Pepper County economic-development director outlines data-center "tech zone," warns water and power limit growth

Brian, director of economic development for Pepper County, told the Madison County Economic Development Committee that his county’s technology-zone incentive policy and preexisting fiber and transmission corridors drew major data centers and that that experience carries lessons for neighboring localities.

Brian said Pepper County’s early data‑center anchors included Swift and Equinix and that those projects built out local fiber and network access points that continue to attract investment. He said the county ties incentives to a defined geography and to purchases of computer equipment, and that the market and utilities determine which projects proceed. “I like to fail fast in economic development,” Brian said, adding, “I don’t have water to cool. That’s a problem. Move on,” to illustrate how raw utilities screening reduces wasted effort.

Brian gave several estimates the committee used for planning context: he said the tech zone could represent roughly $20 billion in capital investment, about 2,000 direct jobs and roughly 9,000 induced jobs (the latter derived from an economic-impact study and subject to differing methodologies). He said Pepper County collects both real-estate and computer-equipment tax revenue from data centers, reporting computer-equipment tax receipts of about $9.7 million in calendar 2024 and roughly $11.2 million by December of the next reporting cycle; he characterized these as projections and emphasized they depend on buildout timing and equipment turnover.

On utilities and operations, Brian explained Pepper County avoids freshwater evaporative cooling, relying instead on air-cooled or closed-loop systems and treated reclaimed water where feasible. He said planned transmission upgrades (from 115 kV to 230 kV in parts of the region) are necessary for sustained data‑center power needs and described the looped nature of transmission lines and the need for multiple structures for redundancy, which affects siting and visual impact.

Committee members pressed Brian on reuse and rezoning risks if a data center vacates large purpose-built buildings. Brian and staff said reuse would generally require rezoning or other planning approvals and that decommissioning or conversion would be handled through normal planning processes rather than by an automatic protection; staff advised that local zoning and on‑site plan rules can make conversion to warehousing or other uses difficult but not impossible.

The committee did not take formal action on incentives or zoning at the meeting; members said they would continue the conversation at future meetings and requested staff follow up on utility availability and planning implications for Madison County.