Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge careful review of Veridian LOI; one resident raises COVID-safety and surveillance concerns
Summary
Two members of the public addressed the council: Andrew Pope urged members to seek independent analysis before finalizing a letter of intent (LOI) with data-center developer Veridian and promoted a library presentation by an outside financial expert; Ty Boll Rood made personal and accusatory remarks about COVID vaccines and alleged legal cover-ups and surveillance, and warned of future litigation.
During the public-comment period of the Dec. 8 Janesville City Council meeting two residents spoke to the council.
Andrew Pope urged council members who voted in favor of a letter of intent for Veridian to seek outside, independent sources of information rather than relying solely on city administration or developers. “You guys did so under the premise of wanting more information… I would really like to encourage you guys to make sure that you're getting your facts from places other than the city administration or the data center developers who are basically just giving you a sales pitch,” Pope said. He encouraged council members and residents to attend a library presentation next Monday by a financial expert with no local contacts and noted the event will be broadcast on JATV.
Separately, resident Ty Boll Rood addressed the council for several minutes with a series of allegations and personal remarks. Rood referenced a news report he described as showing a “black box warning on the mRNA COVID shots for kids,” recounted that his father “died on December 24,” and asserted that local and county governments and their legal counsel have concealed wrongdoing he described as terrorism and surveillance. He told the council he has filed surveys and said litigation could follow by 2030; he urged officials to review the materials he provided.
The council did not respond with fact-based rebuttals during the meeting; the remarks were recorded as public comment and no action was taken. Neither speaker cited a statute, ordinance, or pending council vote tied to their remarks during the comment period.
