Shreveport council approves 25-year PILOT for proposed data center after hours of public comment

The Shreveport City Council voted to approve Resolution 1 44, authorizing annual payments in lieu of taxes under term sheets between the Northwest Louisiana Finance Authority and qualifying entities, a measure tied to a proposed data center project. The motion was moved by Councilman Green and seconded by the vice chair; the clerk recorded the passage as six votes in favor.

The item drew sustained public comment before the vote. Supporters, including Justin Dixon, president and CEO of the North Louisiana Economic Partnership, said the project would bring construction investment and new permanent employment: “My focus is a 150 permanent jobs that will be coming with this project,” Dixon said, while also noting indirect opportunities for local contractors and suppliers. Business and development representatives including a local chamber liaison announced an informational community meeting on Dec. 16 to answer questions and said developers will finance required infrastructure upgrades.

Opponents raised questions about transparency, long-term public cost and environmental impacts. Omari Hossein asked why the public has been asked to “shoulder the risk, the cost, and the consequences of a project” when essential documents and binding guarantees remain undisclosed. Matthew Alexander criticized lump-sum PILOT structures and warned they shift predictable tax revenue into one-time receipts that can be spent down. David Isaacs compared historic industrial loads and asserted the data center could demand “50 to 100 megawatts” of electricity versus the GM plant’s historical 38 megawatts, a point that drew questions and discussion from council members and utility representatives.

Utility and project-side speakers responded in the meeting. A Swepco representative said the utility is prepared to serve the load, will participate in neighborhood meetings and that customers will not bear the cost of serving the project. Project liaisons and economic-development officials said vetting occurred through multiple agencies and that required permitting and environmental rules would apply. Developers and their local liaison said the project will cover the cost of needed upgrades to water and electrical infrastructure and that details will be discussed at public sessions.

Council members and staff repeatedly promised further community engagement and additional information: multiple speakers urged release of studies and fact sheets to the public and recorded a community meeting to provide greater detail. The council’s recorded vote approved Resolution 1 44; the meeting record shows the motion carried with a recorded tally of six.