Reports · Grant County, IN
The data center hearings, indexed
Fifteen hours of Area Plan Commission video across seven meetings, broken into the moments that matter.
Updated July 30, 2026 — Added the July 29 meeting — 36 new moments covering complaints, ownership disclosure, and community benefit. The subcommittee meets again August 5.
As of July 30, 2026
- Nothing adoptedNo data center ordinance has been adopted, and no application has been filed.
- One letterOne company has written to the county about converting the existing crypto mining site on State Road 18 — that letter was read into the public record on June 24 and is linked below.
- County moved firstThe county began this work in October 2025, before any company had made contact — a point the executive director put on the record at the first meeting.
- County land onlyThis ordinance would cover unincorporated Grant County only. Marion, Gas City, and Upland each write their own rules.
Roughly fifteen hours of Area Plan Commission subcommittee video across seven meetings, broken into the moments that matter. Every timestamp below opens the county’s own recording at that second.
The subcommittee met once in March to organize, then began reading a 37-page draft ordinance straight through, section by lettered section. Six review meetings have covered 30 pages. Decommissioning, enforcement, and the penalty sections are still ahead.
Search by keyword — try well, noise, property value, annex — or pick a topic. Moments marked Key are the ones to start with.
OurWeek in Grant County
The data center hearings, indexed
Key moments · 54 moments
https://ourweek.in/grant-county/reports/data-center-hearings-indexed
Mar 11Meeting 1 · organizingno draft pagesScope and approach
No draft pages reviewed
May 18Meeting 2pp. 1–7Definitions – E
pp. 1–7
May 27Meeting 3pp. 8–12F – G
pp. 8–12
Jun 10Meeting 4pp. 12–16H – K
pp. 12–16
Jun 24Meeting 5pp. 16–21L – N
pp. 16–21
Jul 22Meeting 6pp. 21–27O – R
pp. 21–27
Jul 29Meeting 7pp. 27–30U – W
pp. 27–30
AheadNot yet coveredpp. 31–37
pp. 31–37
Still ahead: Decommissioning, enforcement, penalties.
draft pages 137
54 moments
Mar 11, 2026 · Meeting 1 · organizing
- 4:10Mar 11How to get copies of the background documentsKeyAsked whether the reference documents are online, Glancy says they are not — but that anyone who emails the area plan office will be sent them.
- 5:00Mar 11“We've not been approached. There's nothing else behind it.”KeyExecutive director Todd Glancy states plainly why the work started: no company had contacted the county. He describes it as preparing for something happening statewide. Three months before the Recor Digital letter arrived.
- 14:41Mar 11Where the high impact district idea comes fromKeyEd Hartman proposes the structure that shapes everything after: a data center allowed only in a high impact district, requiring a rezoning through the APC, approval by the commissioners, and a special exception from the BZA — “gets all boards involved.”
- 24:37Mar 11“Is there a Bitcoin mining in Gas City?”KeyA new member asks. The answer places it north near I-69, inside Grant County — and another member pins it to 100 North on the west side of the interstate. It is described as ten trailers at this point; by June it is described as forty units.
- 36:03Mar 11The lesson from the solar fight: record the leasesKeyA member raises how the county was left in the dark because land agreements were never recorded, and asks whether the same requirement can be built in here. This becomes the roadside sign provision in June.
- 37:37Mar 11Non-disclosure agreements come up on day oneKeyA member raises NDAs signed with landowners “or even government officials who want to stay mum,” and asks whether an ordinance could reach them. The answer is no. The subject returns in June.
- 55:23Mar 11The property value guarantee is proposedKeyEd Hartman suggests including one and checking what neighboring counties require. It becomes Section K in June.
- 1:09:23Mar 11A resident reads about a two-year moratorium in the paperKeyBrian Datimore says he read in the Chronicle-Tribune that a two-year moratorium had been placed on data centers, and urges the county to pass it.
- 1:12:48Mar 11“The moratorium is not in place yet”KeyThe correction from the dais: it had been sent to legal to be drafted, for presentation to the commissioners on March 16. A member also credits public pressure and the commissioners' listening sessions for it happening at all.
- 1:14:13Mar 11“Rumored for two years now”KeyRebecca Zurkl, who owns the orchard across from Dana on Marion's west side, says the site has been rumored as a proposed data center location for two years — the earliest reference to the west-side thread.
- 1:16:32Mar 11Howard County is being asked for 750 acres, with no company namedKeyBritney Nelson describes what she calls a copy-and-paste of the exit 255 situation next door: a rezoning request for 750 acres with no business identified, near an interstate and a battery plant.
