HUTCHINSON, Kan. — A capacity crowd gathered Tuesday evening to discuss potential data center development in Hutchinson and Reno County, with most participants in an informal audience poll saying they did not want such a facility in their community.
Turnout was high enough that organizers moved the town hall from Shears Technology Center to the larger auditorium at Stringer Fine Arts Center on the Hutchinson Community College campus. The event lasted approximately two and a half hours.
Former state Rep. Jason Probst moderated the discussion, which included Hutchinson City Council member Stacy Goss and state Sen. Mike Murphy.
Murphy discussed Senate Bill 98, which Kansas enacted in 2025. The law provides qualifying data center projects with a 20-year exemption from state and local sales taxes on eligible construction, equipment and other expenses.
To qualify, a company must invest at least $250 million within five years after beginning operations and create at least 20 full-time jobs for Kansas residents. Companies must also enter into a 10-year electricity-purchase agreement and commit to water conservation practices, according to the Kansas Department of Commerce.
Murphy said he voted against the legislation because he opposed providing special tax incentives to the industry. He also said legislation was being developed to repeal the incentive.
Goss told attendees that Hutchinson should have policies and procedures established before a data center or battery-storage proposal reaches the City Council.
She said she previously proposed a temporary moratorium that would have given the city additional time to develop regulations, but the proposal did not receive support from other council members.
Goss argued that Hutchinson has time to proceed carefully because Evergy’s planned generating facility is not expected to begin providing power until 2030. She said two locations within the city have been discussed as possible data center sites: the Hutchinson industrial park and an area near the planned Evergy facility.
Audience members also asked whether residents could vote on allowing data centers or imposing a temporary moratorium.
Goss said any ballot question would need to address a specific legislative proposal to create a binding result. She said it was likely too late to place a petition-driven question on the November ballot and was uncertain whether a special election could be held later.
During the second half of the meeting, attendees used their cellphones to answer anonymous survey questions. Organizers displayed the results in real time, although not everyone in attendance participated.
Of those who identified where they lived, 123 respondents were Hutchinson residents, 42 lived elsewhere in Reno County and three lived outside the county.
When asked whether they wanted a data center in their community, 123 respondents said no, 35 answered maybe and 13 said yes. The results reflected only the people who participated in the town hall and were not a scientific survey of Hutchinson or Reno County residents.
Water use and environmental effects ranked as the audience’s leading concerns. Other concerns included effects on utilities and infrastructure, noise and light pollution, and the potential cost of decommissioning a facility.
Participants were also asked what benefits they would expect if a data center were built locally. Lower property taxes ranked first, followed by increased tax revenue.
Most respondents said a “good job” at a data center should pay between $65,000 and $100,000 annually. About half said a project should create at least 50 permanent jobs.
Probst said the responses indicated that residents expect measurable benefits to return to the community if it hosts a data center.
Respondents appeared more receptive to a small data center using less than 10 megawatts of electricity than to larger developments. Support declined for hyperscale facilities using at least 25 megawatts and giga-scale projects requiring approximately 1,000 megawatts.
When asked what they planned to do next, most respondents said they would continue attending government meetings concerning data centers. Other popular answers included forming a community organization and circulating a petition seeking a public vote on a moratorium.
Few participants said they planned to wait and see how the issue developed.
Probst encouraged residents to remain involved as city and county officials consider future policies and development proposals. He said continued public participation would be necessary to ensure local leaders understand the community’s concerns and expectations.