Camden's Data Center Moratorium Written Before the Hearing

Before Camden residents receive their first advertised hearing devoted to the proposed data center moratorium, the county has written an adoption-ready ordinance stating the problem, rejecting alternatives, setting the scope and duration, and taking effect the night of the hearing.

CAMDEN, N.C. — Camden County has already written the data center moratorium that its residents will speak about Monday night.

Before the first advertised legislative hearing devoted to the proposal, county officials prepared an ordinance stating the problem, declaring that alternatives were considered and found inadequate, defining the uses to be suspended, setting a 12-month duration and making the moratorium effective on the hearing date. The draft carries signature lines for the board chair and the clerk, and a recital stating that the legislative hearing was held.

The county's published notice says commissioners will receive public comment and "consider the adoption" of the moratorium that night.

That does not show how any commissioner will vote, and a board may amend, defer or reject a draft at a hearing. It does show that the county's proposed conclusion was on paper before residents had a hearing devoted to shaping it.

Quick Take

The hearing is Monday, Aug. 3 at 7 p.m. in the boardroom of the Camden Public Library, 118 N.C. Highway 343 North.
Ordinance 2026-08-01 contains proposed language addressing all four statements N.C.G.S. 160D-107 requires at adoption, but its planned actions carry no dated milestones. Whether the Aug. 2, 2027 expiration date alone constitutes the required schedule remains unresolved.
The notice advertises a pause on data centers and cryptocurrency mining. The ordinance also covers data processing facilities and any use associated with them, listing A.I. computing, cloud storage and streaming among the examples.
Four of the five current commissioners participated in the 2024 moratorium vote. Three voted in favor, one against.

Last time, the public record was built before the vote

Camden County also prepared materials before adopting its 2024 residential development moratorium. The difference was the documented public process around it.

The Planning Board discussed that proposal twice and recommended it 6-1. Commissioners then convened a separately called Special Meeting and Public Hearing devoted to the moratorium, advertised twice in The Daily Advance. County Attorney John Morrison questioned County Manager Erin Burke and Public Works Director Chuck Jones on the record about infrastructure capacity, alternatives, affected property rights, the proposed duration and the actions the county intended to take.

Residents, property owners, a commercial broker, a realtors' association representative and an attorney opposing the measure addressed the board. After the hearing closed, commissioners recessed for roughly thirty minutes to consult the county attorney. Commissioner Tiffney White then offered the motion containing the statutory statements, and it passed 3-1.

The record reviewed for the data center proposal shows no comparable Planning Board recommendation, public workshop, stakeholder session or separately called hearing before the adoption-ready draft was prepared.

What reaches Monday's hearing

Aug. 3 is the first advertised legislative hearing devoted to receiving public testimony on the proposal. The July 6 agenda contained no presentation or discussion item on it; it listed only consent item 8. G, proposing to set the hearing date.

Preparing a proposed ordinance ahead of a hearing is ordinary practice in North Carolina local government, and it is not evidence that a board has decided how it will vote. Camden's own record shows a commissioner willing to vote against one.

The ordinance reaches further than the notice

The notice advertises a moratorium on data centers and cryptocurrency mining operations. The ordinance covers data centers, data processing facilities, cryptocurrency mining operations, and any use associated with data processing facilities, with artificial intelligence computing, weather modeling, genome sequencing, application hosting, cloud storage, and streaming services named as examples.

It exempts server rooms clearly incidental and subordinate to a permitted principal use, provided the data processing activity is not offered as a primary service to off-site users. The moratorium would apply countywide outside municipal extraterritorial jurisdictions. Whether the difference between the two documents matters legally is a question for the county's attorney. The question for residents is whether the notice tells them the full range of uses the ordinance would suspend.

Actions without dates

N.C.G.S. 160D-107 requires a statement of the actions the county will take during the pause and the schedule for those actions. Section 2(4) says planning staff will study the impacts, investigate how other communities have regulated these uses, develop land use regulations and propose amendments, with public input sought throughout. It sets no interim deadlines.

