The Local Source for News and Information Since 1980
FEDERALSBURG – With the question of what to do about a proposed data center project looming over Federalsburg, the town’s Planning and Zoning Board spent two meetings reviewing an ordinance that would prohibit data centers in all zoning districts.
The Board first considered Zoning Ordinance 2026-O-7 during an August 26 meeting at the Federalsburg Activities Center. They reconvened and reviewed the legislation again during a September 3 workshop at Town Hall. Both meetings drew strong public attendance, with Town Councilmembers Ian Ferguson and Brandy James also present.
The ordinance was introduced by the Federalsburg Town Council after the Council unanimously approved a three-year moratorium on new data center proposals at its August 4 regular meeting. That moratorium, however, does not apply to the original data center project currently under consideration by the town. Therefore, Councilmembers who are opposed to the idea of a data center proposed going beyond the temporary moratorium by creating an ordinance that would prohibit data centers entirely. The ordinance was drafted and formally introduced at the Council’s August 17 meeting before being sent to Planning and Zoning for review.
The Planning and Zoning Board’s role is “strictly advisory.” The responsibilities of the Board during the two recent meetings were to determine whether the proposed ordinance was consistent with Federalsburg’s comprehensive plan, consider potential changes to the ordinance’s language or parameters, and ultimately advise the Mayor and Council whether the ordinance should be adopted.
The Debate Over a Permanent Ban
The central disagreement among Board members was not simply whether they supported or opposed the proposed data center itself. Instead, much of the discussion centered on whether Federalsburg should permanently close the door to the idea of a data center in the future, or if they should adopt strict regulations on data center companies to determine whether they can do business in Federalsburg.
Planning and Zoning Chair Steve Bollinger said he remained “on the fence” about data centers themselves but opposed permanently banning them. “I’m not fond of a blanket statement to say no, we’re not ever going to have one,” Bollinger said, warning that such a decision could “handicap the town long term” if circumstances change decades from now as technology surrounding data centers changes.
Board member Stephen Parks took a stronger position against an outright ban. He argued that the town should educate itself about the industry and establish clear standards rather than automatically rejecting it. He said he would prefer the town to develop an ordinance defining data centers and establishing requirements that developers would have to meet.
Paul Crawford, another Board member, said that he is personally “against the data center”, but if developers could meet strict requirements, he could change his mind. However, “the problem that I see is that these companies that do this – these billion-dollar companies – they’re going to do what they want once they get their foot in the door.”
Economic Opportunity Versus Environmental Risk
Parks emphasized the potential economic benefits of allowing a data center, particularly for a town he described as facing significant financial challenges. He pointed to examples from other communities that he believed had benefited economically from data centers, including Quincy, Washington, and Loudoun County, Virginia. Parks argued that Federalsburg could potentially use additional revenue for community investments, including recreational facilities and youth programs. “If we had the money from this data center, we could fund a recreation center,” Parks said.
For opponents and more skeptical Board members, however, the potential financial benefits did not outweigh the risks they associated with the proposed project. Crawford listed concerns about air, light, noise, and water pollution. He specifically questioned whether the town and the Chesapeake Bay watershed could accommodate the project’s water and wastewater demands.
“I think that our town is in financial distress, but we're shopping hungry, and we don't want to eat the wrong thing,” said another Planning and Zoning Board member Lywanda Johnson.
Some Board members and members of the public questioned how much control Federalsburg would actually retain after approving a large-scale project, and whether the town would have sufficient legal and financial resources to enforce any strict requirements.
Public Questions and Conflict-of-Interest Concerns
The discussions also produced controversy surrounding Parks, one of three new Planning and Zoning members appointed by the Town Council on August 17. At the August 26 Planning and Zoning meeting, resident Katie Stella-Breeding accused Parks of having a conflict of interest involving the data center project.
The concerns stemmed in part from Parks’ comments at the August 17 Council meeting, immediately after his appointment to the Planning and Zoning Board. Parks had strongly argued against an outright ban and discussed the potential economic benefits of a data center. He said the town could establish “non-negotiables,” including requiring a dedicated power plant, prohibiting use of town water and electric systems, and securing commitments for community investments such as scholarships, firehouses, and public safety. While he maintained that he was not affiliated with the data center interests, he said he had reached out to developers independently to educate himself about the proposal, a move Stella-Breeding called a “back-door meeting.”
At the September 3 workshop, 17-year-old Federalsburg resident Carmalie Payne also questioned Parks’ conduct and motivations during the public comment period. Payne criticized Federalsburg’s Comprehensive Plan as outdated, noting that it had not been updated since 2007 despite expected updates in 2013 and 2023.
She also cited an August 27 social media post from Parks in which he said opponents wanted to ban data centers “without knowing what it is” and suggested that those opposed were “privileged and don’t need it.” Payne argued that opposition was not based on ignorance, pointing to her own independent research. She handed Parks a 20-page essay containing 35 citations on data centers and their impacts during her statements, and further questioned whether Parks’ interest in the project and his communications with developers created an appearance of a conflict.
Parks apologized if his comments had been interpreted as labeling individual residents uneducated, but defended his broader position. He said his outreach to developers was part of his effort to understand the industry and argued that his interest was rooted in finding ways to improve Federalsburg.
The September 3 Vote
The August 26 Planning and Zoning meeting ended with the Board suggesting more specific language defining exactly what constitutes a data center be included in the ordinance. So, Federalsburg Town Manager Leslie Fraley incorporated additional details into a revised version of the ordinance, which the board considered during its September 3 workshop.
After lengthy discussion, the Board was divided on what their formal recommendation to the Town Council would be.
A motion to recommend the ordinance to the Mayor and Council “as written” was not seconded, and no vote was taken. A second motion was then made to inform the Mayor and Council that the Planning and Zoning Board did not recommend the ordinance as written. Parks made the motion and the measure passed 3-2.
The Board’s discouragement of the ordinance does not prevent the Mayor and Council from entertaining it. “You are making a suggestion as to yes or no,” Bollinger explained to the other Board members, “The Mayor and Council ultimately will decide if the ordinance goes into effect.”
What Comes Next
The ordinance is scheduled for a second reading and public hearing during the Federalsburg Town Council meeting on September 9. If the Council chooses to continue on with the legislative process, the ordinance is scheduled for a final vote on September 21.
