Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cabot council pledges opposition to proposed Greyhawk crypto‑mining site; police urge fixes to false‑alarm enforcement
Summary
Council members and the mayor pledged support for county action opposing a proposed crypto‑mining facility near Cabot. Police reported more than 600 commercial alarm responses this year and asked council to explore stronger enforcement options, including business‑license penalties.
The Cabot City Council and mayor expressed support for efforts to stop a proposed cryptocurrency‑mining facility in the Greyhawk area and directed staff to coordinate with county and state officials. The county served a cease‑and‑desist order and the mayor said city leaders would assist if legal action proceeds.
State Senator Ricky Hill urged the council to adopt an emergency ordinance to align commercial and residential land‑use rules and to accelerate local authority. "I would actually encourage the council to do a emergency ordinance on this uh suspend the rules and actually put the commercial part along with your residential in your ordinance," he told the council.
The council noted the site is located in the county planning district and that Cabot’s Unified Development Code does not control commercial regulation there; staff indicated they are coordinating with the county judge, state legislators and county authorities to pursue options and to provide support.
Public safety officials also addressed a growing enforcement problem unrelated to mining: Chief Moore told council the city has responded to "600 plus commercial alarms" this year and that 38 businesses are currently in violation of the city’s false‑alarm ordinance. The chief said many corporate offices do not respond to certified‑mail invoices, leaving the city with limited recourse under the current ordinance.
Councilors and staff discussed enforcement alternatives raised during the presentation, including escalating fines, pursuing compliance through the city business‑license process, or other administrative remedies. Ben was asked to circulate the current ordinance to council members for review and staff was asked to research how peer cities enforce repeat false alarms.
No emergency ordinance or new enforcement rule was adopted at the meeting; councilors expressed unanimous verbal support for opposing the mining facility and asked staff to return with ordinance language and enforcement options for future action.
