By Ryan Applegate
People’s Defender
Public discussion surrounding the possibility of a large-scale data center development in Adams County continued this week, with county officials emphasizing that no formal proposal has been submitted while residents sought additional clarity on what has occurred to date and what steps may come next.
In a press release issued Friday, March 27, the Adams County Board of Commissioners addressed recent attention following Amazon’s public reference to potential interest in the region. The statement noted that representatives associated with Amazon have approached the county, specifically regarding Sprigg Township, but described those communications as preliminary and limited in nature.
According to the release, no formal proposal has been submitted, no agreements have been entered into, and no financial or contractual commitments have been made by the county. Commissioners also stated that they have not received detailed project plans, identified sites, or specific infrastructure requirements.
The statement further indicated that Adams County remains in an early, exploratory stage, with no active project currently under consideration. Officials said they plan to host a series of community forums to provide residents with information and an opportunity to ask questions.
During the Monday, March 30 meeting of the Adams County Board of Commissioners, discussion reflected both the county’s position and questions raised by members of the public.
Adams County Common Pleas Court Judge Brett Spencer, speaking during the public comment portion of the meeting as a resident of Sprigg Township, addressed several topics related to the potential development, including tax structure, public process, and the timeline for decision making.
Spencer referenced figures derived from comparable projects indicating potential annual tax revenue associated with a data center development and asked how those figures would be considered if a proposal were to be presented. He also asked whether the county would consider delaying any decisions until after possible township level actions, including a potential ballot initiative related to zoning.
Commissioner Barbara Moore Holt responded that no negotiations have taken place and that the county has not agreed to any incentives. She stated that any figures discussed to date were based on general comparisons and not tied to a specific proposal.
Commissioners reiterated during the meeting that they have not received a formal proposal and that no decisions are pending. They indicated that additional information would be needed before any evaluation or action could occur.
Questions raised during the meeting also addressed how information has been shared to date. Spencer and others referenced public records that include communications between developers, utilities, and economic development officials.
Those records, which span early 2025 through early 2026, show that multiple developers have expressed interest in Adams County and have requested information related to infrastructure, utilities, and site readiness.
The correspondence includes coordination with organizations such as JobsOhio and Ohio Southeast Economic Development, as well as discussions involving utility providers including AEP Ohio and AES Ohio.
In those communications, developers requested details about power availability, permitting timelines, and potential development sites, including former power plant properties in the county. County Economic Development Director Paul Worley is included in the exchanges as a point of contact facilitating information sharing and scheduling discussions.
Commissioners stated that such communications are part of standard economic development activity and do not constitute formal negotiations or agreements. They also noted that in large scale development discussions, nondisclosure agreements are often used to protect proprietary information and prevent market speculation.
At the same time, officials acknowledged the importance of public involvement and stated that any future proposal would be subject to a public review process.
Additional topics discussed during the March 30 meeting included potential infrastructure considerations. Commissioners referenced general information that has been discussed in early conversations, including possible job numbers, facility scale, and utility needs, while emphasizing that no details have been confirmed in writing.
Water usage and sourcing were also mentioned during the meeting as part of those preliminary discussions, though commissioners noted that specific plans have not been submitted and would need to be evaluated if a proposal is presented.
The role of Sprigg Township and its residents was also part of the discussion. Spencer asked whether the county would consider waiting for potential township level decisions before taking action. Commissioners indicated that they intend to gather more information through public meetings and expert input before determining how and when decisions would be made, if necessary.
County officials stated that upcoming public forums will include opportunities for residents to hear from subject matter experts on areas such as infrastructure, utilities, environmental impact, and land use.
They emphasized that these forums are intended to provide information and do not represent any approval process or pending decision.
The public records referenced during the meeting also reflect broader activity related to economic development in the county, including ongoing work on infrastructure projects and coordination with state and regional partners.
In addition, communications from JobsOhio noted that while interest in data center development has increased across the state, not all projects move forward, and further steps would depend on specific project details and requirements.
As of this time, Adams County officials maintain that no formal data center project has been submitted for consideration. Future actions, if any, would depend on whether a proposal is presented and how it is evaluated through the county’s public process.
The issue is expected to remain a topic of discussion as additional information becomes available and as the county moves forward with planned public meetings.
Leave a Reply