Marshall County is five months into a two year moratorium on construction of Solar Farms, Battery Storage Facilities, Carbon Capture and Data Centers. This has been due to a small, but vocal group of NIMBYs. This has trickled down to restrictions in Culver and consideration of these issues in other Marshall County communities. As per a previous post here, I maintain that communities are either growing or dying. Setting that aside, there may be additional costs to our leadership’s decision to limit or stop development.
The recent actions of the state legislature and new governor has reimagined our tax structure. This means that local governing bodies have to figure out how to do more with less tax income. Turning away new development, with the associated additional tax income, is not a proactive way to address this.
All of the development associated with the construction under the moratorium has minimal long-term impact on county resources. As with any construction, there will be short-term impacts on roads, but those can be mitigated or negotiated as part of the development package. These are not projects that will employ hundreds of people (though the few they do require will be highly-skilled and well-paid), so they will not require acres of parking lots, they will not increase traffic counts on our roads post-construction, they will not cause any increase to our current housing shortage… What these developments will do is pay a lot in taxes, donate to local charities and provide resources for other development where we can look to additional high wage jobs.
Of the four moratorium targets, Data Centers in Indiana have specifically been touted by President Trump and our State government. Turning our backs on any of these initiatives makes us look provincial. That’s not the way I want our county to be perceived.
I am not saying that these should be given free rein and there should be no restrictions on their construction. I don’t know that a short (very short) moratorium isn’t appropriate while research is done, but a two year moratorium likely means that nothing happens for 18 months or more. We don’t have to reinvent the wheel here. Other communities have these and would happily share what they have learned. To my knowledge, there has been little time spent working on new regulations by Marshall County, let alone trying to reduce the length of the moratorium… of which 5 months have passed already… The recent changes to tax laws should make this a priority, not to mention the possibility that we are missing opportunities while other communities take advantage. Those opportunities could be gone if the needs are filled elsewhere.
The tax cost is just one effect on the NIMBYs (and the rest of us). A Department of Energy (DOE) report from December of last year found, “…data centers consumed about 4.4% of total U.S. electricity in 2023 and are expected to consume approximately 6.7 to 12% of total U.S. electricity by 2028. The report indicates that total data center electricity usage climbed from 58 TWh in 2014 to 176 TWh in 2023 and estimates an increase between 325 to 580 TWh by 2028.” As Data Centers consume more power, there will be costs to all of us as power production is ramped up (more costs), and competition for power drives the price up. Our moratorium stops two of the ancillary developments, solar and battery storage, that could help mitigate this too.
Allowing these facilities won’t reduce our electric bills. They could keep us from getting a double hit from higher taxes and higher electric bills and if done right, maybe lower taxes to help mitigate those higher electric bills.
One more time, for those in the back of the room… Communities are either growing or dying! This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t assure that it is smart growth, but extending an open hand in friendship is probably better than showing a closed fist. Our vocal NIMBYs may well cost us all in the end…
By Alfred Nyby June 23, 2025 - 8:23 pm
Recently I read about the Data Center boondoggle:
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/20/tax-breaks-for-tech-giants-data-centers-mean-less-income-for-states.html.
I am wary of tax breaks given to private enterprises. Too many times businesses are playing units of government off each other with limited, if any benefit to the community – often with the help of unscrupulous politicians.
By Kevin Berger June 24, 2025 - 9:52 am
Interesting Article! Thanks for sharing: http://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/20/tax-breaks-for-tech-giants-data-centers-mean-less-income-for-states.html
I fully acknowledge that tax abatements can be a race to the bottom, but when all of your competitors participate, standing by your principles can mean that you end up getting nothing. Per the article, 42 states are providing the sales tax break, so Indiana almost had to follow suit. I say almost, because you also have to weigh other competitive factors.
Indiana’s choice to eliminate sales tax on these projects is not something Marshall County has much say in. The moratorium Marshall County imposed is local though and all on them. They would have done a ban if they could get away with it. I feel that’s shortsighted.
I am not in favor of the county providing tax abatements unless they are presented with information that forces them to be competitive. It would appear that these developments are wanting to come here because of access to the grid, so that is one of the competitive factors I mentioned. I would like the county to try to create TIF districts for these projects. The taxes captured would go a long way to helping with any road and infrastructure improvements and these types of developments add very little if any burden on schools, libraries, etc.
I believe there is a huge difference in providing a tax abatement to get a company here initially compared to providing additional tax breaks when they add equipment or expand. With a new industry, taxes need to remain to cover any new burden caused by a new project. Any additional taxes abated are General Fund dollars we wouldn’t have anyway and are inconsequential in the calculation. Some of those will come in anyway when the abatement runs out. Claw-backs and monitoring of promises are prudent.
Thanks for commenting! I haven’t seen anything from you in a while.