Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Data Centers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Garner schedules public hearing to advance proposed data‑center moratorium
Summary
Garner town council voted unanimously April 28 to schedule a public hearing on a proposed moratorium aimed at giving staff time to draft zoning changes that would define and limit data centers; staff said a hearing could be advertised as soon as May 17 and the moratorium would likely run up to 12 months unless superseded by a text amendment.
Mayor Buddy Gupton presided over a unanimous council vote April 28 to schedule a public hearing on a proposed moratorium that would pause new data‑center approvals while town staff drafts a zoning text amendment.
The measure — moved by Councilmember Stallings and seconded by Councilmember Singleton — directs staff to advertise the hearing as quickly as state notice rules allow. Town planning staff told council they could advertise within 10–25 days and that a hearing could be held as soon as May 17 if the ordinance text is ready.
Why the moratorium: council members cited recent national attention to the infrastructure and environmental effects of hyperscale data centers and local concerns about utility strain, noise and potential tax‑exemption tactics that leave service costs to other taxpayers. Town planning counsel said moratoria are permitted under state law but must document the problem, alternatives considered, and a timeline for action; staff proposed a 12‑month maximum period with the moratorium ending early if the text amendment is adopted sooner.
Town attorney and planning staff summarized the options: maintain the status quo, adopt a moratorium while drafting a text amendment, or process a zoning text amendment without a moratorium. Planning staff said the moratorium route is the fastest way to create interim protections while the town completes technical definitions, thresholds (for example distinguishing accessory server rooms from hyperscale facilities) and enforceable prohibitions.
Councilmembers supported the moratorium as a prudent interim step. “I’ll be all in with the moratorium as quickly as possible,” Councilmember Matthews said. Councilmember Singleton urged a 12‑month window to allow time for thorough drafting and analysis; others echoed the need for enforceable language that would withstand legal challenge.
Next steps: staff will prepare an ordinance and schedule the required public hearing notices. If council adopts a moratorium, staff will simultaneously draft the zoning text amendment so the moratorium can be lifted early if the amendment is approved.
