Residents press Trenton council for records, pause on proposed Prolois data center

At the April 2, 2026 Trenton City Council meeting, residents pressed elected officials to produce communications and halt final approvals tied to a proposed large data center connected in public remarks to a developer identified in meeting materials as Prolois. Citizens urged the council to preserve public records and consider a moratorium while statewide and federal policy work on data-center impacts proceeds.

Jake Davis, a resident who said he submitted public-records requests and a confidentiality agreement exists between the city and the developer, said the agreement cannot override Ohio law: “Notwithstanding anything to the contrary… the receiving party’s obligations here are subject to all applicable law, including without limitation the Ohio Public Records Act, Revised Code 149.43.” He told council the communications he requested on March 5 have largely not been produced and called on the city to make all records related to the project and motion 27-2026 available, preserved and accessible.

Environmental and public-health concerns followed. Melinda Zemper, a board member of Save Ohio Parks, told council that, in her calculations, a 250-megawatt data center could produce “between 1.1 and 1.3 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent” over a year and compared the emissions to tens of thousands of additional gasoline-powered cars. She called for a pause on approvals until state-level study and broader policy decisions are complete.

Several residents also said the March 30 planning commission meeting on the project lasted under 10 minutes and did not take public comment, and they asked the council to explain what the commission actually approved. “Approving something this significant before all the facts are in… makes an outcome look predetermined,” one speaker said.

City leaders responded that Ohio law overrides private non‑disclosure agreements and that staff have been producing public records that are not legally exempt. Mayor Ryan Perry and City Manager Nichols addressed water-use questions raised by residents, saying a city location limits a private developer’s ability to drill directly into the aquifer and that, as city officials described it, any large user inside city limits must buy water from the city and send waste into the sewer system rather than drawing directly from groundwater.

Council did not vote on a moratorium at the meeting. No formal council direction to pause or rescind planning commission action was recorded in the transcript; residents said they will continue to press for additional disclosures, review and public participation.

What’s next: speakers said they will pursue production of the requested communications and records; council members repeatedly encouraged residents to bring concerns to the seven council members and to participate in future meetings. The planning commission action cited by speakers (March 30) and the confidentiality agreement dated Oct. 20, 2025 were central to public requests for transparency.