Pittsburg County commissioners table vote on tax-incentive plan for proposed Iren data center after lengthy public hearing

Pittsburg County commissioners on June 22 tabled a decision on a proposed tax incentive plan for the Emerald ProjectCo data center — a project presented by developer Iren — after a second required public hearing drew dozens of residents with competing views on jobs, water use and tax breaks.

The hearing featured presentations from David Floyd, who explained that the Oklahoma Development Act requires two public hearings before a tax abatement may be adopted, and Jason Date of Iren, who said the planned campus would deliver roughly 1,600 megawatts, place structures on about 10% of a 2,000-acre site, and operate a closed-loop cooling system the company estimated would use roughly “the annual water of five households.” Date said the project expects about 100 permanent jobs and about 1,000 construction jobs, estimated up to $60 million in annual tax receipts, and that the developer planned a road-use agreement and community-betterment payments.

The bulk of the meeting comprised public comments. Supporters and opponents described mixed experiences at a comparable Iren facility in Childress, Texas. Randy Hass, representing Robertson Construction, said local firms would be used on the project. Jess Wilson, who visited Childress, said traffic increased there but he found fewer of the catastrophic effects circulating on social media and urged that decisions be based on facts. Sam Rhyne said he had spoken with residents near the Childress site and that noise and water burdens had been manageable.

Opponents urged delay and additional studies. Brandon Bailey said key water, wastewater and environmental studies were missing and estimated such studies would take six to nine months; he called for binding language requiring a closed-loop system and a written road-use agreement. Regina VanBlaricom said she had spoken to Childress residents and worried about infrastructure strain, noting the proposed project’s proximity to a local school. Brenda Sieben and others asked for air-quality and environmental impact studies and expressed concern about effects on farmland and the water table. Several speakers, including Levi Gilmore, criticized the proposed 85% tax abatement as unfair to residents and local taxpayers.

Commissioner Charlie Rogers thanked residents for speaking and asked whether the public would accept a reduced abatement of 75% instead of 85%, outlining how that change would affect county revenue and the funding available to local entities; Rogers said the county budget is roughly $8 million a year. Commissioners also noted limits of county authority: Rogers and the board said environmental oversight and wastewater matters are regulated by state agencies. Chairman Ross Selman and Commissioner Mike Haynes said they had received threats over the issue and emphasized that no vote had been taken and no bribes were received.

After discussion, Selman moved, Haynes seconded and the board unanimously voted to table the Project Plan and return it to the TID review committee for further negotiations; the motion passed 3–0. The board then adjourned.

The immediate effect is procedural: no TIF designation or tax abatement was adopted at the June 22 meeting. The TID review committee will resume negotiations and may return a revised Project Plan to the commissioners for a future vote. Residents at the hearing asked the county to secure written, enforceable contract terms for water, road use, noise and successor liability before any final approval.