That is the element an attorney pressed the board on at the 2024 hearing, and a version of the argument the developers now suing the county make about that ordinance. Those allegations are disputed, and no court has ruled on them.

Who votes, and how they voted last time

Commissioner	Current role	June 25, 2024 vote
Dr. Jason Banks	Chair	Not on the board
Troy Leary	Vice Chair	Aye, presided as vice chair
Sissy Aydlett	Commissioner At Large	Aye
Tiffney White	Commissioner	Aye, made the motion
Randy Krainiak	Commissioner	Nay

Then-Chair Ross Munro was absent. Camden Tribune will publish the complete roll call on Monday's ordinance, each stated reason, and any absence, abstention, or recusal. Residents can reach the board at [email protected] or through Clerk to the Board Karen Davis at 252-338-6363, ext. 311.

The moratorium already in effect

Ordinance 2024-06-02 does not terminate until Dec. 25, 2026. If the data center ordinance is adopted Monday, Camden would run two development moratoria at once for roughly five months. The 2024 pause rests on water and wastewater capacity, and as Camden Tribune reported on July 12, that expansion was still in permitting and had not reached construction bids.

The county is defending a federal case brought by Allied Properties LLC and other plaintiffs challenging the 2024 moratorium and related development decisions. The allegations are disputed, and no court has ruled on their merits. A July 9 docket entry gave the defendants through Aug. 7 to answer or otherwise respond, four days after Monday's hearing. Camden is separately defending a federal case filed by B&M Investments of North Carolina LLC over the Ponderosa Drive sand-mine dispute, which does not challenge the subdivision moratorium.

An unresolved discrepancy in the notice

Camden Tribune has obtained two versions of the Aug. 3 meeting notice. One states the 6:30 p.m. closed session is to discuss personnel. The other states it is to discuss economic development and contract negotiation. Both list the same hearing, time and location. The county has been asked which version is operative and when each was posted.

Questions that still require answers

Who drafted Ordinance 2026-08-01, and on whose direction?
What alternatives did the county examine before concluding it found none?
Will the board add dated milestones to Section 2(4) before adoption?
Why does the ordinance cover data processing facilities and associated uses when the notice names only data centers and cryptocurrency mining?
Has any developer or site selector contacted the county about a data center?
Did the Planning Board review the proposal before the hearing was set?
Which version of the Aug. 3 notice governs the closed session?

Camden Tribune submitted these questions to County Manager Erin Burke, County Attorney Lauren Arizaga-Womble and Chair Jason Banks on 28 July. Any response received will be published in full.

Why this matters

The question is not whether Camden County may regulate data centers. The county has a legitimate responsibility to examine electricity demand, water use, noise and land use compatibility, and dozens of North Carolina local governments have adopted similar pauses.

By the time residents enter the boardroom Monday, the proposed ordinance already says that a moratorium is necessary, that no alternative was adequate, which activities would be suspended, how long the suspension should last and when it should begin.

Commissioners retain the authority to amend, delay or reject it. Their actions Monday will show whether the hearing shaped the ordinance or preceded its adoption.

How this was reported. This report relies on the draft of Ordinance 2026-08-01, the county's published notices for the Aug. 3 meeting, the July 6, 2026 agenda, the approved minutes of the June 25, 2024 Special Meeting and Public Hearing, N.C.G.S. 160D-107, and prior Camden Tribune reporting. The ordinance reviewed is marked as a draft and may be amended before or during the hearing. Preparing a proposed ordinance in advance of a hearing is ordinary practice and is not evidence that a board has decided how it will vote. Allegations from pending litigation are labeled as allegations; no court has ruled on the merits of any claim against Camden County.

Check it yourself. County meeting records are searchable through Camden Civic Lens, which opens the exact page in the official document. Useful phrases: data center, cryptocurrency, Set Public Hearing, Special Meeting. Civic Lens is not the official record; agendas and minutes are posted at camdencountync.gov.

Updates and corrections. This report will be updated after the hearing and after any county response. Corrections, documents, and first-hand information are welcome at the address on our contact page.