For the second time in as many meetings, the Reno County Commission rejected motions to ban data centers—this time larger than 1 acre—and battery energy storage systems (BESS) in the county’s zoning jurisdiction during a special meeting Monday evening in front of a live audience of about 90 people and, as of Tuesday morning, 260 viewers on YouTube.
A majority of commissioners doesn’t want to ban BESS or data centers right now; that much is clear, but it was already clear after the June 9 commission meeting. The meeting crossed out one option that was already crossed out from a list of potential ways to address the issues of BESS and data centers.
Commissioners could have asked the county planning commission to develop regulations for those industries. They could have asked the planning commission to propose standard conditions for conditional use permits (CUPs) for those industries. They could have asked the planning commission to consider whether they are appropriate industries in the county’s zoning jurisdiction or whether either should be banned. They could have proposed a moratorium while any of those steps were taken.
Commissioners could even have positively affirmed their faith in the planning commission and the county’s CUP process to protect the interests and well-being of county residents and left it at that.
Any of those steps would have given a clear signal of how this commission wants to handle those industries. That would have achieved something, moving things forward. Instead, the main achievement of Monday’s meeting was frustrating an unusually large audience of primarily BESS and data center opponents.
At its June 9 meeting, the City of Hutchinson Planning Commission recommended that the city council ban data centers and BESS in residential zoning districts and require CUPs for them in commercial and industrial districts while the city develops long-term regulations for those industries. That step essentially puts the city on par with what the county already requires, but BESS and data center opponents showed less agitation leaving that Hutchinson Planning Commission meeting than Monday’s Reno County Commission meeting, because the city showed action and forward movement.
Hutchinson isn’t employing a moratorium as it plans permanent rules, and a ban doesn’t appear to be the likeliest outcome of that process. But advocates can see movement. That audience didn’t argue with or heckle planning commissioners the way some members of Monday’s audience argued and heckled. They could see movement, and the city even laid out a roadmap and timeline for its work on regulations.
The county’s planning commission could act on its own initiative to make a recommendation to the county commission. But we could hardly fault those appointed volunteers if they waited for a clear signal from the elected officials as to what sort of recommendations they would act on. The county commission’s inaction does not do anyone any favors.
The problem, though, is that while a majority don’t want a ban, it’s unclear whether there currently is any direction with the support of a majority of commissioners. So we are left with stasis, not because commissioners want to keep the status quo, but because they can’t agree on how to change it.
To get unstuck, commissioners may have to compromise, take time to hash the issues out, and find a solution that a simple majority can live with. The real work of politics.
– The Hutchinson Tribune Editorial Board