Public comment corpus
Board of Supervisors
February 17, 2026 · Data-center subject · 9 spoken public comments
Official meeting recording (Granicus)
| Speaker | Time | Comment (verbatim) |
|---|---|---|
| Christopher Scurries | 0:06:36 | Good morning. It's very early. Good morning. Good morning. I'm happy to be here. So I wanted to talk about item 19 on your consent calendar today, since that's what we're talking about. I was going to talk about something else, but I'm prepared to talk about this as well. Today you're attempting to ratify your recent letter to State Senator Padilla in regards to communication vis-a-vis data center. While this may seem like a run-of-the-mill consent item, I want to encourage all of you to take pause on this. This project has been in the works for over a year and has been fraught with controversy for the past three months. And now, it's only through this very weird, very public back and forth with someone at the state leadership level that you have been obligated to agendize it. I want to point out some of the peculiarities of that letter that you so boldly responded to. For one, you addressed your letter to Senator Padilla. Which one? There's more than one. That was kind of, you just, that was kind of a weird omission that you didn't specify. Speaking of which, you spelled the developer's name incorrectly in the letter. And I know that's a small clerical error, but it does speak again to the attention of detail or lack thereof around here. And maybe more unusual is citing an attempted correspondence between Mr. Rucci and the state senator as a receipt to discuss the project. This attempted correspondence that you are about to bizarrely ratify illustrates a larger issue in this whole saga. You're trusting the word of a developer with a precarious legal history, zero experience building an AI data center, and who is motivated by expediency over responsibility than you do a full environmental impact study by CEQA. Having Mr. Rucci pinch hit for you, I'm sorry, is just unusual. Any reasonable elected official, in that situation, wouldn't oblige that conversation either, as foreign a concept as that may seem to you, given your penchant for trusting the word of this person. The heart of this issue is an independent third-party environmental study. CEQA has been bypassed. State Senator Padilla and the people, for that matter, are not interested in the mitigations offered by Mr. Rucci since he will do anything to get this project done. I understand you may feel slighted by this miscommunication between Padilla's office and yours, but it doesn't change the fact that questions have yet to be answered by our representation, or by our representatives, and Sebastian Rucci does not represent the people of Imperial County, so why is he representing you? So before you ratify this, let's start this dialogue. I mean, you have all remained passively neutral for long enough. The community is not really interested in, you know, his podcast appearance this past weekend. I'm sure you guys saw it, and I do want to encourage you guys to look at me when I'm speaking, not, you know, this is my time. We need you to be accountable. And one of the ways you can do that is start by moving this from consent to action. Please. Thank you. |
| Reyna Adame | 0:10:35 | Good morning. My name is Reina Adame. So good morning, board members. Senator Padilla's December letter to this board asked a vital question. Why was the project of this intensity and scale granted an exemption for environmental review? Padilla warned that without strict guidelines, we risk repeating the mistakes made in other states where data centers have raised costs for ordinary rate payers, polluted our air, and degraded our water supply. The developer claims this project meets the highest standards, but this is a textbook example. The process of disguising ruinous environmental development with clean language. For instance, he claims the facility will use reclaimed water, yet no formal agreement exists between El Centro, which he claimed that there was one. He says that they're prioritizing natural gas, but natural gas is still a fossil fuel. It releases nitric oxide, CO2, and methane directly into the schools and homes in that community. So the developer, Sebastian Rucci, says he welcomes public input, right? While being quoted saying that our whole goal is speed. So why the rush? Why are communities like ours perceived as being too politically weak to push back targeted for this? The developer claims we need these data centers in an interview to compete with China, which is funny to me because China produces more energy than the U.S., India, and all of Europe combined. Okay? So, and we're talking about a data center here, right, that's going to consume 750,000 gallons of our water, right? And it's going to be run on fossil fuels, while in China, they have data centers that are subsea that are powered by 95% offshore wind. So it's apples and oranges. We're backwards in what we're doing here. Ultimately, this AI race is much like Trump's attempted tariff war, which is a futile effort that hurts the real economy in the long run. But unlike with tariffs, our community actually has a choice. Mr. Dhammeh, excuse me, Mr. Dhammeh, just reminding you of the rules that we just stated. So please just go back to the letter. Thank you. Yeah, we got to think globally, act locally. Thank you. It's big picture stuff. It's just a warning for you for now. All right. But unlike with these tariffs, right, we have a choice here. This is an AI. There's a dead-end AI bubble that's accumulating. And we have a choice here at the local level that we should make decisions based on what's good for us first, then the nation, then the world at large, and leave party preferences at the door. What we have to recognize is that this race that's... Mr. Dhammeh, as previously