# 'This is real': Data center moratorium pushed to July after tense meeting (Arkansas Times) > *Tier-3 news archive. Arkansas Times coverage of the 2026-06-09 Pulaski County Quorum Court agenda meeting that postponed advancing Wendell Griffen's refiled 12-month data-center moratorium to July 14. The original HTML is preserved alongside this extract.* ## Source metadata - **Publisher:** Arkansas Times (arktimes.com) - **URL:** https://arktimes.com/arkansas-blog/2026/06/09/this-is-real-data-center-moratorium-pushed-to-july-after-tense-meeting - **Byline:** Elizabeth L. Cline - **Published:** 2026-06-10T03:35:09Z (evening of 2026-06-09 CDT); modified 2026-06-10T18:03:37Z - **Archived:** 2026-06-11, by Invoke-WebRequest (HTTP 200, 284,971 bytes) - **Wayback snapshot:** http://web.archive.org/web/20260610182514/... — pre-existing snapshot found via the availability API (2026-06-10 18:25 UTC, post-dating the article's last modification); no new SPN submitted. ## Extract **Correction notice (as published):** "This story has been updated. An earlier version of the story incorrectly described an electricity consumption threshold of '5 gigawatts per day;' the correct figure is 5 megawatts." At the end of a nearly two-hour meeting punctuated by audible groans from the audience and at least one justice of the peace so upset she appeared to walk off stage to compose herself, the Pulaski County Quorum Court voted to postpone a vote to advance a proposal on a data center moratorium until July 14. The decision was made to allow the justices of the peace to hear from an "independent subject matter expert" on the details in the proposal, including concerns that an energy consumption threshold could scare off businesses other than data centers. Had the measure passed, it would have been placed on the Quorum Court agenda for June 23. The 12-month moratorium ordinance proposal, drafted by Wendell Griffen, aims to pause development on data centers in unincorporated Pulaski County to provide the county time to understand impacts and develop a regulatory framework around it. The Quorum Court meeting got off to a chaotic start when the justices of the peace were, they claimed, handed an amendment to the ordinance minutes before the meeting started. The moratorium ordinance did not appear on the schedule for that reason, leaving the audience wondering when or if it would be heard. When the ordinance was finally up for discussion, Justice of the Peace Phil Stowers invited Jack Thomas of the Little Rock Regional Chamber of Commerce to speak, sparking a round of groans from the nearly 100-person audience. [...] Thomas argued that the ordinance, specifically the thresholds around electricity and water consumption, would exclude businesses that are already operating in or considering doing business in the county, naming Elopak, a Norwegian manufacturer of beverage cartons, and Amazon's LIT3 fulfillment center as examples. "I'd have to pick up the phone and tell that site selector that it is illegal for your project to come to Pulaski County," Thomas said. Several people in the audience hissed, "That's not true." Thomas's concern, however, struck a chord with some other JPs, including Dianne Curry and Staci Medlock, who wondered if the moratorium's language would extend to any kind of company consuming 5 megawatts of power — automotive plants like General Motors were named as another hypothetical — potentially suppressing economic development. Perhaps in anticipation of this critique, Justice of the Peace Patricia Young-Baker said that the ordinance had been amended to clarify that existing businesses would not be affected and to further articulate which entities would be exempt, such as hospitals, schools and public infrastructure. Griffen also took to the podium to explain the ordinance's language. After accusing the JPs multiple times of failing to read the moratorium's language, he argued that the moratorium only applies to "high-impact industrial and high-intensity digital infrastructure." In the definitions of the ordinance, high-impact industrial facilities are indeed defined only as those with electrical demand of 5 megawatts or greater or water use of 100,000 gallons per day or greater. "Just because we have questions, that doesn't mean we can't read," said Justice of the Peace Steven Person, countering Griffen's accusations that the JPs weren't reading the ordinances. Justice of the Peace Julie Blackwood said she's researched local companies that consume more than the 5 megawatt threshold, arguing that "none of them are even close." Still, some of the JPs were left wanting more information. Justice of the Peace Dianne Curry said, "We need that independent conversation, and I don't feel that we should go forward because we need other things answered that are critical to making the ultimate decision, and that's just my recommendation." She first proposed the Quorum Court table the decision, which would have shelved it indefinitely, and, when that failed, she introduced a proposal to postpone the decision pending expert input until July 14, which passed. Justice of the Peace Tina Ward, who represents the Wrightsville area, where AVAIO Digital has planned the data center, was strongly against the postponement idea, saying that the other JPs don't feel personally impacted by data centers. "It concerns me that we just keep on pushing it and pushing it, and all this is happening in my district, where I live, and I'm not trying to be pushed out of where I live. You love where you live, I love where I live," said Ward. "Y'all don't feel it. My constituents feel like I'm not representing them. This is real." Ward, visibly upset, left the stage for a few minutes before returning. Nevertheless, on a 8-to-5 vote, the measure was postponed. Justices of the Peace Natalie Capps, Steven Person, Kathy Lewison, Dianne Curry, Aaron Robinson, Phil Stowers, Paul Elliott and Staci Medlock voted yes, while JPs Curtis Keith, Tina Ward, Julie Blackwood, Patricia Young-Baker and Donna Massey voted against the motion to postpone. JPs Rebekah Davis and Luke McCoy were absent. The evening ended with JPs agreeing to "call a special meeting for hearing the expert," which is to take place separately from the regular scheduled Quorum Court meetings. Director of Public Works Tap Council was tasked with identifying this expert. At the July 14 meeting, the Quorum Court is set to consider a motion again to move the data center moratorium ordinance up to the full Quorum Court. ## Notes - Tier: 3 — established news outlet (Arkansas Times), staff reporting with named sources. - Anchors: the 8–5 postponement vote (yes: Capps, Person, Lewison, Curry, Robinson, Stowers, Elliott, Medlock; no: Keith, Ward, Blackwood, Young-Baker, Massey; absent: Davis, McCoy); Griffen-drafted ordinance covering "high-impact industrial and high-intensity digital infrastructure" with thresholds of ≥5 MW electrical demand OR ≥100,000 gal/day water; Ward's "This is real" remarks; Stowers inviting Jack Thomas (LR Regional Chamber), who argued the thresholds would catch Elopak and Amazon LIT3; agreement to call a special meeting for an "independent subject matter expert," with Public Works Director Tap Council tasked to identify the expert. - **Attribution nuance:** the article reports that JPs "were handed an amendment to the ordinance minutes before the meeting started" and that JP Patricia Young-Baker *described* the amendment (existing businesses unaffected; hospitals, schools, public infrastructure exempt). The article does **not** explicitly attribute authorship or introduction of the last-minute amendment to Young-Baker. - Note the published correction: an earlier version misstated the threshold as "5 gigawatts per day"; the correct figure is 5 megawatts. - Cited by: (populated by wiki pages that reference this archive)