A controversial new ordinance regulating data centers in the small Mississippi River city of Clinton will be considered by the City Council at its next meeting Tuesday, Aug. 11 at 5 p.m.
At the meeting (Council Chambers at City Hall, 611 S. 3rd St., Clinton), the panel will consider a recommendation from the Clinton Plan Commission Aug. 5, which recommended approval of the ordinance.
Spurred by interest from the international company QTS, which wants to build a new data center in Clinton, the proposed city ordinance would regulate development of data centers in Clinton. It concerns siting, construction, expansion, operation, and continuing compliance of data centers within the city.
The 15-page ordinance says: “The City finds that data centers may provide substantial economic development benefits, including tax base growth, construction activity, long-term employment, and significant private investment in real property and utility infrastructure. The City further finds that data centers may involve substantial demands upon public infrastructure and may create concerns relating to water use, electric demand, lighting, noise, vibration, emergency response, stormwater, roadway impacts, and compatibility with nearby land uses.”
The goals of the ordinance are to:
· Allow data centers as a principal use in appropriate industrial zoning districts within the city.
· Require adequate advance planning for utility demand, water use, stormwater management, mitigation, roadway buffering; impacts, emergency response.
· Protect the public health, safety, and welfare, surrounding properties, and city infrastructure.
· Provide a review process that is transparent and coordinated while not treating a data center as a special use unless otherwise expressly required by another provision of the city code.
· Preserve the city’s ability to require project-specific development agreements, road use agreements, utility agreements, water use agreements, and infrastructure-related protections where appropriate.
Ahead of a formal proposal from QTS, Clinton is trying to create its first data center ordinance, which has drawn fierce public resistance. A private Facebook group, Clintonians Against Data Centers, has 1,300 members. Many residents would like the city ordinance to be one of the most restrictive in the state.
City attorney Patrick O’Connell presented a draft ordinance to Clinton’s City Plan Commission Wednesday, July 15, at a crowded public hearing. He said it draws on similar measures adopted in other parts of eastern Iowa.
QTS is proposing a 1,100-acre hyperscale data center (estimated to cost $10 billion) between Clinton Municipal Airport, Valley Oaks Golf Course and Braden Hills residential area, Highway 30 and tributaries of creeks leading to the Mississippi River. The area is across the highway from the Chemplex Site with PCE concentrations in wells.
A data center is a building that stores a large amount of digital data. This data – and the applications used to create, process and share it – is housed in servers that reside within the data center, according to QTS. Data centers are vital hubs for businesses, governments and organizations that rely on technology.
There are many factors that QTS considers when looking at locations for data center development, the Clinton center site says. Data centers require access to power, connectivity and a skilled workforce that not everywhere can provide. Another important factor is existing infrastructure that can support data center development, which this area already has established.
“Having infrastructure already in place significantly minimizes environmental and community disruption which is why we considered this site,” the company says.
City Attorney O'Connell presented the proposed ordinance which he drafted on behalf of the city. He explained that there is no ordinance currently in place which restricts or regulates data centers.
O'Connell stated that no input was sought or received from any data center owner or developer in drafting the proposed ordinance. The following are various considerations and issues posed by O'Connell for further consideration:
· Need for a provision to include assessment of impact on private wells and remedies for adverse impact.
· Need for maximum operating temperature during summer months when demand on electricity is high.
· Further clarification on separate nighttime standards on noise.
· A requirement for the development plan to include a statement of how the construction of the data center complies with the city comprehensive plan.
· Concerns of making the ordinance unreasonably restrictive, such that it would deter data center from locating in Clinton.
At the July Plan Commission meeting, 37 people made comments, including many directed against data centers in general, according to the meeting minutes. Comments and written information provided included the following themes.
· Concerns about adverse effects on private wells.
· Concerns with buffering distance, protection of property owners, and impact on land values, utility costs and impact.
· Environmental concerns, including impact on water resources. noise standards and lighting, clearer and stronger performance standards.
· A business representative with the International Union of Operating Engineers was of the opinion it is detrimental to demonize a particular industry and there should be an equal playing field for all industries with a strong but fair ordinance in place.
The commission received the following written information at the public hearing:
· A letter from attorney Mike Meloy, who represented approximately 30 property owners of Clinton.
