Residents press Butler County on data-center rules and transparency

Dozens of residents used the public‑comment period at the Sept. 1 Butler County Commission meeting to demand clearer rules and more transparency around draft data‑center regulations. Kathy Crook of Benton Township said she only learned about discussions weeks ago and asked the commission to disclose whether non‑disclosure agreements (NDAs) exist and whether the public would be told if staff or the county had signed them. “If there is such a clause, I would think that would be a huge red flag because that's keeping information from the public,” Crook said.

Speakers repeatedly alleged developers or utilities had shaped draft language before it was published. Megan Wright presented documents she said were submitted late by PEC and counsel and asked why changes that favored industry appeared after public hearings had closed: “If the possible future applicant gets to write the rules, it isn't regulation, it is permission,” she said. Carrie Sherburne of El Dorado urged the commission to replace permissive language in the draft—"may require"—with a clear obligation that data‑center owners “shall require” payment of documented infrastructure and emergency‑service costs so taxpayers are not left with the bill.

County staff and commissioners repeatedly said there are no current data‑center applications and outlined the statutory notification and hearing process should an application arrive. Planning staff explained notifications must go to property owners within 1,000 feet in rural areas (200 feet in urban areas) and that every application triggers a public hearing at the planning commission before a recommendation reaches the county commission. Staff also described a state protest period that can require a supermajority vote if 20% of the property area in the notification boundary files a protest.

Several residents asked for a moratorium or at least more time for public hearings and work sessions; Christie Bowman specifically requested another public hearing after she said an attorney representing industry submitted late materials to planning and zoning. Commissioners said they expect to schedule review of planning and zoning recommendations when a full board can be present and said that individual applications would prompt separate hearings and notifications. The meeting did not include any formal vote on data‑center regulatory language; discussion and public comment will inform subsequent planning and zoning work and any future commission consideration.