Monolith and Crusoe asked the Village of Hallam Planning Commission to approve the site plan and recommend the special use permit to the Village Board. After public comment, the Commission voted to continue the matter to its next meeting. No site plan was approved. No recommendation went to the Board. This page is what was said, in their own words, with the audio.
A commissioner moved to continue, giving the missing study as the reason: “We haven't even seen a sound study that was talked about, so how are we supposed to vote on it?” On the site plan, a resident told the room: “Usually when we have a Planning Commission meeting, we have a site plan like a large site plan. We haven't seen any of that tonight… Not an 8.5 by 11.”
Monolith's attorney offered an alternative — recommend the permit and continue only the site plan. The village attorney did not take it up: “They've already made a motion. We're going to hear it.” The motion to continue carried. A resident asked afterward what had passed; the recording ends before an answer is audible.
Five excerpts from the recording. Each one is a company representative or a public official speaking in an open meeting.
The claims the rest of the evening turned on: the noise study result, the annual water figure, and a community benefits agreement “before the board determination.”
Crusoe's Managing Director, responding to a resident's list of seven requested conditions.
Crusoe on expansion, lighting, and what happens if the permit is ever sold.
Monolith confirms it holds an option to purchase both the Phase 1 ground and the 135 acres east of it.
The Commission declines to recommend, and says why.
Planning Commission member: I'm making a motion to basically put a pause on this for next month, continue to next month. We haven't even seen a sound study that was talked about, so how are we supposed to vote on it?
Monolith's attorney: One option you could do, what you have before you today is both the special use permit and the site plan. What you could do is issue a recommendation to approve the special use permit…
Village attorney: They've already made a motion. We're going to hear it.
Monolith's attorney: I'm sorry, I don't mean to argue. I was just going to propose one thing you could do is you could continue the site plan. That's where you would get the noise study, you do a lot of modeling. You could approve the site plan at that point.
A resident: Usually when we have a Planning Commission meeting, we have a site plan like a large site plan. We haven't seen any of that tonight, and I know they've asked for other things too, so I just wanted to make that point, that it's not complete without people being able to see a plan with what… Not an 8.5 by 11.
A resident: Before we leave, could you just say what motion passed? What was the motion? What passed?
[The recording ends here. No answer is audible on the tape, so we do not print one. What carried was the motion to continue, quoted above.]
A resident read the Commission a list of seven protections she wanted attached to any approval: a hard 35-megawatt maximum, separate public approval for every future phase, enforceable water limits and required closed-loop cooling, a final engineering plan before building permits, a noise study before approval, financial assurance or a bond for decommissioning, and an eighteen-month pause to write rules. Crusoe's Managing Director answered.
Steve Buster, Managing Director, Crusoe: So first of all, thank you everybody that spoke. We hear you, I think all your questions are totally fair. I think… your comments were totally fair, and actually like I think we should implement a lot of them. Should we put in a 35-megawatt max in this rule? Yes, like that's fine.
This is just the first step in this process. We have to go through the open house and then eventually the board. Let's get the resolution that they agree to in a place that all of you are comfortable with. Let's put decommissioning in there. We're going to take these with us because they're super valuable, but even so we will agree to that, required to do it on a state level. Absolutely, we'll do decommissioning.
Let's make sure everybody has a copy of the noise study. We can put that in the resolution. Water limits — like, we're fine, set the water limits. Engineered plan and building permit — yes, we will have that. There's a lot of work that needs to be done on the engineering and design that we haven't done yet, but let's do it. Let's put a resolution in place that answers a lot of your concerns. We'd be really happy to do that.
[On lighting] …lighting also will be very low light, soft lights, downward facing, on motion sensors. We have to have some lights for security and safety, but they're going to be a lot lower than what you see at the power plant and other places. We can put that in the resolution.
[Asked how the public would see any of it before the vote] They'll be on our website. They will be on there prior to any vote, so you can read everything, and then email me and ask me questions.
On the night, none of it was in writing. Every line above was a spoken offer, made at a microphone, in a meeting that ended without a recommendation. On September 4 most of it became a filed condition. The September 9 sound study is now available; the benefit agreement still has no stated terms or deadline. See the list →
The resident's list included one item the answer never reached. [Update: on September 4 Monolith proposed Condition 30 — decommissioning security equal to 110% of net removal cost as a surety bond, parent-company guarantee or letter of credit, posted within one year of the start of operations. What follows is the record of August 19.]
