McMinnville residents press city to toughen rules on data centers, citing wastewater, noise and code violations

McMinnville held a public hearing on Ordinance 2026‑09 on a temporary moratorium for data centers and related high‑density computing facilities, and dozens of residents urged officials to use the pause to write strict rules addressing water, noise and safety.

"Developers of data centers all over the U.S. and the world have been taking advantage of the lack of infrasound regulations," Tim Binge said, urging the city to regulate low‑frequency vibration as well as audible sound. Binge told the board those vibrations, below the range of human hearing, have been linked in some reports to health complaints.

Several speakers raised wastewater and code‑compliance concerns about the project’s developer. "The building for the proposed data center project has already been fined twice," Alexis Whitman said, contending one fine in 2025 involved pumping sewage onto the ground and a second involved discharging sewer water. Whitman asked officials how wastewater would be disposed of, how frequently the city would require pretreatment reports, and whether the city would set protections such as thicker firewalls or restrictions on removing trees that could affect stormwater.

Justin Griffin said more than 5,000 people had signed a Change.org petition opposing the data center and described potential environmental risks from cooling systems, noting operators sometimes add biocides and glycols to closed‑loop systems and that some wastewater can be discharged when mineral concentrations rise. "This noise," Griffin added of data centers generally, "it can be heard up to two miles," and he warned of sleep disturbance and stress effects from prolonged exposure.

Other residents echoed those concerns and expressed distrust of the company cited by commenters. "This is not the kind of business you can run on trust or good faith," Corey Lytle said, praising officials for acting quickly but warning about future expansion and urging careful use of political capital.

Supporters of the moratorium, including Julia Johnson, framed the pause as an opportunity to gather facts and consult experts. "The moratorium provides our community with opportunity to gather facts, engage residents, consult experts, and carefully evaluate what regulations and safeguards may be necessary moving forward," Johnson said.

City staff told the board the moratorium is already in effect (it had passed its second reading at a prior called meeting) and announced two public town halls to continue conversation: June 22 and June 25 at City Hall, 6 p.m.; staff said materials and a central project hub would be posted to the city website and streamed via the city's social channels.

The hearing drew repeated questions about wastewater handling, noise monitoring (including low‑frequency vibration), potential expansion limits, and how the city would ensure ongoing compliance if a permit were later granted. Officials said they will post research and regulatory options online and hold the advertised town halls as the next step in public engagement.

The hearing closed with no immediate regulatory change beyond the moratorium itself; the city’s next steps are the public town halls and follow‑up planning‑commission and public hearings before any permanent code or permit changes are adopted.