Marion County planning panel recommends asking commission to extend moratorium while comprehensive plan is updated

Marion County planning and zoning commissioners spent a work-session hour on May 12 reviewing staff research on data centers and agreed to ask the full county commission to consider extending existing moratoria while the county updates its comprehensive plan.

Planning staff circulated a memo summarizing data-center activity in Kansas and neighboring counties and noted Kansas currently shows 19 data centers in staff research. Commissioners raised recurring local concerns — chiefly power demand and potential rate impacts, water use for cooling, noise and aesthetics, road and fiber infrastructure, and the scale of facilities proposed — and discussed regulatory options ranging from targeted permit conditions to formal prohibition.

‘‘No surprises — everybody’s in the same boat,’’ said Russ, who prepared the memo and summarized neighboring counties’ approaches, noting several counties have temporary moratoria or are updating zoning rules. Staff also pointed to examples where generators or utilities undertook infrastructure upgrades when a large project proposed entering a rural service area.

Commissioners debated whether to treat data centers as a permitted use, to regulate them tightly so they would be unattractive to hyperscale operators, or to prohibit them in unincorporated rural areas. Several commissioners favored concentrating any data-center development near towns or in industrial parks rather than scattered across agricultural land. Participants repeatedly emphasized that ‘‘scale’’ is often better measured by electrical load than by building square footage.

The group discussed two near-term procedural tools: a moratorium, which stops acceptance of new applications and can be extended or lifted relatively quickly; and a formal zoning prohibition, which would require public hearings and ordinance amendments and typically take longer to enact. Staff advised that a moratorium paired with a planned comprehensive-plan review would allow public engagement and produce clearer policy guidance for any future regulation.

Commissioners also reviewed technical reference points provided by staff: examples from other counties’ recent rules, and a rough power-draw breakdown for edge facilities (staff noted micro-edge facilities drawing roughly 10–75 kilowatts, equivalent to about 8–60 homes, while larger facilities can draw hundreds to over a thousand kilowatts). Participants discussed tax-exemption windows and long-term economic tradeoffs, with some noting that large incentives or long exemptions could limit local benefit if employment is low.

By the end of the session the planning panel agreed to place the item on the next full meeting with the goal of requesting the county commission consider extending moratoria and launching a more thorough comprehensive-plan review and public outreach. No formal moratorium or prohibition vote was taken at the work session; staff will prepare proposed notice language and possible regulatory amendments for future public hearings.

The work session ended with a motion to adjourn; the panel recessed and will reconvene with the full board in two weeks to consider next steps and public-notice requirements.