Macon County Commissioners passed an ordinance amendment meant to deter data centers from setting up shop. The county’s approach is markedly different from what other Western North Carolina local governments have done. 

Commissioners voted unanimously during their Aug. 11 meeting to amend the ordinance after hearing from over a dozen residents who overwhelmingly voiced opposition to any such facility operating in their backyard. The comments echoed those heard throughout the country over the last year or so, highlighting the lack of local job creation, strains on infrastructure, environmental concerns and quality-of-life issues.

Later in the meeting, Commission Chair Josh Young mused over the fact that the pushback against data centers seems to be one of the rare issues that galvanizes the community despite any other political differences.

“I think this is one of the few times everyone agrees about the task at hand,” Young said.

Having seen the proposed amendment, some commenters expressed skepticism that the changes wouldn’t go far enough. Any unforeseen loophole could mean game over.

Following the public hearing, Commissioner John Shearl, a man with libertarian leanings and an acute disdain for technology, expressed how important the issue is for him and constituents whom he speaks with. Shearl asked Planning Board Chair David Culpepper to speak briefly to what was discussed during that board’s meeting the prior week.

“We looked at it and decided time was somewhat of the essence because we were told there were some vulnerabilities,” Culpepper said. “We recommended you pass the edited changes with this in mind. It is up to you guys if you want to do a moratorium, if you want to change the ordinance completely, that’s totally up to you guys, but the changes probably should be made so you can patch up whatever vulnerabilities there are in the current ordinance.” 

Next to speak was County Attorney Eric Ridenour, who explained the legal reasoning for choosing the amendment in lieu of a moratorium, contrary to so many other local governments that put a pause on any data center development for a year to figure out how to shore up their ordinances.

The amendment targets “cryptocurrency mining, data centers and server-based facilities” in the section of the ordinance discussing properties with “high-impact usage.” While other high-impact facilities can only operate between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., data centers are now confined to operating only from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. In addition, they can’t be operated out of cargo containers, railroad cars, semi-truck trailers or other storage containers, and there is a 750-foot setback requirement.

Ridenour considered that bans and moratoria are easier for companies wishing to build data centers to defeat in court, rendering them basically pointless in many cases. It’s better to regulate than to outright prohibit, he said, adding that he believes that none of the moratoria he’s seen around the region will hold up to legal scrutiny.
To satisfy the criteria for passing a moratorium, a local government must prove that other considered alternatives proved unviable and that a moratorium will “address the problem” and feature a “termination of work plan.” Saying that officials will study the issue isn’t fixing the problem, he posited.

“If you regulate it to the point that it’s not going to happen, you’re in a better, stronger legal position than if you take the moratorium or step back and study it further,” he said.

“I don’t see how they’ve complied with the statute,” he added, referring to other local governments that have enacted moratoria. “I think they’re hung out to dry right now if attacked.” 

Shearl seemed satisfied with Ridenour’s explanation but asked whether passing a moratorium in addition to the amendment could provide an extra layer of protection. Ridenour said he would investigate the efficacy of such a move and report back to the board.