|
Logan County Board
September Special Zoning and Economic Development Committee Meeting
[September 18, 2026]
The Zoning and Economic
Development Committee of the larger Logan County Board held a
special meeting on Thursday, September 17th. This meeting was the
only one the Zoning Committee held this month, as their regular
meeting was canceled due to no action items. The committee held this
meeting to review and discuss amendments to a data center ordinance
for the county.
Four of the six committee members were in attendance. Chairman Gil
Turner, Hannah Fitzpatrick, Keenan Leesman, and Bob Sanders were
present, while Vice Chairman Kathy Schmidt and Joseph Kuhlman were
not.
Turner started by making a change to the agenda and moving public
comments up. Several members of the audience stated they wanted to
keep public comments at the end. Their reasoning was that they did
not know what the proposed amendments were and would have more to
say after the action item was discussed. Turner listened to the
feedback and kept the agenda the way it was.
The amendments were next. Leesman started the discussion on the
item. He shared that he had proposed a total of 18 amendments and
ranked them into one of three tiers. These tiers were “must have,
strongly recommended, and recommended.” While Leesman did not get
into what all the amendments were, the committee did hand out copies
of the suggested changes at the end of the meeting to those who
wanted a copy.
In addition to listing the
amendments and putting them into a tier, Leesman provided reasoning,
evidence, sources, and proposed language change to the previous
ordinance that did not pass. He gave an example, stating that one of
the must have items is a height requirement. Leesman’s research had
turned up that the average height limit seems to be 50 feet,
something that was not laid out in the previous draft ordinance.
Leesman clarified that he did not make these recommendations for
data centers. Rather, he made the recommendations with the county
citizen’s safety in mind. He also clarified that this ordinance
would set the bar for requirements that data center companies would
have to meet. At current, there are no requirements, so the county
would have to address each issue as it came up rather than having a
plan in place.
Fitzpatrick then suggested one additional amendment. Her suggestion
was to allow data centers to only build in districts that were zoned
M1 or M2, which are industrial districts. Leesman asked if she was
suggesting that the companies would have to get agricultural land,
should that be the land they were looking to build on, rezoned
industrial, and Fitzpatrick confirmed that this was her idea.
Sanders asked if this would limit the restrictions that the county
would be able to put in place. Zoning and Economic Development
Officer Al Green said that the companies would still have to follow
the restrictions set forth by the permit and the ordinance.
[to top of second column] |
Green continued,
stating that, due to some emails he had received, he felt it
important to review the need for an ordinance once more. He said
that, when Hut 8 applied, all they had to do was pay a $500
application fee, fill out a three-page form, and submit a site
diagram. Due to their site diagram not being “up to spec,” he
pulled their application. This would not stop another company
from paying the fee, filling out the form, and submitting a
diagram. No impact studies or surveys are needed.
This new ordinance, Green continued,
made the application process more restrictive. It puts more
responsibility on the companies to prove to the county that the
project is worth their while. According to Green, the Regional
Planning Commission wants to try to guide people into the county’s
comprehensive plan. The idea is for the M1 and M2 restrictions to be
less trying to get the companies to rezone agricultural land and
more having them build in areas where the infrastructure for their
projects already exists.
Fitzpatrick made a motion to send all 19 amendments and the
ordinance to the Regional Planning Commission, and then to the
Zoning Board of Appeals. The motion passed unanimously. Green then
stated that the fee schedule for the application fees would need to
be sent as well. The committee suggested a fee of $25,000 per
application. Leesman asked Green if this is in line with what wind
and solar farms were being charged, and he confirmed that it is. The
committee made a motion and passed it unanimously.
Public comments came next. The first commenter spoke on “the essence
of zoning,” claiming the committee was going against it. She argued
that land was already zoned industrial, so letting companies apply
to rezone agricultural land to industrial was against “the essence
of zoning.”
Other comments turned toward the need for a moratorium, with some
directly asking the committee about that. Turner did not have the
committee members respond, stating it was public comment, not time
for a discussion.
After the public comments, the committee made a motion to adjourn
the meeting.
[Matt Boutcher]
|