A resident: And I ask the village to require financial assurance or bond to cover the actual cost of decommissioning.
The reply committed to decommissioning and pointed to state law — Nebraska now requires data center owner-operators to bear decommissioning costs. It did not address a bond, an escrow, a surety or a letter of credit. Neither does the filed application: the word “financial” appears in it once, in the sentence “the Village bears no financial responsibility.”
A resident put the practical version of the same question to the room: what happens if the conditions are broken?
A resident: What does the town have for power for them if they don't abide by our regulations? Like if they can't keep it under a sound level or they don't… follow the regulations of the town, what does the town have power-wise to say, “Hey, can we shut them down? Can we make them comply, or is it just a fine where they just budget it in and they pay the fine?”
A resident: Well, our tax money in Hallam would have to pay an attorney to fight it if they weren't complying.
Monolith's July 31 FAQ says in writing that the company holds the adjacent 135 acres “under option.” On August 19 that was confirmed out loud, along with something new: Monolith does not own the Phase 1 ground either.
A resident: Since Monolith does not own the land that Phase 1 would be on, why is Crusoe paying Monolith anything, and is it a sublease?
Russ Webb, CEO, Monolith: We actually have a lease on option to buy, so we actually do have control of that land… We're currently leasing it, and we have an option to purchase it, and we would actually sell the piece to Crusoe on the area that they would be building on.
A resident: Do you currently have an option on that property to purchase as well, Phase 2?
Russ Webb: We do.
A resident: So it's basically your land if you want it.
Russ Webb: Yes.
Steve Buster, Managing Director, Crusoe: Expansion to Phase 2: there is no Phase 2 right now. This is only Phase 1, we put a limit of 35. If we ever want to do a Phase 2, we will come back and meet with you all and go through the process again.
A resident: So is that a Crusoe statement that you don't need Phase 2, or is it Monolith's expansion Phase 2? Because I think those are two different things, guys.
Russ Webb: They are. I mean, from our side, we would like to do Phase 2 because it gives us more revenue to support our expansion… if you vote on Phase 1, we're not asking for approval on Phase 2 today. We have to go back to the same review process, and you guys can say no.
A resident: Can Monolith survive ongoing without Phase 2, period?
Russ Webb: Uh, yes we can, but it really … allows us to be able to expand faster, give us more capability to move faster with our expansion plans.
Steve Buster, Managing Director, Crusoe: Noise: I know that's important. We have commissioned a noise study. The Village of Hallam has an ordinance that says there's a limit of 55 dBA to the nearest residential home. We are going to be compliant with that noise ordinance. Our noise study, that we will make available to all of you, says we are at 39 dBA — it's significantly below the limit when we're operating normally. There are times where we have to run generators if the grid goes down, then we bump up to 52, but still below the requirement of the Hallam ordinance.
Steve Buster, Managing Director, Crusoe: We're very water efficient, we use a closed-loop or air-cooled system. So we're using 770,000 gallons a year, which is like 1 to 2 restaurants; it's very low, efficient water use.
A resident: Monolith has also said they would approximately use 770,000 gallons of water per year or less, plus the initial fill of 500,000. The 770,000-gallon figure is not in the application. If the projected water use is the 770,000 gallons of water, that should be an enforceable condition of approval.
That was correct on August 19: the figure had been said out loud twice and appeared nowhere in the filed application. Crusoe's answer was to agree it should be written down: “Water limits — like, we're fine, set the water limits.” [Update: on September 4 it was. Condition 22 caps average operational water use at 770,000 gallons a year on a rolling five-year basis, excluding construction water, the initial fill of liquid-cooled units, water-quality withdrawals and emergencies. The 500,000-gallon fill is still not in writing.]
The application as filed in July never named an operator. It referred only to “active conversations with a strategic partner.” A resident pressed on it. [Update: the September 4 cover letter and the resolution's findings name “Crusoe Technologies LLC and its affiliates, the intended Project Operator.” None of the thirty-six conditions does. Condition 1, assignment on written notice, is unchanged.]
A resident: I don't think the application even says Crusoe is for sure who you're going with… So is there a possibility of you changing? I mean, why isn't that in the application for sure?