· A letter consisting of 15 pages with suggested changes to the proposed ordinance presented by Celeste Robbins, which was read to the commission by several of the persons who made public comments, as well as other unsigned written statements.
· Copies of these documents are included with the Plan Commission report in the Aug. 11 council agenda, as well as the city staff report dated July 17th from City Attorney Pat O'Connell after the public hearing was considered by the commission.
At the Aug. 5 Plan Commission meeting, where public comment was not allowed, comments made by the commission included the following:
· The ordinance should require a performance bond.
· Setback requirements should be extended to 1,500 feet from residential areas.
· Infrastructure to and from a data center should be at the cost of the developer.
· Homeowners should not incur any increase or additional utility costs due to data center energy usage.
The commission recommended the ordinance with these changes, voting 5 in favor, one against, and one not voting.
QTS developing such centers worldwide
QTS is developing a similar data center campus in Cedar Rapids, on 612 acres in the Big Cedar Industrial Center, having broken ground a year ago.
Founded in 2003 and owned by Blackstone since 2021, QTS has dozens of data centers in operation and development across the U.S., UK, Netherlands, and Spain.
Tiffany O’Donnell, Mayor of Cedar Rapids, has said: “QTS represents a new era for Cedar Rapids—one defined by innovation, investment, and bold possibilities. This project not only brings world-class infrastructure to our community—it is the next big chapter in our long and proud story."
QTS opened a data center near downtown Chicago in July 2016, covering about 467,000 square feet of building space on a 30‑acre campus, and had an estimated construction cost of around $200 million.
Before any permit is issued in Clinton for a data center, the applicant shall submit a Data Center Development Plan to the city. The ordinance says the plan shall be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator, City Administrator or designee, Building Official, Fire Marshal, Public Works Director, City Engineer, and such outside consultants as the city deems reasonably necessary.
In June, the city said the council’s decision not to approve a proposed temporary moratorium was not an approval of a data center. The moratorium was introduced as an ordinance and failed on its first reading. As a result, that ordinance did not advance and will not return for additional readings.
That vote did not approve a site plan, development agreement, construction, public incentives, or any final project. Instead, the city will continue its due diligence, gather additional information, develop appropriate regulations, and involve the public in the process.
The city ordinance is expected to address water use, utilities, noise, lighting, setbacks, buffering, traffic, stormwater, emergency response, environmental compliance, decommissioning, and enforcement.
As part of this process, residents will have the opportunity to review the proposed ordinance, ask questions, share concerns, and provide input before the Council takes final action.
In a company statement issued June 12, QTS said it is “in the due diligence phase of a potential project in the City of Clinton and has not yet submitted a formal development plan to City staff for review. QTS recognizes that projects like this are important to the community and is approaching this process thoughtfully and responsibly. At this stage, the company is focused on project feasibility and careful evaluation to ensure any future proposal aligns with local development standards, while continuing to listen to community perspectives as part of that process.
“QTS will follow the same development review and permitting process required of all projects in the City of Clinton,” the company said. “QTS appreciates the work City staff are undertaking as part of the City’s ongoing planning process to establish clear zoning standards for data centers. QTS plans to submit a development plan that aligns with applicable zoning requirements for the City’s review. Following submission, QTS will proceed through the City’s standard development review and approval processes, which may include negotiation of a Development Agreement, obtaining zoning and building permits, and meeting all other applicable standards.
“Community engagement is an important part of the development process. QTS will continue to listen to community input as it evaluates the project and will expand engagement more broadly once a development plan has been submitted, providing a clearer foundation for discussion and feedback. As soon as a plan is available to share, QTS looks forward to engaging openly and directly with residents and stakeholders. Community engagement will continue as the project advances and more information becomes available.”
If QTS ultimately decides to proceed, the company will be required to submit project-specific plans and supporting information for review. As a community, the city will evaluate those materials, infrastructure impacts, applicable permits, and any necessary agreements through the appropriate public process.
“Residents will not be left out of that process. There will be additional opportunities for public review and participation as actual plans and information become available,” the city said, noting residents can visit the QTS Clinton project website QTS Clinton. Information on that website is provided by QTS and does not replace formal project submissions, professional review, or the city’s public approval process.
“Clinton is a community that values both responsible growth and the people who call it home,” a city press release said. “Our goal is to carefully consider the potential opportunities and impacts, require appropriate protections, and make decisions that serve Clinton’s long-term interests.”
