Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Whitley County to ban or pause data‑center projects, citing water, noise and grid concerns
Summary
Dozens of residents urged the planning commission June 24 to adopt a moratorium or ban on hyperscale data centers, warning of groundwater depletion, noise that can affect livestock and diesel generator emissions; speakers also demanded transparency (no NDAs) and opposed tax abatements.
Dozens of residents and visitors urged the Whitley County Planning Commission on June 24 to adopt a moratorium or ban on large data centers, saying the projects pose risks to water supplies, quiet rural character and local infrastructure.
At a public listening session, multiple speakers described experiences near recently built or proposed campuses in neighboring counties and advocated protections ranging from caps on building size to a one‑year moratorium while the county completes ordinance drafting.
"There's lots of money behind these businesses and...they will pay the fines and that will negatively affect our community," said Hattie Preston, who raised concerns about water use, high‑pitched noise that she said can travel miles and reported livestock impacts she had seen elsewhere.
Several speakers urged a moratorium. "If you'd like to keep your jobs, I'd encourage you to listen to your constituents and follow Fountain County and passing a moratorium on data centers for Whitley County," said Wesley Hafenden, who identified himself as the Democratic nominee for state representative for most of Whitley County.
Speakers from Allen and New Haven counties described problems they attribute to large projects there: increased local water and electric demand, large numbers of diesel backup generators and changes to wetlands and farmland. "They make you a whole bunch of promises... They do not care about you," said a resident who said a nearby installation in Allen County produced permanent changes to wetlands and neighborhood character.
Residents also raised policy specifics they want addressed in any code: bans or severe restrictions on hyperscale campuses; mandatory closed‑loop cooling systems; caps on building size (one speaker suggested 100,000 square feet as a practical upper limit for the county); legally binding decommissioning bonds; explicit prohibitions on NDAs during negotiation; and no tax abatements for large projects.
Several speakers cited state and federal tax‑exemption programs or agreements that reduce data‑center tax liabilities. One commenter read from a state provision describing the data‑center retail and use tax exemption for qualifying projects, noting local governments can also provide property tax exemptions under conditions.
Commissioners listened and thanked attendees for turnout. No policy decision was made at the meeting; staff said the input would guide drafting. The listening session closed without a vote.
