City of Reno staff are planning to cast a wide net in proposing regulation changes for data centers after the city council voted 6-1 on Monday to extend a temporary moratorium on the centers through August 2027.

Last month, the city council OK'd a 30-day moratorium on data centers — a timeline required under city rules. Council members always intended to extend it. 

The council also required the pause to not end until new regulations are adopted, unless it finds that existing rules are sufficient, and instructed staff to proceed with drafting new regulations, which could encompass topics such as water, energy usage and community benefit agreements.

The decisions came after more than 5 hours of public comment during a special meeting of the council, which saw dozens of community members call for stricter scrutiny — or even a permanent ban — of data centers.

Now, city staff will work in the coming months to craft a proposal that encompasses suggestions from the public, outside groups such as the Sierra Club, council members and regional officials who have been studying the issue for more than a year.

At the onset of the meeting, Lauren Knox, a senior planner for the city, said the staff work will encompass about a dozen topics, including data centers' noise impacts, effects on air quality and fire and building safety. She also acknowledged that some aspects are outside the purview of these regulation changes — for example, tax breaks for data centers are offered by the state, not local government.

Read More: Have data center tax breaks helped Nevada's economy? Here's what we found.

However, Monday's 9-hour meeting also spurred more suggestions from the public and council members. For example, some wanted more research into a potential ban on the developments, in addition to distinctions in code depending on the size of the data center.

Other ideas mentioned during the meeting included a community advisory board for the public to weigh in more on regulation changes, increased inclusion of tribal groups, independent auditing and imposing new fees on data centers wanting to come to Reno.

"I literally have 30 issues that I think need to be addressed," Councilmember Naomi Duerr said at Monday's meeting.

Like it has nationwide, data center opposition has exploded in Reno. Northern Nevada is an attractive place for data centers because of its business-friendly tax environment and proximity to California, but opponents have criticized their potential environmental effects and strain on the region's water and power infrastructure.

Rural governments are taking action, too. Officials in Humboldt County, a rural area in northern Nevada, recently took initial steps for a data center moratorium.

Many union members have spoken out against the moratoriums because of the significant amount of construction jobs that building data centers bring, though they tend to create very few permanent jobs.

In the past 18 months, city officials have approved three data centers — run by Colovore, Oppidan and Centra — including one particularly controversial one under construction near downtown. 

These are smaller facilities than others in the state, but can still use considerable energy. One data center approved by the council, for example, is set to use as much power annually as anywhere from 11,000 to 26,000 homes do in one year.

Central to Monday's meeting was how long the moratorium should last.

The idea to extend the moratorium through next August came from Councilmember Devon Reese. He wanted there to be enough time to gather input, in addition to seeing how the state Legislature addresses the topic during its session from February to June next year.

"I just think we will need more time than we are allowing ourselves," Reese said. "Government is very bad at moving quickly and when we do move quickly, we do it very poorly."

However, not everyone was on board with this timeline. Councilmember Brandi Anderson, for example, supported an initial proposal of having the pause end at the end of the year.

"I think that hanging this date and the expectations farther out because the [Legislature] is going to do something one way or another is us abdicating our leadership here," he said. "Why are we betting against ourselves already?"

However, city staff said its work will continue even with the more generous timeline. It ultimately passed 6-1, with only Councilmember Kathleen Taylor in opposition.