Jackson County hearing on moratorium draws residents and unions to opposite sides of data center, battery storage debate

Jackson County held a public hearing June 1 on two proposed moratoriums — ordinance 6,074 (a 120-day pause on processing data-center and battery energy storage system land-use applications) and ordinance 6,087 (a related temporary moratorium with amended language). Dozens of residents and organizational representatives testified in a session that crystallized sharp differences over safety, environmental protections, notification, zoning and local economic benefits.

Supporters of the moratorium said the pause is necessary to fill regulatory gaps in the county's Unified Development Code and to give staff, the planning commission and the public time to craft protections. Beto Martinez, a Kansas City resident, said the moratorium “is reasonable. It's needed to ensure there's transparency, accountability and responsibility to the … residents of this community,” and urged the county to study cumulative public-health and environmental impacts and prepare decommissioning plans for facilities that will eventually be retired.

Residents who described firsthand concerns about water, emergency response and property impacts urged including battery energy storage systems (BESS) in the moratorium. Kelly Jabs, a Buckner–Sibley resident, said local officials and developers have not provided clear answers on monitoring and liability if a BESS fire or contamination occurs. “We need parameters that protect us and that mitigate the situations … we are in tornado alley, we are in flood areas,” Jabs said, urging a 120-day pause that moves quickly toward written protections.

Labor and construction representatives argued a moratorium risks stalling local union jobs and broader economic opportunity. Zack Dunn, representing the Laborers International Union of North America, said his union’s more than 4,000 local members stand to gain thousands of craft hours from data-center construction and urged the legislature to adopt “reasonable development” standards rather than freeze projects. Mike Talboy of the Kansas City Building and Construction Trades Council stressed safety improvements over decades and asked the county to use the period to set standards that still welcome projects.

Chair and legislators debated whether the pause should be 120 or 180 days, whether the issue should remain in full legislature for visibility, and whether separate treatment of BESS and data centers would be appropriate. The sponsor of 6,074 said 120 days is intended to give staff a firm deadline but could be extended if needed. After discussion, members moved to hold the ordinance to allow more drafting, outreach and possible amendment.