Daviess County Paused Data Center Applications for One Year

The Fiscal Court’s moratorium gives one Kentucky county time to write local rules before large data center projects can enter the permitting pipeline.

May 30, 2026

A Google data center in The Dalles, Oregon. Daviess County Fiscal Court approved a one-year moratorium on data center applications while county officials study zoning, utility demand, water use, and local impacts. Photo by Tony Webster, via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 2.0.

Daviess County Fiscal Court voted on May 28, 2026, to approve a one-year moratorium on data center applications and permits. WFIE reported the vote was unanimous, and WKU Public Radio reported the ordinance took effect immediately.

The ordinance gives Daviess County one year to study how data centers would affect zoning, water use, electricity demand, noise, land use, and local permitting. The May 14 Fiscal Court agenda identified the ordinance as KOC 921.690 (2026) 03-2026, “An Ordinance Imposing a Temporary Moratorium on the Acceptance and Processing of Applications Related to I.T. Infrastructure Facilities (Including Data Centers).”

Daviess County has not approved or rejected a specific data center project.

It has temporarily closed the county application window while local officials decide what rules should exist before a developer files paperwork.

Daviess County acted before a developer filed

The Daviess County action started formally with a first reading on May 14. The Fiscal Court agenda listed the county officials involved: Judge/Executive Charlie Castlen; Commissioners Larry Conder, Janie Marksberry, and Chris Castlen; and County Attorney John Burlew.

The proposed ordinance addressed the acceptance and processing of applications for I.T. infrastructure facilities, including data centers. According to Spectrum News, the moratorium would direct planning and zoning officials not to accept applications for zoning permits, conditional use permits, site plans, or building permits related to data centers anywhere in the county.

The second reading and final vote came on May 28. WKU Public Radio reported that the Fiscal Court unanimously approved a one-year moratorium on applications and permits and that the pause gives the county time to draft zoning regulations for the industry and study possible local impacts.

Daviess County acted before a formal data center application was filed with the county. That timing is important. Once a developer files a zoning, site plan, utility, or building request, local officials may face legal timelines, staff recommendations, property owners’ expectations, economic development pressure, and public anger all at once.

A moratorium changes that order.

It first creates a pause, then a rule-writing period.

The moratorium creates a one-year rule-writing window

The moratorium does not create permanent data center rules. It creates a temporary stop on applications while Daviess County studies what those rules should be.

County Judge/Executive Charlie Castlen told Spectrum News that he and other officials attended a conference of Kentucky county executives where data centers were discussed. He said the three concerns he focused on were noise, water usage, and energy consumption.

Those are local government issues. Noise affects nearby homes. Water demand affects local supply planning. Electricity demand affects utility capacity and, depending on how costs are assigned, could affect ratepayers.

Data centers can also reshape land-use debates. Large facilities need land, utility access, cooling capacity, power infrastructure, road access, security, and local permits. When a county does not have specific data center standards, local staff may have to fit a new type of facility into older zoning categories written for other industrial uses.

That is what Daviess County is trying to avoid. The Fiscal Court used county ordinance authority to pause permit activity before the county had to judge a project under rules that may not match the scale of the use.

The county and city authorities do not match

Daviess County’s moratorium does not automatically control what happens inside the City of Owensboro. WKU Public Radio reported that Judge/Executive Castlen said Owensboro has a separate set of rules, and County Attorney John Burlew said Owensboro can regulate zoning inside the city.

That distinction matters because much of the public debate has focused on Owensboro. On May 11, the City of Owensboro issued a public statement stating that no active data center projects were being considered and that no formal proposal had been presented. The city also said any future project would need to benefit residents and align with Owensboro’s long-term interests.

The city statement responded to social media posts, petitions, and public discussion. City officials acknowledged residents’ concerns and said they had researched early data center developments elsewhere, including problems some communities experienced.

The city’s statement did not end the local debate.

It clarified that no formal proposal was pending while leaving open the possibility that future economic development opportunities could be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

The Massie rezoning made the data center fight visible

The Owensboro Metropolitan Planning Commission gave the data center debate a visible local setting when it considered the Massie Property rezoning on May 14. The property is a 121-acre tract in west Owensboro, along the 3500-4300 blocks of West Parrish Avenue. The rezoning request would have changed the property from rural agriculture and light industrial to heavy industrial, to accommodate a future industrial park.

The planning commission voted 5-4 to recommend denial of the rezoning request after a meeting dominated by public concern about a potential data center development. Owensboro Times reported that planning staff had recommended approval, citing the comprehensive plan and the site’s designation within an Industrial Plan Area.

OMPC Executive Director Brian Howard said a motion to approve the rezoning with a condition prohibiting data centers failed 5-4. A second motion to deny the rezoning then passed by the same margin. The planning commission is a recommending body on rezoning, while the Owensboro City Commission holds final authority if the request proceeds.

