Columbus Council to vote on version of data center rules created by ‘unofficial’ board
During its meeting Tuesday night, the Columbus Council substituted the proposed technology overlay district ordinance for one created by an “unofficial” data center committee, meaning the new version of the ordinance would be what is used when it comes to a vote
The council also voted to delay the first reading of the ordinance for one week, so it will be on the June 9 meeting’s agenda. Without any other delays, the council will vote on the ordinance June 16, Clerk of Council Lindsey McLemore told the Ledger-Enquirer.
The council began debating the ordinance Tuesday night. The technology overlay ordinance would outline the rules for a hyperscale data center anywhere in the consolidated jurisdiction of Columbus and Muscogee County. One called Project Ruby is targeted for 865 acres in northeast Muscogee County.
Deliberation on this ordinance was delayed until after the May 19 election because of advertisement requirements, following the Columbus Planning Advisory Commission decision to recommend passing the ordinance in April.
The purpose of the technology overlay district is to provide a set of rules to permit and regulate data centers and related technology uses, according to the ordinance.
Columbus residents filled the council chamber Tuesday night. Many of them wore T-shirts with the messages “Keep it Rural” and “No Data Center.” They also carried signs that have become a common sight around Muscogee County, advocating for no data center with a QR code leading to a change.org petition with 4,953 signatures as of Wednesday at 5 p.m..
Before the public hearing on the ordinance, Columbus Mayor Skip Henderson stressed to the crowd this ordinance was not directly related to the controversial Project Ruby.
“This is about an overlay ordinance,” Henderson said. “This is not about a data center — not about a specific data center. This is specifically about guardrails that are being proposed to try to protect the citizens if a data center were placed anywhere in our community.”
When a specific data center is proposed, Henderson said, it will come to the council at that time for debate.
An ‘Unofficial Committee’
To begin the public hearing, Henderson invited Greater Columbus Chamber of Commerce president and CEO Jansen Tidmore to present recommendations from the chamber’s Unofficial Data Center Overlay Ordinance Review Committee.
The unofficial committee comprises 16 members, including retired state Rep. Calvin Smyre (D-Columbus). Committee members who attended Tuedsay night’s council meeting with Tidmore included Ken Henson of Ken Henson Law, Joshua Ferguson of Infovore Data Solutions, Columbus-based environmental consultant Erin Bouthillier and Brantley French of Bystar Credit Union.
Subject-matter experts who helped create the committees recommendations are:
- Jeremy Cummings, Columbus Water Works
- Wes Kelley, Brasfield & Gorrie
- Doug Jenkins, Georgia Power
- Will Johnson, Columbus Consolidated Government
- Carolyn Bermudez, Liberty Utilities
- Andy Camp, Georgia Power.
Dialogue and conversation are an important part of a healthy process, Tidmore said. They call it an “unofficial committee” because that is what it is he said.
“You all didn’t mandate us to do this,” Tidmore told the council. “You all didn’t put it on the table as this had to be done.”
The committee came together after observing conversations about the technology overlay district and nationwide debates about data centers, Tidmore said. The PAC and council indicated they want a group to analyze the topic “piece by piece and issue by issue and dissect it,” he said.
The committee didn’t want members who are completely for or completely against data centers, Tidmore said. They also didn’t want to focus on a specific project because the ordinance is not about a specific project, he said.
“It’s about how do we approach this,” he said. “It’s about how do we have the conversation and how we establish the baseline.”
Tidmore and his group presented some of their main recommendations for the ordinance to the council. The full list of recommendations and the version of the ordinance implementing the changes can be found in their report.
Some of the recommendations are changes to the noise rules, shifting the time windows and changing how the noise is measured. They also had suggestions for the setback, buffer and accountability, including enforcing fines.
Councilors support unofficial committee’s recommendations
After the group from the “Unofficial Committee” spoke, Mayor Pro Tem and Columbus Councilor Gary Allen of District 6 motioned to substitute the existing ordinance for the one proposed by the committee.
This would be a template the council could change during the process, Allen said. No councilor opposed the motion.
