Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Digital Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pulaski County court refers data‑center ordinances to planning for review
Summary
The Pulaski County Quorum Court voted to send two resolutions and two ordinances addressing high‑intensity digital infrastructure (data centers) to the county planning department and planning commission for study, public hearings and a recommendation within 90 days.
Get email alerts on the Digital Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Pulaski County Quorum Court on Monday agreed to refer a package of resolutions and ordinances intended to regulate high‑intensity digital infrastructure — often described at the meeting as large data centers — to the county planning department and planning commission for study and public hearings.
Justice Blackwood, sponsor of the resolution identified as 26I32, said the measure is not anti‑technology but is meant "to be protective of the taxpayers and ratepayers" and to give the court tools to require transparency, cost recovery and protections for county infrastructure. Wendell Griffin, a resident who testified, urged the court to treat such facilities as heavy industry because of their electrical demand, water use, noise and emergency‑response impacts.
County planning staff told the court the Aveo data center application on 145th Street remains under staff review and that the applicant has outstanding submittals. Planning director Jim Crainer said site‑clearance work could start within about 30 days pending state‑level approvals, with heavier construction following in several months. The county attorney clarified that ordinances cannot typically be applied retroactively to projects with earlier vested applications, so measures would affect future projects rather than applications already filed.
After extended debate over timing, moratoriums and public notice, the court voted to send two resolutions (26I32 and 26I33) and two related ordinances (items 31 and 34) back to planning for review and a recommendation within 90 days. The roll‑call vote on the referral recorded 11 ayes and 3 nays.
The planning commission and department will hold public hearings and return recommendations to the full court. The review process will determine whether the county can adopt local standards addressing siting criteria, utility impacts and public‑notice requirements for future high‑intensity digital infrastructure projects.
