Residents press commissioners with safety, water and property-value concerns after staff brief on possible Prometheus data-center siting

County planning staff told the commission that state statute allows counties to create industrial parks or overlay PUDs and asked whether the board wanted staff to pursue regulatory options that could be used for large projects such as data centers. The request was prompted by conversations with Prometheus about a possible data center, an associated power plant and a man camp, staff said.

"This is kind of our first step," a planning staff member told the commission, asking for direction on whether to pursue amendments to PUD regulations that could provide a pathway for such projects. Commissioners said they wanted more definitive details about project location, infrastructure needs and controls before taking regulatory steps.

Public comment that followed was overwhelmingly opposed. Multiple residents who said they live in the east-county area that could be affected described concerns over water (wells and aquifers), potential sewage and man-camp impacts, noise and continuous low-frequency vibration, light pollution and loss of property value. Several speakers said Prometheus's plans were sketchy and that they had not seen long-term independent health or environmental impact assessments.

Chris Houle, who said he lives east of town, told the board, "I think I gave you all a map that kinda shows how many residential people live out there, and it would affect all of us." Brad Eisner said he believed property values would be severely reduced, that the development could threaten local water, and argued that community benefits offered so far (fire trucks, park improvements) were inadequate compared with what he described as large corporate gains.

Other speakers described the area as working ranchland with wildlife and livestock at stake. Betty Mosley described the prairie as a personal and community resource: "I love the prairie... This is what God has created for us." Several speakers asked the commission to require independent long-term studies and full disclosure of infrastructure, water, waste and traffic plans before any zoning or siting decision.

Commissioners emphasized they had received information but had not decided to pursue a PUD. One commissioner said industrial siting processes at the state level (industrial siting commission) might be more appropriate for very large projects because counties may lack staffing capacity to evaluate technical impacts. At the close of the discussion staff said they would not move forward without clear direction and more details.

What's next: No motion was made to adopt a PUD or change regulations. The board asked staff to continue gathering information; community members signaled they would continue advocacy and request independent impact assessments before any formal proposals move forward.