Unidentified images of three of the 2,500 artificial intelligence (AI) data centers now in operation across the U.S. – screenshot
By Pauline Masson –
Rumors that a data center will be constructed in Pacific has sent an explosion of worry on local Facebook pages and word of mouth conversations.
Artificial intelligence (AI) data centers, the backbone of the internet, are being constructed at a rapid pace all across the U.S. Tech companies have spent billions of dollars to build new ones, with promises of economic boons to cities where they locate.
They have also poured billions of dollars into local economies. If one were to be built here it would be a sea change in city finances. But citizens are concerned about the total impact of the hugh energy and water use that a data center would have on Pacific.
While data centers themselves create few permanent jobs, what they do create is huge increases in taxes collected by cities, school and fire districts.
Like heart transplants, DNA sequencing, and the internet, once humanity discovers a new window of learning, there is no turning back.
Data centers are here to stay. In the United States, there are over 2,500 data centers now. The question here is what impact would one have on the local community.
Data centers use a huge amount of energy, but they can double the tax revenue of a small city, funding infrastructure improvement and resurrect school and fire districts struggling with limited resources.
City leaders are left to weigh the possible good against the possible bad.
One of the biggest concern with Pacific citizens seems to be secrecy, a government policy that has plagued the city in recent years.
Clearly cities and property owners have a right to withhold discussion on a possible property sale – or a proposed development – until an agreement is reached.
They have the right to stay mum.
But the downside is that residents form their opinions – some very strong – without a clear picture of the proposed developments.
This is a two-edged sword. At what point the public should be brought into the conversation has a mixed history in Pacific.
When a group of citizens wanted to build a skate park in the city, this administration appointed a committee to oversee skate park design and development and held public workshops so citizens could look at possibilities and offer their desire on what should be included in a skate park.
One need only look at the Manors of Brush Creek subdivision on LaMar parkway to see how public support can go astray. Neighbors of the development made repeated pleas for an opportunity to discuss the project with officials before a final decision. Their pleas were rejected by the mayor and BOA, which led to the unseating of all officials on the ballot at the next election, and electing the current mayor and three of the current aldermen.
The BOA experienced a bit of a spat – appearing to relate to city secrecy – at the Jan. 20 meeting when alderman Debbie Kelley made a motion calling for an ordinance that prohibits the city from entering into any non-disclosure agreements (NDA) related to land use and zoning matters.
Ms. Kelley did not say why she was asking for the ordinance. After adding the phrase “with the approval of the BOA,” the measure passed 5-1. Alderman James Cleeve, the single no vote, said he was not opposing the ordinance on merit but he had not had enough time to think about it.
We won’t report the many comments shared on local social media that show that citizens are thinking about it, but it is worth noting that worries about a data center in Pacific are being aired.
Nationally, there are reports of huge positive impact that data centers have on the local tax base that enables small cities, school and fire districts that rely on taxes to reach unheard of levels of funding.
Clearly the city needs more money. The citizens might favor a data center if they had a say in the finer points of the agreement with the city as they did on the skate park – easily the most positive approval of any public works project in recent memory.
It may be too late for that now.
The decision comes down to a vote by the BOA that could happen at their 10:30 a.m. special meeting at city hall next Tuesday morning
Even though any action or discussion on the project will take place in closed session, citizens can speak out about the data center before the closed meeting during the public comments portion of the BOA meeting agenda, which is listed above the closed session.
This article is filled with positive claims about data centers that are un-sourced and frankly ridiculous. AI data centers are not “the backbone of the internet”, they do not “double the tax revenue” (how would that even work?!?), and they have most certainly not “poured billions of dollars into local economies”.
Can you cite a single source for any of these claims?
What is your source for “they do not double the revenue?” and “they have not poured billions of dollars into local economies.”
The tax exemption status will not bring tons of money into a community. Look at the lottery that was supposed to bring tons of money to education!!
I’m not aware that the developers have asked for tax exemptions. We may find out about that after the city approves a development plan.
This sounds like a piece written by cooperate lawyers. “BUT THE MONEY…”
Cooperate tax dodging has always been an issue that plagued our nation. It harms our communities at every level. “It will be different this time” is the logical fallacy that the abused use when they refuse to see the truth. This will only hurt us. Once they have their foot in the door, they won’t give a second thought about selling our communities future to the highest bidder.
Pauline Masson is in favor the data center because she is corrupt. BOUGHT AND PAID FOR. Typical of her field.
Tyler, Tyler, Tyler. Where do you get these ideas? If you can find anyone who is willing to pay me, please tell them I need raise.