Oldham County fiscal court sends moratorium on data center approvals to planning commission after large public turnout

Oldham County Fiscal Court on Tuesday voted unanimously to send a proposed ordinance imposing a temporary moratorium on data center development to the county planning commission for study and public hearing, after more than two dozen residents spoke during an extended public-comment period.

The proposal originally would have imposed a 120-day pause on acceptance, processing and approval of new data-center applications in the unincorporated parts of the county. Magistrates amended the draft before voting, changing the moratorium period to 150 days and adding language to explicitly cover private-utility and private-utility buildings and “data centers of any size.” The ordinance, as amended, exempts applications already filed before the ordinance’s effective date and does not apply inside incorporated cities. The court voted in roll call on the amended proposal; recorded votes were unanimously in favor.

The moratorium was framed by the judge and multiple magistrates as a temporary pause to allow staff, consultants, utility providers and stakeholders to evaluate infrastructure and land-use impacts. Judge David Vogel told the room the moratorium would allow the county to “evaluate existing policies, infrastructure capacity, and long term planning objectives regarding data centers” before changing zoning or development rules.

Resident speakers pressed for stronger, longer protections and for inclusion of currently filed applications. Don Erler, who lives near the proposed site in Waters Farms, told the court that "a data center is not mentioned in the comprehensive plan" and urged that pending applications be covered by the moratorium. Judge Vogel explained that the draft moratorium, as written and advised by county counsel, would not legally apply to applications already filed prior to the ordinance’s effective date.

Environmental and water-resource concerns were a frequent theme. Susan Griffin Ward, representing the Kentucky Waterways Alliance, urged systematic environmental review and cited water demand estimates: "Medium-sized data centers, 5 to 20 megawatts, can require up to 3,000 gallons of water a day," and she said public filings suggest the proposed facility could be on the order of hundreds of megawatts, which would carry far greater water needs. Mark Salaga, a professional environmental engineer who testified as a resident, said projects of this scale should be processed through comprehensive planning and zoning rather than conditional-use permitting: "Approving this or doing this under a conditional use permit is absolutely wrong," he said.

Community organizers said they had gathered thousands of petitions. Nathan Oberg of the Facebook group We Are Oldham County said his group had 2,855 verified signatures asking the court for protections. Several speakers urged later meeting times and broader public engagement; Larry Kaiser said, "If your public process is inconvenient for the public, then your public process is broken."

Magistrates also discussed process mechanics during the hearing. Planning staff confirmed the next procedural step is the planning commission, which must hold a public hearing and make a recommendation to fiscal court. The technical-review committee and then the Board of Adjustments will hear technical and permitting questions in upcoming months; staff said the earliest technical-review meeting for the currently filed project is scheduled for May 21 at 1 p.m., with a likely Board of Adjustments hearing in June.

The court’s action sends the proposed ordinance — as amended to 150 days and to explicitly include private utility/private utility buildings and data centers of any size — to the planning commission for the statutorily required review and public hearing. The ordinance as drafted directs staff to study infrastructure and utility capacity, environmental impacts, cumulative land-use effects and regulatory frameworks used by comparable counties.

The moratorium does not immediately stop projects already filed before the ordinance’s effective date; several speakers requested that the county attempt to include pending filings. Judge Vogel and county counsel confirmed the county’s legal advice is that those filings cannot be suspended retroactively by the temporary moratorium as currently drafted.

The court recessed after the vote; staff and several magistrates said they will pursue additional study committee meetings, public outreach and site visits to jurisdictions that have regulated large-scale data facilities. The proposed ordinance will return to the fiscal court after the planning commission’s recommendation and the county’s standard ordinance process, including two readings and public hearing(s).