Residents gathered at a La Porte County public forum to press officials for stronger local rules and more information about possible data center development, raising concerns about water use, power demands, noise, long‑term jobs and annexation.
Speaker 1, who led much of the discussion, said current county zoning treats data centers like warehouses and limits them to M1/M2 industrial areas (currently KOP). He argued data centers “bring an awful, awful lot of tax base” and said similar centers now “are approximately paying $30,000,000 a year in taxes for the coffers of the county.” At the same time, several residents said the facilities create few long‑term jobs and can bring environmental and quality‑of‑life harms.
The meeting focused on several specific risks and policy responses. Residents urged the county to require impact studies on wastewater, groundwater and wildlife; several speakers warned about PFAS and nitrates and asked that homeowners be offered third‑party water testing. Others stressed noise and frequency concerns tied to cooling fans; one attendee said a pending personal lawsuit underscores limits in county noise enforcement.
Speakers also discussed annexation, a recurring worry. Multiple participants said cities can annex property under state statute when landowners agree, limiting county ability to stop developments that move inside city boundaries. Speaker 1 cited the relevant state statutory process and encouraged residents to contact state legislators about bills that would restrict local control.
Several participants pointed to model ordinances used elsewhere — notably Loudoun County and Lake County — that create a special zoning category and add requirements such as road‑use agreements, distance limits from homes and schools, and mandatory special exceptions through the BZA. Speaker 8 said those “guardrails” should be built into the county draft so that approvals require multiple stages of review.
County staff and supporters of a draft ordinance said the document is posted on the La Porte County website and that the planning commission will hold a public hearing — likely in March — where residents can present formal comments. Speaker 1 said he would add attendees to an email list and reiterated the county’s willingness to slow processes through moratoria or more detailed permitting if needed to protect public resources.
No formal vote or ordinance adoption occurred at the forum. The next procedural step is the planning commission’s public hearing on the draft ordinance; county officials encouraged residents to study the posted draft, sign up for the email list and participate in the commission meeting.