of buildings and structures thereon. Such ordinance shall be adopted after the Planning Board has adopted the land use element and the housing plan element of the Master Plan, which the Board did in July of last year, and all of the provisions of such zoning ordinance or any amendment or revision thereto shall either be substantially consistent with the land use plan element of the Master Plan or designed to effectuate such plan element. So there has to be some connection between what the governing body did and what is in our ordinance. On page 20 of the 2025 Master Plan under goals and objectives for land use, the goal was to achieve a pattern and mix of land uses that achieves various community planning objectives including the provision of quality residential neighborhoods, the protection of natural resources, the economic development of the community and the creation of a livable and desirable community. The first objective listed under land use goals and objectives was to direct growth into areas suited for land development and away from areas appropriate for resource protection. The draft of Ordinance 2026-25 in the third and fourth paragraphs on page one indicates that the Town Council further recognizes that high intensity digital infrastructure uses such as data centers may be incompatible with the environmental protections, infrastructure limitations and land use objectives mandated within significant portions of the Township located in the Pinelands areas. And the Township Council further finds that due to these characteristics, data centers may not be appropriate within many areas of the Township, absent rigorous site specific review and demonstration of infrastructure capacity and compatibility. So, our goal is not necessarily to debate the pros and cons of the ordinance. That is something that happens at the governing body. If we want to spend some time talking about the pros and cons, that would be fine, but Mr. Peters stated that we are here to make sure that this ordinance is either substantially consistent with the land use element of the Master Plan or designed to effectuate such plan element. A number of the Board members were on the Master Plan Subcommittee. Mr. Peters did not know if the Board needed to talk about specific things because they might have already discussed the things you might build in a town. Does this match up with that? That is the discussion the Board should center on.
Dr. Campbell sated that when the Planning Board Subcommittee began the Master Plan back in 2023 the present concern over an AI data center did not exist. She, Ms. DeMarzo and Mr. Heller spent almost two years on that working with professionals. In fact, the term data center up until lately simply defined a physical room, building or facility for storage, management and dissemination of information. In the past, it was the military and telephone companies that built them. Today, data centers serve a completely different function. Nowhere in the past or present Master Plan is the term data center mentioned. Nor is construction of an airport, a nuclear waste facility or a ten story building. If a function is not allowed, it is not mentioned. Dr. Campbell asked Mr. Peters, as a point of clarity, if she was correct in understanding that we are not voting tonight for or against the ordinance since that is not a Planning Board function. That is a Council function. Mr. Peters replied that the short answer is that is correct. The second answer is we are going to check with the attorney to make sure he agrees. The Board is not the governing body deciding whether or not this is an ordinance that should be enacted or not. The Board's sole responsibility is under 40:55D-62 which is to determine if the ordinance is substantially consistent with the land use plan element of the Master Plan or if the ordinance was designed to effectuate that plan element. And if you feel that it has, then you would find that it is not inconsistent. If you cannot make the connection, then it would be inconsistent.