Wythe County residents press supervisors on data centers as Fluidstack secures estoppel for Progress Park

Residents packed the Wythe County Boardroom on June 9, 2026, pressing supervisors to stop or restrict large data centers that they said threaten water supplies, agricultural land and the county’s character. After hearing public comment, the board approved an estoppel statement certifying that the Progress Park lot intended for a data center is in compliance with existing covenants.

The pushback began during Citizens’ Time, where speakers including Catherine Clemons and Maranda Edwards told the board they felt betrayed by what they said were closed meetings and developer non-disclosure practices. "As fellow Wythe County citizens, how are you able to look at our community ... and then you decide you're going to let it slip out from under us to people who are only here to benefit off of our land?" Clemons said. Residents cited an online petition that organizers said had reached more than 1,300 verified signatures within days.

County Administrator Stephen D. Bear introduced Fluidstack representative Kate Franko, who described the Progress Park project as a modern data center that would use a closed-loop cooling system. Franko said the facility would require an initial fill of water and then use roughly the daily equivalent of about seven homes, and that Fluidstack anticipates 200–500 employees on the campus when fully built. "No non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) are required by Fluidstack," she told the board and residents and said the company would comply with permits and county requirements.

Mr. Bear and County Attorney Scot Farthing explained that the Estoppel Statement is an administrative certification confirming the lot does not currently violate Progress Park covenants and that formal site-plan review and building permits will still be required before construction. Farthing said the statement is a standard document requested by developers to confirm compliance with covenants.

Several residents and speakers raised technical and environmental questions that county staff said will be addressed during site-plan review and permitting. Denise Davis cited federal drought data and USDA agricultural figures, noting Wythe County is in a D2 (severe) drought classification and asked who would have priority access to scarce water if multiple large facilities locate in the county. "Who gets first dibs on the water? Who makes the decision as to who gets the water first?" she asked.

Board members voiced differing positions. Supervisor Rolland R. Cook said he supports a data center in Progress Park because the park was intended for industrial use, but he opposed a separate unsolicited 1,000-acre site near Exit 86. Vice Chair J.W. "Dicky" Morgan and Supervisor Bradley D. Martin said they are uneasy about zoning but acknowledged a need for controls; Supervisor Sarah P. Crockett described herself as torn. Chair James D. "Jamie" Smith said he supports the Progress Park project but expressed concern about loss of farmland and emphasized that any zoning change is only as good as future boards that will enforce it.

After the public presentations and discussion, the Board voted to approve the Estoppel Statement certifying the Progress Park lot's covenant compliance. The roll call showed all present members voting in the affirmative (Bradley D. Martin; James D. "Jamie" Smith; Rolland R. Cook; Jesse R. Burnett; Sarah P. Crockett; J.W. "Dicky" Morgan). The approval does not authorize construction; Mr. Bear and Mr. Farthing emphasized that the site plan, permits and any regulatory approvals remain to be reviewed.

Chair Smith also proposed forming two task forces: one including Board and School Board members to plan how data-center revenue might be spent for schools, and another to increase community engagement on infrastructure priorities; the board authorized staff to form those task forces.

The meeting record shows the board entered a closed meeting later that evening for prospective business (recorded as Project Quercus) under statutory authority; upon return the board certified the closed meeting. The transcript and public comments indicate community concern over transparency, environmental impacts and long-term land use. Residents asked the Board to consider temporary ordinances or stricter land-use tools to require public hearings for projects with high water or power demand.

Next steps: Fluidstack must submit a site plan and secure any required permits; the county's regulatory review and subsequent public notices will govern whether the project proceeds and under what conditions.