Jackson County commissioners recommend denying special-exception for proposed data‑mining site after public outcry

Jackson County zoning commissioners recommended on March 17 that the Board of Supervisors keep a contested agricultural parcel zoned A‑1 and deny a special-exception application for a proposed Bitcoin/data‑mining facility, after more than an hour of public comment on noise, fire risk, power use and potential effects on property values.

The commission concluded in a formal motion that the type of use proposed by the applicant is "best zoned under M‑1," an industrial classification, but that the particular site is not suitable for rezoning to M‑1. For those reasons the commission voted to "recommend the board of supervisors keep this zone A‑1 and deny the application for special exception use." The vote was recorded as unanimous by the commission members present.

Residents who live within several hundred feet of the proposed site spoke during the public-comment period and urged denial. Ranger Owen, who said he and his wife are among the closest residents, said the operations he inspected elsewhere were noisy and raised safety concerns: "We don't think that Bitcoin mining facilities are a good fit for Jackson County given the environmental impact and footprint that they involve," Owen said. He asked the county to require a minimum setback of 1,500–1,800 feet and a maximum noise level of 50 A-weighted decibels at the nearest residence.

Amanda Richardson, who said her family owns roughly 85 adjoining acres near the project, told the commission she opposed a special-exception permit and cited fire risk and local noise and quality-of-life impacts. "We are all opposed to a special use permit for any Bitcoin operation," she said.

Several commenters described field visits to existing facilities and reported hearing loud fans and mechanical noise. A number of speakers raised concerns about e‑waste disposal, potential groundwater contamination from fire or ash, electric-grid strain or higher costs, and the idea that one approved facility would invite additional sites.

The applicant, identifying himself as John Holberic (applicant representative), told the commission the company uses metal structures rather than hoop buildings, that newer equipment uses direct‑drive fans (which are quieter than older belt‑driven fans), and that the company maintains an e‑waste disposal plan that uses licensed decommissioning vendors. "We use no harsh chemicals in our facilities," he said, and he stressed the company’s patronage payments to the local electric cooperative. He also said the project is sized at about 2.5 megawatts for the Jackson County site and that the company has built multiple facilities in Iowa.

During the meeting staff and commissioners reviewed procedural history and authority. Commissioners discussed a previous moratorium on data‑mining facilities enacted in September 2024 and later rescinded; several members of the public said the moratorium’s intent—to give the county time to prepare an ordinance—had not been fully satisfied before the applicant filed. Commissioner discussion referenced the zoning-commission role under the ordinance for recommending appropriate districts for uses not explicitly listed and the role of the Board of Adjustment for setting conditions if a use were permitted.

After discussion the commission approved a motion that (1) found the proposed use is best classified as M‑1, (2) found the specific area is not suited for M‑1 zoning, and (3) recommended that the Board of Supervisors leave the parcel zoned A‑1 and deny the special‑exception application. The commission’s recommendation will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for a final decision.

The commission did not set specific conditions on future proposals beyond that recommendation. Staff said the Board of Supervisors will receive the commission’s recommendation on an upcoming agenda; the applicant may pursue administrative or appeal options pursuant to county ordinance and state law.

The meeting’s public-comment segment featured roughly two dozen speakers, many of them neighbors and landowners. Commissioners said they would forward the recommendation and the record to supervisors for their consideration.