Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County hears utilities and industry input as supervisors consider data-center ordinance
Summary
Board members and utility representatives reviewed two draft ordinances offering either a light-touch (encourage development) or regulatory (protect resources) approach. Key issues were water use, energy supply, cooling systems, noise and scale; staff will collect feedback and return a revised draft June 23.
Crawford County supervisors discussed two draft ordinances on Monday that would set local rules for data centers, weighing whether to adopt a light-touch approach to attract investment or a tighter regulatory framework to protect county resources.
Colin, who drafted the samples with staff and legal review, told the board the central decision is "What is your goal for the ordinance? Is it to attract investment? Is it to create jobs?" He walked supervisors through regulatory choices: whether data centers should be allowed by right if they meet objective standards or be treated as conditional uses, what measurement (megawatt use, campus acreage or building size) should determine scale, and whether to require closed-loop water cooling to minimize withdrawals.
Stephanie (utility consultant) and local utility representatives said transmission capacity and reliable electricity are immediate gating factors for medium or large facilities. They emphasized that many potential investors look first for an ordinance and a clear statement of utilities' ability to serve a site; staff noted that a DNR water-use permit would be required above 25,000 gallons and that some counties rely on utility letters confirming capacity rather than duplicative county studies.
Speakers discussed mitigation measures including measuring noise at the nearest residence, requiring reporting of peak water/energy usage, and setting setbacks from homes. Emergency-management staff suggested training and emergency-plan coordination but cautioned about adding counterproductive barriers. Several supervisors said they favored a staged approach to attract small-to-medium projects that could build local infrastructure incrementally.
The board asked staff to solicit further written input (utilities, municipal water providers, rural water districts and county departments) and to produce a revised draft for the June 23 meeting.
