During Wednesday evening’s Ridgecrest City Council meeting, the Council directed staff to begin the process of seeking intervenor status in the California Energy Commission’s (CEC) review of the proposed Inyokern Data Center.
The decision came after more than an hour of discussion among councilmembers that highlighted community concerns over water use, energy consumption, and noise and environmental impacts, questions to Sean Hungerford, a representative of the project developer, and public comments.
Although the councilmembers stopped short of taking a stance in support or opposition to the project, they repeatedly stressed the need for Ridgecrest to closely monitor the CEC’s review and ensure local concerns are represented throughout the process.
Councilman Kyle Blades said the city should closely monitor the project and remain involved as state and county agencies evaluate the proposal.
“What I hope we do as a council is that we direct staff to be in the business of the state and the county staff because that’s where real work gets done. Being in their business and making sure we’re monitoring what’s going on, understanding the calendar, understanding the schedule, and holding them accountable,” he said.
Councilmembers also discussed the project’s review timeline and the role the CEC will play in determining whether the proposal can move forward.
According to city staff, the commission is currently reviewing the completeness of the developer’s application. If deemed complete, the project would enter a formal review process that could extend for more than a year before returning to local agencies, including Kern County, for additional approvals.
Councilman Scott Hayman said many of the issues raised by residents are expected to be addressed through that review process.
“I think it’s hard to make a real grounded decision until we hear back with some objective findings and information from the CEC in regards to some of these topics and issues that are concerning,” Hayman said.
Representing developer R&L Capital, Hungerford participated remotely and answered questions from councilmembers about the project and its review process.
Hungerford emphasized that the proposal remains in its earliest stages and argued that extensive studies have already been completed to address many of the concerns being raised by residents.
“We want this project to be done right. It’s important to the company that it be done in a completely transparent way,” Hungerford said. “The 1,300-page application included 20 technical studies — water supply assessment, biological studies, air quality, noise, and everything else you can think of. We did this precisely because we anticipated the public would have questions about the project.”
Hungerford also reassured residents that the project would undergo significant environmental review before any final approvals are granted. He described R&L Capital as a local company with existing investments in Eastern Kern County and said the project could generate substantial economic benefits.
According to Hungerford, construction is expected to employ approximately 1,600 workers over a multi-year period, create dozens of permanent positions, and generate millions of dollars annually in tax revenue.
Public comments followed and reflected that the majority of the community was still in opposition to the project.
Dana Thompson, a lifelong Ridgecrest resident, said she generally supports efforts to diversify the local economy, but believes that data centers present unique concerns that should not be ignored.
“I wish I could get behind this project and the jobs that it’ll bring,” Thompson said. “But for four years you’ll bring workers, you’ll develop the community, then you leave, you flip that switch and turn it on. And what if you’re wrong? What if you’re wrong about the water consumption? What if you’re wrong about the electrical use? Then what? You drain our water table, you take what’s left, and you leave the community to deal with the fallout.”
Thompson argued there are alternative ways to strengthen the local economy, including expanding tourism and attracting remote workers to the area.
James Wecker, whose family has owned property in Inyokern for more than 40 years, echoed those concerns and pointed to experiences in other communities that have welcomed large-scale data center developments.
“This isn’t the first data center. This isn’t the first discussion. This isn’t the first end result of what may happen,” Wecker said.
Wecker argued that communities across the country were promised economic benefits only to face rising utility costs and environmental concerns after projects were completed.
“The national discussion that is taking place is that these data centers, everyone went racing down the road thinking they would bring jobs and tax revenues and all of this wonderful stuff,” he said. “What they got and what they were sold were two different things.”
Jennifer Slayton urged the council to remain actively involved in the review process but cautioned against taking a formal position on the project before additional information becomes available.
“I do not think you should take a stance on this tonight or in the near future, because that is the point of having a complete application, is you have all of the facts and you can review those,” Slayton said. “I don’t want you to say we oppose or we approve. I think it’s premature.”
Still, Slayton argued that Ridgecrest has an important role to play in ensuring state and county officials understand the potential impacts the project could have on the region.
“I do feel it’s appropriate for you to be the voice of our whole valley,” she told councilmembers. “There are so many issues and so many people in this valley who do not have a council that can speak for them.”
Slayton also raised concerns ranging from groundwater use and power demand to zoning, environmental impacts, and potential effects on nearby military operations. She questioned the completeness of the project’s application materials, telling councilmembers that residents have spent weeks reviewing the documents and identifying what they believe are deficiencies.
Supporters of the project offered a different perspective, emphasizing the economic opportunities the development could create.
Brian Holt, vice president of the Kern, Inyo and Mono Counties Building Trades Council, said the project would provide years of work for local construction workers and apprentices while generating broader economic activity throughout the region.
Holt said construction workers spend money locally and argued that the project’s impact would extend well beyond the job site itself.
“The developer has committed to stringent local workforce requirements,” he said. “This project is not going to be one of those where you drive by and see all the out-of-state license plates.”
Anthony Osby, director of the Electrical Training Alliance of Kern County, said projects of that scale are critical for apprenticeship programs that rely on real-world job experience to train future electricians.
“Projects like this don’t just create jobs for people already in the trade,” Osby said. “They also help create opportunities for those people who are looking for a path into the middle class.”
Despite this, councilmembers were unanimously aligned on the need for Ridgecrest to remain actively engaged in the review process.
The CEC is expected to continue reviewing the project’s application in the coming weeks, with additional opportunities for public input as the review progresses.
