Residents and reporters press company on water, fire and grid impacts during county hearing on proposed data‑center expansion

A company representative presented options for expanding operations near Middletown and answered extended questions from supervisors, reporters and residents about potential environmental and public-safety effects on Des Moines County.

During the presentation and public Q&A, the representative described a planned maximum capacity of 25 megawatts for the site and said expansion could involve either Bitcoin mining or a modular data-center (AI/high-performance compute) tenant. Several attendees repeatedly asked about cooling methods — whether the facility would use a closed-loop air system (no water) or an evaporative water-based system — and whether any expansion would be subject to binding, written limits on water use.

Reporters and residents focused on four main concerns:

- Water use and wastewater handling: At least one participant cited a figure of roughly 43 million gallons per year associated with expansion scenarios and asked for specific wastewater plans and destinations. County emergency management, reporters and public commenters pressed the company for documentation on water use and disposal and requested written assurances from local utilities about the grid and supply impacts.

- Fire and hazmat risks: Public-safety officials and the county’s safety director asked whether the company had reviewed fire and emergency-response plans with local law enforcement, fire and hazmat teams. Commenters emphasized that burned electronic equipment can produce hazardous emissions and said responders need accessible hazard information.

- Local communications and outreach: Multiple reporters (Lori Cochran of the Burlington Beacon and Tracy Lamb of the Hawkeye) said they had attempted to contact the company and asked how the public should reach a company representative for follow-up; one reporter said repeated emails and in-person attempts had received no response.

- Local economic and traffic impacts: Supervisors asked about local hiring, construction contracting and property-tax contributions for a 25-megawatt facility; road and gate traffic patterns near Middletown and Sperry were raised as issues that would need data from the company.

Company responses in the meeting were mixed: the representative said closed-loop air cooling is possible and that a closed-loop system would not use water, but also acknowledged that some cooling configurations may rely on evaporative methods depending on tenant and capacity. The representative agreed to follow up with the county’s emergency management office and suggested supplying additional documentation by email, but did not provide binding written limits on future water use at the meeting.

Lori Cochran, a reporter with the Burlington Beacon, said: "I've emailed you and your company several times and never gotten a response." Tracy Lamb, city editor of the Hawkeye, also asked when the company purchased the parcel and when it first contacted county land‑use staff; planning staff said the sale purchase was recorded May 7, 2025 and an initial letter dated September 2024 is in county records.

Several public commenters asked the company to obtain written statements from local utilities confirming that the grid and water systems could accommodate any expansion without negative impacts; one commenter urged that any future concessions be placed in writing. County emergency-management staff recommended the company contact Shannon Prada to coordinate emergency-response planning.

The board heard the presentation and extensive public comment but took no formal action on the proposal at the June 23 meeting; supervisors said they wanted more documentation about water use, grid impacts and emergency‑response planning before considering policy or permitting changes. The company representative agreed to provide additional materials to the county and to follow up with emergency management.