Residents urge supervisors to block data-center "technology overlay" after town-hall backlash; motion to end process withdrawn

Dozens of New Kent County residents packed the boardroom on April 13 and urged supervisors to oppose a proposed Technology Overlay District, saying the designation would invite large data centers that threaten rural character, increase utility costs and water use, and create noise and environmental impacts.

"Data centers do not belong in New Kent County," Board Chair Mr. Steers said in remarks opening the discussion, adding that the county currently has no development applications for data centers and that he had spoken with officials in surrounding counties who linked an overlay adoption to being "on the map" for data-center developers.

Public commenters across districts pressed the board to stop the TOD process. Tom English told the board the draft would "create a slightly streamlined process to entice data centers" and warned residents could lose "peace and quiet, still nights and starry skies." Shelley Wiggins, executive director of New Kent Christian Academy, urged supervisors to keep school transportation funding intact for families who already depend on it, noting 36 George Watkins Elementary students rely on county-provided transport to her center.

Other residents cited water consumption and utility-rate impacts, limited long-term local job creation, and concerns about forever-chemical risks and air pollution. Gary Brose said communities that accepted data centers often felt "buyers remorse," and Kirsten Krostic called the overlay a public-policy gamble that could expose the county to legal and planning challenges once qualifications are adopted.

In response to the public outcry, Supervisor Jordan Stewart moved that the board "direct staff to discontinue the process for establishing a technology overlay district." Board members debated whether discontinuing the formal TOD work would reduce the countys ability to manage future proposals or whether continuing staff work and public hearings provided more transparency. Several supervisors said they wanted a full public hearing and wider notice if the board proceeds.

After extended discussion and objections about notice among board members — including concerns raised that some supervisors had not been contacted about the motion in advance — Stewart withdrew the motion. The subject remains unresolved; staff told the board they will plan community meetings and, if the board wishes to proceed later, any public hearing will be advertised according to Virginia law.

Chair Steers told the audience the county has seen many public comments through planning channels and social media and said staff would coordinate future community engagement. The board did not adopt, reject, or otherwise finalize an ordinance or policy at the meeting.

What happens next: Supervisors said they will consider additional community meetings and public hearings before deciding whether to proceed with, amend, or discontinue work on a technology overlay district. No formal vote ended the process.