State House, District 15

Survey: responded

“Hyperscale data centers can cause major problems not only to the land, but the people and wildlife that live in the vicinity of them. Water pollution: Alarms have been raised in many areas of not only public water supplies being contaminated like in Cheyenne WY, but also in the streams and rivers close to the hyperscale data centers. PFAS contamination is not easily mitigated and is extremely detrimental to health. Noise pollution: The constant noise of the hyperscale data center is disturbing for humans. Not only can the high noise levels cause sleep deprivation, but the low frequency noise can provide physical discomfort to humans and wildlife. Environment: In South Dakota, we have prime farmland/pasture. The farmland and pastures are necessary for America's food stability and for its economy. Other issues that also have been reported and are still being researched are: Massive water consumption vs. the needs of nearby residents High Energy demand and how it affects the electric bills of nearby residents The effects of the noise pollution on farm animals Potential inability of resale and/or loss of property values of homeowners in the vicinity of hyperscale data centers Much information has been written about the above situations that arise from Hyperscale data centers. These issues can cause a decrease in quality of life and sometimes are irreversible. I believe until we have concrete answers and sound solutions for these concerns, we should have a moratorium on the Hyperscale data centers here in South Dakota.”

Survey: responded

“The biggest concern I hear is that people feel decisions are being made behind closed doors while local communities are expected to absorb the impacts. South Dakotans are asking: How much water and electricity will these facilities consume? Will local residents end up paying higher utility costs? Are taxpayers subsidizing billion-dollar corporations without seeing meaningful long-term benefits? What happens to farmland, roads, and local infrastructure? How much local control do communities actually have once deals are negotiated? There’s also frustration that the public often learns about these projects after major agreements are already in motion. People are not anti-technology, but they are tired of feeling like ordinary citizens get less information than corporate developers. And frankly, many people are skeptical of promises about jobs. A hyperscale data center can require massive public infrastructure investment while creating relatively few permanent positions compared to other industries.”

“First, I believe transparency has to come before incentives. If a corporation wants public support, tax breaks, utility partnerships, or local approvals, the public deserves clear information upfront, including projected energy demand, water usage, tax agreements, and infrastructure impacts. Second, local communities need real authority in the process. Rural residents should not feel steamrolled because state leaders are chasing ribbon cuttings or press releases. Third, I think South Dakota needs stronger safeguards to make sure residents are not subsidizing private profit. That means carefully reviewing utility cost shifts, protecting groundwater resources, and ensuring companies contribute fairly to the infrastructure they depend on. I’m not opposed to data centers. They may absolutely have a place in South Dakota’s economy. But I do not believe economic development should mean blank checks, secrecy, or asking local communities to simply “trust the process.” Good policy requires balance: welcoming innovation while protecting taxpayers, natural resources, and public trust.”