stated, this is a special meeting. Comments, public comments need to be related to the agenda items. The chair has indicated what that extent is. If we continue discussing merits outside the scope... This AI race is being used to justify an extractive economy that's stated in the agenda. It's a very important part of the agenda. And we have to understand what the data center is because there's no product being developed here, right? It's just our data being collected. Mr. Dhammeh, please respect the rules. Do you understand why the data center is being... Please respect the rules, Mr. Dhammeh, if you'd like to speak during public comment. Thank you. I don't have the capacity to build here. It's a futile plan. So the only goal of building the data center here and other data centers here is cruelty, control, and financial speculation. So if you want to be a part of that, you can be a part of that. But we're telling you that we don't want you to ratify this letter. We're telling you that you have to reject the ministerial classification and the data center doesn't represent how this fight started and require a full secret environmental review and release the files that Richie says are there that show that this data center is up to code and it's going to be healthy for us. I think it's all lies and you guys have to be outside of community or private right? Is dead end. Thank you. |
| Diana Salcedo | 0:14:15 | Good morning, everyone. I'm Diana Salcedo. I'm going to talk about Virginia, the people that are living with an AI data center. They are complaining. Ms. Salcedo. Are we not going to be able to talk? You guys are going to shut us up? It's a requirement at a special meeting to comment only on what is on the agenda. At what point are we going to be able to talk about the AI data center? When are we going to have dialogue? Ms. Salcedo. I'm asking you, when? Yes. When? We've created venues for that. We are... We are going to be providing... No, not workshops, because then we're not allowed to speak. You need to let... We asked the public comments... Peggy, you need to allow us to speak. Excuse me. Please respect this decorum of this room. I'm trying to, Peggy, but you're making it difficult. I understand, Diana. Okay? Thank you. Well, I'm in the United States, and I can't speak. Thank you. |
| Francisco Leal | 0:15:35 | Good morning, members of the board, public. So the letter they're going to ratify today, all right, it talks about a timeline about issues that Senator Estipa Dia is trying to address with the county right now. So part of that, you know, he mentions some specifics, right? And I would like you to just consider, you know, that letter to make sure that you address his concerns. That's what we're asking. We're not asking you to do anything else. We're not trying to ask you to do anything that is not what, you know, would help really the community to understand what's going on here, right? And we've been asking questions. Yes, you're saying you're... Building channels, right, to communicate. So since we haven't seen anything yet coming from your side to the community in terms of actually addressing our concerns, we just keep asking. We keep showing up, asking questions. We keep, you know, sharing information on social media to make people aware of what's going on here. So that is what we need to make sure that the county is focused on. We keep asking, you know, for answers from the county, and we're not asking you to do anything else. We don't want to hear from anybody else, but you're the elected officials. You're representing us. You're representing our community. So with that letter, you know, we're still don't see any answers being provided, right? It's a timeline. For what purpose? Just to say that, yes, you are trying to reach out to the senator, and he's not responsive? Okay, but what do you do with that? You know, nothing. Okay. Nothing, because the questions are still being unanswered. So we would like to see putting you an agenda item where we can come and speak freely about the data center. You don't have to shut us down, right? We would like to see a statement from the board. If it's not the board individually, as an elected official, what is your posture about this? You have been silent for so long time, you know, right now, that, trust me, it's not helping anyone. Any of you. Because for more than I'm trying not to think, you know, why are you doing this, that you're supporting the project. Being silent, it means, like, you're enabling it. We just want answers, right? So that letter you're sending to the senator, it's good for timeline purposes, but please address the questions. That's all we're asking. Thank you. |
| Peter Rodriguez | 0:18:40 | Good evening, members of the board and audience. My public comment is, um, I'm an alternate in their position. The chair of the board. Our last meeting we had. City there for a presentation. And you know, I've learned and been there and I've only been there a short time. Six months. Everyone that violates. I am talking about service that's due for the county. Um, an agenda item. Is not an agenda item. It's a special meeting. I know, but I'm not talking about any specific agenda item. Mr. Council. I'm talking about my service to the council. Public comment on agenda items. But it's on the agenda. Um, clarifying if it's on the agenda. Mr. Rodriguez stated it's not on the agenda. Yes, it is. But you have given us strict rules and regulations. I'm trying to go around them. Which agenda item? 19. What we have here basically is a failure to communicate. But I'm serving on the board. They, every business communicates well, because they want to be compliant with county air quality. None of them want to be out of compliance. I'm so proud of every business that have come forward. Even you guys had a compliance issue. But you addressed the issue. Because there was honest communication. And what's missing here is a failure to communicate. I read your document. And I prefer to discuss. Additional items that should be added to the timeline with the CEO in private, not in open. Because I believe that's in a better mode of communicating. It's an olive branch. Okay? You guys laid down some strict rules. And I get it. We got to play within the rules. I'm a football referee, so I get it. But it's also deplorable when there's a chain of command, governor, legislator, board of supervisors, city council. It's sad when it is violated. Thank you. |
