Frederick City and County News of Interest VOL. 4, NO. 12 | December 4, 2025

 

VOL. 4, NO. 12  |  December 4, 2025 Frederick City and County News of Interest Please join our monthly email list by clicking here. Learn more about CRG at the bottom of this newsletter. CRG Editorial: Data Centers December is THE month for data center deliberations and decisions that will impact our future for decades. Problematic are pro-business misleading (and erroneous) statements that: hundreds of electrical worker jobs are at stake, jeopardizing salaries exceeding 5 figures (from an International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers [IBEW] mailed flyer delivered to residents); a new estimate of $215M gross in revenues to the County (FNP 11/11); a recent Chamber of Commerce editorial touting huge gross revenues and hundreds of salaried positions, associated incomes, and recovered taxes (FNP 12/1); a FNP Board of Contributors editorial suggesting our County regulations are the most rigorous and protective in the country (FNP 11/22); a US Mail-delivered flyer from the Maryland Tech Council strongly arguing that a much larger portion of the County should be opened to data centers beyond the current limit approximating 1% of the County’s area; a just-delivered survey in a flyer from the Data Center Alliance of Maryland on the benefits of data centers; regional television ads espousing the huge community benefits from data centers; and now a City of Frederick Council initiative to revise the Land Management Code to allow data centers within City limits. CRG accepts that data centers are coming to the County at the Eastalco site, but STRONGLY disagrees with the assertions above because they ignore the well-documented costs generated by data centers in the U.S. and abroad. These costs are not included in any of the revenue projections but must be documented in an INDEPENDENT, UNAFFILIATED cost-benefit analysis that, so far, the County and City Councils have not supported. As well, and disturbingly, data centers are under consideration with no identified sources of power or water. private properties in Baltimore, Carroll, and Frederick counties, including long-term agriculture and businesses, are being lost through eminent domain for the proposed $424M Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project (MPRP) transmission line construction that powers N. VA data centers. Maryland residents will cover the majority of the MPRP transmission lines costs. connecting the Doubs electric substation to a new substation for a permitted data center in the County has a total cost of $33M, with the data center picking up only 8% of the cost, and residents the remainder. electricity costs are projected to increase for residents from 5% to >20%. nearby property values decline reducing property tax revenue and resale value. noise controls are inadequate. there is neither adequate emission control nor protection from hazardous spills. stormwater impacts are ignored for recharging groundwater that fill neighbor wells and baseflow for local streams. impervious surface runoff threatens flooding of neighboring properties and stream erosion, and damage to shrub and down-slope tree buffers and floodplains will occur. And electronic waste (e-waste) is a growing problem that is made far worse by the equipment turnover required in huge, hyperscale data centers. CRG would be on board IF these issues were addressed in comprehensive fiscal analyses and regulations that ensure our new Eastalco industrial neighbors will guarantee protections needed above. However, the smokescreen created in ignoring the threats and easily-adopted regulations must be countered. An option for the County would be to conduct an assessment of the above-noted threats, by gathering information for a year from the first data center built, and using those collected data to determine whether data centers create these issues, or if the business community’s claims are supported. Our County and City are for residents: Our living expenses and quality of life must be first and foremost. Protect those, and data centers might be considered good neighbors! It's critical that you show up at the 12/16 and 12/23 County Council meetings where the final ordinance and subsequent amendments will be decided — details below. Please attend or send comments to councilmembers@frederickcountymd.gov  and copy: CountyExecutive@frederickcountymd.gov PlanningCommission@frederickcountymd.gov Upcoming Meetings and Events Council Legislative Meeting, Tuesday, December 16 at 5:30 pm — Winchester Hall, First Floor Hearing Room Council Workshop, Tuesday, December 23 at 5:30 pm — Winchester Hall, First Floor Hearing Room

See the CRG blog at: responsiblegrowthfrederick.com Contributors: P. Gallagher, R. Huber, S. Jakubczyk, E. Law, R. Robey, M. Rosensweig, K. Sellner. CRG is a grassroots coalition of Frederick residents who prioritize responsible growth, expanding infrastructure, and a functional natural environment. We advocate for development that accommodates projected population increases while fostering a strong and diverse community fabric and increasing economic opportunities. Our comprehensive approach emphasizes public safety, traffic mitigation, increasing school capacity, and housing for all members of our community. Many Frederick residents want to know — but cannot find — information about how to participate in discussions of important local issues. The City and County generally hold meetings from 3–10 p.m., making it impossible for most of us to attend meetings or weigh in on issues of interest. Our mission with this monthly newsletter is to highlight City and County activities so you can learn more and, with your limited time, weigh in on areas of growth and development, City and County policies, and other local activities. Occasionally, opinions or longer stories will be offered by knowledgeable experts/readers. We welcome suggestions for articles focused on specific topics. Contact Kevin Sellner (kgsellner@gmail.com), Marge Rosensweig (marjorierosensweig@gmail.com), or Steve Jakubczyk (jakubczyksteven@gmail.com) for consideration of your issue. We're on Instagram... follow us! Check out our Facebook page!