- 1:18:32Mar 11A feasibility study for exit 255 — and an Italian developerKeyChris Parker says he attended the exit 255 listening sessions, that the study described a million gallons of water a day — roughly what Upland, Gas City, and Fairmount use combined — and that the developer would not be Amazon but an Italian company.
- 1:28:31Mar 11“This board has no influence over the city's doings”KeyRaymond Bear tells the room the county cannot stop Marion from annexing land and permitting a data center inside city limits, and that residents should be taking their pressure to the city councils.
May 18, 2026 · Meeting 2 · pp. 1–7
- 4:36May 18The county's own comprehensive plan says protect farmlandKeyNolan Holloway grounds the whole discussion in page 94 of the plan adopted last year: public surveys found 75% of attendees wanted farmland protected from large-scale development.
- 14:31May 18The high impact district — the real controlKeyA data center could only go in a high impact district. Grant County has none. Creating one takes a rezoning through the APC, the commissioners, and then a BZA special exception.
- 42:38May 18The solar lawsuit that shapes every number in this draftKeyMembers recall solar companies threatening to sue on the theory that the ordinance was impossible to comply with — the reason setbacks were set at defensible rather than maximum distances.
- 2:10:15May 18A resident names a second, much larger projectKeyPat Anel, a retired abstractor, says her research points to Clean Cloud Energy and a 753-acre site with an adjacent 3,200-acre solar farm. The chair directs her to the City of Marion — it is outside county jurisdiction.
- 2:21:41May 18Why not just ban data centers outright?KeyAsked by a resident. The answer: Marshall County, Indiana had passed a total ban a month earlier, untested in court — and a detailed ordinance is harder to overturn than a prohibition.
May 27, 2026 · Meeting 3 · pp. 8–12
- 9:31May 27The moratorium, explainedKeyTwo separate things: a commissioners' moratorium, and an APC resolution letting the office hold applications for six months while the ordinance is written. The second took effect the night it was signed.
- 21:06May 27The off-grid rule is writtenKeyMolly Early proposes replacing nine subsections with one: grid power only for offices and fire suppression, everything else self-generated. The reasoning is that grid upgrades for a huge new customer get paid for by everyone's bill.
- 26:05May 27Closed-loop cooling becomes the only option allowedKeyAir-cooled and evaporative systems are struck from the draft, leaving closed loop as the sole permitted method — the provision meant to protect the water table.
- 39:38May 27The noise limit lands on 40 decibels — with a question markKeyA 55 dB placeholder is replaced by 40, but nobody has measured what the county's background noise level actually is, so the number stays provisional.
- 1:07:45May 27A resident argues the off-grid rule could backfireKeyJune Brown warns that forcing on-site generation invites turbines or small nuclear reactors, producing industrial smog and odors — in her view worse than a grid connection.
Jun 10, 2026 · Meeting 4 · pp. 12–16
- 35:21Jun 10County or city? The distinction that trips up almost everyoneKeyThe chair explains the county has no authority inside Marion, Gas City, or Upland — and that residents concerned about those areas need to go to their city council.
- 51:07Jun 10Why write rules for something nobody wantsKeyThe chair's answer to the room: without a local ordinance, if the state or federal government forces the issue, the county gets handed someone else's rules instead of its own.
- 52:04Jun 10“We cannot make it impossible for them to build. That's what gets us sued.”KeyThe clearest single statement of the constraint the whole ordinance is written under, in answer to a resident asking for a 250-mile buffer.
- 1:03:34Jun 10Why the roadside signs matter more than they lookKeySolar companies signed land leases the county never learned about. Because purchase agreements aren't recorded the way leases are, posted signs become the public's early warning.
- 1:19:50Jun 10A company would have to hold public meetings before applyingKeyThe pre-application section: informational meetings in Grant County, in a public venue large enough for the crowd, before anything is filed.
- 1:53:22Jun 10An Indiana court has already ruled these hurt property valuesKeyA member cites the Court of Appeals decision arising from the Lone Oak solar farm in Madison County, with the Supreme Court declining to hear the appeal — and argues a data center is worse than solar.
- 2:00:17Jun 10The homeowner decides — not the developerKeyAs drafted, the developer chose whether to pay the difference or buy the property. Members flip it: that choice belongs to the person who lives there.
Jun 24, 2026 · Meeting 5 · pp. 16–21
- 1:43:05Jun 24The county reads a company's letter into the recordKeyExecutive director Todd Glancy discloses an email dated June 15 from a firm the captions render as Recor Digital, which says it is acquiring the existing crypto mining site and wants to convert it to an AI data center. He states it is the first such communication the office has received.
