To Mr. Wolgemuth, City Manager Laura Liegois, and whomever else it may concern:

My name is Taylor Vandenberg. I grew up in Fort Madison, and it is and forever shall be the home of my family and my heart, despite my own distance. I love and respect the community that nurtured me here, that offered me room to grow, explore, play, and learn. Now that I have relocated to New York, it is Fort Madison that I dream of when I yearn for relaxation, for peace and calm, and for my family. It is Fort Madison that I someday hope to perhaps return with my own.

With that in mind, I have a few things to say regarding the subject of this meeting, particularly the statements made on July 25 by Mr. Wolgemuth.

They are as follows.

Hi Laura,

Thank you for reaching out and for your commitment to ensuring the public receives accurate, factual information. I appreciate your willingness to present the facts objectively and help residents better understand the planning process.

First of all, it is my understanding that multiple attempts have been made to reach out to you regarding the nature of this development, and none have been met with any appreciation on your part or any information. Given that you had contacted the Southeast Iowa Regional Planning Commission in August 2025, for all intents and purposes a year ago now, regarding your plans for data and bitcoin mining (according to the statement by City Manager Laura Liegois), you have not been forthcoming or acted at all as someone with the surrounding communities’ best interests at heart, by withholding information and recklessly and irresponsibly allowing rumor and speculation to fill the resultant void.

Secondly, you yourself have acknowledged this very failing in the second paragraph of your statement, which tells me that you did not care or did not want to engage in an open discussion of the construction of a facility which has the potential to greatly impact this community and its residents. Personally, if I believe I am doing an act of good or one which benefits people on a grand scale, I am open, honest, and upfront from the very get-go. I do not choose to operate in secrecy.

Next, I would like to address your Fact vs Fiction assessments.

Myth: “The data center will cause our electric bills to increase.” 
Fact: Electric rates are determined through the utility and regulatory process—not by a single customer connecting to the grid. Any large electrical service must be reviewed, engineered, and approved by the utility before power can be provided.

This answer is vague, not at all objective, and provides no assurance to a concerned community. It simply passes on blame to the utility provider, which should be noted is Interstate Power and Light Company, itself a subsidiary of Alliant Energy, a for-profit company which, in February of this year, “beat Wall Street estimates for fourth-quarter profit … benefiting from robust power demand and strong performance in its electric and gas segments” according to Reuters International News Agency. In the following sentence, Reuters states that “U.S. electricity use reached record highs last year and is expected to rise again in 2026, as AI and crypto data centers expand” (https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/alliant-energy-beats-quarterly-profit-estimates-strong-power-demand-2026-02-19/.). It should also be noted that any rejection of interest in the construction of a new and large consumer by a for-profit utility provider can be objectively called into question here.

According to law expert Ari Peskoe, director of the Electricity Law Initiative at the Harvard Law School Environmental and Energy Law Program, “There are two ways that data centers can raise rates for everyone. First, the utility is building new infrastructure to provide energy to data centers and spreads those costs to all ratepayers. Second, certain energy prices that the utility pays are set through markets, and when demand goes up — and supply doesn’t go up fast enough to meet it — prices go up.” (https://hls.harvard.edu/today/how-data-centers-may-lead-to-higher-electricity-bills/) These concepts are simple to understand.

The burden of the cost of construction of infrastructure to power your facility is “socialize[d] … across all users”. This will cause electricity bills to rise for the duration of construction. In addition, according to the World Resources Institute, a global research nonprofit studying sustainable practices for business, economics, government, and finance, “water and electric infrastructure often remains in place for around 30 years. If a data center downsizes or relocates before these costs are recovered, communities may be left paying for infrastructure sized for a facility that no longer exists” (https://www.wri.org/insights/us-data-center-growth-impacts). This means that should your endeavors fail or should you choose to relocate post-development within a given timeframe, this small community will still be shouldering the financial burden for your individual pursuits.

Supply and demand is even easier to understand. As demand for power rises faster than supply, so too does its cost, which again, is passed onto local residents. My question regarding this first claim is how you plan to assist in covering these costs in order to protect residents from the increase in demand resultant from your facility.

Myth: “The data center will take power away from local residents.” 
Fact: Utilities are responsible for ensuring reliable service for all customers. Large projects require engineering studies and infrastructure planning before service is provided.

