Skagit County adopts interim moratorium on new data‑center permit applications

Skagit County commissioners voted on June 1 to adopt an interim ordinance pausing acceptance of new permit applications for data centers, following a presentation from Will Hoehne of the Prosecuting Attorney's Office and supportive public comments.

Hoehne told the board he was "here to present for your consideration a moratorium on data centers in Skagit County," arguing the pause is necessary to give the county time to update land‑use regulations to reflect local conditions. He said the county's large tracts of forestry and natural‑resource‑zoned land, comparatively low land prices for those classifications and proximity to flood plains require careful scrutiny before intensive industrial development is allowed.

Hoehne warned of infrastructure and resource stresses, saying data centers can demand "a tremendous amount of electricity" and, in some places, use open‑loop cooling that consumes substantial quantities of water. He also described a recent case in which a developer successfully argued to a state commission that a proposed facility complied with county land‑use rules, saying the outcome illustrated the risk of not having explicit local regulations for this use.

Commissioner Burns voiced support for taking time to craft regulations, citing rising energy costs and local water shortages. A member of the public, Laura Klaus (identified in the transcript as representing "Skagitounians to Preserve"), urged the board to protect farmland and water resources and said she "unequivocally support[s] the adoption of this moratorium."

Chair placed a motion "to approve the interim ordinance as outlined," the board recorded an affirmative voice vote and the Chair declared the motion passed. The board noted Commissioner Browning was not present for the vote. The moratorium directs staff to pause acceptance of new permit applications for data‑center development while county officials prepare any necessary code amendments.

The moratorium is framed as a temporary measure to preserve the county's ability to review and, if necessary, revise zoning and permitting rules to address local land‑use, water and energy impacts associated with large computing facilities. The board did not provide a detailed timetable for drafting or adopting code amendments during the portion of the meeting recorded in the transcript.

Next step: staff will prepare follow‑up materials and proposed code language for the commissioners to consider; no timeline for those drafts was specified in the meeting record.