Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Grant County court approves PILOT for Sheridan data center; solar PILOT for reNRG tabled after interruptions
Summary
Grant County Justices voted 7-0 to express preliminary intent to enter a PILOT with Sheridan Data Center LLC. A separate PILOT for reNRG AR 1 LLC’s proposed solar facility was presented but tabled after interruptions and the motion was rescinded.
Grant County Justices on July 21 voted unanimously to express the county’s preliminary intent to enter a payment-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILOT) arrangement with Sheridan Data Center LLC for a proposed data center.
County Judge Randy Pruitt presented Resolution 2025-02, and Justice Jason Roshto moved for approval; Justice Mike Nevens seconded. The court recorded a 7-0 vote in favor. The resolution indicates the county’s preliminary willingness to pursue a PILOT with the company; specific PILOT terms were not stated in the meeting minutes.
Earlier in the meeting resident and public commenter Brody Channell delivered a packet of research and voiced opposition to data centers and named companies including ReNRG and Clean Cloud Energy, criticizing the presence of company representatives who had not been listed on the published agenda. Following his remarks, Clean Cloud Energy representatives Clark Bixler and Raj Keswani addressed the court and described the expected water and electrical usage for the project.
The court also considered Resolution 2025-03, a separate preliminary-PILOT resolution for reNRG AR 1 LLC’s proposed solar generation facility. During the reading of Resolution 2025-03 the gallery interrupted and there were heated exchanges involving Clean Cloud Energy representatives and members of the public. Justice Jason Roshto rescinded his motion to approve Resolution 2025-03 and the item was tabled until a later date; no vote on the substance occurred.
The meeting record does not include detailed PILOT contract terms, specific water or power consumption figures, or timelines for next steps on either project. The court did not adopt Resolution 2025-03 and indicated the solar proposal will return for future consideration.
