Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Data Centers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Gardner council declines to adopt proposed moratorium on data centers after public outcry and extended debate
Summary
Residents urged a pause on data-center approvals, citing water, noise and zoning gaps; council debated a six-month moratorium but the proposed resolution failed for lack of a second. Staff will continue work on code language and potential conditions for future applications.
About two dozen residents and landowners pressed the Gardner City Council on whether to pause consideration of new data-center projects, but the council declined to adopt a proposed six-month moratorium after extended debate and no second on the motion.
Supporters of a pause told the council the city needs clearer code language and enforceable standards before another hyperscale facility is considered. "Vote in favor of a moratorium," said Carrie Schmidt, who told the council a pause would allow staff to create a definition and write rules so future applications could be evaluated on clear criteria. Michael Drestler, another speaker, warned that "closed-loop systems just do not exist" and urged the council to require specifics on water discharge, noise and monitoring.
City staff and several council members said many of the technical protections residents seek can be written into the planning and permitting process or into site-specific development agreements. "I think six months is, to me, an appropriate place to start," said Ryan (city counsel), explaining the legal framework that typically allows a short moratorium while the city prepares targeted land-use regulations. Staff described the process for drafting text amendments and said a properly scoped moratorium can be extended if more time is needed for outside studies.
Opponents of the moratorium cautioned that an outright pause could push developers to other jurisdictions and argued the city already has tools — plan zoning, stipulations and development agreements — to require noise limits, monitoring and water-handling practices. After discussion, a motion to adopt Resolution 2193 (the six-month moratorium) was made but received no second and therefore died.
The council did not take formal action on data-center policy at this meeting. Staff said it will continue gathering information on potential code amendments, monitoring options and technical studies that could be required of applicants; council members said they may revisit time-limited pauses or ordinance changes once staff brings recommendations back for review.
What happens next: staff will continue work on code language and report back to the council on a proposed process and timeline; a focused mill-levy and budget calendar remains scheduled on the June 15 and July 6 agendas.