I have addressed this claim above. The addition of further infrastructure in order to “ensure reliable service” places a financial burden upon the residents. This is redundant.

Myth: “The data center will consume all of the area’s water.” 
Fact: No final cooling system has been selected. Modern data centers utilize a variety of cooling technologies, and water requirements depend on the final design. Any utility services would be coordinated through the appropriate providers.

According to the Environmental and Energy Study Institute, a climate nonprofit interested in “advancing science-based solutions for a sustainable, resilient, and equitable world”, “A data center’s water footprint is calculated as the sum of three categories: on-site water usage, water use by power plant facilities that supply power to data centers, and water consumption during the manufacturing process of processor chips” (https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/data-centers-and-water-consumption). They also state that “Water can come from various sources, including blue sources (e.g., surface water and groundwater), piped sources such as municipal water, and gray sources (e.g., purified reclaimed water)” (https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/data-centers-and-water-consumption).

Regarding the manufacture of processor chips and servers, EESI says: “Chip and server manufacturing are significant sources of water consumption for data centers. Semiconductors and computer chips are integral to data center processing. Each server in a data center contains multiple CPUs, GPUs, and memory chips. Larger data centers and those that support AI requests can contain tens of thousands of servers, each with multiple chips. Ultrapure water is ideal for cleaning, etching, and rinsing chips during the manufacturing process. Creating ultrapure water is a highly water-intensive process, requiring approximately 1,500 gallons of piped water to produce 1,000 gallons of ultrapure water. An average chip manufacturing facility consumes approximately 10 million gallons of ultrapure water per day. A single chip installed in a data center has already consumed thousands of gallons of water by the time it reaches the site.”

You can see here that the impact of data center processing on the global water supply is already evident in the early stages, before even reaching your facility. However, our focus today is on local impact. There are multiple opportunities for data centers to stress the infrastructure of Fort Madison and its water supply.

Note: “In the context of data centers, “water consumption” refers to the amount of water withdrawn from blue or gray sources minus the water discharged by the centers (primarily warm water left over from cooling the IT racks). The consumed water is generally the water that evaporates or is otherwise taken out of immediate human usage” (https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/data-centers-and-water-consumption).

First, “Approximately 80% of the water (typically freshwater) withdrawn by data centers evaporates, with the remaining water discharged to municipal wastewater facilities. The large volume of wastewater from data centers may overwhelm existing local facilities, which were not designed to handle such a high volume (https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/data-centers-and-water-consumption).

Second, “Withdrawal of fresh water from local streams or underground aquifers may lead to aquifer exhaustion, particularly in water-stressed areas” (https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/data-centers-and-water-consumption).

Third, “Besides on-site water consumption, a significant portion of data center water usage originates from the power facilities where they obtain their energy. Because 56% of the electricity used to power data centers nationwide comes from fossil fuels, a significant portion of data center water consumption is derived from steam-generating power plants. Fossil fuel power plants rely on large boilers filled with water that is superheated by natural gas or coal to produce steam, which in turn rotates a turbine and generates electricity. Water withdrawals from these power plants are a significant source of water stress, particularly in drought-prone areas and in the summer, when water levels are lower and electricity demands are higher” (https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/data-centers-and-water-consumption).

EESI notes that “a medium-sized data center can consume up to roughly 110 million gallons of water per year for cooling purposes, equivalent to the annual water usage of approximately 1,000 households,” and if your promise of potential growth and development includes growth in the size of your facility, it is important to add that “Larger data centers can each “drink” up to 5 million gallons per day, or about 1.8 billion annually, usage equivalent to a town of 10,000 to 50,000 people” (https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/data-centers-and-water-consumption). As of the 2020 Census, the population of Fort Madison is 10,270. A large data center would have the potential to consume five times as much water as necessary for this town to survive.