Frederick City and County News of Interest VOL. 4, NO. 11 | November 11, 2025

VOL. 4, NO. 11  |  November 11, 2025 Frederick City and County News of Interest Please join our monthly email list by clicking here. Learn more about CRG at the bottom of this newsletter.   For quick access, click on a title here and jump to that article, below: City Elections City: Just Say NO to Data Centers in the City City and County: Data center e-waste — a problem that can’t be ignored City and County: Data centers and state budgets study: are tax benefits “smoke and mirrors”? City: Planning Committee Workshop Highlights East Street Traffic Woes City: Brickworks Contaminant Update County: Data Center Overlay County: Data Center Intrusions County: MPRP Transmission Line Upcoming Meetings and Events ______________   City: Elections At press time, official results of Frederick’s 2025 Mayoral and City Council elections have not been finalized. However, it appears that the Democratic candidate for each office will be victorious by a wide margin. CRG will explore the plusses, minuses, and challenges of this outcome in our December newsletter.     City: Just Say NO to Data Centers in the City  On October 23 and November 6, the City’s Land Use, Public Safety, and Community Development Legislative Committee met and, disappointingly, City Council President Katie Nash proposed a revision to the Land Management Code (LMC) to allow data centers in the City. This proposal appears to go significantly beyond what the County has put forward, potentially opening City residents to the noise, emissions, stormwater runoff, children’s public health threats, and hazardous chemicals (diesel, coolant water biocides, corrosion by-products). Rationale for this unilateral proposal is unclear and concerning. At present, the LMC does not allow such use and it’s hard to accept the reasoning behind introducing a text amendment that details the conditions under which one can be built. Nash's proposal opens Pandora’s Box to data center construction and operations without resolving all the power, water, resident concerns, property value declines, etc. that have consumed 2+ years of data center discussions at the County’s Planning Commission and Council. Residents have been outspoken in their pleas to not follow the poor examples of community detriments experienced by our Loudoun County, VA neighbors as well as many, many communities across the U.S. The ever-popular rationalization of “think of the economic windfall” is misleading at best as it fails to mention the decrease in property values, the increase in electric and water bills, and the cost burden of the needed infrastructure which will fall on the shoulders of current homeowners. The incoming City Council, whose term commences December 11,2025, will need to approve any change to the LMC. CRG’s position is that this conversation shouldn’t even move forward as, again, data centers are not allowed in the City. Why go through the efforts of identifying ways to bring them in, unless there is something CRG and other blindsided residents are missing? We are confident, though, that if this somehow moves forward the new legislative body will step up and just say NO — not in City limits. If for some reason the text amendment is approved by the current City Council, any future data center projects will not be revisited by the incoming Council; that responsibility will be transferred to the City’s Planning Commission (see links below to documents provided to committee members). 1 Executive Summary Form Data Center Taxes and    Revenue_20251106  2 Data Center Revenue Barkdoll Comment  Note that Adamstown residents have repeatedly emphasized how attractive the community and surrounding area were to entice residents to move to the area. With the data center expansion proposed for the Eastalco site, the area is unappealing now with charm and vistas lost. Livability has been severely eroded. Do we want the same outcome for ‘livable’ Frederick? We should be concerned that a City impact could far outreach the immediate neighborhood and affect the community as a whole.   City and County: Data center e-waste — a problem that can’t be ignored As the County and City contemplate data center development, it’s worth considering the problem of electronic waste (e-waste) because data centers produce a lot of it. A quick look at the available reporting on the subject reveals a large and growing problem that must be addressed. It is not impossible to address, but the problem does provide another reason to significantly slow the building of data centers so solutions can be put in place. These links provide more information: https://medium.com/@celions/the-hidden-environmental-cost-of-data-center-growth-millions-of-tons-of-e-waste-0bb4a18dbaa1 https://ncsglobalinc.com/insights/e-waste-in-data-centers/ https://www.human-i-t.org/data-center-recycling/#:~:text=Refurbishing%20and%20 Excerpt from a Clean Energy Leadership Institute (CELI) article in December 2024: While discussions about data centers’ energy consumption and environmental impact are widespread, far less attention has been given to the mounting problem of electronic waste (e-waste) generated by these facilities. Servers and GPUs, essential to data center operations, are typically replaced every 2–5 years, producing millions of tons of outdated equipment — more than 80% of which is discarded. A recently published Nature study warned that generative AI alone could contribute an additional 1.2–5 million tons of annual e-waste, posing serious environmental and health risks globally.   