Data centers and the proposed county moratorium

The proposal is a one-year county moratorium on data-center projects — a temporary pause, described in the meeting record as time for the county to study the issue and, if needed, write development standards before any project is considered. The official minutes of the June 23, 2026 Planning Commission meeting record the item as a proposal brought "together" by a county commissioner and a candidate for county mayor (Commissioner Linda Yockey and mayoral candidate Curt Cobb), asking the Planning Commission to "formally recommend to the Board of Commissioners, a One Year Moratorium on Large-Scale Data Centers." As of 2026-08-06, the County Commission has not voted on it. The steps the record documents:

Date	What the record shows	Where it's documented
June 16, 2026	Commissioner Anita Epperson tells the Rules & Legislative Committee she "had been receiving calls about possible data center coming"; Commissioners Greg Vick and Linda Yockey respond that the Planning Commission is already discussing the issue and working on a plan.	June 16 Rules & Legislative minutes (included in the July 21 committee packet, linked below)
June 23, 2026	The Planning Commission hears public comment, discusses the proposal, suspends its rules to add a vote to the agenda, and votes to recommend the County Commission adopt a one-year moratorium.	Official minutes (in the July 21 packet) · meeting video · transcript
July 21, 2026	"Data Centers One Year Moratorium Request by Planning Commission" appears as New Business item 8 on the Rules & Legislative Committee agenda.	Committee agenda · meeting video
July 28, 2026	The planning director reports the moratorium resolution is finished and filed with the mayor's office, has gone through the Rules & Legislative Committee, and is being held by the mayor for the September County Commission agenda.	Meeting video (1:17:30–1:18:30) · transcript

In the July 28 statement's own words: "I have finished it and turned it into the mayor's office … it's gone through rules and legislative in time to be on the next commission agenda, but the mayor wanted to put it on the following" — because, as the director relayed it, the mayor will have newly seated commissioners on board and "wanted to give them an extra month so that they would have an opportunity to learn about it" before voting.

• Public comment (video 5:32–11:34): two residents of the same Unionville household, named in the official minutes as Adam Vanderkin and Jennifer Vanderkin, spoke in opposition to data centers. Adam Vanderkin — described in the minutes as a senior IT manager with the state with almost 20 years in IT, and who identified himself on the video as running for Bedford County Mayor (8:41) — cited large electricity and water consumption at data centers elsewhere in Tennessee and urged the county to act before any project is proposed — acknowledging that no one is proposing one here at this time. Jennifer Vanderkin said electricity providers spread infrastructure costs across ratepayers, that evaporated cooling water is not returned to the water system, and that in her view the promised economic benefits would not materialize. These are the speakers' statements from the record; this page does not assert them as facts about data centers.
• The written discussion item in the official minutes states the moratorium would give the Planning Commission "an opportunity to study the actual impacts and critical resource demands they're believed to place on" community infrastructure (electricity and water consumption), the environment and public health (the Duck River's capacity, air, noise, and light), and "The Real Benefit to our Economy" — including "$100M+ investments that only require fifteen (15) offered full-time jobs." The item itself notes "there are competing narratives" about newer technology and calls for the matter to be "deeply investigated."
• On water (video 42:07–44:17): the planning director said he did not believe an unincorporated-area data center could be served with enough water, and — referring to a large facility in Memphis raised in discussion — said it "can use up to five million gallons a day and we probably have in excess two million gallons a day," adding that the county draws only from the watershed feeding the Normandy reservoir. His statement from the record.
• On utility bills (video 40:39 ff.): the director said large data centers require utilities to build infrastructure whose costs are typically spread across ratepayers, and named the heads of local utilities as people who "would like to be a part of the conversation." His statement from the record.
• A dissenting note on duration (video 46:00–47:43): one speaker in the discussion disagreed with a year-long moratorium — "I think we'll end up in a lawsuit" — suggested "Maybe we do six months, nine months," and asked that a committee be formed with utility directors.
• Mayoral candidate Curt Cobb (video 48:22–50:19), named in the minutes as a co-proposer, spoke in support of a moratorium of "a year or 18 months," said the City of Shelbyville's planner had told the city planning commission that "two different data centers" had looked at Shelbyville, and urged the city and county to work together. His statements from the record.
• The vote (video 55:42–57:29): because the item was listed for discussion only, the commission first voted to suspend its rules and amend the agenda (motion by Linda Yockey, seconded by Jay Graham; "Motion passed unanimously," per the minutes). The minutes then record Kennon Threet's motion, seconded by Lynn Kasicki: "to recommend to the County Commission a one-year moratorium on Data Centers to give The Planning Commission an opportunity to learn more about the Data Centers." On the roll call, the minutes record yes votes from Larry Hasty, Lynn Kasicki, Kennon Threet, Linda Yockey, Alan Gill, Jay Graham, Wayne Simons, and Reid Farmer — eight of the nine members present — and no vote from the ninth member present, Jeff Sweeney; the minutes record neither a vote nor an abstention for him. In the video, when Sweeney's name is called on the roll (57:23), the response — recorded in the unofficial auto-generated transcript as "pass on that one" — is the only answer the record captures from him. The minutes state: "Motion Passed."

