Moratorium or a different approach? Nearby counties vary on data centers

As tech companies invest in land for potential data centers, south central Kansas has become a patchwork of regulations and moratoriums for the centers.

State lawmakers passed sales tax incentives for data centers last year. Soon after, companies began buying land, leaving local governments to contend with how, or if, the centers can develop.

Sedgwick County has a data center moratorium until mid-June as it works to create regulations for the facilities. Tech companies have already bought land in the western part of the county, which residents fear are for data centers. They have expressed concerns about water and energy use, groundwater contamination and noise levels.

“This is a new animal,” county resident John Hecht said at a recent county roundtable, “and we need to do it right. Take the time to do it right.”

Nearby counties are also figuring out how to contend with the centers.

In Harvey and Saline counties to the north, commissioners approved three-year moratoriums on data centers.

Both said they’re doing so to give their staff time to consider data center regulations. In Saline’s case, it’s also considering regulations for nuclear power and hydrogen-based facilities.

“I know there’s been concern raised that this would say, ‘Oh, Saline County is not open for business... if we put a temporary moratorium on these types of uses,’” County Administrator Philip Smith-Hanes said.

“We are not open for business to the same extent that Sedgwick County, Butler County, Harvey County, McPherson County and Dickinson County are not open for business, because all of those adjacent counties have either had or are in the process of having a moratorium on one or more of these uses.”

The Harvey County Commission unanimously passed its own moratorium on data center developments earlier this year. It is set to expire at the end of 2028.

The moratorium allows the county “time to research, consider or create regulations governing future development concerning data centers,” a release by Harvey County said.

McPherson County, north of Harvey, has a moratorium on data centers in unincorporated areas until Dec. 1, 2026.

“This will allow for the time to perform a thorough and comprehensive review of the impact of data centers in the community,” McPherson County Planning Director Jon Kinsey said in an email to The Eagle.

Kingman County, southwest of Sedgwick, has a year-and-a-half long moratorium that is set to expire in August 2027, according to planning director Amanda Stucky.

“Our planning and zoning board is in the process of making regulations that will protect our community,” Stucky said in an email to The Eagle.

Other counties have not adopted moratoriums. Some point to the centers as significant economic development opportunities that could bolster their tax base through property taxes and job creation.

Cormor Inc., a Canadian technology company, is nearing construction on an AI data center in Wellington, south of Wichita in Sumner County.

The site will initially begin as a 15-20 megawatt facility, with plans to grow to 100 megawatts. According to Data Center Map, which tracks data center developments across the country, the site will take up 31,000 square feet.

Sumner County allows data centers to be built only in districts zoned agricultural commercial.

A presentation given by Cormor to the Wellington City Council about the center touted “immediate and long-term benefits for the community.”

“A high-profile tech campus enhances Wellington’s profile for future economic development recruitment,” the presentation said.

Other counties have had companies express interest in developing centers. The Hutchinson Tribune reported that an AI company is interested in building a data center in the city in an industrial area.

As a result, Reno County is preparing a task force to study data center regulations but has yet to introduce a moratorium.

Unlike in Sedgwick County, which shares a planning department with Wichita, most surrounding counties have separate planning departments. That includes Reno County, which would allow larger cities, like Hutchinson, to decide whether they also want to regulate the centers.

Hutchinson’s City Council appears to be split on whether it will introduce a moratorium, but most council members agreed that regulations needed to be considered.

“[The task force] came about because we thought the cities and the county ought to have as close together suggestions for these industry developments that are going to come about,” Reno County Commission Chair Ron Hirst said.

Butler County, east of Sedgwick County, said it does not have specific regulations for data centers, and it’s not interested in setting a long-term moratorium for the centers.

“It doesn’t take that long to put the regulations together,” Butler County Administrator Will Johnson said, “and all you’re going to do is kick the can down the road by doing a moratorium.”

It’s also more likely that the centers would want to locate closer to El Dorado, near water and power resources that unincorporated parts of the county don’t have, Johnson said.

El Dorado’s City Commission recently held a work session to learn more about the centers. The commission noted that it did not have any applications for a potential data center, but that there’s been interest in south central Kansas for them.

“Now, we can be proactive and we can determine, number one, do we want them in certain zones?” El Dorado City Manager David Dillner said. “Two, do we want them to be special use or by right and do we want specific regulations to help mitigate any risks that may come from these?”

Efforts to regulate data centers statewide failed in the Legislature this year.

A recent amendment at the Statehouse would have placed a three-year moratorium on data centers in counties that have recently declared a drought emergency, which would have included Sedgwick, Reno and Harvey counties, according to Sen. Chase Blasi.

That failed on a 12-22 vote in the Senate.

Other bills that were introduced to regulate the centers, including requiring them to used closed-loop systems to use less water, and only allowing them in industrially zoned areas, failed to make it out of their respective committees.