Grant County commissioners hear data center concerns, approve wind farm bond ordinance and review county operations, part 1

[Editor's Note: Due to the length of these two meetings, the report is being broken into several articles. This first one covers the public input at the Oct. 6, 2026, work session. ]

Oct. 6, 2026 work session and Oct. 8, 2026 regular meeting

By Jason Weiland

The Grant County Commission heard concerns from residents about a proposed data center in southern Grant County during its October 8, 2026, regular meeting, followed by a presentation from the company seeking to develop the project. Commissioners also approved an extension of the Great Divide Wind Farm industrial revenue bond arrangement, considered rising employee health insurance costs and received an update on Gila Regional Medical Center.

The regular meeting followed an October 6 work session that included reports from the hospital's board of trustees, the Grant County Community Health Council and county department directors. Those reports covered hospital staffing and finances, detention officer pay, road repairs, airport improvements and the county's recent takeover of the Grant County Conference Center.

The data center discussion drew considerable public attention Thursday. Residents questioned the project's possible effects on water supplies, air quality and the surrounding community. Others urged commissioners to continue working with the developer rather than impose restrictions that might discourage investment.

The commission had previously approved a notice of intent for a proposed one-year moratorium on data center development. The ordinance was scheduled for consideration October 22. No moratorium was adopted at the October 8 meeting.

Public comments focus on veterans and proposed data center

The October 8 meeting opened with public comments about upcoming veterans' events before turning to the proposed Site Layer 1 data center.

Grant County Deputy Assessor Raul Turrieta, a Navy veteran, spoke about the October 17 Walk for the Heroes event at Fort Bayard. He encouraged residents to participate and recognize veterans and military families.

Sylvia Sierra, Veterans Affairs Officer at Western New Mexico University, also discussed the honor march, which took place at Bataan Memorial Park and walked about Fort Bayard Cemetery. She emphasized the importance of recognizing military service.

The remaining public comments largely concerned data center development and the county's proposed moratorium.

Allyson Siwik, executive director of the Gila Resources Information Project, questioned how much information the public had received about the proposed development. "A major issue is water use," Siwik said. "We're still in the dark about the facility's water use. Will they use wet cooling or a closed loop system?"

She said the project could also affect the surrounding area through noise, lighting and construction activity. "A facility of this size will change the landscape valued by local residents and Continental Divide Trail users," Siwik said. Siwik questioned where construction workers would live and whether temporary housing camps would be established. "Project details need to be made public, and we encourage the commission to not sign any non-disclosure agreements as other communities have," she said.

She told commissioners that the county needed answers from Granite Renewables before making decisions that could affect residents. "There's a long laundry list of questions that need to be addressed," Siwik said.

Patrice Mutchnick also raised concerns about the proposal. She questioned how the county would evaluate possible air emissions, water demands and other environmental effects. "This data center is not going to be built in my backyard," Mutchnick said. "But it is going to be built in our neighbor's backyard if we let it."

She said the commission had a responsibility to consider the health and well-being of Grant County residents, as well as people living in neighboring counties. Mutchnick raised questions about emissions from the proposed natural gas generation equipment and how those emissions might affect communities downwind. "We have control over what we do for our own community and we don't have to be subject to these large infrastructure projects without any controls," she said.

Mutchnick supported the proposed one-year moratorium. "I'm in support of the moratorium," she said, adding that the decision would affect not only current residents but future generations.

Elizabeth Foster likewise spoke in favor of a moratorium. She questioned the need for additional data centers and the effect they could have on local resources. "But the bigger question for me that nobody answers is why do we need these data centers?" Foster asked. "What kind of data are we inviting them to store in our neighborhood?"

Foster said she supported a permanent moratorium.

Ollie Stortevant, a paramedic and volunteer first responder, discussed possible health effects associated with air pollution. "As a paramedic, I hold a unique privilege," Stortevant said. "I get to take care of community members from birth until death and often on their worst days."

She said environmental conditions can contribute to health problems in rural communities. "Our environment plays a huge role in our health as rural Americans," she said.

Stortevant discussed the effects of particulate matter and raised concerns about what additional emissions could mean for residents already facing respiratory and cardiovascular health problems. Her comments concerned potential health risks, not documented emissions from an operating Site Layer 1 facility. The project remains in the planning stage.

Boarbara Bush discussed Project Jupiter, another data center development proposal in New Mexico, and urged commissioners to consider a longer moratorium rather than limiting their review to one year. "We need to make sure we have our ordinances in line," Bush said. "We need to make sure that the very best practices are followed with the construction and the operation of any data center to go in within Grant County."

Bush said she was concerned about the possible effects of construction traffic, pollution and damage to roads.

Dave Becker used his public comment period to raise several questions about the developer's approach to the county and the regulations that might apply to the project.

