – discussion and possible action.

The city requests to be exempt from this tax every year because it already provides more money to the library than the tax.  It passed by voice vote.

       b) Fire Department Rescue Boat Purchase – discussion and possible action.

The city currently only has an older more-or-less fishing boat, and this would be to purchase a rescue boat. Only one of the three bids met the requirements of the city.The proposal is for $56,050 which is less than was proposed in the budget. 

The purchase was approved by a roll-call vote of 10-0..

       c) Special Event Requests – discussion and possible action:
           (1) UW-Stout Move-In, 3rd Street East, August 23 through August 31, 2025.
           (2) UW-Stout Homecoming Soap Box Derby, Wilson Avenue West, October 20, 2025.
           (3) UW-Stout    Homecoming    Parade,    Various    Downtown    Streets, October 25, 2025.

All three of these were packaged into one motion They were all approved by voice vote. 

   7. Budget Transfers

There was one budget transfer for the fire department to buy computer equipment  because the current computers cannot be upgraded to Windows 11. The budget transfer was approved 10-0 by a roll-call vote.

   8. Mayor’s Report

The mayor addressed the concerns over the Pine Ave construction - the city had very little control over this as it was a DOT project.

The pickleball courts are being resurfaced.

There was a brief discussion on the improving condition of the lake.

   9. Communications and Miscellaneous Business

More concerns about the Pine St. construction. 

The Menomin Meander is coming this weekend.

Shopping with a cop is on Saturday. 
   10. Claims

The claims list was approved by a roll-call vote 10-0.

   11. Licenses
       a) Normal license list – discussion and possible action

There are no licensees. 
   12. Adjourn 

Adjourned at 11:06
“PUBLIC ACCESS”
NOTE: Members of the public may view City Council meetings via Zoom Teleconference / Video Conference or over the internet by going to https://zoom.us/join (URL for Zoom meeting), or by calling 1 312 626 6799. The Access Code for the meeting is 841 4777 4147. Please note this is for viewing purposes ONLY. If you wish to participate, you must appear in person at the meeting.

NOTE: Upon reasonable notice, efforts will be made to accommodate the needs of individuals with disabilities. For additional information or to request the service, contact the City Clerk or the City Administrator at 715-232-2221.

Additional meeting summary by Sarah Cardwell:

At the City Council Meeting on July 7th two items were approved to send to the City Planning Council:

1. Consider the annexation and rezoning of a plot of land that borders County Road B north of I-94 Exit 45 between 650th and 690th Avenues on the north and south and 630th Street to the east.
2. Consider rezoning of the Alliance Church property from residential to commercial.

The City of Menomonie Planning Council met on July 28th to consider these issues.

A large crowd assembled at the meeting to provide public comment. Three people spoke out against the church rezoning. They are concerned that rezoning the church to commercial could result in the church being able to sell/lease the four lots on 7th Avenue North for businesses. Thirteen people spoke out against the annexation and rezoning issue for the land bordering County Road B. Note that the comments were directed against the proposed use of the land for a data center.

The Church and YMCA spoke regarding the need for rezoning the church to accommodate a before and after school program in the part of the church building previously used as a school.

Adam Accola, the Director of Economic Development for Greater Dunn County spoke to the need for economic development in the county and that all the proposals being received lately require large tracts of land and that Dunn County has a reputation for refusing developments.

One of the landowners, Luanne Prochnow spoke about the fact the land has been in the city’s comprehensive plan to be annexed into the city for several years.

The Planning Committee voted to approve both the annexation and rezoning for County Road B and the rezoning of the Alliance Church property.

August 4th was a regularly scheduled City Council meeting, and the two issues were on the agenda for approval.

The room was even more crowded than at the planning meeting. Some of the same people spoke at this meeting. Again, all the people that spoke out against the proposal, 18 in total, expressed concerns about the data center. About 10 people spoke that seemed to be in favor of the proposal. Some didn’t say yes but merely stated that the town needs economic development. The lawyer representing Balloonist LLC which is the development group for the data center that has expressed interest in the site only stated his name and that he represents Balloonist. People were frustrated by this and thought that the representative should have stated more. The City Council approved the annexation and rezoning. Statements by the Council members were a reminder that the vote was for annexation and rezoning of the area has been in the city’s comprehensive plan since 2016. Concerned citizens will need to continue to monitor the city’s actions to ensure that when and if the data center makes an application to build, concerned citizens can express their concerns.

While not as many people spoke out against the Alliance Church rezoning, there were more Council members concerned about the potential effects of this rezoning than the County B land. The main concern is that a commercial designation could lead to development of the four lots that are not being used by the church for commercial enterprises. The rezoning is necessary to have a licensed childcare facility so the program can receive state funding to lower costs for parents. There are no new buildings planned for the church site. The before and after school program will be run out of the space formerly occupied by the school associated with the church. If the before and after school program is discontinued the land can be rezoned back to residential. Those in favor of the rezoning understand the need for childcare in the Menomonie area. And, if it puts people at ease, the church has been at this location since 1981. The church ran a school at the location for 25 years. It appears if the church wanted to develop the lots they might have done it already.