Steve Buster, Managing Director, Crusoe: It's a great question. We don't control the land, they do, so they have to be the applicant, but we are the partner.
A resident: That's what you said, but it's not in the application.
Steve Buster: Yeah, we can change that. We can edit that resolution for the board meeting. We have an agreement with them, we're not going to work with anybody else.
Asked separately what stops the approval being handed to somebody else, Crusoe's answer was that the approvals travel with the property: “All these approvals run with the land… because we're doing a special use permit, it's specific to this site only and runs with the land.”
A resident: What's your average campus acre size right now of your data centers?
Steve Buster, Managing Director, Crusoe: We look at 10-acre sites like this, and we look at… we have some sites in Texas that are much, much bigger… So we can go and find small sites in different places and take advantage of stranded power like this — small 35, 40, 55 megawatts — and put together a cluster that we can then… AI companies or companies around the US can use that data center cluster.
A resident: How many modulars?
Steve Buster: There's 36 buildings on the 10 acres… They're 14 by 14 by 60.
Roughly forty-five minutes of the hearing was public comment. Residents are not named here. These are the threads that came up more than once.
On rules first: “You guys just did a comprehensive plan last year, data centers were not a contemplated use at that point… There's not really rules in place to regulate data centers specifically within the community… we're looking to you all to kind of hit the pause button on this, come together as a community, you know, maybe take 8-12 months to like come up with the right rules.”
On enforceability: “Let's go through that recording and make sure everything they used to sell this place is in writing and signed and enforceable… just make sure that everything they used to sell this is in writing and enforceable.”
On voting without a study: “Without the sound study, I'm surprised that even this is going to go to a vote. So if you vote, you approve it, it's going to be subject to getting a sound study that you don't even know what it entails… There should be changes to the ordinances to address these issues before it even goes to a vote.”
On what the village keeps: “Since we have our 1-mile extra-territorial area, I feel that we should protect that area… I also know Monolith is a good company and they have helped people, but I wish that we could come up with another plan.”
On deciding from the written record: “I just urge members to make their decision based on what is written, not what's been said or promised or talked about, but what is in writing. Otherwise, we have nothing to stand on.”
On the other side of the argument: “I'm not for data centers, so don't think that. But we've got big issues coming to our area… The village at least is going to get some say in what happens with Monolith and Crusoe. The other 10 to 15 that are being opted in as we speak, we're not going to get a say… at least with this one, our board has some type of say.”
The Planning Commission continued the matter to its next meeting. Under Nebraska law (§19-929) the Village Board cannot take final action on the special use permit until it has the Commission's recommendation in hand.
The chair told the room the item is scheduled for the Board's September meeting: “it is scheduled to be at the board meeting in September, 14th, because the first Monday is Labor Day, so we don't meet till the 14th.” But the Commission's next regular meeting — its stated “3rd Wednesday” schedule — falls on September 16, two days after the Board meets. If that holds, the order runs: the Board meets September 14 but cannot vote; the Commission decides its recommendation September 16; and the vote lands at the Board's next meeting, Monday, October 5. [The village posts no Commission dates, and a special meeting could change the order — confirm with the Village Clerk at (402) 787-0505. We are checking and will post the answer here. Plan on the 14th either way.]
Monolith and Crusoe held an open house at the Hallam Auditorium on Thursday, August 27, 7–9 p.m. Crusoe described the format from the podium: “it's not going to be a town hall style… it's going to be more of a like science fair style,” with staff at stations answering questions directly, no public comment portion and no vote.
Update, September 4: Monolith filed thirty-six revised conditions, a 36-unit site plan and a new draft resolution with the Village Clerk, and its cover letter promises “large-scale copies of the site plan at the Planning Commission's meeting and Board of Trustees' public hearing.” The sound study was not among those September 4 documents. September 10 update: the September 9 study is now available and predicts compliance with its evaluated limits; read the report and limitations. Docket acceptance remains unverified here. What is in the September 4 filing, and what is not →
Source. Recording of the public hearing of the Village of Hallam Planning Commission, August 19, 2026, Hallam Auditorium. Nebraska's Open Meetings Act (§84-1412) guarantees the right to record an open meeting. Excerpts above are transcribed from that recording. Residents are deliberately not identified. If you believe any quotation here misstates what was said, write to HallamSaysNo@gmail.com and we will correct it the same day.