Supervisors hear about possible data center
By MIKE WILLIAMS
Patriot Publishing
The possibility of a data center being constructed in Pulaski County in the future came before the Board of Supervisors at their February meeting Monday night.
County resident Betsy Mabry addressed the board, saying in January 2025, 13 months ago the Virginia General Assembly had allocated up to $3 billion for the construction of a data center and power plant in the county.
“There is some confusion and questions about whether or not the Pulaski County data center and power plant are proposed,” Mabry said alluding to a recent television news interview with County Administrator Jonathan Sweet.
Mabry said during the interview that Sweet indicated a data center project had already been approved as Project Goose and Project Poseidon.
“Now that Mr. Sweet has publicly announced that the data center is a potential In Pulaski County, Mr. Sweet and each of you all can speak openly about these projects … you can reveal to Pulaski County citizens and your constituents the pros and cons of this $3 billion project that is so generously allocated to Pulaski County from our state government,” Mabry told the board.
She told the board a “three-minute data search will reveal concerns about having a data center in this area, the two biggest concerns being the colossal use of water and electricity.
“Citizens have questions about how Pulaski County’s water resource reserves will service a data center power plant,” Mabry continued.
“The population growth as outlined by your strategic goals, as I understand it, by 2030 you’re looking for population base of 40,000 in the county,” Mabry said.
“Also, how are these water reserves to continue to service the town of Pulaski, including James Hardie, since Hogan’s Dam is no longer a viable source of water for the town.” Mabry added the town has had to contract through the PSA for water.
“The citizens of Pulaski County deserve to be made aware of the impact of this project and how it will impact what most of us, I think, in the County of Pulaski consider us as ‘small town USA.’
“If that goes in place, Pulaski County will be small town USA no more. There’s no going back.
“Therefore, I am requesting that the Pulaski County Board of Supervisors hold a public meeting for citizens. Now that it’s public … it’s announced … to inform us the pros and cons of this project for the county.
“ How is it going to directly affect each of us, your children, your grandchildren, for years to come,” Mabry continued, noting such a public meeting would afford citizens the opportunity to ask questions about the project.
In response, Sweet noted, “It’s rare that I speak to public comment, but I think it’s critically important, because some of the statements made could be considered dangerous.”
“There’s been no public announcement of any project. We’ve only been talking in the hypothetical of a pursuit of a data center, and that is Virginia’s First Regional Industrial Facilities Authority’s pursuit of a data center that would potentially be located in Pulaski County, by way of the regional commerce park that’s been there since 1999.
“So, Virginia’s First has identified data centers as a good industrial application to locate within the industrial park that’s been there for a very long time,” Sweet explained.
“So, there is no end user, there is no data center specific project. There is interest in data centers, and there is interest in a variety of industrial applications. That is the nature of an industrial park … to create capital investment and bring jobs and bring investment to our community, so that we are not solely reliant on real estate taxes to fund our public education system, our law enforcement, our quality of life here in Pulaski County,” Sweet continued.
“So I just want to make sure that for the media’s and for the citizens’ information that there’s been no project announced in Pulaski County with respect to data centers, but we can say that Virginia’s First Regional Industrial Facilities Authority – comprised of 11 jurisdictions – is pursuing projects to include data centers to be located in our regional industrial park. Just for clarity purposes, I thought that was important to state.”
At that point, Mabry responded.
“Well, I understand it’s very complex, and it does, you know, involve the industrial park, but the language is Pulaski County is the location for the data center, so maybe Roanoke City or other surrounding counties may not care that it’s in Pulaski County, but as a citizen of Pulaski County, I do,” she stated.
In response, Sweet said he has through news media interviews tried to basically inform the citizenry that data centers are included in the pursuit in the regional Industrial Park by a regional industrial authority.
“That industrial park does reside within the legal jurisdictions of Pulaski County, but it is owned by a regional entity, of which we are only one of 11 members to that authority,” he explained.
“So there is full transparency. We’re trying to explain the water situation, that none of the water that would serve the industrial park will be coming from Pulaski County, but actually purchased from a neighbor jurisdiction of which there is excess capacity to serve the industrial park. That these (data centers) operate on a closed loop system so the evaporation and the cooling process doesn’t take place like data centers used in the examples we’re hearing about from 20 years ago.
Sweet said new data centers are very efficient.
“They do use a lot of energy, but they are low water consumers. Now, because of these companies’ desires to lower the environmental impact, if there is a power plant associated with a data center then there would be no demand on the grid because the power plant would serve specifically behind the meter for the project.”
“So there’s a lot of just double talk around the subject, and I think it’s very dangerous to to be sharing that in the public space without clarification and understanding of actually what we’re talking about, and that’s modern data center projects.
“I’m happy to spend time with Miss Mabry or any citizen that would like to learn more about the subject matter,” Sweet concluded.
In response to a question from Draper’s Dirk Compton, Sweet said Pulaski County had been fortunate to be able to share the cost of a regional industrial park with other jurisdictions.
“They’re actually investing in Pulaski County,” Sweet explained. “Typically, wherever a project like that is located, we’ll use Volvo as an example, [the host jurisdiction] tends to enjoy the lion’s share of the job opportunities that come from a project.
“We’re 49 percent shareholders, so we would enjoy 49 percent of the revenue yield from that. And then eventually there is expiration of those revenue sharing agreements in which Pulaski County has the potential then to enjoy 100 percent of those revenues.
“So, it’s like any partnership, you share in the cost, you share in the in the yield, and that’s the way it works, by way of percentage, with all those jurisdictions.”
