Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Environmental Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenters urge moratorium on injection wells and criticize data center tax breaks
Summary
During public comment at the March 19 meeting, two written statements urged county action: one criticized Ohio data center tax breaks and another called for a moratorium on class II brine injection wells, citing alleged brine migration and an expert report; commissioners did not act on either request at this meeting.
Two members of the public submitted written statements during the Washington County commissioners' March 19 meeting, urging policy changes on distinct environmental and tax topics.
Barbara Stewart submitted a written statement criticizing long-standing tax exemptions for data centers in Ohio. Stewart wrote that the exemptions — enacted about 15 years ago — cost "less than a million dollars" annually at first, rose to $27 million by 2018 and to about $150 million by 2020, and that recent totals for 2025 are not yet known. She argued that the policy subsidizes large technology companies, risks additional pollution from power generation for hyperscale facilities and could ultimately erode local jobs.
Steve Arnold provided a written statement calling for a moratorium on class II brine injection wells. Arnold cited an expert report by geologist Dr. Catherine Helm-Clark, quoting that "simply put, eastern Ohio is an outlier due to a constellation of conditions that favor the failure of class II brine injection wells," and alleged that the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) had verified brine migration "up to 5 miles" in Washington County. Arnold urged the board to sign a moratorium to protect aquifers.
The record shows the statements were entered as public comment; the commissioners did not vote on or direct staff to pursue a moratorium or reconsider data center tax policy during the March 19 meeting. Both statements contain factual assertions that were not accompanied by supporting documents in the meeting record; the meeting minutes list the statements as written submissions.
The meeting did include other announcements and routine approvals; no formal county action on the issues raised in these written comments was recorded at this session.
