Alabama residents left powerless to stop massive Bitcoin mining data center despite county and town moratoriums — hole in state zoning laws lets facility through

Bitcoin mining rig
(Image credit: Getty Images)

Somerville in Morgan County, Alabama, is a quiet, idyllic town full of green pastures, grazing animals, and soon enough, a Bitcoin mining center. Despite the many protests from residents and moratoriums at both county and town level, the 50-MW facility from VoltCore is going ahead, due to a teeny weeny problem with the zoning laws: there aren't any, or at least, none that apply.

More specifically, Alabama is one of the many states where counties don't have any power over zoning (Dillon's Rule) until they hit at least 600,000 residents, which isn't the case in Morgan County. Municipalities and towns do have that legal ability, but many towns don't apply it, and when they do, they have limitations on how they apply it outside of town borders. That's precisely the situation that Somerville and its residents find themselves in, having had no need for zoning control until now.

Both the county and Somerville have enacted moratoriums against VoltCore's buildout, but those cannot legally stop the construction, since it's built on private land. According to Ray Long, Morgan County Commission Chairman, "We can’t keep them from doing anything right now because there's no laws at all in Morgan County in rural areas [...] There's no zoning, there’s none of that, so we really don't have anything to stand on other than what we can say is, 'We really wish you wouldn't do it.'"

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware

There are also several petitions running, the largest with about 2,000 signatories, and a GoFundMe campaign to try and hire a lawyer to help with the situation. Alabama's Limited Self-Governance Act does predict having to deal with noise and pollution concerns, but it's written in such a way that specifically prevents it from being used to control zoning. The VoltCore build even has an approved energy connection from the Tennessee Valley Authority, and work is reportedly proceeding as usual, connecting water, gas, and AT&T lines.

Even if the Somerville town drafted a local law for zoning, it would take many months and multiple rounds for it to pass, and even still would almost certainly only apply prospectively and not to the VoltCore installation. Furthermore, the data center's location just outside the edge of town could put it outside legal reach regardless.

Other Alabama counties have taken notice of the problem, though, as a recent report indicates that data center bans will be a hot topic at an upcoming Association of County Commissioners. The dim view of data centers in general across the United States has rallied quite a number of states. South Dakota signed a law limiting installations of 10 MW or more, while New York, Oklahoma, North Carolina, and many others all have proposals in motion to hold or control new buildouts.

Google Preferred Source

Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.

Bruno Ferreira
Contributor

Bruno Ferreira is a contributing writer for Tom's Hardware. He has decades of experience with PC hardware and assorted sundries, alongside a career as a developer. He's obsessed with detail and has a tendency to ramble on the topics he loves. When not doing that, he's usually playing games, or at live music shows and festivals.

  • PEnns
    "...Somerville and its residents find themselves in, having had no need for zoning control until now."
    "Zoning laws? We don't need no stinkin' zoning laws. They're too cumbersome for business!"

    A few minutes later.....
    "Wait, they're building WHAT in our lovely hamlet???? How dare they!!"
    Reply
  • COLGeek
    PEnns said:
    "...Somerville and its residents find themselves in, having had no need for zoning control until now."
    "Zoning laws? We don't need no stinkin' zoning laws. They're too cumbersome for business!"

    A few minutes later.....
    "Wait, they're building WHAT in our lovely hamlet???? How dare they!!"
    This is a keen observation and likely something FAR more common in unincorporated areas than people are remotely aware of.
    Reply
  • wussupi83
    There's a second story here beyond zoning laws.. Someone has enough conviction in the future of Bitcoin to build a 50MW data center to keep mining it ..that's interesting.
    Reply
  • GiinTak
    PEnns said:
    "...Somerville and its residents find themselves in, having had no need for zoning control until now."
    "Zoning laws? We don't need no stinkin' zoning laws. They're too cumbersome for business!"

    A few minutes later.....
    "Wait, they're building WHAT in our lovely hamlet???? How dare they!!"
    Cute, but more accurately a group of farms have no need for zoning laws. By extension, neither does the country store that forms a village center that later expands to a town and a city and develops a commercial district, at which point zoning laws start becoming useful. They're slipping into the crack between "there's no point" and "we're established enough to think about these things, we have a mayor now."
    Reply
  • xanas3712
    PEnns said:
    "...Somerville and its residents find themselves in, having had no need for zoning control until now."
    "Zoning laws? We don't need no stinkin' zoning laws. They're too cumbersome for business!"

    A few minutes later.....
    "Wait, they're building WHAT in our lovely hamlet???? How dare they!!"
    Just actually enforce nuisance lawsuits and there is no need for zoning here. It'd be far more expensive with an appropriately escalating fine regime until you solve the problems of the installation, and if there was no cause for that then the facility should not be blocked.

    The real problem is the state not providing redress for rights violations of existing parties. You have a right to build, but if it causes problems for those around you must pay to resolve those problems along with punitive damages for their trouble.
    Reply
  • Reechard
    The article uses the word "powerless" but I'm from rural Appalachia and I don't think they're using the full scope of that word. There are many many extrajudicial ways to make sure this does not come to fruition. An open mind is necessary.
    Reply
  • Darkhands
    Reechard said:
    The article uses the word "powerless" but I'm from rural Appalachia and I don't think they're using the full scope of that word. There are many many extrajudicial ways to make sure this does not come to fruition. An open mind is necessary.

    Ah, the good ol' southern "Laws apply to everyone else except me" line of thinking.
    Reply
  • Reechard
    Darkhands said:
    Ah, the good ol' southern "Laws apply to everyone else except me" line of thinking.
    When the laws don't apply to the rich and powerful despite an overwhelming majority, them the laws are not worth the paper they are written on. Take a page or two from the history books and look up the Molly McGuires. There is a very distinct disconnect between morals and legality and you need to put a line in the sand somewhere . That line is drawn when the law causes deliberate harm to the people despite their protestations . I'm pretty sure "Taxation Without Representation" is the entire foundation of the USA and if you're going to be a legalitarian you may as well accept the monarchy and feudalism the laws are moving towards at an alarming rate.

    Laws are not always moral, and morality beats legality. If you think laws are more important than reducing harm I can point you to a multitude of allegorical scifi that says you're the bad guy.
    Reply
  • Reechard
    Darkhands said:
    Ah, the good ol' southern "Laws apply to everyone else except me" line of thinking.
    Of course it is incorrect when the majority takes action to assert their will, if it is against the law, despite the law being created against the will of the majority, to the benefit of the wealthy minority that purchased the law.

    It is unreasonable because the law says bad.
    Reply
  • Darkhands
    Reechard said:
    When the laws don't apply to the rich and powerful despite an overwhelming majority, them the laws are not worth the paper they are written on. Take a page or two from the history books and look up the Molly McGuires. There is a very distinct disconnect between morals and legality and you need to put a line in the sand somewhere . That line is drawn when the law causes deliberate harm to the people despite their protestations . I'm pretty sure "Taxation Without Representation" is the entire foundation of the USA and if you're going to be a legalitarian you may as well accept the monarchy and feudalism the laws are moving towards at an alarming rate.

    Laws are not always moral, and morality beats legality. If you think laws are more important than reducing harm I can point you to a multitude of allegorical scifi that says you're the bad guy.

    The problem is that there isn't even any harm yet. Who's to say they won't be a good neighbor? (As much as any other industrial/business neighbor can be). Just seems a little cart-before-the-horse to be calling for such extreme measures as extrajudicial action before any other legal recourse, and before anyone has even been inconvenienced, let alone harmed.
    Reply