HERMISTON, Ore. — The Hermiston City Council on Aug. 25 adopted findings backing an 810‑acre expansion of the city’s urban growth boundary to accommodate large “hyperscale” data center campuses and associated code changes, but postponed final ordinance action because the second‑reading rule requires unanimity.

City Planning Director Clint Spencer opened the hearing, telling the council the package would amend the comprehensive plan and code and would be appealable under state land‑use law.

The package implements a 2024 economic‑opportunities analysis that identified demand for large industrial parcels for data centers. “There was a need for over 1,200 acres of land for data center development,” Jesse Winterrude of Winterbrook Planning told the council, describing site‑selection criteria that included contiguous tracts of at least 100 acres, buffers from residences and avoidance of constrained lands.

Why it matters: staff and consultants said the expansion is intended to meet a specific, identified industrial need — especially for 100‑acre‑plus sites — while minimizing conflicts with farms and residences. The proposed area south of Feedville Road was chosen because it is surrounded by rural industrial uses and rail lines, planners said.

Details and debate
- The city’s proposal would place the newly added land inside the UGB, annex it into the city, designate it heavy industrial and create a hyperscale‑data‑center (HDC) overlay. Staff said the proposal is a partial response to the full demand identified in the EOA, not a 20‑year supply solution.
- Planning Director Clint Spencer said staff prepared a new public‑facilities plan (appendix I) and engineering analyses for water, sewer and transportation. Joshua Lott (Anderson Perry) and Matt Hugart (Kittelson and Associates) were listed as consultants on infrastructure and transportation.
- Garrett Stevenson, the city’s land‑use lawyer, explained that Oregon law prescribes a priority analysis for UGB expansions (including consideration of exception lands and farm soils), which led staff to select the Feedville Road area. “Oregon law is very prescriptive about how we bring certain lands in,” Stevenson said.
- Jesse Winterrude said the EOA found two sites inside the existing UGB that could be used and identified remaining need outside the UGB for additional 100‑acre tracts. He said several candidate tracts were screened and the south‑of‑Feedville area had fewer residential and farmland conflicts.

Infrastructure, water and community questions
- In public testimony, Tara Jones asked whether developers would pay for Feedville Road improvements. Assistant City Manager Morgan replied: “Any improvements that are necessitated by the developing of any data centers will have to be borne by the data center developers themselves.”
- On water use, Morgan and other staff said hyperscale campuses generally use large volumes but that much of the cooling water would be nonpotable and could be returned to irrigation canals after use. Morgan said, in the Columbia Basin context, data centers can bring river water to the corridor and discharge a portion to local irrigation systems, which staff described as a potential benefit to some irrigated acreage.
- Councilors and the planning‑commission chair pressed on traffic, right‑of‑way width, buffers and potential chemical use in cooling systems; staff said the transportation analysis and DEQ permitting will address those points and that the HDC overlay and design standards are intended to limit incompatible uses.

Process and votes
- The Hermiston Planning Commission reviewed the proposal at its August meeting and made a unanimous recommendation to the council, Planning Commission Chair Dean Fialka told the council.
- The council voted 6–1 to adopt the findings of fact and make the record (Councilor Linton voted no and said she did not have sufficient time to review the large packet). Councilors who spoke in favor cited the adopted EOA and job and revenue potential; those who opposed cited packet timing and outstanding questions.
- Ordinance 2374 (comp plan and zoning text/map changes) and ordinance 2375 (annexation) were read by title. Because one of the required roll‑call steps for final adoption was not unanimous, the council scheduled second readings and final action for the Sept. 8, 2025 meeting.

Limits and next steps
- Staff and consultants repeatedly noted that design, permitting and development agreements would follow if the ordinances pass final adoption; no developer contracts, enterprise‑zone agreements or tax incentives have been finalized.
- Planning Director Clint Spencer reminded the council that UGB expansion decisions are subject to statewide planning goals and may be appealable to the Land Use Board of Appeals under ORS 197.830.

The council will take second readings of the ordinances at its Sept. 8 meeting; further technical design and permitting work will continue in the interim.