Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenters urge Taos County to oppose expanded plutonium production and to curb data‑center development
Summary
Residents at the April 21 Taos County Commission meeting urged commissioners to adopt a 'people not pits' resolution opposing expanded plutonium pit production, cited environmental and legacy concerns at Los Alamos, and warned that permitting backup power could attract diesel‑backed data centers to the county.
Dozens of residents used the county's public‑comment period to press the Taos County Commission on two recurring themes: opposition to expanded nuclear weapons work and concern about data centers and their local infrastructure impacts.
Several speakers urged the commission to act on a pending ‘‘people not pits’’ resolution that would object to expanded plutonium pit production at national facilities. Susie Schwarz told commissioners the department of defense memo titled "Responsive Today, Dominant Tomorrow" argues for ‘‘modernization of the nuclear weapons stockpile’’ and said that posture is dangerous locally and globally. "Strategic deterrence is as critical to US national security today as it has been at any point in history," she quoted from the memo and argued the county should take a stand. Eric Kersner, describing himself as an economist and longtime resident, called the issue a legacy decision and warned about long‑term environmental harms, including abandoned uranium mine sites.
Several commenters cited prior local and municipal resolutions opposing pit production as precedent. Shane Brown referenced earlier resolutions by the City of Santa Fe and the Town of TA and urged the commission to sponsor its own objection and place it on a near‑term agenda.
Speakers also connected energy and permitting choices to a second concern: the arrival of data centers. Morgan Gentry, a local business owner, said watchdog groups often predict data‑center siting by tracking permits for backup energy facilities and cautioned that "backup energy" provisions (often diesel or other fossil fuel generators) can precede large, sealed data‑center projects. Gentry recommended proactive local policy measures, pointing to examples such as Maine’s moratorium and a Wisconsin referendum that requires public votes for large installations.
Other public comments combined ethical, environmental and economic frames. G. Nichols, while acknowledging the economic benefits flowing to New Mexico, criticized what she described as a funneling of public funds to contractors and developers and urged investment in communities rather than weapons work.
The commission received the comments during a scheduled public‑comment period; no formal voted action on a county resolution was recorded during the meeting. Commissioners did not indicate a final decision on sponsoring a county resolution during the session and instructed staff to proceed with normal agenda scheduling and follow‑up where appropriate.