In order to mitigate these strains on the local water supply (to prevent the consumption of potable water, as is now happening in Loudoun, VA), data centers can utilize “closed-loop cooling systems, immersion cooling, air cooling, and using non-potable water sources (e.g., recycled wastewater and captured water)” (https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/data-centers-and-water-consumption). EESI also recommends measuring the data center’s Water Usage Effectiveness (WUE). Developed by the Green Grid, another nonprofit association committed to improving the sustainability and efficiency of data centers, the WUE metric “helps data centers track how much water they use, as well as find ways to optimize water usage” (https://www.datacenterknowledge.com/cooling/a-guide-to-data-center-water-usage-effectiveness-wue-and-best-practices). Both DataCenter Knowledge (an Informa TechTarget publication) and EESI state that most data centers cannot meet the target WUE metric due to size and climate conditions. They both also state that best scores are made by data centers utilizing air-cooling systems.

My question is whether you plan to utilize these systems (air-cooling, immersion cooling, and closed-loop cooling) in order to optimize your water usage; how often and what metrics you plan to use to analyze consumption; whether you plan to grow past air-coolant capacity; and in the event that strain on the water supply follows construction of your facility, what steps you plan to take to reverse those effects and to prevent your center from dipping into the community’s potable (drinking) water. These are non-negotiable, in my view.

This town needs clean water to thrive more than it needs a data center, and once again, your murky, noncommittal attitude toward its construction speaks only to your disregard for the consequences of your actions.

Myth: “The facility will be extremely noisy.”
Fact: Modern AI data centers are enclosed with buildings. Noise mitigation is a standard part of facility design through building construction, equipment placement, and sound attenuation technologies.

Data centers are notorious for the level of noise they produce. The National Library of Medicine (National Institutes of Health)’s study on data centers’ effects on human health notes at the very beginning of their presentation that “Data centers generate significant noise pollution primarily from diesel generators and Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) systems, with internal noise levels reaching up to 96 A-weighted decibels (dBA)—well above the 85 dBA threshold considered harmful to hearing” (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12273412/). Towns and residents subject to these high and low decibel disturbances report 24/7 ringing in the ears, headaches vertigo, sleep disturbance, and spikes in anxiety and blood pressure.

This noise is a result of “the humming of cooling systems and air chillers, the rumbling of diesel generators, and the whirring of fans”, with noise levels increasing “as developers stack more information technology (IT) equipment and servers into smaller spaces” (https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/communities-are-raising-noise-pollution-concernsabout-data-centers). Depending on the final cooling method you select, these noise levels can be extremely detrimental to homes near to the facility, of which I know there are many.

I again ask you which cooling technologies you plan to implement, and what steps, in detail, you plan to erect in order to successfully soundproof and protect the surrounding homes and community from the undue stress caused by data center hum. If the proper steps are not taken, the health of the residents of Fort Madison is once again called into question.

(It should not go unaddressed, and you have, mistakenly, I am sure, neglected to do so, that data centers also contribute greatly to air pollution. The NLM (NIH) is quick to note that “Air pollution is the most acute concern. Fossil-fueled power plants and diesel backup generators that power data centers emit hazardous pollutants such as nitrogen oxides and fine particulate matter, increasing rates of respiratory diseases, cardiovascular conditions, and elevating cancer risk in nearby communities. A recent model indicates that the U.S. data centers in 2030 could contribute to nearly 1300 deaths annually, resulting in a public health burden of more than $20 billion” (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12273412/). And as, according to the CDC, Iowa is 4^th highest in rate of new cases of cancer as of 2023, we do not need to add any more risk to the health of our citizens (https://gis.cdc.gov/Cancer/USCS/#/).)

Myth: “This is a heavy industrial manufacturing plant.” 
Fact: It is not. A data center is a secure technology facility that houses computer servers supporting artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and digital infrastructure.

This, to me, is moot. The label of the facility is far less important to me than the effects it has on its surrounding communities. If it is to cause a drain on water, gas, and electricity, to pollute the air this community breathes and to divest them of their health and happiness, it is not to the community’s overall benefit.

This leads me to your next claim.

Myth: “This project only benefits the developer.” 
Fact: Projects like this have the potential to generate significant private investment, create construction jobs, provide long-term skilled employment opportunities, increase the local tax base, and encourage additional investment in the community.

