FROM THE EDITOR: Boards Must Know Their Role
In Spotsylvania, an argument over whether to deploy development standards or require data center projects to go through the Special Use Permit has ramifications far beyond data centers.
By Martin Davis
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Email Martin
Members of Boards of Supervisors must walk a fine line between the political and the practical.
As representatives of their districts, Board members have a responsibility to listen to their constituents and to be responsive to their concerns and needs.
However, Board members must be mindful of overstepping and meddling in practical matters that are better left for others.
When a Board leverages the political to take control of the practical, an imbalance is created.
In Spotsylvania County, the Board of Supervisors is coming close to creating an imbalance, and the ramifications could prove detrimental for future business development in years to come.
The Coming Imbalance
In December 2025, the Board responded to citizen concerns over data center development by instituting a series of development standards that ensured every project would follow the same general guidelines.
The standards mandated minimum setbacks, established rules about preserving existing vegetation, and set rules for the construction of berms, among others.
For a minority of the Board, however, this wasn’t enough. The reason has to do with a small number of data center projects that don’t have to go before the Board for approval because they are “by-right.”
By-right projects are allowed to by-pass Board approval so long as the land the project is to be built on is already zoned appropriately, and the plan conforms with “existing zoning laws, building codes, and land-use regulations, allowing it to proceed without requiring special approvals or variances.”
Being business-friendly means the Board knows its role. It is to set clear guidance for potential companies that want to move into the county and invest significant funds that provide jobs and shore up the county’s finances.
Business-friendly counties do not get into the weeds of planning projects. More important, they don’t show themselves to be unpredictable.
Lori Hayes (Lee Hill), Jake Lane (Livingston), and Chris Yakabouski (Battlefield) have in recent years been critical of by-right data center development, insisting that every data center project should come before the Board for approval. Their solution is that every data center project should go through the “Special Use Permit” process.
Typically, SUPs are required when a project is outside existing zoning laws, building codes, or land-use regulations. Hence, the term “Special Use.”
The three lost their fight in December, when the development standards were adopted. However, Kevin Marshall, who cast the deciding vote in December for the development standards, lost his re-election bid to David Goosman who ran on an anti-by-right data center development platform.
This gave Hayes, Yakabouski, and Lane the fourth vote they needed to re-visit the issue in January and try to revoke the development standards.
The standards survived the first meeting in January, but the Board has referred the question back to the Planning Commission, which will hold a public hearing at its February 4 meeting and consider whether to recommend requiring by-right data center projects go through the SUP process. The commission will send its recommendation back to the Board for its February 24 meeting.
Should the Planning Commission agree that data center projects should go before the Board via the SUP process, the new Board bloc will have effectively given itself the power to accept or kill any data center project that is by-right.
‘Absolute’ Right?
During the debate at the January Board meeting, Yakabouski made a statement that was eyebrow-raising in its rejection of by-right development.
“The public,” he said, “has an absolute right when they have property close by — that is, developed in a way that might impact them in a detrimental way — to have a voice in that process.”
Though the statement was made in the narrow context of by-right data center development, it raises a foundational question.
If the public “has an absolute right” to dictate what happens on “property close by” should it be deemed “detrimental,” does this mean that the Board of Supervisors can step in on any by-right project and force it into an SUP process?
This is far from hypothetical.
The Spotsylvania County Code lists 35 uses for Industrial-1 land, not including data centers, that can proceed by-right. Among these businesses: animal shelters, outdoor sports and recreation businesses, scientific research and development businesses, veterinary hospitals, and warehouses.
Any one of these types of businesses could arguably have a “detrimental” impact on nearby properties. A veterinary hospital can lead to concerns about noise; scientific research and development businesses can lead to concerns about contaminants and the type of research being conducted; outdoor sports and recreations businesses can raise concerns about traffic.
Given that the major complaint about data centers in this region is their size — property values in Virginia are not known to be negatively affected by data centers, there is very little noise associated with these facilities, and there is virtually no traffic impact—it raises questions as to why the public should have more say in the by-right development of a data center than any of the other approved uses already recognized by the county
More important, it raises the question why the Board should have more say over by-right data center projects than any other by-right uses the county allow.
Overreach
The development standards the Board passed in December were the Board’s reaction to a political problem. And the Board basically got it right.
They addressed the issue with a policy solution. In doing so, they abated the concerns they heard from citizens, while making clear to developers what’s expected when they bring a data center project to the county without dictating how to manage their projects.
Drew Mullins (Courtland) offered evidence of developers’ pleasure with the solution passed in December when at the January Board meeting he described how one company had reworked their plans to accommodate the new standards. This, he explained, demonstrates how this company wants to be a good “forever neighbor.”