E-waste recycling and handling are poorly regulated, with limited infrastructure to support circular practices. Privacy and security concerns often prompt companies to destroy outdated hardware rather than reuse or recycle it. Addressing this growing issue requires a better understanding of its scale, societal impacts, and systemic gaps. ________ Let your elected officials know if you’re concerned about this issue.   City and County: Data centers and state budgets study: Are tax benefits “smoke and mirrors”? A recent Baltimore Banner article detailing the growth of data centers in Maryland included reference to a report by a nonpartisan nonprofit, Good Jobs First, that is worth reading. Here is a link to the report, and an excerpt from the Banner article: https://goodjobsfirst.org/cloudy-with-a-loss-of-spending-control-how-data-centers-are-endangering-state-budgets/ Excerpt: “Data centers create tax base without creating a lot of demand for public services,” said economist Anirban Basu during a business panel discussion at The Banner’s Impact Maryland event this week. But the tax benefits might be smoke and mirrors, some say. Most data centers are awarded tax exemptions on sales taxes in favor of property taxes. That’s already the case in Maryland. Good Jobs First, a nonpartisan nonprofit watchdog on tax subsidies and incentives, found in a report in April that at least 10 of 32 states with data centers have lost more than $100 million per year in tax revenue from these facilities. The loss stems from exemptions on sales and use taxes for some of the necessary and most expensive components of a data center. “If Maryland were to exempt sales taxes, but let local governments tax on property taxes, there’d be a net loss and kind of a shell game within the state,” said Greg LeRoy, executive director of Good Jobs First. ________ You can read the full Banner article here: Massive data centers invaded Virginia — and Maryland wants to be next   City: Planning Committee Workshop Highlights East Street Traffic Woes An 18-unit townhouse complex is planned for 200–220 N. East Street, site of the former model train museum. The project was a key discussion item at the PC workshop on October 20. Of interest is the design which, according to neighbors who spoke in favor of the site plan, seems to “fit” at least loosely with the form-based code concept for the East Street corridor. This configuration is a compromise between the initial proposal — a 5–6 story multi-family structure — and rehabilitation of the railroad museum complex.  While PC members applauded the project design and placement of the garages off Austin Alley (adhering to the downtown design guidelines of no street-facing garages), of concern is entry to the planned garages off the busy and narrow N. East Street across from Pistarro’s. The alley is located between 2 traffic lights at east 2nd and 3rd streets. Imagine trying to turn left from N. East Street opposite Pistarro’s with southbound East Street traffic behind you and northbound traffic from a green light at E. 2nd coming at you — a NIGHTMARE! Traffic here is already congested with traffic slow-to-stopped several times a day and now this turning need added to the traffic expected from Galleria, the downtown hotel and conference center, Visitation, and Brickworks — WOW! Access and egress (according to many who travel this route) would be far better from E. 3rd Street, which would be unfortunate for residents of that thoroughfare.  So, while the project itself appears suitable for the neighborhood, it is a strong example in favor of preventing the City from issuing construction permits due to likely traffic problems on an already-overused corridor — and a caution to the City to more keenly assess each project in relation to the development on surrounding streets rather than as a unique entity. CRG urges the City Council to adopt and enforce stronger traffic requirements for our narrow and most-traveled streets such that any identified obstacles to traffic flow in an area that will endanger normal and continuous flow patterns, even if slow, can be used to reject proposed development.  