Data Centers: Local Control, Public Transparency, and Community Consent

I am not categorically opposed to data centers, nor do I believe state government should categorically prohibit communities from welcoming them.

If a community determines that a data center will bring worthwhile investment, jobs, tax revenue, or other economic benefits, that community should have the ability to pursue that opportunity.

But the reverse must also be true.

Local communities must retain meaningful authority over the conditions under which data centers are built and operated within their jurisdictions.

That means cities and counties should be able to establish reasonable ordinances addressing issues such as land use, zoning, noise, water consumption, energy demand, infrastructure impacts, setbacks, environmental concerns, emergency planning, and other legitimate effects on surrounding property owners and residents.

A company seeking to invest in a community should not automatically receive the power to override that community's own rules.

Economic development should be a partnership, not a surrender of local authority.

Local Decisions Should Remain Local

Arkansas communities are different from one another.

What may be appropriate for one county, city, or industrial area may be entirely inappropriate for another.

State government should not impose a one-size-fits-all policy that prevents local governments from responding to the needs and concerns of the people they represent.

I support preserving local authority so communities can determine whether a proposed data center fits their long-term plans and establish reasonable standards governing its operation.

The role of the state should be to establish fair statewide rules where genuinely necessary—not to strip communities of their ability to govern themselves.

No NDAs for Public Officials Conducting the People's Business

I also have serious concerns about requiring elected or appointed public officials to sign nondisclosure agreements when negotiating matters that could substantially affect the communities they represent.

Private companies have legitimate proprietary information, and narrowly defined protections for genuine trade secrets may sometimes be appropriate.

But public officials are not corporate employees.

They are representatives of the people.

Requiring them to broadly conceal negotiations involving land use, public infrastructure, tax incentives, utility demands, or other significant community impacts is contrary to the principles of representative government.

A public official should not be placed in the position of knowing information that is critically important to the people they represent while being contractually prohibited from discussing it with them.

The Public's Right to Know Must Be Protected

Arkansans should also retain meaningful access to public records through the Freedom of Information Act.

Before a major data center project is approved, citizens should have access to the information necessary to understand what is being proposed and how it may affect their community.

That includes, to the fullest extent permitted by legitimate protections for narrowly defined proprietary information, information concerning public incentives, infrastructure commitments, water and energy demands, governmental agreements, land-use decisions, and other obligations undertaken by public entities.

FOIA exists because government belongs to the people.

Residents cannot meaningfully participate in representative government if important decisions are negotiated behind closed doors and the relevant information becomes available only after the decision has effectively been made.

My Position

My position is straightforward:

If a community wants a data center, that should be its choice. If a community wants to establish reasonable rules governing data centers, that should also be its choice.

I will defend the authority of local governments to adopt reasonable ordinances addressing the impacts of these facilities.

I will oppose efforts to use state law to unnecessarily strip communities of that authority.

I do not believe public officials should be required to sign broad nondisclosure agreements that prevent them from being accountable to the people they represent.

And I will defend the public's ability to use Arkansas's Freedom of Information Act to obtain the information necessary to evaluate decisions that may affect their property, infrastructure, utilities, finances, and quality of life.

Arkansas should welcome economic investment.

But economic development should never require abandoning local control, public accountability, or transparent government.

The community should have a voice. The rules should be clear. And the public should be able to see how the decision is being made.

With respect for all Arkansans,

Joshua Irby

Paid for by Joshua Irby