Pulaski County, Arkansas, Debates Data Center Projects and Proposed Regulations
Pulaski County, Arkansas, is experiencing a significant debate over two planned data centers, one by Google and another by AVAIO Digital. Local officials and business leaders support the projects for their potential tax revenue, while community members and some elected officials express concerns over water and electricity usage, environmental impact, and lack of public input. Proposed land use regulations aimed at addressing these concerns were sent for further study by the Quorum Court.
The national debate surrounding data center development has reached central Arkansas, specifically Pulaski County, where two new data centers are planned by Google and AVAIO Digital. Little Rock Regional Chamber President Jay Chesshir and utility executives advocate for the projects, highlighting estimated property tax revenues of $4.5 million from the Google facility alone, and promoting an informational website to counter what they call "misinformation." They assert that the companies are environmentally conscious and that utility costs will not shift to residential customers.
However, this optimism is met with strong opposition from community members and some elected officials, including Justice of the Peace Julie Blackwood and Democratic county judge nominee Wendell Griffen. Concerns center on the immense water and electricity demands of these facilities, with Central Arkansas Water CEO Tad Bohannan stating one data center could use four million gallons of water daily on hot days. Critics also point to a lack of public transparency due to non-disclosure agreements and the potential environmental impact. A Gallup survey mentioned in the article indicates significant national opposition to data centers in local communities.
During a recent Quorum Court meeting, proposed land use regulations for data centers, sponsored by Justice of the Peace Julie Blackwood, were discussed. Despite some debate and public dissent, the Quorum Court voted to send these regulations to the county planning department for further study rather than immediately adding them to the May agenda. Public sentiment expressed on social media remains largely skeptical, demanding more detailed impact studies and greater transparency from local leaders.