City and county leaders are in a bit of an uncomfortable spot as Clinton County weighs whether to welcome a major data center project and a potential precast concrete plant that could come with it: on one side, the promise of new tax revenue, high-tech investment, and well-paying jobs; on the other, growing public unease about the pace, purpose, and long-term impact of such development.
The timing could hardly be more complicated. Like many local governments across Indiana, both the City of Frankfort and Clinton County are reeling from the effects of Senate Bill 1 – legislation that has reduced local tax revenues once used to fund core services such as police, fire, and schools. Those lost dollars have left communities scrambling for new sources of economic stability. In that context, the financial allure of a project boasting hundreds of jobs and a sizable property-tax base is difficult to ignore.
On a recent trip to southern New Jersey, a delegation of city and county officials toured one of the nation’s most advanced data centers and met with two companies involved in its construction. Among them was one of the major precast concrete manufacturers in the country, which currently has more than 500 employees at its East Coast facility and is now considering Clinton County as a possible Midwestern expansion site. If that comes to be, it will mean dozens – perhaps hundreds – of blue-collar and technical jobs supporting local industry and public infrastructure.
Yet, the thought of data centers-massive, power-consuming facilities that store and process digital information-has generated fierce debate among residents, with many citizens voicing concerns about stress on local resources, in particular water and energy. Others are concerned about the aesthetic and environmental footprint such developments may leave behind.
Local officials are sensitive to that tension. Many have stressed that the visit was about fact-finding, not endorsement. They say understanding how data centers can coexist with manufacturing partners while minimizing environmental impact is critical before commitments are made.
That is prudent, and it is worth recognizing. Local leaders are tasked with striking a tough balance between economic opportunity and community consent. They must weigh the urgent need to replace lost revenue against the valid concerns of residents who fear irreversible change to the county’s character and landscape.
The challenge of Clinton County represents that of dozens of communities across the state: how to grow without losing what makes a place home. The choices made in the coming months will shape not only the local economy, but also the public’s trust in how that economy is built. However one comes down on the issue, this clearly is no yes-or-no question. It’s a test of leadership — and of balance — in a time when both are in short supply.