Bay City asks planning staff to study data‑center rules after months of public concern; resolution passes unanimously

The Bay City Commission voted unanimously on Jan. 5 to ask planning staff and the city’s zoning consultant to study the local implications of data‑center development and to identify public‑engagement questions and potential zoning provisions.

“My intent is to be proactive and to get public input through the planning commission,” Mayor Gerard said while introducing the resolution, urging the city to prepare questions and zoning language rather than react after a proposal arrives.

The resolution followed a lengthy public‑comment period in which dozens of residents and stakeholders expressed a range of views. Opponents warned about long‑term environmental impacts, water use, noise and limited local job creation. Marilee White (1119 Frasier Street) said data centers ‘‘don’t create enough jobs to justify such a large‑scale project’’ and raised concerns about PFAS and water impacts. Other commenters urged strict limits on water and electricity use, noise setbacks, and community‑benefit agreements.

Construction‑trades and labor representatives urged a careful, technical approach. Justin Palmerville, business manager for UA Local 85, said Bay City may lack suitable large parcels for mega centers and recommended subject‑matter expertise when framing any rules. Dion (Bridal Beranek), an electrician representing 600 workers, urged commissioners to review Michigan Public Acts 181 and 207 when weighing protections for jobs and rates.

Commissioners discussed the practical likelihood of large centers within city limits (many said the city lacks suitable sites) and emphasized that the resolution does not ban data centers but rather triggers a public process to identify questions and constraints. Several commissioners asked staff to obtain a quote from the zoning consultant for a scoped study and to return with cost and scope options.

Commissioner Tenney moved to approve the resolution; Commissioner Runberg seconded. Roll call recorded nine yes votes and the motion passed.