10/07/2026
Imagine, public input
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1715829436784284&set=a.210411117326131&type=3
🚨 City of South Bend - Municipal Government
South Bend Common Council and Mayor James Mueller ANNOUNCED ITS DATA-CENTER FRAMEWORK TODAY. TONIGHT, I SENT THE MAYOR AND EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER TWO EMAILS ASKING HOW RESIDENTS CAN HOLD THEM TO IT.
"Neighborhoods First" needs to mean something residents can enforce.
Who is responsible? What evidence becomes public? What happens when an operator breaks a commitment? And what will these projects actually cost us?
Those questions are now in writing.
Here is what officials said on October 6, what the draft proposes, and what I did about it. 👇
🏛️ THE CONFERENCE
South Bend unveiled its draft Neighborhoods First Framework for Data Centers at Studebaker Building 84.
I couldn't attend because the notice I received from local government came too late for me to arrange it. I have now asked when and how the City first announced the conference and what lead time residents will receive for future discussions.
The government speakers were Mayor James Mueller and Common Council President Canneth Lee.
Mueller presented the proposal and answered questions. Lee emphasized benefits for existing residents, neighborhood protection and opportunities for local workers.
Other speakers included host Kevin Smith, Murray Miller of the St. Joseph Valley Building Trades, and IBEW Local 153 Business Manager Mike Leda.
📋 WHAT THE CITY IS PROPOSING
The written draft applies to facilities with power capacity OVER 70 megawatts OR land area OVER 15 acres.
Its main proposals include:
• Full local property taxes, no local tax breaks or City subsidies, and operator-funded utility upgrades. State incentives are outside these standards.
• No City NDAs; public City agreements; community meetings and reporting.
• A 400-foot residential setback and 100-foot agricultural setback, with an alternative involving fair-market-value offers for voluntary sales; noise, lighting and traffic protections.
• Water and energy efficiency, wastewater and generator standards, emergency planning, cleaner-energy and sustainability measures.
• All tax revenue the CITY RECEIVES devoted to neighborhoods: 50% for infrastructure and housing affordability; 50% for climate action and utility relief.
• Local labor, prevailing wages, apprenticeships, workforce agreements and minority- and women-owned business opportunities.
• Operator-funded neighborhood priorities, disclosed partnerships and annual workforce education investment.
Some protections already have rules behind them. Others require additional adoption, agreements or implementation. We need to know which is which.
🎤 WHAT THE MAYOR SAID DURING QUESTIONS
Mueller said no project was mature enough to evaluate against the framework, and pledged to reject projects that fail to put neighborhoods first.
He said serious drafting took months, with discussion dating to last December.
He explained that electricity regulation involves state authorities, while City powers include zoning, noise and lighting.
Public feedback would be summarized before finalization. He encouraged comments by October 31 and said later submissions would still be considered.
A Council discussion was possible, but no date was committed. Separate implementing measures would need approval, including a noise ordinance and public hearing.
Revenue estimates were still being developed. Council would appropriate the City's receipts, and future councils might not be bound by today's allocation pledge.
He also described companies assessing feasibility before announcements, argued that data centers support the future economy, and said misinformation had circulated.
Those are the positions officials presented. My emails ask for the details and records needed to evaluate them.
📨 WHAT I SENT TONIGHT
At 7:57 p.m., I sent the original accountability email and meeting requests.
After reviewing the complete eight-page draft and conference remarks, I sent a second email at 8:12 p.m. with additional, more specific questions.
Both went to Mayor James Mueller and ALL NINE council members:
Canneth Lee
Ophelia Gooden-Rodgers
Sharon McBride
Heidi Beidinger
Sherry Bolden-Simpson
Sheila Niezgodski
Oliver Davis
Karen White
Rachel Tomas Morgan
Both also copied the Mayor's scheduling office, Communications Director Allison Zeithammer, Senior Policy Advisor April Canahuati and the Council office.
That is 14 recipient addresses. I requested distribution to the entire Mayor's Office staff; that forwarding has not been confirmed.
Both emails were verified in my Sent folder. Sending is confirmed. Receipt, acknowledgment and meeting dates remain unconfirmed.
The follow-up acknowledges provisions already in the draft, including noise studies, decommissioning plans, workforce reporting and an annual neighborhood-revenue report.
It asks how those provisions will work and what makes them enforceable. All original questions remain active.
🔎 THE TWELVE AREAS I ASKED THEM TO ANSWER
1️⃣ LEGAL EFFECT AND ENFORCEMENT
Which provisions become ordinances, permit conditions or binding contracts — and which remain policy goals? Who enforces each? What approvals wait until compliance is demonstrated?
I added questions about adoption schedules, qualified language, and the lawful authority and criteria behind the Mayor's pledge to reject unacceptable projects.
2️⃣ DISCLOSURE BEFORE COMMITMENT
When will proposed agreements, ownership and affiliated entities, financial analyses, infrastructure obligations, environmental studies and resource projections become public? What review period applies before binding commitments?
The follow-up asks how residents can influence land, zoning, utility and financial decisions before construction — how speculative inquiries will be handled, whether community meetings continue during operations and expansions, and what specific legal basis supports any withholding.
3️⃣ THE FULL PUBLIC COST
Who pays for construction, financing, upgrades, maintenance, monitoring, emergency-response needs and closure? How are discounted land, public debt, reimbursements, utility arrangements and other indirect assistance accounted for and independently checked?
I added questions about shared upgrades, stranded capacity and state incentives — plus a worked example of the electricity-exemption payment: legal authority, calculation base, rate, eligibility, required agreements, payer, collection and permitted uses. Taxable-value commitments and appeal rights need explaining, too.
4️⃣ WATER, ELECTRICITY AND EMERGENCIES
What maximum demands apply? Who can order reduced operations during drought, extreme heat, shortages or electrical emergencies? How are household rates and reliability protected?