Citizen group disappointed
Clintonians Against Data Centers issued a statement Friday, Aug. 7: “We are disappointed by the decision that was made to not allow us to address the City Plan Commission during their August 5th meeting regarding the data center ordinance.
“We are also disappointed in the lack of discussion and questions by commission members on this very important topic.
“We had hoped to read and present comments about the revised ordinance prepared by Clinton City Attorney O'Connell that the City Plan Commission was reviewing, either before or during the meeting, so that any questions or concerns could be addressed in a transparent public setting,” the group said. “Instead, no handouts were given to the public nor shared on the viewing screen in council chambers during the meeting.”
It also said the minutes of the July 15 Plan Commission meeting are inaccurate. “Comments by some members of our group were changed or excluded,” the statement said.
“Meaningful public participation is an essential part of home rule government in Iowa. Providing community members with an opportunity to review and comment on proposed ordinances before they move forward helps ensure better-informed decisions and strengthens public confidence in the process,” the group said.
“One of our goals has been to work collaboratively with city officials to develop an ordinance that is in the best interests of the health and safety of residents of our community.”
The concerned citizens group said in Clinton, “we have been dealing with pollution and contamination for decades. Cancer rates are increasing in Iowa. Our farmland and wetlands are valuable.”
Group spokesman Kevin Bradley said on Thursday, Aug. 6: “The city council basically gave them an ordinance for them to approve that's sent back to them to approve themselves and city council. So, in other words, they're doing the job of the Planning Commission, and that's not what should have happened,” he said Thursday. “So the citizens, when they said we weren't allowed to participate in the conversation and we have no idea what they were voting on, so it tells us two things. One is they want to keep it hidden from the citizens.
“And two, we don't even know what it was that they voted on. So that really is not transparent as it should be to the citizenship of Clinton,” Bradley (a former planning commissioner for cities in Indiana and California) said. “Because we don't know if they made any changes. We don't know if they looked at any of the suggestions that we had.”
“What if they go bankrupt or they just abandon the buildings? Now it's the city's responsibility to clean this multibillion-dollar waste site up, it's just going to be a problem for the community,” he said of QTS. “And they haven't, as far as I know, they have not done that. So our city council is doing everything they can to let this go through.”
“This is a self-serving council right now, and they're just railroading things through without really taking a step back and seeing what it can do the long term, and not just on the decommissioning side but the economic side of the city,” Bradley said. “One of the things the city of Clinton is fighting is it's shrinking. And a lot of these people in these apartment buildings are on state aid.”
“There are a lot of these decisions are really being based and made on personal gain. And I just have a real problem with it,” he said of the council.
Their group is upset the ordinance wasn’t made available for the public to review when the Plan Commission voted on it, “so we have no idea what went to the city,” Bradley said. “We don't know when the city presents theirs on the agenda if it's the same one that the Plan Commission passed on.”
Response from mayor
Mayor Scott Maddasion said the city “values public participation and appreciates the interest residents have shown throughout the review of the proposed data center ordinance.
The Plan Commission’s role is to review proposed ordinances and provide recommendations to the City Council,” he wrote Friday by email. Public comments regarding the proposed ordinance were accepted and received during the July 15, 2026, Plan Commission meeting, where the Commission heard extensive public input from residents and stakeholders.
“The city remains committed to transparency throughout this process. All meetings are publicly noticed, open to the public, and recorded,” the mayor said. “The proposed ordinance has not completed the review process, and no final action has been taken by the City Council. Additional opportunities for public discussion and input will remain available as the ordinance moves forward.”
At the City Council meeting Tuesday at 5 p.m., the council will be discussing the anticipated timeline and next steps for the ordinance review process, Maddasion said. “That discussion will help establish a path forward and provide the public with a clearer understanding of future opportunities for engagement before any final consideration by the City Council.”
WVIK News reached out to council members for comment, and has not yet received any responses.
To see a video of the Aug. 5 Plan Commission meeting, click HERE.
This story was produced by WVIK, Quad Cities NPR. We rely on financial support from our listeners and readers to provide coverage of the issues that matter to the Quad Cities region and beyond. As someone who values the content created by WVIK's news department, please consider making a financial contribution to support our work.