Another proposal for the East Street corridor is likely to add to traffic woes. On the agenda at the October 20 Planning Commission meeting was the site plan for Harmon Park (which is proposed to become part of a 6.9-acre community park). This area expands Harmon Park as it connects to the existing Brickworks property along the west side of East Street. Positive features are tennis, pickleball and basketball courts, a (possible) tot lot, a (possible) dog park, and walking paths. Parking will be available with access on Winchester Street (although as some workshop attendees pointed out the parking lot has other dedicated uses). This expansion of Harmon Park satisfies a portion of the Brickworks promised green space. However — and that's a big however — a primary pedestrian access from the Brickworks to the park is a surface-level crosswalk across East Street (and north of the traffic circle) with an island between the north and south traffic lanes — we guess for the folks who are too slow to cross East Street in a single attempt. The proposed crosswalk will not have a traffic light but will include flashing lights. What? Aside from the fact that any pedestrian walkway across East Street is an accident waiting to happen, many Brickworks residents will be unable to fast walk across the street while traffic is barreling down on them. CRG hopes cars and trucks will stop, allowing parents with children toddling or in strollers, less-mobile adults and others walking slowly and carefully, etc. to cross safely. We fear this is another traffic tie up in the making.   City: Brickworks Contaminant Update On October 29, Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) staff members from its Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) convened a meeting to outline proposed soil contaminant cleanup plans for lots 4 (grocery, retail, and parking) and 6 (townhomes, garages) of the Brickworks property between Monocacy Boulevard and East and South Streets. A consulting firm (Geo-Technology Associates, Inc.) for the owners presented a comprehensive overview of historical and recent soil measurements and indicated most of the areas would be capped or filled and capped to prevent exposure to soil contaminants from historical land uses of the property. CRG is pleased with the proposed soil remedies and takes a few bows: If we had not pressed the City and the developer for addressing the well-documented contamination over 3 years ago, the City would have allowed site development without any remediation, thereby exposing future residents of the property to contaminants endangering their health for decades. Now we hope that the new Council will revise the Land Management Code (LMC) to require brownfield mitigation before any development can occur (e.g., the Galleria and Train Museum properties) and several CRG members have received emails from Council members that such a LMC revision is under Planning Department review and write-up for adoption by the new Council. County: Data Center Overlay As we have reported for the past 18 months, County officials have been debating the extent of data center development in and around the 2200-acre Eastalco site near Adamstown. In the recent Planning Commission meeting, the members recommended reduction of the Eastalco site to approximate 1700 acres but allowed for possible expansion for two large adjacent farms approximating 550 acres. As a plus for local residents, twenty-three other properties (homes, St. Joseph’s church, and an elementary school) were recommended for inclusion in the County Community Growth Area to ensure access to water and sewer infrastructure. It remains to be seen what the County Council will adopt. There is still no resolution of power nor water supplies to the data center properties yet the County Executive and Council continue to move forward, largely with only modest requirements for noise abatement, emission reductions, neighbor property and well protections, hazard control plans, reimbursements for property value losses, and stormwater controls at the centers. CRG STRONGLY suggests that identifying power and water supply, and treatment following data center use, as well as a thorough independent review of costs and benefits of data centers be implemented BEFORE any more data center corporations apply for construction and operation in the County or its municipalities.  County: Data Center Intrusions At a special Town Hall meeting (October 20), Council Members Kavonte Duckett, Mason Carter, and Steve McKay heard Adamstown residents describe the issues they are having with dust, noise, and traffic during the construction of the Rowan data centers. Prior to the meeting, the Council members toured several farms and saw firsthand the proximity of the data centers to some homes. County: MPRP Transmission Line (from StopMPRP) On October 9, 2025, PSEG Renewable Transmission LLC filed its third federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. It was confirmed that service of the lawsuit has begun — property owners named in the complaint are starting to receive legal papers. If you are among those being served, please accept delivery. Refusing delivery does not change your status as a respondent. Upcoming Meetings and Events Citywide Planning Department Community Outreach Meeting — November 17, 2025 at 6:00 PM     See the CRG blog at: responsiblegrowthfrederick.com Contributors: P. Gallagher, S. Jakubczyk, E. Law, M. Rosensweig, K. Sellner. CRG is a grassroots coalition of Frederick residents who prioritize responsible growth, expanding infrastructure, and a functional natural environment. We advocate for development that