Hayes said she appreciated what the company did, but she then noted that had they brought their project before the Board — as they would have had to do through an SUP process — “we could actually modify” the plans that Mullins shared and show the company how they could use more of the land.
This is precisely what Boards should not be involved in doing. Design of highly complex systems like data center facilities rightly belongs in the hands of the companies trained in such work, not in the hands of local officials.
This type of meddling in the minutiae of projects makes it hard for any developer to know what to expect when they bring a project forward.
It also raises the specter that at any point in the process, a Board member for any number of unknowable reasons can move the goalposts and send them back to the drawing board.
These changes are not harmless. Data center companies spend millions before ever bringing a project forward. Every change means hundreds of thousands dollars more to meet the whims of a Board with no guarantee that the goal posts won’t shift again.
Business-friendly?
Spotsylvania has long touted itself as a business-friendly county.
Being business-friendly, however, means the Board knows its role. It is to set clear guidance for potential companies that want to move into the county and invest significant funds that provide jobs and shore up the county’s finances.
Business-friendly counties do not get into the weeds of planning projects. More important, they don’t show themselves to be unpredictable.
This is precisely what Boards should not be involved in doing. Design of highly complex systems like data center facilities rightly belongs in the hands of the companies trained in such work, not in the hands of local officials.
The current debate is about data centers. But now any company representing an industry currently approved for by-right development in Spotsylvania is likely to think twice before pouring money into a project.
The Board of Supervisors should step lightly in February when the issue again comes before them. Spotsylvania is a desirable place to live, which explains why it has enjoyed a population explosion over the past three decades. It also explains why in recent years major data center companies, Kalahari, Lidl, and more companies have chosen to bring their business to Spotsylvania.
But Spotsylvania isn’t the only desirable locale in central Virginia. Caroline County is seeing population growth as people seek more affordable housing outside of Spotsylvania and Stafford. And data center companies are investing all around the county. Earlier this month, Amazon paid more than $72 million for 1,900 acres in Louisa County.
Spotsylvania deserves a Board that understands the importance of balancing the political and the practical, and also knows when to take a win.
The development standards agreed to in December, while not perfect, were a win. They were a sound policy solution to a political problem.
If the Board pulls back and demands that by-right data center projects be forced to undergo the SUP process, it will be snatching defeat from the claws of victory.
Forcing companies to undergo the SUP process gains the county nothing; it does, however, send a chilling signal to other business developers.
The message? Welcome to Spotsylvania. But don’t get comfortable. The rules can change at any moment.
Local Obituaries
To view local obituaries or to send a note to family and loved ones, please visit the link that follows.
Support Award-winning, Locally Focused Journalism
The FXBG Advance cuts through the talking points to deliver both incisive and informative news about the issues, people, and organizations that daily affect your life. And we do it in a multi-partisan format that has no equal in this region. Over the past year, our reporting was:
First to break the story of Stafford Board of Supervisors dismissing a citizen library board member for “misconduct,” without informing the citizen or explaining what the person allegedly did wrong.
First to explain falling water levels in the Rappahannock Canal.
First to detail controversial traffic numbers submitted by Stafford staff on the Buc-ee’s project
Our media group also offers the most-extensive election coverage in the region and regular columnists like:
And our newsroom is led by the most-experienced and most-awarded journalists in the region — Adele Uphaus (Managing Editor and multiple VPA award-winner) and Martin Davis (Editor-in-Chief, 2022 Opinion Writer of the Year in Virginia and more than 25 years reporting from around the country and the world).
For just $8 a month, you can help support top-flight journalism that puts people over policies.
Your contributions 100% support our journalists.
Help us as we continue to grow!
This article is published under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND. It can be distributed for noncommercial purposes and must include the following: “Published with permission by FXBG Advance.”
My gosh. I read through this article on 'Data Centers and the Spotsy Co Bd of Supervisors' and thought, 'puh-leze, let there be a disclosure statement at the end of it'. and there's not one.
Geez, how disappointing.
'FXBG Advance' receives money from the DATA CENTER industry for 'Digital Insights'. There's now the local attorney for the region's DATA CENTERS, Charlie Payne and the Stack Infrastructure developer for the 8-12 DATA CENTERS going out in the 'Celebrate Virginia' 22401 property, Kevin Hughes on some sort of 'FXBG Advance' Advisory Board.
Local writer Steve Watkins of 'Pie and Chai' has already called 'FXBG Advance' out for this 'conflict of interest' that is not disclosed to readers, as in 'Seriously Marty'? I guess readers are giving up and just leaving for another news source.
Any chance, you'll put in the Disclosure statement?