Thus far we have explored the many concerns of residents: namely, sound pollution, air pollution, water consumption, and energy consumption, and the rising costs of each (including health care costs resultant from any number or combination of the aforementioned potential and near-guaranteed issues). None of these factors will in any way be of any consequence to a developer who does not make their livelihood and embed their roots in this community. A developer will not hear the hum of the cooling systems in their bedroom. They will not attempt to soothe their crying child when he or she cannot sleep. They will not breathe in the nitrogen oxides generated by diesel backup generators. They will not lose drinking water. They will not struggle to decide which bills to pay: rent, or electricity. They will not pay the urgent care visit costs. They focus only on the, once again, “potential” to generate significant private investment, create construction jobs, etc..

According to the World Resources Institute, and any sort of common sense, these construction jobs are temporary. As soon as the infrastructure is finished, those opportunities dry up. As far as permanent or long-term positions go, “A review of more than 1,200 U.S. data centers found that even the largest employ fewer than 150 permanent workers, and sometimes as few as 25” (https://www.wri.org/insights/us-data-center-growth-impacts). Any revenue generated is often undercut by “sizable tax incentives to attract data centers, meaning the actual gain can be far smaller than projected” (https://www.wri.org/insights/us-data-center-growth-impacts). And with the reduction in property value and long-term health effects, these “potential” benefits must be weighed against the cost, and must be done by those whom they most acutely affect.

Myth: “The site was chosen at random.” 
Fact: The property was selected because of its strategic location, transportation access, available infrastructure, and its suitability for long-term technology investment.

Once again, I find myself only able to draw the conclusion that you have chosen this site with disregard for its community members, thinking only of “its strategic location, transportation access, available infrastructure, and its suitability for long-term technology investment”. I would prefer that it were at random, because that would imply to me that perhaps you were unaware of the community you would be harming.

Our Vision, Our goal is to attract a world-class technology investment to Fort Madison and Lee County. Artificial intelligence infrastructure is becoming one of the fastest-growing industries in the world, and communities that are prepared to support these investments will be well positioned for long-term economic growth.

If successful, this project has the potential to: 

I would like to interrupt here to state that your conditional “ifs” are not conditional for the residents of Fort Madison. While you can pick up and leave in the event that you are unsuccessful, the members of this community have, in many, many cases, lived here for generations. This is where they built their homes and their lives, and the homes and lives of their children and grandchildren. Their established well-being should not hinge on your “potential” successes. They should rest on well-researched, proven, exhaustive guarantees which you have thus far been unable and unwilling to provide.

* Bring substantial private investment into our community. 

Which will be dampened by falling property values and quality of life, as noted above.

* Create hundreds of construction jobs during development.

These are temporary, and create a temporary boon, and then disappear, as noted above.

* Create high-paying permanent technology and operations jobs. 

The number of permanent jobs created are minimal without substantial expansion, which increases the risk of negative consequences for the community, as noted above.

* Increase the local tax base that supports public services.

Undercut by any tax incentives, which Iowa does offer, based on investment amount, as noted above and at https://revenue.iowa.gov/taxes/tax-guidance/sales-use-excise-tax/data-centers.

* Encourage additional businesses and infrastructure investment throughout the region.

Undercut by quality of life, as noted above.

* Position Fort Madison and Lee County as leaders in the next generation of American technology infrastructure.

This claim may be true. At the cost of its current residents, as noted above.

I understand that projects of this size naturally generate questions, and I welcome those conversations. My commitment is to work transparently, provide factual information, and be a responsible long-term partner in the community.

Again I express my skepticism in your welcome. A year of speculation and rumor is a long time to leave the topic deliberately unaddressed. Your transparency is marred by the selective topics which you have barely touched on here. And a long-term partner would put the needs and health of a community before their own pursuits.

The actions taken thus far have not rung with honesty, transparency, or goodwill. While I respect and appreciate any attempt to become a part of Fort Madison, to elevate the lives of its people, I respect more a person who listens to those who’ve been here long before, and intend to be here long after. My personal hopes to return will be irrevocably quashed in the event that this facility is built.

Data centers represent a disconnect between industrial leaders and the communities they entrench in their economic and artificial battles, with no regard for real local concerns. (For an excellent summary of these concerns, see this article by Liz Mineo of Harvard Gazette: https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2026/04/why-are-communities-pushing-back-against-data-centers/.)

Therefore, with all due respect, I place myself in opposition to this project moving forward.

Sincerely,

Taylor Vandenberg