accommodates projected population increases while fostering a strong and diverse community fabric and increasing economic opportunities. Our comprehensive approach emphasizes public safety, traffic mitigation, increasing school capacity, and housing for all members of our community. Many Frederick residents want to know — but cannot find — information about how to participate in discussions of important local issues. The City and County generally hold meetings from 3–10 p.m., making it impossible for most of us to attend meetings or weigh in on issues of interest. Our mission with this monthly newsletter is to highlight City and County activities so you can learn more and, with your limited time, weigh in on areas of growth and development, City and County policies, and other local activities. Occasionally, opinions or longer stories will be offered by knowledgeable experts/readers. We welcome suggestions for articles focused on specific topics. Contact Kevin Sellner (kgsellner@gmail.com), Marge Rosensweig (marjorierosensweig@gmail.com), or Steve Jakubczyk (jakubczyksteven@gmail.com) for consideration of your issue.   We're on Instagram... follow us!   Check out our Facebook page!

 

Frederick City and County News of Interest VOL. 4, NO. 10 | October 8, 2025

 

VOL. 4, NO. 10  |  October 8, 2025 Frederick City and County News of Interest Please join our monthly email list by clicking here. Learn more about CRG at the bottom of this newsletter. For quick access, click on a title here and jump to that article, below: Opinion: City Primary Election Implications City: Updates on Planning Commission Discussions/Decisions City: Planning Department City Council: Housing, Health, and Education Committee (HHE) County: Community Data Center Meetings County: Data Centers & the Potomac River Upcoming Meetings and Events ______________   Opinion: City Primary Election Implications The results of the September Primary Election yielded some very interesting takeaways that need to be carefully thought through by the remaining candidates in the general election. They also highlight a few indications of how things may be changing in the City regarding future election attitudes and overall parameters. First of all — and contrary to the opinion of the editors of the Frederick News Post (FNP) — the biggest surprise was not the solid overall leading vote for the first-time candidate, Libby Taylor, but the resounding rejection of incumbents and the status quo. The two longest-serving Council members finished last and next to last in the competitive at-large race. Frankly, voters said, "Thank you very much for your combined 40 years of service," but it's time to move forward. In addition, the performance of Ron Beattie in his challenge to two-time incumbent Mayor Michael O'Connor should be of some concern to the Mayor in the upcoming general election. With 42% of the vote and basically a tie in the critical District 3 (downtown), it seems running on perceived past accomplishments alone might not result in the Mayor receiving a third term.  It's easy to argue that voters want to hear what a candidate is going to do in the future that represents a fresh approach to City government and addresses the key issues facing the City with a measurable timeline of actual progress (such issues as affordability — from crippling  property taxes, to housing at all levels, and the continuation of unbridled growth and capitulation to the development community that results in a "build-first at any cost, and worry about covering infrastructure costs later" mentality). One final takeaway has to be the performance of Fredy Ventura Garcia who, as a legal resident but non-citizen, received more votes in a losing effort in District 5 than three of the district candidates who won their individual races. Perhaps now the FNP will stop asking whether people will support non-citizen voting! Kudos to the Charter Review Commission whose efforts opened the door for this level of participation and created an upbeat and exciting election atmosphere. To me this is the lead the FNP buried!   — Steve Jakubczyk, North Market Street resident City: Updates on Planning Commission Discussions/Decisions The September CRG newsletter reported on two issues of concern regarding development projects in the City: Master Plan approval of the Frederick Health application for a large mixed-use community in the Route 15/Monocacy Boulevard/Route 26 triangle; and a proposed Land Management Code (LMC) text amendment to revise required phasing standards for mixed use developments. Both issues, discussions of which had been continued from prior Planning Commission (PC) hearings, were brought before Commissioners at their September 8 hearing. Frederick Health Master Plan: Though supported by PC staff, discussion and decision on this application was continued (at the request of the applicant) after substantive discussion about the adequacy and phasing of road improvements at several critical intersections. Commissioners are supportive of the overall concept offered by Frederick Health officials of a mixed-use walkable community which