Grant County court adopts preliminary PILOTs for solar project and data center after public opposition to data center

The Grant County Quorum Court on Oct. 20 voted unanimously to adopt two separate resolutions expressing the county's preliminary intent to enter payment-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILOT) arrangements — one for a proposed solar energy facility and the other for a proposed data center.

The vote came after an extended public comment period in which residents raised environmental and community concerns about the data center proposal. "I began my Facebook group 'Stop Grant County Data Center' on October 9 and now have approximately 630 signatures on my petition," said resident Brody Channell, who asked the court to "address how we can protect ourselves first." Amy Huff said she was "disappointed" the public had not been informed and asked whether court members might personally benefit; she warned of potential impacts to mental health, property values, groundwater and the power grid. "I do not think it is a good idea for a Data Center in Grant County," she said.

Why it matters: The resolutions do not themselves create tax agreements but state the county's preliminary intent to negotiate PILOTs with the named companies. Such arrangements can affect future tax revenue, land use and local services; residents warned of environmental and neighborhood impacts, particularly around groundwater and tree clearing.

Court action and votes: The court read Resolution No. 2025-03, expressing preliminary intent to enter a PILOT with reNRG AR 1 LLC for a solar generation facility; Justice Jason Roshto moved to adopt, Justice Jimmy Easley seconded, and the court recorded an 8-0 vote to adopt the resolution. The court then read Resolution No. 2025-06, expressing preliminary intent to enter a PILOT with Sheridan Data Center LLC and to repeal Resolution 2025-02; Justice Mike Nevens moved to adopt, Justice Tony Carder seconded, and the court recorded an 8-0 vote to adopt.

Public concerns and evidence cited: Several speakers presented environmental and community-impact claims. Misty Smith cautioned about online sources and repeated a claim that a proposed 4,598-acre site (described in public remarks as "equivalent to 7 miles") would destroy "over two million trees"; she urged verification of such figures. Bob Tehan provided a copy of the Arkansas Groundwater Protection and Management Report 2024 and said the report focuses on the Mississippi River Valley Alluvial aquifer (MRVA) and the Sparta/Memphis aquifer, raising concerns about aquifer sustainability under increased water use. Katelyn Stroud said she worries about flooding and storm impacts for children growing up in the small-town community. Chris Connelly said the county may not have resources to manage ecological consequences, adding, "the reward won't outweigh the risk."

What happens next: The adopted resolutions state preliminary intent and authorize the county to proceed with discussions; they do not themselves finalize tax agreements or development approvals. The transcript does not record further steps such as finalized contracts, specific mitigation measures, or timelines for project review. Any formal PILOT agreement, development permits, or environmental reviews would be separate actions required before construction or tax arrangements take effect.

Votes at a glance: Resolution 2025-03 (reNRG AR 1 LLC, solar) — mover: Justice Jason Roshto; second: Justice Jimmy Easley; vote: 8-0 to adopt. Resolution 2025-06 (Sheridan Data Center LLC, data center) — mover: Justice Mike Nevens; second: Justice Tony Carder; vote: 8-0 to adopt.