Residents urge moratorium and transparency as commissioners hear concerns over proposed JPG data center

Hundreds of residents filled public comment on June 11 as the Jefferson County commissioners fielded repeated calls for a moratorium and fuller disclosure about a proposed JPG data center in the county.

Janice Kleper, who identified herself and supplied an address, told commissioners she had reviewed a development plan and public reporting and pressed officials on where to obtain official documents. She said proponents had presented claims that “infrastructure upgrades related to the data center will be funded 100% by the project” and asked who would monitor those promises. Janice asked that the county ensure any written commitments match submitted designs and reviews.

Commissioners and staff explained that only a zoning determination has been made so far — that a data center can fit in a heavy industrial zone — and that detailed scrutiny happens later at the building permit and engineering review stage. A county official described the next step as an independent engineering review to verify whether a proposed design “will fit” and avoid adverse impacts.

Other residents underscored environmental and public-health questions. Mary Hampton, who gave her address at the podium, urged the board to consider the project’s scale and proximity to parks and homes, citing concerns about potential emissions, cooling systems and long-term groundwater or wastewater handling. “We want transparency, ethics, honesty and accountability,” she said, urging commissioners to consider a moratorium while the community gathers more data.

Speakers repeatedly asked about technical details the county would require of any data-center applicant: whether the project would use closed-loop cooling (which some speakers described as a sealed fluid system), how leak containment and chemical handling would be ensured, whether the project would require on-site generation or upgrades to substations, and whether tax abatements or PILOTs (payments in lieu of taxes) might be requested. One commenter summarized the developer’s public claims, saying the project would not tap groundwater, would use a closed-loop cooling system that “does not consume water for cooling,” and would pay for grid upgrades. Those claims were relayed by residents and not independently verified during the meeting.

Several speakers pushed for proactive local rules. A number of residents said ordinances or a temporary moratorium would give the county time to craft requirements addressing generators, lighting, coolant containment, water consumption and how any PILOT funds could be used. Commissioners described the formal moratorium process: a zoning amendment can be initiated by either the plan commission or the commissioners, the plan commission must hold a public hearing, and the plan commission then certifies a proposal to the commissioners for final action.

Commissioners emphasized procedural limits. One member said the county cannot reject a use expressly allowed by the Unified Development Ordinance without following required steps and that an independent engineering review would be used when a formal building permit arrives. The board also said the building-permit application will be posted on the county website and is available for public review at the surveyor’s office.

The public commenters repeatedly asked the board to notify residents when a building-permit application is filed and to adopt rules for third-party review and enforcement if promised infrastructure or environmental protections are not delivered. The meeting closed without a moratorium vote; commissioners indicated they would receive permit filings and consider next steps after staff secures the permit package and engineering review.

What’s next: The county said building-permit materials and the engineering review process are the next procedural milestones. Residents seeking official plans or notices were directed to the county website and the surveyor’s office for copies and to continue asking the board to consider a moratorium or ordinance that would allow local requirements before final approvals.