Data center moratorium

Speaking for the Climate Coalition, she urged a two-year moratorium, citing planning department climate assessment findings of major negative impacts and the Dickerson proposal.

The Montgomery Countryside Alliance representative asked the Council to enact its own moratorium — merging the two bills — saying the Executive's six-month order doesn't give enough working room.

A climate activist focused on noise, using an electric toothbrush analogy to show 55 decibels around the clock is unbearable, and urged merging the bills.

An environmental health researcher raised PFAS contamination and EMF exposure from substations and transmission lines, calling a two-year moratorium the only defensible course.

A 350 Montgomery County activist cited harms in Oregon, Virginia and New York, and said the county's stressed watershed cannot sustain more harm.

A resident argued the Dickerson project's $40-50 million tax revenue is small relative to grid, water and climate costs, and that waiting two years for cleaner technology is worth it.

Nature Forward's clean energy campaign manager supported the two-year bill only with binding permanent reforms and opposed the six-month bill as too short.

A Chesapeake Climate Action Network representative supported a moratorium and laid out a four-part definition of genuine 100% clean energy to guard against greenwashing.

The Civic Federation backed the two-year bill, opposed the six-month bill and its Dickerson carve-out, and listed unanswered questions on electricity, water, fire risk and net fiscal benefit.

An environmental specialist criticized the three-year delay in public disclosure about the Dickerson site and suggested using Loudoun County's experience as a pilot.

A union carpenters representative opposed both moratoriums, saying they destroy family-sustaining construction jobs and push investment elsewhere.

An Ashton-Sandy Spring resident of 47 years showed a real estate listing advertising a 12-acre farm as 'suitable for data center site' and urged quick action to protect historic communities.

An energy mediator proposed a community benefits negotiation process during any moratorium that could allow the county to lift it for projects with binding agreements on clean energy, ratepayer protection and workforce.

The Chamber of Commerce CEO opposed both bills and urged completing ZTA 26-01 instead, calling the Dickerson site a strategic opportunity.

A Dickerson resident supported the two-year moratorium and criticized Atmosphere's CEO for claiming environmental credentials without data and for invoking McCarthy-style attacks on community leaders.

Terra Energy's owners' representative opposed the moratoriums, detailing the project's setbacks, self-funded infrastructure, 390 acres of forest easements, hybrid water system, and separate 500-megawatt battery project.

An 18-year-old county resident supported at least a six-month moratorium, citing noise impacts on the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem and Potomac water supplies.

The Sierra Club chair urged members to take the time to get data center rules right, demanding locally generated renewable energy and no ratepayer cost-shifting.

The Taxpayers League representative opposed the moratoriums, arguing data centers offset residential tax burdens and citing his own career in the industry.

A working mother from the Brookeville/Olney area, testifying for the first time, urged at least a two-year moratorium citing water consumption, grid strain, and few permanent jobs.

Additional speakers including Steven Finley, Ravi Subramaniam (retired EPA scientist with Third Act), and others testified in support of the two-year moratorium, citing governance, health, and environmental review needs; business voices countered that both moratoriums would signal the county is closed for business.