He added that Pulaski County is fortunate to have an industrial park adjacent to an airport that’s not next to a residential or commercial
center that we can locate employment opportunities and capital investment.
“So again, we don’t have to put all of the burden on landowners by way of real estate taxes.
“So, this decision was made a long time ago, not by this board, well before I got here, and we are looking to make sure we optimize the investment that was made 30 years ago for the benefit of our citizens and protecting their interest.
“I will remind everyone that we are a triple bottom line county. We care about the environment, we care about our citizens, and we care about our bottom line.”
Sweet said some are “using 20-year-old bad examples as the reason to not consider a quality project inside our 30-year-old industrial park.”
March 3, 2026 @ 3:36 pm
I don’t understand the frustration over this center Mr. Sweet said that it is a closed system for water and the Center pays for electricity am I missing something here. I don’t see how it would effect my electric bill or water bill most citizens would not even know it’s here if people would understand it’s purpose.
March 3, 2026 @ 8:57 pm
NO. DATA. CENTER. HERE.!!!!!!!!
March 4, 2026 @ 9:49 am
Please do your research on it. Watch More Perfect Union to see the spikes in utilities, cancer, hearing loss, and other deadly issues caused by data centers. It is a terrible idea to bring it here. The long-term damage is irreversible. Lives are worth more than money.
March 4, 2026 @ 10:30 am
Lots of questions here, for example what jurisdiction are they buying the water from where does the additional power come from is it going to be from wind turbines and are they getting a “jurisdiction” to release water from claytor lake piped in there to run that plant, what about the waste there’s going to be waste. Mr sweet mentioned several times we were looking at older data centers and the problems that were associated with them but did not offer an example of a modern Data center, so how as citizen’s of Pulaski County can we make a decision without all the pertinent information? Living next to James Hardie has proven to be less than desirable with the smell and “noise” or even living near Volvo with all the heavy truck traffic that came with that and the road damage from all the heavy trucks. I know I would like to sell my property for what it’s been assessed for, and now going to be reassessed again for taxes to pay for the new sports complex….
March 4, 2026 @ 10:51 am
Please disclose to the citizens of Pulaski County the identity of the jurisdiction that will provide the water to a data center if it is built, and where the water would come from and the path the water would take to get to the data center. Radford? Water from New River? The reaction from Counties downstream to the lower flow of water from the New River? You use the word “industrial “ park”. I thought it was a “commerce park”. Quite a difference!
March 4, 2026 @ 4:13 pm
I am one citizen that is VERY concerned about a data center possibly being built in Pulaski County, even though I have read what Mr. Sweet has to say. I see $$$$ signs in official’s eyes. I am not young anymore. I have read over and over about what data centers cost residents . Mr. Sweet tries to reassure us that those are “old data centers” that suck water systems dry and run up electric bills dramatically. I can only say that I would be very glad if our water system is not affected, but I would like to hear where ONE, just ONE data center has been located that did not cause dramatic increases in the local electricity costs for citizens. Everything I have read says otherwise. My electric bill is already painful. There are a lot of things Pulaski needs — new water pipes all across the town and county are one thing. But a new fitness / rec center was needed more ? Nothing against a fitness/ rec center — it sounds great. I am sure my grandchildren will use it. But our infrastructure is desperate for attention. I wish Pulaski could pursue those improvements as readily as we pursue a rec center or a data center. I do know the data center would bring $$$$$ to Pulaski. But at what cost ? It just seems that we are hearing about a proposed data center awfully late in the game.
March 4, 2026 @ 4:20 pm
Mr. Sweet needs to be more transparent with the people that pay his salary. He has always treated the people of this town and county as though they are beneath him, even well before this data center was a thing. He has done his due diligence to earn the reputation that he has of being untrustworthy.
I personally (along with my coworkers) have watched AEP and other sub contracted workers go in and out of a very discreet location in town to access the location in the county in which they are working day and night to build something …..
March 6, 2026 @ 11:21 am
When will there be a meeting for citizens to ask questions or voice concerns????
March 6, 2026 @ 12:34 pm
The prospect of landing a data center and power plant is both exciting and yet chilling. it’s exciting for the massive but temporary construction jobs, tax contribution and continuing maintenence and security jobs. Further, these types of computers are regularly depreciated in 3 to 5 years. Should the project survive the boom and bust cycle, it will likely require a further investment to replace the computers. Care must be taken with the timing of the tax relief incentives.
However, should the need for data centers evaporate, Pulaski is left with a large empty building and possibly a power plant; likely a useful thing for a different industry. That’s the exiting part.
Nothing is all good and there are down sides, and not small ones. Reportedly, data centers are obnoxiously noisy, so location will be a factor. Water consumption is an issue. Reportedly, these operations can return 70% of the water they use as ” Grey water” meaning it likely can be used for irrigation but is not potable.
End Part 1
March 6, 2026 @ 1:08 pm
Part 2
The nature of the power plant will be an issue. The odds are high that it would be portable gas turbines in trailers. The data center can provide the number but they might be fairly numerous and would add to the general cacophony (noise). They would also exhaust into the surrounding area. A traditional power plant would be cleaner quieter but also consume water. Since the building is large, solar with battery storage would be the ideal solution. and could be backed at night by the grid, when demand is low.
Now if the county votes against the project it simply means it doesn’t happen here. So the project goes elsewhere. If it goes to Giles, Montgomery, Bland, or Wythe County it could easily affect our shared water and air and they would gain the benefits, along with the noise and downsides.
There’s a lot to ponder here and how we react will depend on the final form of the proposed data center. it’s too early to get exicted pro or con because there is no detailed proposal to evaluate.