Vanderburgh County Data Center Research Committee Meeting - September 15, 2026

The Vanderburgh County Data Center Research Committee held its second meeting on Tuesday, September 15, 2026, from 1:00 PM to 2:48 PM in Room 301 of the Civic Center Complex in Evansville, Indiana. Chair Lloyd Lamberton presided. Members Scott Ambrose and Richard Reed were absent. The committee reviewed a draft ordinance template, discussed definitions for data centers, and began outlining categories based on size and community impact. Key decisions included establishing a framework for small, medium, large, and hyperscale data center categories, and directing staff to compile definitions for further refinement.

Approvals and Administrative Items

• Minutes from the September 2, 2026 meeting were acknowledged but no formal vote was recorded.
• Committee membership changes: A member resigned, and Mark Murry was appointed as replacement. Susan Hardwick and Mark Murry introduced themselves, noting their backgrounds in utilities and data analysis, respectively.
• Communication: John Bates and Susan Hardwick still needed access to the SharePoint site, which had been populated with ordinance-related files.

Discussion Items

Draft Ordinance Template Review

• Jenna Richardt presented a draft ordinance template compiled from multiple existing ordinances. Susan Hardwick asked whether decommissioning standards were included; Jenna confirmed it was a bullet point but not fully developed.
• Committee members agreed to use the template as a starting point and make edits iteratively in future meetings.

Data Center Definitions and Applicability

• Chair Lamberton referenced model ordinances from Kentucky and other sources. Definitions from the Kentucky model ordinance were read aloud, including definitions for "data center" and "data center accessory use structure."
• Tom Shetler, Jr. recommended using the phrase "sole purpose of" to distinguish data centers from businesses with incidental data processing.
• Mark Murry suggested definitions should be based on measurable community impacts (e.g., noise, utility usage) rather than just size or power demand.
• Lauren Lynch emphasized the need to define the purpose of the regulated use (e.g., on-site vs. regional/global services).
• Jason Naab recommended defining a data center first, then establishing thresholds (size, megawatts) and applicable zoning districts.
• Susan Hardwick recommended keeping "grandfathering" under consideration to avoid impacting existing businesses.

Proposed Data Center Categories

• The committee discussed categories: small, medium, large, and hyperscale. Examples from existing ordinances were cited: Warwick County (small <10,000 sq ft, medium <40,000 sq ft, large >40,000 sq ft) and a data center tracker using energy use (mega campuses >1 GW, hyperscale >100 MW, large 51-99 MW, medium 11-50 MW).
• Mark Murry proposed defining categories by size, power, and typical characteristics. An example framework was presented: small (<20,000 sq ft, <5 MW), medium (20,000-100,000 sq ft, 5-20 MW), large (100,000-500,000 sq ft, 20-100 MW), with threshold details to be refined.
• The committee generally agreed to use at least three categories (small, medium, large) and possibly a hyperscale category, with parameters to be finalized.

Electric Infrastructure, Reliability, and Cost Allocation

• Jon Robertson explained that large data centers often build or fund dedicated power infrastructure (e.g., combined-cycle natural gas plants) and may construct their own water/wastewater treatment facilities. Service terms are typically negotiated in contracts approved by the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC).
• A representative from CenterPoint (unidentified speaker) stated that the utility requires data center developers to pay 100% of infrastructure costs to serve them, and that rates are set by the Indiana Commission for the local territory only, not shared across other regions. The representative noted that customers could potentially benefit from feed-in tariffs or spreading fixed costs.
• Susan Hardwick cautioned against blurring ordinance requirements with contractual matters; Lauren Lynch asked how residents could be assured they wouldn't bear project-related costs. Discussion included bonding for decommissioning and infrastructure to protect ratepayers.
• Committee members underscored the importance of ensuring that infrastructure upgrades are fully funded by the developer, and that the ordinance should include decommissioning standards.

Community Impact and Additional Definitions

• Lauren Lynch expressed a desire to allocate time to discuss community impacts (e.g., noise, water usage, transportation) rather than just contractual terms.
• Chair Lamberton noted that further definitions would be added as the committee reviews other sections of the ordinance.
• Committee members identified the need to inventory existing data centers in Vanderburgh County and determine applicability/grandfathering.

Upcoming Meeting Calendar and Site Visits

• The committee reviewed the upcoming review calendar: September 29 (Sections 6-8), October 13 (Sections 9-11), October 20 (Sections 12-14), November 10 (Sections 15-17), November 17 (Sections 18-19), December 8 (public comment meeting), December 15 (final vote on recommendations).
• It was suggested to reorganize the calendar to group energy-related topics (electric, water) for more focused discussion, and to invite speakers from Evansville Water & Sewer Utility and CenterPoint.
• Site visits were discussed: a large hyperscale campus in New Albany, Ohio (no longer offering tours but viewable externally) and a smaller facility in Hammond, Indiana that offers tours. Committee members considered sending a few representatives due to travel costs.

Key Outcomes

• The committee agreed to define a "data center" using a primary definition and to develop subsets for small, medium, large, and hyperscale facilities, with parameters for square footage, megawatt demand, and typical characteristics to be refined.
• Jenna Richardt will compile the draft definitions based on the discussion and circulate them for edits before the next meeting.
• The committee will continue to consider measurable community impacts, existing facilities, grandfathering, applicable zoning districts, infrastructure reliability, and cost allocation.
• The committee directed staff to arrange presentations from Evansville Water & Sewer Utility and CenterPoint for upcoming meetings.
• Adjournment: Motion by Jenna Richardt, seconded by John Bates, unanimously passed at 2:48 PM.