could, ultimately, include a new hospital plus residences, and other retail/commercial structures. However, they remain concerned about the potential for even worse traffic congestion in the area, despite the proposed traffic mitigation plans proposed. After lengthy discussion, and indications from a majority of the Commissioners that they would not support the plan at this time, the applicant was granted a 60-day continuance to provide more data on the phasing of site development and road improvements, whether and how the developer would/could include Moderately Priced Dwelling Units (MPDUs) in the community, and how Route 15 expansion will fit into the area’s traffic flow. LMC Text Amendment: The proposed (by developers of Renn Quarter) text amendment was designed to address what appear to be limitations of the phasing requirement for mixed use developments (i.e., requiring that a certain amount of retail/commercial development be initiated once a defined level of residential development had been attained). The PC staff report identified this “one size fits all” requirement as an impediment to achievement of a Comprehensive Plan goal of encouraging mixed-use, walkable developments. Commissioners agreed but were unanimously opposed to a) recommending a solution that would apply to all mixed-use developments and not on a case-by-case basis; and b) allowing administrative decisions about waivers of the phasing requirement rather than full PC hearings with public input. They voted against recommending approval of the proposed text amendment and agreed to advise the City Council, via letter, of the reasons for their decision. City: Planning Department The City Planning Department has begun a reorganization effort to address changing conditions associated with growth. CRG has long been concerned about the lack of progress in the finalization of Form Based Code (FBC). Brandon Mark, with whom this responsibility lies, has also had the responsibility for the Planning Department’s Historic Preservation (HP) staff. His HP duties have now shifted to a new department, which will free up time to tackle projects like FBC. Further, he is being allocated additional staff to help with the growing workload. The Planning Department’s HP staff will have their own organization, with Christina Martinkoski having applied to lead this group and a new hire. The department is in the process of implementing and executing a monitoring system for review of products such as the Comprehensive Plan. Director Collard says she sees the value of creating citizen-populated work groups for the 5-year review of the current plan as well as preparations for the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, a positive development and a plus for CRG’s goals. City Council: Housing, Health, and Education Committee (HHE) Continuing discussion of several key City issues were held on September 18 and October 2. A City-wide Affordable Housing Overlay was discussed with slight opinion differences voiced by Council persons Donna Kuzemchak and Ben MacShane. MacShane was skeptical of any way to provide affordable housing for individuals and families below 60% of the Annual Median Income level; the ‘Missing Middle’ might be covered in some manner by City help, but he saw no way to assist affordable housing for those in the lowest income bracket. Kuzemchak indicated that residential AND commercial properties could accommodate the lowest wage earners and the City ought to identify City-owned properties for possible affordable housing. The Planning Department’s Gabrielle Collard suggested there were incentives to increase housing for the lowest income families, through partnerships, grants, etc. It also appears that Kuzemchak believes that MPDU fees in-lieu collected funds, now more than $4.6M, should only be used for affordable housing to be purchased rather than housing that is not only for sale, but rental as well (such as multi-family units). The latter is a concept that CRG supports, because the lowest income residents likely have insufficient capital for anything other than renting. Another option, Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), was again discussed, with possible relaxation of several City impact fees to encourage construction. So far, ADUs are found to be not inexpensive options and rules for occupation and future use remain unclear. One public comment encouraged relaxation of fees for any ADUs constructed for low income, non-family residents to broaden affordability. At the end of the September meeting, housing advocate Ann Ryan encouraged greater flexibility in ways to provide affordable housing, including rules supporting Single Room Occupancy (SRO) in the City. CRG strongly supports Ms. Ryan and the Frederick Housing Task Force in discovering and encouraging City funding options successfully used in other municipalities across the U.S. County: Community Data Center Meetings Two community meetings regarding data centers have been held near Adamstown in recent weeks (September 19 and 25). Officials and County staff attended to listen to resident questions regarding the recent data