Pittsylvania supervisors reject data center, bringing hugs, cheers for crowd of hundreds (2025)

CHATHAM — Ending half a year of a bitter debate that divided a community, the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday night rejected rezoning for a proposed data center and power complex even though the company working to bring it requested its application be withdrawn a day earlier.

The 6-1 vote capped a meeting that was moved to Chatham High School to accommodate an overflow crowd, which erupted in cheers and hugs after the vote happened following a three-and-a-half-hour session.

Tim Dudley, who represents the Staunton River District, was the lone vote against the rejection. Dudley’s district includes Hurt, which would have seen a financial windfall if the project succeeded.

Decked out in red and yellow, many at Tuesday’s meeting wore shirts with the now signature “no power plants, no data centers in rural neighborhoods.” Hundreds gathered in the school’s auditorium Tuesday night to see if supervisors would wipe the issue from the agenda or proceed since it had been advertised as a public hearing.

The Herndon-based company sought to rezone 750 acres — down from its original plan of 2,200 — in an area along Chalk Level Road that branches out to other smaller communities just a little north of Chatham.

The rezoning was needed to change the land from a residential suburban subdivision and agricultural district to a heavy-use industrial district.

Only two members of the board — Chair Robert Tucker and Ken Bowman, who represents the Chatham-Blairs District — offered comment before the pivotal vote occurred. It happened after more than 45 people spoke out on the issue between a public hearing and the citizen comment portion of the meeting.

The majority who talked Tuesday night were against the data center and power plant.

Tucker said he sent the board an email Monday night asking one thing.

“I simply asked a question — If you are going to build a stick house from the ground up and you own the property, are you going to put that type of investment in the hands of someone that has not built a house?”

He said transparency had been an issue throughout the project.

Tucker was referencing Balico’s first planned development of a data center.

In general, Tucker isn’t against data centers, which are large facilities filled with computers that store information in what’s known as “the cloud.” However, he said he would not support this project.

“Because you don’t get a second chance to make a first good impression,” Tucker said.

Bowman also went on record with his opposition, opening questioning why Irfan Ali, the founder of Balico, wasn’t at the meeting Tuesday evening.

“The project came out of the gate without being prepared to address the concerns of the community,” Bowman said.

The most vocal objection was to a 3,500-megawatt power plant, which would be the largest in Virginia. Residents learned in late October of the plan to rezone about 2,200 acres near Chalk Level Road.

After supervisors sent a signal late last year that they wouldn’t approve such a large-scale endeavor, Balico — the company behind the development — pulled back to regroup.

About a month later, it revealed its current proposal for Balico Technology Campus that would use 13 parcels amounting to a little less than 750 acres for a data center and power-generating units.

The Pittsylvania County Planning Commission recommended denial of the rezoning request after 30 people spoke out on the project in a nearly five-hour long meeting in January. That set the stage for a February public hearing before the board of supervisors.

That hearing was shelved until March, when Balico asked for an extension.

Opposition has steadily grown in the six months since neighbors found out about the project.

The town of Hurt would have been a benefactor if the data center proceeded. Balico had a letter of intent in place with the town to fund a new water treatment facility there and run about 19 miles of pipeline along U.S. 29 to the project near Chatham.

On Monday, the company announced it requested that its application be withdrawn. Since it was already on the agenda and the public hearing had been advertised, supervisors had to decide whether to grant the request.

Reason behind switch

Steven Gould, an attorney representing Balico, addressed supervisors on the reason behind the switch.

“Balico concluded it did not make sense to continue pursuing the project as currently proposed,” he said after it engaged with Hillwood, a real estate and investment company.

The company is run by Ross Perot Jr., the son of the presidential candidate in 1992.

“The decision was made to go back to the drawing board,” Gould said.

Balico wanted to pull out “without penalty,” which means the company could bring back another proposal at any time.

In a 5-2 vote with Dudley and Westover District supervisor Murray Whittle opposed, supervisors rejected the company’s request to withdraw its application.

With the rejection from supervisors, it’ll be a full year before Balico can make another run at an application.

With that, the original public hearing proceeded as planned and advertised.

In a statement, Balico appeared to want to pivot to a housing development but wouldn’t say the data center proposal was dead.

“We will be considering all options going forward,” Jeff Brasfield, a spokesperson for Balico, said when asked Monday if the data center project may surface again in the future.

“We will not be providing any further commentary at this time,” he said of other questions by the newspaper.

“We encourage the county to keep its options open,” Gould told supervisors Tuesday night.

The attorney also noted that since Balico wasn’t moving forward with its application, there would be no formal presentation on the data center proposal Tuesday night, something that likely shaved hours off of what could have been a long evening.

Instead, the meeting wrapped up at 10:30 p.m.

Public comments

“You have before you tonight a decision to make that could end this for good,” Amy Davis told the board, marking the first of 39 people signed up for the public hearing.

Davis expressed a sentiment shared by many in the stretched-out process who simply wanted the board to take action before another delay happened.

Hurt Mayor Gary Hodnett warned the board that the issue of data centers would not go away in the county with its water.

“No matter what you do tonight, it’s going to keep coming to you like a train down the track,” he said, urging the board to approve the measure that would help the small town in the northermost part of the county.

Steve Worley, also a member of Hurt Town Council, spoke in favor of allowing Balico to proceed with its plans.

He pointed to up to $120 million in additional tax revenue the county could have for its coffers if the data center were to be built.

The Charlottesville-based nonprofit enlisted the help of Francesca Dominici, who chairs the Harvard Data Science Initiative. She’s also a professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

The report outlines health impacts specifically surrounding a 3,500-megawatt power plant, which would be the largest in the state. The natural-gas facility would tap into the Mountain Valley Pipeline, which crosses near the roughly 750 acres that Balico wants to rezone.

Monday’s report looks at the health impacts and costs with exposure to what it terms “fine particulate matter” from the plant, a “particularly serious form of air pollution,” it states.

Greg Buppert, a senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center, implored the board to vote down the measure Tuesday night.

“Let’s put this ill-conceived project to bed,” he said before referencing findings from Monday’s report.

On the flip side, Alice Bond said the environmental issues were false, pointing out that governing bodies would regulate the air, water and noise.

“It’s true that the view will change,” she said, quickly noting that change itself is difficult.

“But progress means change,” she said. “It always has, it always will.”

Others, like James Burger, noted the location of the proposal — in a rural residential area — as a reason for the backlash among neighbors.

“Being a contractor, you wouldn’t want me to come put a toilet in your kitchen,” he said, which was greeted with a laugh from the audience.

Tucker and Bowman pointed out the divisions within the community caused by the project, something Bowman said could take generations to heal.

“We have to make sure that we learn some lessons going forward,” Tucker said. “There have been a lot of pain in the community within churches, within families.”

Yet the chair referenced that this wouldn’t be the last time a project like this would surface.

“We are going to face situations like this going forward,” he said.

“What are the takeaways that we can basically use going forward?” he questioned. “There are a lot of things that we have to address as a county.”