Your browser doesn't support audio playback.
A panel discussion consisting of community, political and data center industry leaders Tuesday night at Shepherd University has reignited the debate over local control of data center development in the state.
The discussion, organized by the Stubblefield Institute at Shepherd University, aimed to help the public better understand local and statewide impacts of data centers.
What became clear throughout the night is that local leaders and community members feel ignored by the development process in place.
House Bill 2014 – which established the state’s microgrid and data center certified program last year – exempts the projects from any county or municipal oversight including zoning, building permitting or other local license requirements.
The evening’s moderator, Steve Pearson, editor of local newspaper The Observer Weekly, reflected on how the lack of local control in 2025’s HB 2014 drew him into the issue. He also noted how quickly the state government moved on the issue of data centers.
“Here we are, in the course of a year, with a whole new industry in West Virginia,” he said. “Throughout that process, you know, it’s all been at the Legislature. It’s been, you know, I don’t want to say behind closed doors, but I mean, it hasn’t been out in the community.”
Dado Slezak, executive vice president of Utility Innovation for QTS Data Centers, laid out the development process his company usually follows to create local connections and relationships with the local community in the leadup to breaking ground on a data center.
“You will be surprised, but the serious parties – I like to think QTS is one of them – will spend a lot of time, sometimes even years, getting to know the geography, the people, the community, because you just cannot pull off a project that size without the people,” he said.
But Amy Margolies, executive director of the grassroots coalition Tucker United, said the reality of development for the Ridgeline Facility in Tucker County has been a far cry from the idyllic process Slezak laid out. She said local leaders were shocked to discover the development was moving forward.
The level of secrecy surrounding the Ridgeline Facility and its developer Fundamental Data have led Tucker United to team up with other groups including the Sierra Club to appeal to the courts and file complaints with regulators to try and force the release of more information. Margolies said they are not opposed to innovation or economic development but simply want equitable partnership in those endeavors.
“All of this is about a right process, right place and a right profit share,” Margolies said. “I think it really comes down to figuring that out, and we cannot figure that out without being at the table. And that is the steady drumbeat we have been saying from Tucker County is just we want to have a conversation.”
The original draft of HB 2014 included a distribution structure that would send all tax revenue from high impact data centers to state coffers. The final version of the bill sends 30% to counties. But in a community dependent on the tourism industry and prideful of its natural beauty, Margolies said a lot of residents are left wondering if 30% is enough to shoulder 100% of the cost in local effects.
“When I hear this idea of ‘We need to power our digital future.’ Whose digital future? A lot of West Virginians are not even living in the digital present,” Margolies said. “One in five West Virginians doesn’t have access to a reliable broadband. I think when we think about all of these things, we have to make sure we’re not being asked to build this infrastructure and we’re going to be last in line to use it.”
Cara Keys, Jefferson County commissioner, said the lack of local control over data centers is unique to West Virginia. She pointed towards her neighbors in what has been dubbed “Data Center Alley” in Virginia where the county not only receives millions in annual revenue but also retains local zoning control to be responsive to residents’ needs.
“Loudoun County has almost $2 billion a year in real estate taxes for data centers, and they have learned over the past 10 years how residents feel about setbacks,” she said. “What that used to be 200 feet from a residential dwelling has been increased to 500 feet.”
Keys, who is also a commercial real estate appraiser, called on the legislature to reestablish some form of local input and control.
“Be critical of this bill,” she said. “This bill allowed Charleston to supersede local control. Everything we had in place is thrown out the window.”
She said the state is in a unique position to learn from other states how best to grow with data centers.
“I think West Virginia has a history of making itself a future victim with poor planning,” Keys said. “Applying critical thinking and what we’ve learned and lessons we’ve learned from data centers across the country. How can we mitigate this to make data centers successful in West Virginia?”
Chris Morris, state data economy liaison and director of the Data Economy Office of the Department of Economic Development, was the fourth panelist for the night. His office is new.
“So far, I’ve not hired anyone yet,” he said. “I do have some folks on loan from other areas of the Office of Energy and in economic development division.”
But Morris was open to adjusting the state’s process and suggested his office could create a local coordinator position to better communicate what the state is doing and respond to local feedback.