Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Data Centers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Effingham County to study data centers; board weighs legal limits and state pause
Summary
Public commenters urged the Effingham County Board to consider a countywide moratorium or a regulatory ordinance on hyperscale data centers, citing water, energy and transparency concerns; board members said counties lack zoning authority for many areas and noted a recent executive pause from the governor.
Effingham County residents urged the county board to slow or regulate the siting of large data centers, warning the facilities can strain water and electric systems and deliver limited local employment while producing outsized tax advantages for outside owners.
“My name is Pat Lewis. I’m speaking today as a member of the East Community Alliance,” Lewis said, asking the county to consider an ordinance or moratorium similar to the city of Effingham’s 12‑month pause on applications for cryptocurrency mines and data centers. He cited environmental and transparency concerns and asked the board to coordinate with the city and notify the public if companies express interest.
Nicholas Kachchuck, a resident and member of the Party for Socialism and Liberation, told the board he worries about grid strain and local water use and that many projects bring few long‑term jobs to host communities. “You have to look at the effectiveness of what it is that’s being built,” Kachchuck said.
Board members responded that county authority is limited. Several members said a county moratorium would likely apply only to unincorporated areas and that making Effingham a “zoned” county — with a zoning administrator and board of appeals — would be a major undertaking. One board member summarized the legal barrier: counties can act only where statute grants zoning or permitting authority.
Board members also noted a recent statewide pause on data center incentives announced by Governor J.B. Pritzker; the pause was described as a temporary hold on processing agreements and incentives while the legislature and stakeholders work on a broader framework. Several members said that action and pending state bills (referred to in public comment as State Bill 4016 and House Bill 5513, the so‑called Power Act in testimony) could limit near‑term development.
Some board members suggested a narrower regulatory route that targets specific impacts — for example, rules on backup generators, closed‑loop cooling systems to limit water withdrawals, or required public hearings and transparency around incentive requests — rather than a blanket ban on data centers.
The board did not take formal action at this meeting but directed staff to monitor state developments and the city’s moratorium and to bring legal guidance back to the board if statutory authority or recommended ordinance language becomes available. Several members encouraged residents to monitor and participate in any state hearings and local public hearings that may be required.