center overlay zone that has been proposed by County Executive Fitzwater. In the first meeting, vehement antagonism was obvious from Adamstown residents and their associates, strongly requesting that the Council SLOW DOWN in expanding the acreage the County would consider for future data centers in the overlay zone (from ~2200 acres to now adding another 650 acres) to allow assessment of what data center development and operations would mean for residents, County revenues, environmental impacts, and water and power supplies, not to mention monthly electricity bills. The second meeting was less contentious with Pat Murray, Fitzwater’s Chief of Staff, calmly and thoroughly responding to all residents with facts he could provide, engaging with often lengthy comment and questions from the assembled residents. Council members (Young, Knapp, Keegan-Ayer, McKay) attended one or both events as did state Senator Karen Lewis Young and Delegate Jesse Pippy, as well as Sheriff Jenkins. In the second meeting, staff of Maryland’s Department of the Environment (MDE) were also present as was Mike Kuykendall from the Eastalco management company, Catellus, to provide feedback. Most residents were cordial with challenging comments and County and MDE staff remained calm and as responsive as possible. It remains to be seen whether the Council will shift its just-announced support for the centers and the overlay to more protective requirements for residents. As pointed out by several residents, let the officials’ responses determine your vote next fall, which is very consistent with CRG’s position! Make your thoughts on data centers clear by sending comments to the County Planning Commission, who will be considering the proposed data center overlay map at their meeting Wednesday, October 15 — see info below. County: Data Centers & the Potomac River The Interstate Commission for the Potomac River Basin (ICPRB) is preparing a report providing a 25-year outlook on water supply and demand pressures on the Potomac River Basin, which for the first time includes impact from the regional data center industry. CRG expects content to provide summaries on increased periods (and severity) of droughts, seasonal high precipitation, longer low-flow river conditions, as well as increased demand for water to support the data center industry and regional growth. CRG is deeply concerned about water demand as there are now more than 600 centers operating, permitted, or planned in Virginia, many utilizing water feeding the Potomac. The ICPRB is not a regulatory body and hence, does not regulate use; it tracks water supply and use in the basin. During low-flow conditions, agreements are in place to follow recommended reductions in water withdrawal. However, compliance with these recommendations is VOLUNTARY. Should conditions develop where low-flow conditions become more the norm, the Commission may have to consider shifting from voluntary compliance to mandatory, likely requiring a regional if not Federal authorization, though the latter may be difficult, given the current Federal commitment to relaxing many environmental protections. Upcoming Meetings and Events City Planning Commission, Monday, October 13, 6 PM, City Hall: Brickworks, Galleria developments County Planning Commission, Wednesday, October 15, 9:15 AM, Winchester Hall: Critical Data Infrastructure Overlay Map hearing. Written comments must be submitted to the Planning and Permitting Division at least 48-hours in advance of the Commission meeting in order to be considered. Written comments are accepted via email: PlanningCommission@FrederickCountyMD.gov.

See the CRG blog at: responsiblegrowthfrederick.com Contributors: P. Gallagher, S. Jakubczyk, R. Robey, M. Rosensweig, K. Sellner. CRG is a grassroots coalition of Frederick residents who prioritize responsible growth, expanding infrastructure, and a functional natural environment. We advocate for development that accommodates projected population increases while fostering a strong and diverse community fabric and increasing economic opportunities. Our comprehensive approach emphasizes public safety, traffic mitigation, increasing school capacity, and housing for all members of our community. Many Frederick residents want to know — but cannot find — information about how to participate in discussions of important local issues. The City and County generally hold meetings from 3–10 p.m., making it impossible for most of us to attend meetings or weigh in on issues of interest. Our mission with this monthly newsletter is to highlight City and County activities so you can learn more and, with your limited time, weigh in on areas of growth and development, City and County policies, and other local activities. Occasionally, opinions or longer stories will be offered by knowledgeable experts/readers. We welcome suggestions for articles focused on specific topics. Contact Kevin Sellner (kgsellner@gmail.com), Marge Rosensweig (marjorierosensweig@gmail.com), or Steve Jakubczyk (jakubczyksteven@gmail.com) for consideration of your issue. We're on Instagram... follow us! Check out our Facebook page!