I asked which state utility orders and tariffs actually apply, who enforces them, and which cost decisions remain for later proceedings. Where the City lacks authority, how will it lock in the needed commitments from utilities, regulators or other governments before capacity is committed?
5️⃣ ENVIRONMENTAL AND OPERATING STANDARDS
What measurable limits cover noise — including low-frequency noise — lighting, wastewater and generator emissions? What baseline testing, independent monitoring, public reporting and corrective triggers apply?
Some resource and efficiency reporting is conditional on information being "maintained or available." Will operators have to collect and retain it?
I also asked for absolute noise limits, nighttime and tonal rules, generator-compliance verification, simultaneous-testing impacts, numeric efficiency targets and alternative-cooling approval standards. The draft's 15 dB comparison relates two measurement scales; absolute ceilings still need specifying.
6️⃣ CUMULATIVE IMPACTS AND THRESHOLDS
How will the City count affiliated companies, connected facilities, phased expansions, shared infrastructure, existing facilities and committed capacity?
What happens exactly at 70 MW or 15 acres? How are capacity and acreage measured? Will connected projects be aggregated?
What protects residents from smaller facilities — or facilities outside City limits that rely on South Bend utilities or agreements?
7️⃣ VIOLATIONS, OWNERSHIP CHANGES AND CLOSURE
What complaint procedures, response deadlines, inspections, penalties and corrective measures apply? What lawful authority supports restricting operations or suspending approvals for serious violations?
A closure plan needs funding behind it. What bonds, escrow, insurance or other financial guarantees apply? Who independently sets the amount? Do obligations follow a new owner?
I also asked who pays recurring public-safety costs — and whether hazard plans and responder training will be ready before operations, given the draft allows training to begin within six months afterward.
8️⃣ NEIGHBORHOOD REVENUE ACCOUNTING
Exactly which revenue reaches the City? What deductions or restrictions apply? How do TIF, debt, assessment changes and tax appeals affect the amount available?
I asked for gross-to-net examples, receipts and spending by project and neighborhood, resident participation, and clarification of the electricity-exemption payments.
How does the 50/50 pledge survive future councils? What public process precedes changes? Will the annual report labeled an audit receive independent financial verification?
9️⃣ JOBS AND COMMUNITY BENEFITS
Separate temporary construction jobs from permanent jobs. Publish measurable commitments — local hiring, wages, apprenticeships, training, procurement and annual investment — with reporting and remedies when commitments are missed.
I added questions on actual minimum percentages, the definition of "local," equivalent workforce agreements, investment formulas, verification, and transparent selection of training institutions and community partners.
🔟 INDEPENDENT REVIEW AND CONFLICTS
Who selects, pays and oversees the consultants checking costs, utility impacts, environmental evidence, workforce results and neighborhood revenue?
Will their qualifications, methods, assumptions and findings be public? How are financial or organizational conflicts involving officials, advisers, contractors and representatives disclosed and addressed?
Who independently checks evidence supplied by the operators?
1️⃣1️⃣ DIRECTLY AFFECTED RESIDENTS
How are impacts on homes, renters, schools, property values, displacement and neighborhoods already carrying industrial burdens assessed? What real role do affected residents have in siting, mitigation and investment?
The setback language includes a purchase-offer alternative. Does making an offer alone allow closer construction if the owner declines? What happens to a household that wants to stay?
I asked about independent appraisals, relocation and transaction costs, renters, vacant but habitable homes, and who decides whether surrounding residents are adequately protected.
1️⃣2️⃣ PUBLIC COMMENT AND LASTING ACCOUNTABILITY
Will substantive recommendations be accepted or rejected with reasons? Who adopts each protection, through which votes and public meetings? How are future exceptions or weakened protections reviewed? How do obligations survive new owners and administrations?
I also asked for the noise-hearing schedule, clearer notice and participation options, and confirmation that BOTH emails enter the official public-comment record.
📅 THE RESPONSES AND MEETINGS I REQUESTED
Acknowledgment and at least three proposed meeting options by OCTOBER 13.
Written answers by OCTOBER 23.
Those are my requested dates, not statutory deadlines.
I requested a 45-minute meeting with Mayor Mueller before the OCTOBER 31 public-comment deadline, with appropriate policy, legal, utility/public works, community investment and neighborhood staff.
I also requested a Council discussion. A joint discussion is welcome; separate discussions can be arranged. If the full Council participates, I requested an appropriately noticed public meeting.
In person is preferred; video is acceptable. If the Mayor cannot meet before the deadline, I requested his earliest available meeting and an interim staff discussion. Any offered time still needs to be checked against my availability.
I asked EACH council member which enforceable protections they support, what must be answered before approvals, what legislative action they will support, and whether they support a public hearing.
A coordinated technical response is acceptable if it identifies endorsing members and material disagreements. If an office lacks authority, I asked it to identify who has authority and explain how it will pursue the answer.
No meeting is confirmed or scheduled.
I also have a separate, ready-to-paste public-comment version. It has not been submitted through the comment form. I asked whether a separate submission is required. Residents can comment through the City's framework page or leave a voicemail through 311.
I will compare the final framework and implementation records against BOTH sets of questions. Unanswered issues will receive documented follow-up, questions at public meetings and appropriate records requests.
Put the protections in writing. Make the obligations measurable. Make the records accessible. Make violations consequential.
Then "Neighborhoods First" will mean something residents can rely on.
Wayne Hubbard Jr.
👇 WHAT HAVE I MISSED?
What questions, concerns or protections would YOU add?
If you live near a possible site, rent, own a home, work in the trades, or understand the utility and environmental issues, I want your input.
Leave your questions below so they can be included in the next round of follow-up.
