County to continue without data center moratorium

The Macon County Board of Commissioners briefly discussed on Sept. 8 the possibility of issuing a moratorium on data centers, but elected not to pursue one. AI data centers have become a topic of conversation in Macon County, echoing a national discussion about the presence of facilities designed to manage enormous amounts of data for large language models. These data centers are known for using large amounts of electricity and water, creating light and noise pollution, taking up lots of available space while generating low tax revenue and employing comparatively few local workers. While the phrase "data center" has traditionally referred to benign server facilities used to manage data for businesses and organizations, the term has more recently been used by the general public to refer to the massive facilities required to power AI and cryptocurrency-mining operations. Members of the public rallied against data centers over the summer in Macon County, with the Town of Franklin adopting a moratorium on new data center construction in July and the Town of Highlands set to adopt one in August. These moratoriums have been considered and adopted by town, city and county governments across the state, temporarily blocking data centers from being built or constructed until their respective local governments can develop prohibitive restrictions for them. Macon County attorney Eric Ridenour advised against issuing a moratorium at the commissioners' Sept. 8 meeting, saying he believes the county Planning Board's recommended restrictions, adopted in August, are sufficient to prevent a developer from attempting to build a data center in Macon County. These restrictions include clarifying language in the high-impact land use ordinance to require a prospective data center to operate only between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. and establish noise, space and vegetation buffers between the facilities and neighboring properties. The ordinance was previously amended in 2023 to add cryptocurrency mining to a list of high-impact uses which includes sawmills, slaughterhouses, airfields and other facilities. During public sessions in July, August and September, people argued the county is not going far enough with the amendment, requesting they also implement a moratorium or add steeper restrictions to more strongly prohibit them. Sarah Johnson, who spoke at other commissioners and Planning Board meetings, said in September, "The health impacts, pollution, energy costs, resource consumption and farmland loss and wildlife disruption are too great to leave everybody running wild in the mountains like this." Johnson said she would like to see a moratorium, or at least some more restrictions in the county ordinance such as requiring cooling infrastructure for the facility be closely regulated and monitored, capping the number of generators a facility can have, and requiring a prospective business put 10 years of employee salaries into a capital bond with the state to protect employees to "ensure the county employees will have some form of financial comp once the business fails." Matt Jackson said, "I think by being one of the first counties that has a hard-set rule, and so many other people are exploring ideas, that sets us up for potential loopholes that we're not thinking of or seeing. I think it would be a good idea to have the moratorium in conjunction with the new rules, which look good and strong, but we don't know what we don't know. There can be much more out there." Responding to public comments and addressing the board, Ridenour said he believes after an initial review it would be legally possible to implement a moratorium, but said doing so could undermine work already done. "I don't think it strengthens anything that we've done. I think, in the long run, it could potentially weaken it," Ridenour said. "People don't see what Joe [Allen, planning director] does during the day. They don't see what I do during the day, and the thought processes and the knowledge of cases that have been overturned, and all that gets factored in." He said adding more restrictions or implementing a moratorium could undermine the efforts to prevent data centers from establishing in the county, adding space for potential loopholes or vulnerabilities that could be exploited by a company. He said the current amended high-impact land use ordinance should be enough to prevent data centers from being built. "I think it undermines what is already done," Ridenour said of a moratorium. The commissioners did not make a motion to implement a moratorium.

County to continue without data center moratorium

Contact Us