Case study
How one county paused data centers: a committee, ten towns and a county board
In the summer of 2026, Jefferson County, Wisconsin, adopted a moratorium on zoning permits for data centers. Its path is rebuilt here from the minutes of the public bodies that took it up.
The question How quickly can one policy move across a county's public bodies, and can each step be shown from a document that body published itself?
The question
How quickly can one policy move across a county's public bodies, and can each step be shown from a document that body published itself? Jefferson County's moratorium on data centers passed through the county's Planning and Zoning Committee, the town boards it asked for comment, a public hearing and the County Board. It began with no application on file: the committee's minutes say the intention was to start discussion on the topic early.
The record
-
Jefferson County, Planning and Zoning Committee
Under an item on data-center regulations, the committee is told that no data-center application has been received.
-
Jefferson County, Planning and Zoning Committee
The committee votes 5-0 to set up an 18-month moratorium on data centers, or one lasting until an ordinance is adopted.
-
Town of Sullivan, Town Board
The board receives the county's letter and chooses to offer no comment for now.
-
Town of Oakland, Town Board
At a special meeting the board votes 5-0 to send the county a letter of support.
-
Town of Palmyra, Town Board
The board votes unanimously to support the moratorium and the drafting of an ordinance.
-
Town of Watertown, Town Board
The board passes a motion to tell the county the town supports the moratorium.
-
Town of Farmington, Town Board
The proposal appears among reports from the county's zoning division, for information; no motion is recorded.
-
Town of Lake Mills, Town Board
The board passes a motion supporting the 18-month moratorium and has a letter of support drafted.
-
Town of Koshkonong, Town Board
The board votes, all in favour, to support the county's request.
-
Town of Cold Spring, Town Board
The proposal is reported to the board for information; no motion is recorded.
-
Town of Milford, Town Board
The board passes a motion to tell the county the town favours the moratorium, as the town's plan commission did the same evening.
Town minutes web page (the town's site has no secure address, so it is not linked): http://www.townofmilford.org/Minutes
-
Jefferson County, public hearing on R4697T-26
Fourteen speakers are recorded in favour, the file holds 40 more emails in support, and no comment in opposition is recorded.
-
Jefferson County, Planning and Zoning Committee
The committee votes 4-0 to approve the moratorium ordinance and send it to the County Board.
-
Town of Jefferson, Town Board
After the committee has acted, the board votes on a voice vote to support the proposed moratorium.
-
Jefferson County, County Board
Two amendments to the ordinance's duration wording fail; the board then adopts Ordinance No. 2026-10. The minutes give no tally.
-
Jefferson County, Planning and Zoning Committee
The committee turns to data-center regulations: size limits, definitions and water plans. No motion is recorded.
-
Jefferson County, Planning and Zoning Committee
The meeting packet carries a template ordinance from the state's counties association. The meeting's outcome is not yet published.
What the ordinance covers
The County Board adopted Ordinance No. 2026-10, which creates Section 22-86 of the county's code. In its own words:
"there shall be a moratorium on the receipt of applications for and the granting of all zoning-related permits for the placement or construction of Data Centers, including rezone petitions, conditional use permits, and other approvals, for a period of eighteen (18) months."
It lasts "for a period of 18 months from the date of enactment, or until such time as it is rescinded or replaced with substantive data center regulations, by action of the County Board of Supervisors, whichever is earlier", and the County Board may extend it by separate action.
What connecting them showed
The committee's first vote and the County Board's adoption are 42 days apart.
- There was no application on file. When the committee first voted, its minutes record that none had been received.
- Seven towns supported the moratorium: the Towns of Oakland, Palmyra, Watertown, Lake Mills, Koshkonong, Milford and Jefferson. The Town of Jefferson voted after the county committee had already approved the ordinance.
- None opposed. Three towns took it up without acting: the Town of Sullivan chose not to comment, and the Towns of Farmington and Cold Spring heard it for information.
- At the county's hearing the minutes list fourteen speakers in favour and 40 more emails in support. Under comments opposed they record none.
- The committee approved the ordinance 4-0. At the County Board, two amendments to its duration wording failed before the ordinance was adopted.
- The work went on after adoption: by August 31 the committee was discussing data-center regulations, and its September 28 packet carried a template ordinance from the state's counties association.
What the record does not show
- The County Board's minutes record the adoption without a tally, so this page gives none.
- The ordinance takes effect on passage and publication, and its publication date is not in the record, so neither is the day it took effect or the day it ends.
- The outcome of the committee's September 28 meeting is not yet published.
- Six of the county's towns have no item on the moratorium in the record: Aztalan, Concord, Hebron, Ixonia, Sumner and Waterloo.
- When most of these documents were posted is known only from their file metadata, and the Town of Milford's minutes page carries no posting date at all.
- The letters the towns sent to the county are not public, and the Town of Jefferson's plan commission minutes for July 27 were not found.
How it was done
The county's and the towns' agendas, minutes and packets were collected from their public websites at a polite pace, and a copy of each was kept as it was read. Each step on this page was then read in the document itself, and the passage behind it was checked against the kept copy. Machine-read outcomes were not trusted: they had marked several towns' recorded votes as unknown, and one town's information item as a recommendation. The page names public bodies only. The people who spoke are in the minutes, and they are left there.