Becker thanked District 4 Commissioner Eddie Flores for supporting the notice of intent to consider the proposed moratorium. "I urge Commissioner Flores, [District 1 Commissioner and ] Chairman [Chris]Ponce, and the rest of the commission to adopt the ordinance for the moratorium on October 22nd," Becker said. He referred to correspondence from New Mexico Environment Department Secretary James Kenney concerning the developer's air permitting process and public outreach.

Becker questioned why Site Layer 1 representatives had not held public meetings where residents could ask questions about the proposal. "Do they immediately announce public meetings so they can talk to the people of Grant County about the project and take questions? No," Becker said. He objected to the developer's presentation being scheduled after the public comment period. "They'll be giving a presentation after our chance for public comments today so they do not have to answer our questions," Becker said.

He also questioned what information had been provided to the public about the project's intended operations. Becker said the county needed to establish rules before allowing development to proceed. "The commission needs to put brakes on data center development in Grant County to put in place some regulations guaranteeing accountability, transparency," he said. He said those rules should prohibit nondisclosure and confidentiality agreements that would prevent public access to information.

Becker also challenged the employment benefits being discussed. He questioned whether construction jobs would go to local workers and whether permanent positions would require specialized skills that residents might not possess. "Specialized construction companies from out of the area build the facility," Becker said. "And then it only takes a handful of people to operate."

He argued that the county should examine those claims rather than accept job estimates without further information. "That's why the county needs to adopt a moratorium so you can evaluate what kind of regulations need to be put into place to protect not only the people in Hachita but the public interest of the county as a whole," he said.

Becker asked whether the county's existing noise nuisance ordinance was adequate. "Does that need to be strengthened to protect local people and the environment from data center noise?" he asked.

He also wanted commissioners to consider financial protections for the county if the facility eventually closed. "What sort of financial assurances will the county require so our taxpayers are not left paying for decommissioning or cleanup?" Becker asked.

Becker said the county should require water reclamation and reuse plans and consider rules addressing local hiring and workforce training. "A moratorium will give us the time to consider all these things to protect the interests of our community," he said.

He ended by urging commissioners to adopt the ordinance October 22.

Laura Rubelmann thanked commissioners for considering the moratorium and encouraged continued public participation. She also called for cooperation between county and municipal governments. "The city and county, we're all in this together," Rubelmann said. "And I hope you'll work together, too."

Carrie Sue Flores spoke against the proposed data center. She raised concerns about carbon emissions, wildlife, national forest lands and the long-term effects of industrial development. She compared the proposal with the region's history of mining, noting that mining companies had provided employment and other forms of support to local communities. Flores questioned whether the proposed data center would provide comparable benefits.

Although Flores opposed the development, she did not explicitly call for adoption of the moratorium during her remarks.

Jeff Bloom offered a different view.

Bloom said he shared concerns about the possible environmental and community effects of the data center, including impacts that might extend beyond the immediate development site. "I have concerns of this data center," Bloom said. "I have concerns wherever it's being built."

He also questioned whether the jobs created would benefit Grant County residents. However, Bloom expressed concern that a moratorium could make negotiations with developers more difficult or discourage other industries from considering Grant County. "I have a concernon a moratorium," he said.

Bloom told commissioners he appreciated the comments from residents who had spoken before him. "They are all valid concerns," he said. He argued that the county should consider whether it could negotiate protections and benefits with the developer rather than stop the process. "There is no reason not to at least entertain to work with a business, any business, any industry, to be placed into Grant County," Bloom said. "But it needs to be done in good faith."

Bloom questioned whether a moratorium might be interpreted by developers as a signal that Grant County did not want their projects. He said the county should use the opportunity to negotiate over the project's effects on residents. "Every business that is built impacts the environment," Bloom said.

He argued that the goal should be to work with developers to reduce those effects. "The opportunity is to work with the business to find out what can be done to minimize the impact to the community, to improve the community and to minimize the impact to the environment," he said. Bloom referred to his experience in another community where residents had worked with a developer on a cargo container port project. He said the business had negotiated with residents and offered concessions, but the community ultimately lost some of the benefits that had been discussed. "I don't want to see that happen here if we can work with the business, with the industry," Bloom said.

Anna Wyland supported the moratorium and urged commissioners not to enter into nondisclosure agreements. "I would like the county commissioners to support a one-year moratorium on this data center," Wyland said. She also asked commissioners to consider a legally binding prohibition against signing nondisclosure agreements with the developer.

Wyland said the moratorium would allow time to examine the project's effects. ”I believe that a one-year moratorium will give the county commissioners the time to safeguard our community, safeguard the water, the air quality," she said.

John Bush said data centers serve a growing need for cloud computing and other digital services. He believed Grant County could work with developers, but only under conditions that protected local resources. Bush said solar and wind should be the primary sources of power, with natural gas generation reserved for backup. He also argued that developers should bring their own water rather than draw on local aquifers for cooling.

He supported the moratorium until the county could establish rules governing such projects.

The comments showed that residents did not hold a single position. Some opposed the development, others wanted stronger safeguards before allowing it, and Bloom questioned whether a moratorium was the best way to achieve those protections.