Residents urge council to deny rezoning for proposed 162‑acre data center near Jackson Elementary

Dozens of residents addressed Kershaw County Council on Sept. 23 urging the body to deny or delay a rezoning request for a 162‑acre parcel at 771 Park Road that some developers have proposed for a large data center.

Advocates including Zakiya Mickle, environmental justice chair for the South Carolina NAACP State Conference, and local residents warned the council that clearing 162 acres would harm wildlife, increase light and noise pollution, and could strain local water and electric systems. "This parcel is equivalent to 123 football fields," Mickle said, adding that diesel generators, steady lighting and large cooling systems can produce persistent pollution and health risks for nearby residents, including students at Jackson Elementary School, which she said is less than 10 minutes from the site.

The public commenters described several categories of concern: potential increases in residential electric bills if utilities pass on new demand; high water use and possible impacts to wells and pressure; noise and low‑frequency vibration from generators and cooling equipment; loss of habitat; and the permanence of a rezoning to "general development." "Once the zoning is changed, there is no guarantee of what might actually be built," resident Lashana Meagley told the council. "That's too much risk for our community to bear."

Speakers also questioned job projections and economic claims for data‑center projects. Multiple commentators said permanent on‑site employment would be small (speakers gave estimates ranging from about 11 to 15 permanent positions) while construction and infrastructure impacts would be long‑lasting.

Several speakers asked the council to require additional study before moving forward. Zakiya Mickle and others specifically asked that the South Carolina Office of Resilience perform a community impact and resilience assessment and make the results public before any action. Shonda Johnston (last name spoken in the hearing as "Johnston") urged freedom‑of‑information requests for developers' anticipated daily, monthly and annual water consumption and for any negotiations or incentives between the county and the developer.

Council members responded that the matter was not yet before the council as a formal rezoning vote. Several members said they support more information and noted technical issues the council will want answered: the project's precise footprint and buffer zones, water‑use and whether the site uses reclaimed or closed‑loop cooling, electric‑utility impacts and proposed mitigation, and whether a development agreement or other legally binding conditions would be appropriate should the council consider rezoning. Vice Chairman Russell Bridal said he had been told the facility would use a "closed loop" water cooling approach, but asked staff and the developer to confirm and provide documentation. Councilman Shumate noted the county is beginning a ZLDR (zoning and land‑development regulations) rewrite and that the comprehensive plan and ZLDR will guide future land‑use decisions.

No formal rezoning vote was taken at the Sept. 23 meeting. The public comment and council discussion were part of the council's public‑comment period and the comprehensive‑plan hearing process. Multiple speakers urged delay: "Trust is not a substitute for due diligence," Mickle said. "This community deserves facts, not just promises."

The council did not schedule a vote on the rezoning at the Sept. 23 meeting; several council members said they expect additional briefings and more detailed technical materials before any land‑use decision.

The record of public comment, including requests for specific water and energy data, will be part of the council's file on future agenda items related to the parcel.

Ending: The matter remains under review. Council members asked staff to gather technical details on water and electric demand, mitigation measures, and any incentives or agreements under consideration. Several residents said they will return for future hearings.