The Massie Property had been identified for industrial recruitment before the recent data center debate. Owensboro Times reported that city officials and the Greater Owensboro Economic Development Corporation had previously described the property as a future industrial park intended to attract economic development projects.

Public concern grew around data centers, but the formal action before OMPC was a rezoning request for future industrial development. Residents were reacting to what heavy industrial zoning could allow, not to a filed data center site plan.

Share this with someone tracking data centers, utilities, or local government in Kentucky.

Frankfort considered guardrails but did not enact them

Daviess County’s moratorium also reflects a gap in Kentucky law. The Kentucky General Assembly considered data center bills during the 2026 Regular Session, but the key proposals had not become law as of the latest legislative records.

House Bill 593 addressed large data center utility service arrangements. The bill would have required electric service contracts, tariffs, application fees, service studies, minimum contract terms, and protections against charging or allocating certain data center infrastructure costs to other customers served by natural gas, water, or wastewater utilities. The House passed the bill 90-8 with a committee substitute on March 4, but the last listed action was March 31, when it was returned to the Senate Economic Development, Tourism, and Labor Committee.

House Bill 856 addressed water use. It would have required data centers to submit a water feasibility study to the Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet before beginning operations and to submit an annual water usage report. The last listed action was March 10, when the bill was sent to the House Natural Resources and Energy Committee.

Those bills show that state lawmakers recognized the same categories local residents are raising: utility costs, water use, service studies, infrastructure burden, and public reporting. The bills also show what counties currently lack: a statewide framework enacted that answers those questions before local permit fights begin.

In that vacuum, counties and cities are writing their own pauses. WKU Public Radio reported that Cave City recently passed a one-year moratorium on data center projects, placing Daviess County in a growing list of local governments taking preemptive action.

The public still cannot see the full money trail

Data centers are attractive to local economic-development offices because they can bring large capital investment, property tax revenue, utility load, and construction activity. They can also require major infrastructure commitments, large power capacity, water planning, and land-use changes.

The Daviess County record does not yet identify a specific developer, power agreement, water agreement, tax incentive package, site contract, or memorandum of understanding. The City of Owensboro said no formal project had been presented.

That leaves a reporting gap. Local residents know data centers are being discussed. They know an industrial rezoning request was pending. They know a petition gathered thousands of signatures. They do not yet have public documents showing whether a company contacted the city, the county, the Greater Owensboro Economic Development Corporation, Owensboro Municipal Utilities, or any other local entity.

That gap should guide the next round of public questions. Residents can request emails, meeting notes, nondisclosure agreements, utility inquiries, site-selection communications, incentive discussions, and any communications between local government and data center companies.

Why this matters in Kentucky

Daviess County’s moratorium shows how local government can act before private infrastructure sets the terms of the debate. That does not make every data center proposal harmful. It does mean the county has chosen to study the public costs before applications arrive.

For Daviess County residents, the stakes are practical: utility bills, water use, road capacity, noise, land-use compatibility, emergency response, tax revenue, and public access to documents. Those issues affect households, farmers, businesses, utility customers, and neighborhoods near potential sites.

For Owensboro residents, the Massie Property debate shows how industrial recruitment can collide with public trust. A property may be framed as a future industrial park, while residents worry that heavy industrial zoning could make a data center easier to approve later.

For other Kentucky counties, the Daviess County vote offers a template. Fiscal courts can ask whether their zoning ordinances address data centers, whether local utility providers can handle large load requests, whether water studies are required, and whether cost protections exist for non-data-center customers.

The larger Kentucky problem remains unresolved. Local governments are reacting one county and one city at a time while statewide data center legislation remains unfinished.

What residents can request, track, and compare

Daviess County residents can ask the Fiscal Court for the full enacted text of KOC 921.690 (2026) 03-2026, the May 14 meeting minutes, the May 28 meeting minutes, the roll-call vote, and any staff memo explaining how the moratorium will be enforced.

Owensboro residents can ask the City Commission whether the Massie Property rezoning will return, whether any appeal or revised request is expected, and whether the city will adopt its own data center rules before considering future industrial rezonings.

Residents can submit open records requests to Daviess County, the City of Owensboro, Owensboro Municipal Utilities, the Greater Owensboro Economic Development Corporation, and the Owensboro Metropolitan Planning Commission for communications with data center companies, site-selection consultants, utility consultants, or state economic-development officials.

Utility customers can ask Owensboro Municipal Utilities and any relevant electric, water, wastewater, or gas providers whether they have received load inquiries, service study requests, water-demand questions, or infrastructure-cost estimates related to data centers.

Kentuckians outside Daviess County can ask their fiscal court or city council four specific questions: Does our zoning ordinance define data centers? Does our utility have a policy for large load requests? Would existing customers pay for any new infrastructure? Would the public see water, power, noise, and tax-impact studies before any vote?

The moratorium gives Daviess County one year.

The useful public work is to make that year produce written rules, public documents, utility answers, and clear decision points before any developer files an application.

Dispatches from Kentucky

Discussion about this post

Ready for more?