Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Mcginnis Sale topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Columbia Borough council rejects $6.35 million bid for McGinnis property after hours of public comment

Columbia Borough Council · May 27, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After hours of public comment and questions about water use, noise and bidder finances, Columbia Borough Council voted unanimously to reject a motion to award the McGinnis Innovation Park property to Sadia Holdings LLC for $6,350,000 on May 26, 2026.

Columbia Borough Council voted down a motion to award the McGinnis Innovation Park property to Sadia Holdings LLC for $6,350,000 on May 26, 2026, after an extended public-comment period in which hundreds of residents urged the council to pause the sale and demand more information about the bidder and potential environmental and infrastructure impacts.

Residents across dozens of public comments warned that a large data or AI center on the site could increase local utility costs, strain the electric grid and water supplies, harm wildlife and raise constant levels of low-frequency noise. “The McGinnis property should not have been purchased by our council in the first place,” said Brad Chambers, a Columbia homeowner, and asked council to reject the bid or reopen bidding if the contract lacks protections. Other speakers cited petitions (one speaker said 1,487 signatures) and pointed to borough code noise limits and state-level bills under consideration.

Proponents of accepting the sole qualified bid, including a longtime resident and former council member, argued the borough needs immediate revenue. “Approving the sale is a practical and crucial step to solving a tax generation problem for our landlocked borough,” Todd Burgard said, noting the borough’s budget pressures and saying the proposed development would return funds to the general fund and allow the borough to negotiate mitigation conditions after sale.

Council and staff described the constraints of the sealed-bid/RFP process the borough used to sell the property: sealed bids limit detailed public presentations before award, and state and borough rules define acceptable sale procedures. Borough staff also said the borough code requires full payment for the property within a statutory timeframe following award, a deadline that factored into council deliberations about whether the bid met all requirements.

Councilmembers repeatedly returned to two practical questions: whether the bid met the borough’s RFP requirements (including a payment/closing timeline) and whether the borough could legally or practically impose post-sale restrictions to prevent a data center. Several residents and one councilor pointed to the August 2025 zoning change that allows data centers by right in certain districts, meaning a developer could proceed under existing zoning unless new local regulations are adopted through the full public-advertised ordinance process.

After discussion, Councilmember Zink moved to award the bid, seconded by Councilmember Murphy. In a roll-call vote the motion failed: Councilmembers Cooper, Byers, Deasy, Murphy, Ziegler, Zink and Council President Kauffman voted “No,” and the motion to award the sale was defeated.

The council also voted earlier in the meeting to table the draft zoning text amendment intended to add specific requirements for data centers; the draft remains in rough form and will require public advertisement and further review before any ordinance vote. Borough leaders said the tabling gives them time to address the regulatory gaps residents raised and to gather additional input and technical reviews.

What happens next: council members and staff said the borough may reissue a call for bids, seek alternative buyers (including possible nonprofit or redevelopment options), or pursue further ordinance work to add local restrictions. Several residents urged the council to assemble an independent review committee and to publish more documentation about the bidder’s finances and the proposed community benefits before any future vote.

The council meeting closed with routine business and administrative approvals. The next council meeting was set for 7 p.m. Tuesday, June 2, 2026.