Councilor Glenn Davis of District 2 spoke in support of creating the technology overlay district.
“We don’t have anything on the books,” he said. “And we need it. It’s all about updating our procedures and how we operate.”
Davis said this ordinance is a “working document” that would be inserted into the city’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) that could be amended.
“I just want to share to the public, we’re listening,” he said.
People in the crowd, which was widely against the data center, laughed at this statement.
Davis reiterated the council was listening to their concerns. He said a lot of information is circulating that people could “call it conspiracy theories or call it facts.”
“People need to take their time to work through it,” Davis said. “We’re all working through it, and a lot of this stuff is new to people.”
The technology in this industry is changing on almost a daily basis, Davis said, with many of the updates focused on solving problems created by data centers.
“There is a lot of technology that is good that is solving these problems,” he said.
Everything being discussed about a data center in Columbus is “all speculation,” Davis said.
“You can talk about a Project Ruby,” he said, “but right now, there’s no Project Ruby.”
There’s not a project until someone submits a request, Davis said, and that has not happened. More than 30 sites in Georgia could be used for data centers, he said, including neighboring counties. Companies wanting to build a data center are going to choose only a few locations because of their budget, he said.
“We need to look at protecting our community and doing what’s best for our community,” Davis said. “The more you look at this, there are (positive) attributes, even along the lines of creating affordability for your citizens, opportunities for your citizens and growing your community. And you have to ask yourself how many chances are you going to get like that.”
Davis’ speech was met by hecklers in the audience, with at least one individual being escorted out by a sheriff’s deputy. Davis completed his comments by thanking the “Unofficial Committee” for their work.
Questions about increasing fines, delaying first reading
Councilor Joanne Cogle of District 7, a mayoral candidate, expressed concern about the proposed fines that would be issued if a data center violates the noise standard.
If a data center’s noise exceeds the approved sound level, the company would be fined a maximum of $1,000 for each day the violation exists. Cogle asked whether this amount could be increased and who set it.
“I have some concerns that $1,000 a day for each violation is not a lot,” she said.
City Attorney Clifton Fay said Georgia law sets $1,000 as the maximum fine for misdemeanor offenses. The city’s charter also sets $1,000 as the maximum fine for violating a city ordinance, he said.
“Up to $1,000 each day is consistent with any other ordinance that is enforced by police or special enforcement in Muscogee County,” Fay said. “This is a maximum.”
Cogle noted part of the proposed technolog overlay ordinance allows the city to have grounds for civil action if there is continued noncompliance. She asked whether a timeline could be added to determine how quickly the city could revoke the certificate of occupancy.
Such a timeline is included in the citation process, Fay said, and could be whatever the council chooses: 30 days, 60 days or 90 days.
“My concern is how long that (process) usually takes to follow through with the citations,” Cogle said.
Sometimes processes like this in the city can take years, she said.
Environmental Court is conducted every week in Columbus Recorders Court, Fay said.
“Every Wednesday, they’re going to go before the Environmental Court judge for whatever the violation is,” he said. “This also gives the city another tool, as far as filing a civil action, to get an injunction or other relief that might be needed to force compliance.”
Allen, referring to the limitations of fining more than $1,000 in Recorder’s Court, asked whether it would be possible to move this issue to Superior Court.
“The enforcement starts in Recorder’s Court,” Fay said. “If there’s a civil action, or if the city needs an injunction to force compliance, that, normally, has to go to Superior Court.”
The council voted to delay its vote on the technology overlay ordinance for one week. This would provide another opportunity for representatives from Georgia Power and Columbus Water Works to attend a council meeting and address concerns from the community and the council, Davis said.
Other than Davis and the questions from Cogle and Allen, nobody else on the 10-member council spoke during the meeting about their opinions or any concerns regarding the proposed ordinance.
When people in the audience criticized the council for not responding to their questions and concerns at the moment, Henderson said this meeting was an opportunity for the council to listen to the public.
The next Columbus Council is scheduled for June 9 at 9 a.m.
This story was originally published June 3, 2026 at 5:52 PM.