- 1:49:31Jun 24Where the existing crypto site actually isKeyResidents ask and members answer: unincorporated county land at State Road 18 and I-69, north of 18, beside the electrical substation — about a mile outside Marion city limits.
- 1:51:46Jun 24Why crypto is being regulated separately — the grandfather problemKeyMinutes after reading the letter, the APC president explains his position: crypto needs its own ordinance, because combining them could let the existing operation be grandfathered in and escape the rules now being written.
- 2:19:56Jun 24“They say they have signed non-disclosure agreements”KeyMichael Duke says data centers are among the most talked-about open secrets at Marion city hall, that something is underway west of Marion, and that council members and the mayor decline to discuss it. He flags this as his own read of community talk.
Jul 22, 2026 · Meeting 6 · pp. 21–27
- 1:27:21Jul 22Reporting expanded to indirect water useKeyA member points out that operators typically report only direct water use, not the water consumed cooling their own power generation — and that no federal rule requires the second number.
- 1:34:21Jul 22The subcommittee starts to reverse itself on off-gridKeyTen weeks after adopting it, the chair says they may have to rethink the off-grid requirement if generators prove more hazardous than grid power. The trigger was diesel emissions at the Fort Wayne site.
Jul 29, 2026 · Meeting 7 · pp. 27–30
- 9:52Jul 29How a complaint would actually workKeyTodd Glancy walks through it: the APC office takes the complaint, investigates, sends notice naming the problem, and demands an action plan by a deadline. If nothing comes back, the county fixes it and bills the escrow.
- 10:34Jul 29The county can't just raid the escrowKeySpending it runs office → APC → county council appropriation → commissioners, auditor, and treasurer. Glancy: the office doesn't have free rein of that account.
- 16:16Jul 29“A reasonable opportunity” becomes 10 business daysKeyMembers refuse to leave the response window undefined, on the reasoning that a vague ordinance is one a developer's attorneys can drive through.
- 32:58Jul 29“There is no penalty in here”KeySherry French, from the floor: spending the company's own escrow to fix a problem isn't a punishment. She argues there has to be a fine on top, because a company with deep pockets will treat the escrow as a cost of doing business.
- 34:57Jul 29The hole in the escrow ideaKeyA member follows the thought to its conclusion: the county cannot physically walk into the building and fix a noise problem. If the fault is inherent to the system, escrow money can't buy a remedy — only the operator can.
- 36:35Jul 29The only penalty currently on the books: $2,500 a dayKeyEnforcement points back to the county's existing zoning penalties. Members note that covers zoning violations — and that a complaint might not be one.
- 49:23Jul 29Who the customers are — and the military questionKeyWorking through a required disclosure of the operation's sector mix, a member says that if it turned out to be entirely military they probably wouldn't be happy, particularly if the special exception said otherwise.
- 51:11Jul 29A confidentiality carve-out gets struck entirelyKeyThe draft allowed ownership and compliance details in a non-public appendix seen only by county counsel. A member calls it the opposite of transparency — “carving out a place for them to hide.” Deleted.
- 54:04Jul 29“If they decide we are going to start making weapons systems”KeyThe change-of-use provision gets teeth: members want notice before a change is implemented, not 30 days after, and want it subject to APC approval rather than mere notification.
- 1:00:37Jul 29“What kind of business is or is not allowed?”KeyStephanie from Upland asks whether there is any guideline for what a data center can host — AI, crypto, central bank, military. The answer: it comes out in the BZA special exception hearing. Crypto, she is told, gets its own ordinance.
- 1:06:59Jul 29“I don't know that we have the legal right to dictate who owns it”KeyOn international ownership. The chair's position is that the county can require disclosure and let the BZA weigh it, but probably cannot bar foreign ownership outright.
- 1:07:41Jul 29An office in Indiana, and registration with the Secretary of StateKeyWhat they decide they can require: a maintained physical presence in the state, so there is somebody to serve papers on, plus registration in the state business database so any resident can look the company up.
- 1:11:05Jul 29Any lawsuit gets filed in Grant CountyKeyMembers add a venue clause, comparing it to contract negotiations where the stronger party forces you into its home court.
- 1:28:41Jul 29The strongest tool the county hasKeyStated plainly after a long back-and-forth: if the operator does something the county doesn't want, the BZA can revoke the special exception and shut it down. Members acknowledge it would be litigated.
