A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Franklin County adopts data-center regulations after public concerns about water and renewables

May 21, 2026 | Franklin County, Pennsylvania


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Franklin County adopts data-center regulations after public concerns about water and renewables
Franklin County commissioners voted to adopt a revised Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance amendment aimed at regulating data centers after public comment and a multi-step review process.

County staff member Carrie told the board the revised SALDO amendment had been reworked at the commissioners' direction and subjected to two public hearings. "Staff has prepared an amendment that is responsive to your direction and we look forward to your consideration tonight," she said.

Supporters of the amendment urged adoption despite unresolved questions, arguing that some municipalities lack zoning and that something on the books is preferable to no regulation. A commissioner who led the motion said the county must provide guidance where municipalities have no zoning and that the ordinance can be amended later. The commissioner also directed staff to monitor the rules on a periodic basis, suggesting a biannual review.

Members of the public urged attention to specific provisions. Jacob Reed of Green Castle said he supported the amendment as presented but urged ongoing engagement and later fixes. "The future isn't inevitable. It's whatever we decide to make it," Reed said, urging the board to shape local policy on data centers and renewable-energy integration.

Peters Township resident Josh Redmond raised a separate concern about water supply and enforcement. He told the board he feared large campus-style data centers could strain local water resources and questioned whether the proposed enforcement penalty would be sufficient if a large operator exceeded water limits. "If he just pays $500, he can suck as much water as he desires," Redmond said, characterizing the penalty structure as potentially inadequate.

Elliot, a county staff member, replied that the $500 penalty in the proposed amendment is the maximum statutory penalty and that anything higher would conflict with the municipality planning code; he noted the $500 can be assessed per day.

After discussion, commissioners voted by voice to approve the SALDO amendment. Supporters said the ordinance provides countywide guidance while allowing municipalities to adopt or modify provisions to fit local circumstances.

The board approved the measure by voice vote; the transcript records affirmative responses from commissioners but does not provide a roll-call tally. Commissioners asked staff to report back periodically so the county can adjust requirements to reflect technological or legal changes.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee