Seattle Land Use and Sustainability Committee Special Meeting - May 11, 2026

The Land Use and Sustainability Committee of the Seattle City Council held a special meeting on May 11, 2026, from approximately 2:05 PM to 2:50 PM to discuss data centers and potential regulation, including a proposed one-year moratorium on new land use permits for data centers. Chaired by Councilmember Eddie Lin, the meeting included public testimony, a staff briefing, and committee deliberation. No votes were taken; the meeting served as an initial information-gathering session ahead of forthcoming legislation.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Peter Nitza (Nitsa Segan and Com Co., local real estate firm): Expressed concern about a blanket moratorium, arguing that data centers are a bright spot in economic development and that Seattle is the second largest concentration of AI talent after the Bay Area. Suggested setting a megawatt limit (e.g., a power consumption cap) to allow co-located data centers supporting jobs to continue. Warned that an outright ban could push data centers just outside the city while still burdening Seattle City Light, and noted high commercial vacancy rates that could be partially filled by data center uses.
• Dan Diorio (Vice President of State Policy, Data Center Coalition): Emphasized the importance of data centers to everyday life (healthcare, banking, education, etc.) and provided economic statistics: 47,960 jobs, $3.64 billion in labor income, $6.8 billion to state GDP, and $1.8 billion in state and local tax revenues in Washington (2023). Respectfully urged against a moratorium due to the industry's economic role.

Discussion Items

• Staff Briefing (HB Harper and Eric McConaghy, Council Central Staff):
  • Currently no definition of "data center" exists in Seattle's land use code or utility rate codes. Existing data centers have been permitted under substantially similar use categories (e.g., business support services, office, utility service).
  • Data centers vary widely in size (small to mega), equipment, and infrastructure needs (electricity, water, cooling).
  • A draft resolution (sponsored by Councilmember Juarez) is forthcoming, expected to address impacts (electricity, water, jobs, pollution – including noise and greenhouse gases), establish policy guidelines, and set expectations for City Light rate legislation and the moratorium ordinance.
  • The proposed moratorium would last one year (with a required work plan), halt acceptance of new land use permits immediately, but not stop ongoing reviews. A public hearing is required but can occur after action.
  • Work plan elements: developing a proper definition (possibly differentiated by size), aligning with state laws (some tax preferences repealed; a monitoring bill failed in 2025 session), best practices for monitoring electricity/water usage, zoning and development standards, and exploring community benefits.
• Councilmember Questions and Positions:
  • Councilmember Juarez (not on committee but guest): Cited the New York RAISE Act (AI safety bill) as a model, noted massive corporate investments (Amazon $200B, Microsoft $190B on AI), and stressed the need for guardrails without stifling innovation. Emphasized interdepartmental coordination (land use, City Light, SPU) and the importance of a careful definition with thresholds (e.g., megawatt size).
  • Councilmember Kettle (guest, vice chair of Parks & Seattle City Light): Urged due diligence and stability for local businesses; highlighted existing data centers in Seattle and their beneficial heat reuse. Criticized lack of leadership at Seattle City Light (referencing recent departure of top personnel) and noted infrastructure challenges (buried cable outages in District 7).
  • Council President Hollingsworth: Supported the moratorium as a temporary measure to study impacts, particularly on aging electrical infrastructure and water usage. Noted that existing data centers in Seattle are around 25 megawatts (small-scale). Expressed concern about mega data centers' disproportionate environmental justice impacts on communities of color, citing an example of a rural town affected by generator-run data centers. Clarified this is not anti-AI but about resource management.
  • Councilmember Rinck: Appreciated the urgency and environmental justice framing. Asked about the number of existing data centers in Seattle (at least half a dozen, but exact count unknown due to lack of definition). Inquired about regional coordination (King County, other jurisdictions) and whether the city provides economic incentives for AI/data center development (staff confirmed no known incentives).
  • Councilmember Foster: Asked whether a land use moratorium can apply only within city limits or also to Seattle City Light's broader service area. Staff responded that it likely applies only to geographic city limits; follow-up needed. Stressed the need for full understanding of regulatory tools.
  • Chair Lin: Emphasized that the lack of a definition is a major gap; noted that AI-driven mega data centers differ from traditional co-location/accessory uses. Raised concern about regional electricity impacts (even data centers outside Seattle can affect the integrated grid and rates). Supported state or regional regulation as ideal. Indicated that the moratorium's definition may not be the final one and that multiple definitions may emerge.

Key Outcomes

• No formal votes were taken; the meeting was a briefing and discussion.
• A draft resolution and a one-year moratorium ordinance are expected to be introduced in the coming days.
• Committee members expressed broad support for proceeding with a moratorium to allow time for research and development of regulations, though some urged caution to avoid destabilizing the business environment.
• Staff will follow up on specific questions: legal scope of moratorium (geographic vs. service area), exact number of existing data centers in Seattle, and potential regional coordination.
• The work plan will include definition development, monitoring standards, zoning standards, and exploration of community benefits.
• Next steps: continued interdepartmental work (land use, Seattle City Light, Seattle Public Utilities) and further committee discussion when formal legislation is introduced.