• A temporary pause, not a permanent ban. Throughout the June 23 discussion, the moratorium was described as time to study the issue and write standards — in the motion's own words, "to give The Planning Commission an opportunity to learn more about the Data Centers."
• The county attorney's guidance, as relayed at the meeting (video 51:52–52:15): the planning director recounted a conversation in which the county attorney initially doubted counties could still enact moratoria, "looked it up while I was right there with her," and concluded that they can — "18 months is about the most you can have." This is the director's account of the attorney's guidance, from the record; neither the statute nor a written opinion has been published in the county record reviewed for this page.
• Requirements, as stated at the meeting (video 54:58–55:12): the director said that for a moratorium "you have to show harm or neglect," and that the request sent to the commission must be specific about what the moratorium covers.
• The precedent cited at the meeting (video 40:39–40:56): the director said the county previously followed the same pattern for solar projects — "like we did with solar … we ended up with a solar farm before because we didn't have any rules and then once we created the standards we haven't got anymore" — adding that solar remains available, "just a little bit more complicated than it would have been before."
• Only the County Commission can enact it (video 54:25 ff.). Asked whether the Planning Commission could impose a moratorium itself, the chairman answered that "the county commission is the only one that can do that. It's the legislative" — the Planning Commission's June 23 action is a recommendation.

The June 23 written discussion item referenced "$100M+ investments that only require fifteen (15) offered full-time jobs." For context, the State of Tennessee's economic development agency (TNECD) publishes a data-center incentive with those thresholds. In TNECD's own description:

• "Data Centers: Sales tax exemption for certain hardware and software purchased for a qualified data center."
• "Eligibility: Minimum capital investment of $100M within a three-year period and at least 15 net new full-time positions each paying 150% of the state's average occupational wage."

That is the state's published incentive policy, quoted from TNECD's incentives page. This page draws no conclusion from it about any project, existing or hypothetical, in Bedford County.

Each open question below is answerable by a specific public document or vote. As those appear, this page fills in.

Open question	What would answer it
Will the County Commission adopt the moratorium? No commission vote has occurred as of 2026-08-06.	The September County Commission meeting — agenda, vote, and minutes on the county's commission meetings page
What exactly does the resolution say — scope, definitions, duration, exceptions? The text has not been published on the county pages reviewed for this page.	The resolution text, expected in the commission agenda packet when posted
What did the Rules & Legislative Committee decide on July 21? The agenda and video are posted; minutes were not yet posted as of 2026-08-06. (The July 28 account of the outcome above is the planning director's statement.)	The committee's July 21 minutes, when posted to the committee page
Is any data-center project actually proposed in Bedford County? No application appears in the meetings and documents reviewed for this page; the June 16 committee minutes record "calls about possible data center coming," and a June 23 public commenter said no one is proposing one at this time.	Any application, rezoning request, or agenda item filed with Planning & Zoning or the City of Shelbyville
Did two data centers look at the City of Shelbyville, and which ones? This appears in the record only as a statement by a speaker relaying the city planner's account.	City of Shelbyville planning records or city planning commission minutes

Every source this page uses is public. Watch the meetings and read the documents directly:

• June 23, 2026 Planning Commission video — public comment from 5:32; the data-center discussion and vote from 40:18 to 57:36. Open Bedford's searchable transcript.
• July 28, 2026 Planning Commission video — the status update at 1:17:30. Open Bedford's searchable transcript.
• July 21, 2026 Rules & Legislative Committee video, with the agenda and packet.
• Planning Commission agendas & videos — the county's own listing, and the Planning & Zoning department page.
• County Commission meetings page — where the September agenda and packet will appear when posted.
• Bedford County TN Government YouTube channel — all county meeting videos.

The moratorium is expected on the September County Commission agenda, per the planning director's July 28 statement — check the commission meetings page for the agenda when it posts. The county's published procedure for speaking at meetings: record your name and address on the sign-up sheet before the meeting is called to order, address the chairperson respectfully when called on, and limit remarks to three minutes on items germane to the agenda. At the July 28 Planning Commission meeting, the planning director relayed the county attorney's explanation of the current public-comment law: the public may speak on "anything that is under the purview" of the body holding the meeting, "whether it's on the agenda or not" (video 0:36–2:17) — his account of her guidance, from the record. Persons with a disability who wish to request accommodation for a committee meeting are directed by the county to notify Suzanne Alexander at least one business day ahead at (931) 684-7944 or suzanne.alexander@bedfordcountytn.gov.