Citizens sue Jones County over data center ordinance. What we know.

An ordinance governing data centers that Jones County commissioners passed in January is invalid, a group of Jones County citizens claimed in a lawsuit filed Tuesday.

The Jones County Board of Commissioners passed the controversial ordinance on Jan. 16 that created a new M-2 zoning designation in the Griswoldville Industrial Park and allowed data centers as a conditional use in those areas.

Now, residents say the amendment and the process by which it was made law violated residents’ due process rights and failed to follow state law and local ordinances.

The plaintiffs are asking the court to declare the ordinance unconstitutional and vacate it. The county has not yet responded to the lawsuit.

Residents allege the amendment didn’t follow rules around public notices

The lawsuit claims the ordinance is invalid because officials didn’t properly notify residents, publish documents or make motions during meetings clear.

An ad announcing a Jan. 12 hearing and a Jan. 16 meeting appeared in the legal ads section of the Jones County News on Dec. 25, but the lawsuit alleged the ad didn’t detail all of the legislative actions that were set to take place or make it clear that the Jan. 16 meeting was to be the final vote on the ordinance.

The lawsuit also alleged Jones County didn’t clearly tell the public where they could see a copy of the proposed ordinance. It wasn’t until Jan. 7, five days before the Jan. 12 planning and zoning hearing, that commissioners posted the text of the ordinance on Facebook for residents to see.

“The County’s failure to provide a copy of the proposed M-2 Data Center Ordinance in sufficient time before the date of the public hearing on the zoning decision on January 12, 2026 is not only a violation of its own ordinances, but a violation of due process and the right of the County’s citizens to transparency and the opportunity to be heard,” the lawsuit said.

Issues with the county providing drafts of the ordinances to the public continued beyond the Jan. 12 planning and zoning meeting, the lawsuit claimed.

During the Jan. 16 meeting, an attorney working with the Jones County Board of Commissioners projected a revised version of the ordinance on a screen in front of officials. The lawsuit alleged that this version was never presented to the public or the planning and zoning commission, and that residents who tuned into the meeting through a YouTube stream couldn’t see the revised text.

“By failing to provide the revised ordinance for the public to review, the public was denied a meaningful opportunity to be heard and participate in the decision,” the lawsuit said.

The complaint further alleged that the motions to introduce and pass the ordinance were done improperly.

The motion to introduce the amendment was done incorrectly, the lawsuit said, because it was done at the behest of a third party instead of that third party submitting a text amendment application. Additionally, the motion itself was not articulated in such a way that made it clear to residents that it was a request to create a new ordinance for data centers in M-2 districts.

The motion to pass the ordinance was called into question as well.

According to the lawsuit, as the commissioners’ counsel was projecting the revised version of the ordinance, the commission made a motion to pass the ordinance “as presented.” The lawsuit argued that because there were multiple versions of the ordinance and the motion didn’t clarify which one it pertained to, it was unclear to the public what was happening.

The lawsuit also alleges that developer involvement makes the ordinance invalid

The plaintiffs argued that communications between a data center developer and officials rendered the ordinance invalid.

According to communications obtained by Jones County residents through an open records request, Jones County officials had been in touch with Eagle Rock Partners — a data center developer — in months prior to the introduction of the ordinance.

Eagle Rock put in an application to bring a data center to Jones County in early October, but withdrew the application for unknown reasons on Oct. 20, the day it was set to be voted on by commissioners.

The communications show officials workshopping language for a data center ordinance, and discussing the timing of when the developer should put in an application for a data center development.

The lawsuit alleged that this constitutes an instance of unlawful “contract zoning,” which is when a locality takes zoning actions based on pre-determined development outcomes or commitments to third parties.

“Legislative zoning actions must be conducted through good-faith deliberative processes responsive to public welfare considerations,” the lawsuit said. “A zoning process that is prearranged, outcome-driven, or structured to create the appearance of public participation without substantive consideration constitutes predetermination and is arbitrary and capricious under Georgia law.”