Ohio data centre project faces backlash after one-year moratorium
Grove City is facing a split among residents regarding a charter amendment targeting substantial developments, including data centers. Proponents assert this measure safeguards the community's unique character and resources against unchecked growth. In contrast, critics warn that the amendment could stifle potential economic opportunities. The decision on this pivotal amendment will be presented…
In Grove City, Ohio, a proposed charter amendment has ignited a heated debate that shows no signs of abating. On one hand are residents and leaders advocating for the amendment's protection benefits, while on the other are those warning of severe economic repercussions. This conflict reflects a nationwide trend of opposition to data centers, with Grove City taking an unusually strong stance against them, according to an Axios report.
The controversy revolves around a planned 300-acre, $6.9 billion high-density computing/data-center campus. The developers chose the site due to its proximity to a 345-kilovolt electrical substation, claiming it's ideal for a power-intensive facility. However, concerns over electricity demand, water usage, noise, backup generators, traffic, environmental impact, and long-term character of Grove City have mounted.
This intense opposition prompted the city council to impose a one-year moratorium on all data center projects, including the proposed campus. The opposition group, Protect Grove City, did not stop at the moratorium. They drafted a charter amendment to block data centers and other large development projects unless approved by voters. The group gathered over 2,000 signatures, necessitating its placement on the November ballot.
The amendment's scope is far-reaching. Any development occupying 50 or more acres, using 20 megawatts of power, or consuming 500,000 gallons of water daily would face a referendum. Developers would also have to foot the bill for related ballot costs.
Critics, including some city and regional economic development leaders, argue that the amendment's impact would be catastrophic. Council President Ted Berry stated that it "would literally kill the city," while former U.S. Rep. and Ohio Chamber of Commerce CEO Steve Stivers called it a "development amendment" that signals a "don't grow" policy.
Interestingly, the opposition group is willing to negotiate. They propose a compromise version that reduces the 50-acre threshold to 750,000 square feet and removes requirements for existing companies. This version would replace the original if council sends it to the ballot. The group would withdraw their current amendment in favor of the compromise.
However, the new draft has not been publicly vetted, and council is unlikely to replace the original amendment with this one. This strategy by the opposition group has been likened to blackmail by some, including council President Ted Berry. Belt, a leader in the opposition group, maintains that their intent is to "come to the table in good faith," not blackmail. Berry, however, feels the issue has lost support and seems ready to let it go to the ballot as proposed.
Written by urgent.news from Times of India's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