- 1:33:14Jul 29“An NDA won't get you out of answering the questions”KeyMembers draft language making clear a non-disclosure agreement doesn't excuse the disclosures this ordinance requires — a direct answer to the NDA concerns raised in March and June.
- 1:38:59Jul 29Letter W — what the county gets out of itKeyPage 30, community integration. The first section in the entire draft about benefits rather than restrictions.
- 1:40:42Jul 29Spare fiber and server space for local businessesKeyA member's pitch: they'll lay far more fiber than they use, and the county should negotiate for access — plus storage or compute capacity that could attract a manufacturer. “If you just want dollars you're being short-sighted.”
- 2:09:18Jul 29Abandoned, or a public nuisance?KeyA late debate over what to call a shut-down facility, and whether declaring it a nuisance would let an owner walk away and leave the county holding it.
The recordings
- Mar 11, 2026 · Meeting 1 · organizing — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdbMOMurlEo
- May 18, 2026 · Meeting 2 — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXB9X83Rgr0
- May 27, 2026 · Meeting 3 — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yuz2GgEa6E0
- Jun 10, 2026 · Meeting 4 — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBPiPZlRIxo
- Jun 24, 2026 · Meeting 5 — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzAt5Nb9Bbk
- Jul 22, 2026 · Meeting 6 — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Y1RadqxMhA
- Jul 29, 2026 · Meeting 7 — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wmU8EFyy6k
Timestamps are the moment each exchange begins. Links open five seconds early for context. Located using automatic captions — watch before quoting.
Before you quote any of this
These timestamps were located using YouTube’s automatic captions, which garble names badly. Watch the clip before repeating a name, a number, or a quotation. The video is the record — this page is only a way in.
Common caption errors in these recordings:
| The captions say | Almost certainly |
|---|---|
| BCA, ABC, EZA, PCA | BZA (Board of Zoning Appeals) |
| IDM | IDEM |
| ANIE | ANSI |
| PAFS, PABS, POS | PFAS |
| kayo, capos, ko | CAFO |
| Marian | Marion |
| Record Digital / Recor Digital | one of these — unverified |
| Sweeter, Fair, Cooko | Sweetser, Fairmount, Kokomo |
| Missen wall, salamony | Mississinewa, Salamonie |
| TA River, teas | Teays aquifer |
| Victoria Sparks | Rep. Victoria Spartz |
| Governor Brun | Gov. Mike Braun |
Company and personal names are especially unreliable — assume every proper noun is wrong until checked against the recording.
Sources and method
Every moment below was located by reading the automatic captions of the county’s own YouTube recordings, then spot-checking against the video. Displayed timestamps are the second the exchange begins; links open five seconds early for context. Auto-captions garble proper nouns badly (see the decoder above). Watch before quoting.
- ChannelGrant County Government — YouTube channel · retrieved Jul 30, 2026
- VideoMar 11, 2026 — Subcommittee meeting 1 (organizing) · retrieved Jul 30, 2026Timestamps located via YouTube auto-captions, which garble proper nouns. Watch before quoting.
- VideoMay 18, 2026 — Subcommittee meeting 2 (draft pp. 1–7) · retrieved Jul 30, 2026Timestamps located via YouTube auto-captions, which garble proper nouns. Watch before quoting.
- VideoMay 27, 2026 — Subcommittee meeting 3 (draft pp. 8–12) · retrieved Jul 30, 2026Timestamps located via YouTube auto-captions, which garble proper nouns. Watch before quoting.
- VideoJun 10, 2026 — Subcommittee meeting 4 (draft pp. 12–16) · retrieved Jul 30, 2026Timestamps located via YouTube auto-captions, which garble proper nouns. Watch before quoting.
- VideoJun 24, 2026 — Subcommittee meeting 5 (draft pp. 16–21) · retrieved Jul 30, 2026Timestamps located via YouTube auto-captions, which garble proper nouns. Watch before quoting. The Recor Digital letter is read into the record in this recording.
- VideoJul 22, 2026 — Subcommittee meeting 6 (draft pp. 21–27) · retrieved Jul 30, 2026Timestamps located via YouTube auto-captions, which garble proper nouns. Watch before quoting.
- VideoJul 29, 2026 — Subcommittee meeting 7 (draft pp. 27–30) · retrieved Jul 30, 2026Timestamps located via YouTube auto-captions, which garble proper nouns. Watch before quoting.
Updates to this report
- Jul 30, 2026Added the July 29 meeting — 36 new moments covering complaints, ownership disclosure, and community benefit. The subcommittee meets again August 5.
- Jul 30, 2026First published — six meetings indexed, 111 moments across nine topics.