| Michelle Hollinger | 0:21:16 | Good morning, Board of Supervisors. Michelle Hollander, Victoria Holmes. Unfortunately, I did not understand the rules of your special meeting. And I will abide by your rules. Regarding item 19 on the consented agenda, I respectfully ask that this item be removed from the agenda and moved to an action item so that the public can comment. It is frustrating to be up until 1 in the morning writing speeches, coming here early, wondering if my business is going to survive this with silence on the other end. It's about time that we have open dialect. So please, again, I respectfully ask that you open this up to the public. Please take it off the agenda. Make it an action item. Thank you. |
| Jake Tison | 0:22:59 | Board of Supervisors, Madam Chair, I'm Jake Tyson. So about this letter, item 19. You know, one of the things you guys all signed on, you know, you guys are all agreeing to it. So, I mean, anyway. You're all agreeing to it, the whole premise of the whole project and everything. But you guys added this into the letter. It says, to be clear, the county of Imperial did not solicit Imperial Valley Computer Manufacturing LLC to develop the Imperial Data Center project in the unincorporated area of the Imperial County. Well, we know Tim Kelly did, right? Your cousin did. And IBEDC. We know this because, you know, he sat at this podium and he said we were, he said the public and the private sector came together with, I'm sorry, the business and the private sector came together. Mr. Tyson, that's not true. He sat here and said it. That is not true. He said it. Hold on, hold on. No, no, let me correct this quickly. Let me, please. Can I have my tie back, please? I've asked the chair. Yeah. So IBEDC is not a county organization. That's right, they're not. It is a separate organization. You're exactly right. So let's be clear. It is not the county that solicited or talked to any development. Right. They came to us. It was not us. And did I do have a cousin? Yeah. And I also have a sister and a brother. I got five sisters. Okay. I have family. But there's no financial interest in my part. Right. Okay. I'm not talking about. That is absolutely true. Mr. Kelly, I did not say anything about your financial interest. You did make inference that the county of Imperial solicited by having an association with IBEDC. Mr. Timothy Kelly stood here and said it was part of the plan. Okay. Let's get back to the comment. Mr. Scurries. Mr. Scurry. It's in your letter, though. Okay. Mr. Tyson, you can continue. I'm sorry? You can continue. Thank you. Okay. Yeah. So it's in your letter, right? And so he said it was private and the public for the people. It was a plan for the people. They've been working on it forever. And then he tells the story how he found the project, you know, when he was in L.A. on another business trip or something, you know? So, you know, it's just amazing you guys signed it and you guys state that. It's impeachable. It really is. Because, you know, the documentation of, okay, okay, so if he did it, great. That's cool. He was awarded that contract. Where's the RFP for that? Where's that? Where's the public? Where's that item on the agenda to get him to do that job? Mr. Tyson, can you get back to your point about the letter, please? Well, my point is in your letter it's saying you guys didn't solicit it, but you were part of the plan to do it. And that was just clarified to you. Anything else, please? Oh, go ahead. Anything else on the letter? No, let's do it. Anything else? No. You're finished with your public comment? Yeah. Thank you. |
| Kelly Jordan | 0:26:23 | Good morning, Supervisors, Madam Chair. My name's Kelly Jordan. I live in the City of Imperial. I'm here. I see you all probably more than I see my own family. Thank you. These rules, too, kind of threw me off this morning. I will say this. In ratifying that letter that you all sent out, it sends a clear message. It sends a clear message to all of us, the people you represent. And we're not asking for perfection from you all. We're not asking for apologies from you all. We're just asking for alignment with the county's own adopted standards. We believe we have a right to health and safety and the right to live without industrial scale infrastructure overwhelming our homes. These are not considerations for you to ignore. They're your stated policy. So please do not ratify that letter. Thank you. |
| Ian Hayasaka | 0:28:14 | My comments are going to be very short, but what I do want to say is that it's incredibly important with the complex nature and the scale of a new industry that we have direct communication and that we continue to have communication with the senator and with the people of the Imperial County. And I think that with the speculative nature of the industry and the fact that it hasn't made any money yet, that it's really important for us to really, really take a look and talk with the people around in the industry and have a very open dialogue. I don't know when that's going to happen. I don't know how that's going to happen, but I would like it to, like the communication between the people of the Imperial County and the people of the Imperial County, I think that's going to be a very important thing between everybody to begin. That's all. |