Earlier this summer, the Post asked our readers what issues you wanted to hear candidates in contested races address leading up to the Aug. 4 primary election.
Based on that feedback, we developed a five-item questionnaire centering the issues most important to residents across Johnson County.
Each day this week, we’ll publish the candidates’ responses to one question. So far, we’ve published responses on property taxes and cost of living, public schools, special education and vouchers, and economic development and the Chiefs stadium deal.
Today, we’re publishing candidates’ responses to the following question:
Readers repeatedly raised questions about large data centers proposed across Johnson County and tied them to concerns about their impact on local water and energy use. Currently, Kansas offers large data center operators sales tax exemptions in exchange for commitments on water conservation and energy grid preservation. But some readers are calling for a statewide moratorium on data centers. What is your stance on a statewide moratorium? Do you support incentivizing data centers to come to Kansas?
Below are the answers the Post received from candidates on the issue:
Ethan Corson / Renee Duxler (Democratic)
As governor, I will require data centers to pay their full share of energy costs, contribute to the communities where they are located, use modern technology to minimize water usage, and enter into decommissioning agreements to ensure communities do not have to pay for the center’s closing if it goes offline. Data centers create good-paying union jobs, as well as ongoing operations roles that keep Kansans employed long after the initial build is complete. That means more opportunity for Kansas workers to build careers and support their families. However, you have my word that I will always respect resident input as this needs to be a local control issue. These decisions should be made by communities, not handed down from Topeka lawmakers.
Cindy Holscher / KC Ohaebosim (Democratic)
I am the only Democratic candidate running who has called for a statewide moratorium on new data centers.
I am not opposed to data centers. I am opposed to asking Kansas families, farmers, and small businesses to subsidize some of the wealthiest corporations on Earth without any clear guarantee that Kansans will benefit. That’s why I’m calling for a temporary statewide moratorium until we put common-sense guardrails in place that protect taxpayers, protect our natural resources, and ensure these projects actually deliver for Kansas communities.
The companies driving these projects are some of the richest corporations in the world. They propose these projects because they think they’ll be profitable. But if a project is profitable, taxpayers shouldn’t have to pay for it. My position is simple: If a company wants to build in Kansas, it should pay its fair share.
Curt Skoog / Jennifer Bacani McKenney (Democratic)
Data centers test whether we still believe in local self-government. We should treat them as infrastructure, hear every stakeholder, and respect that towns like Edgerton and De Soto can, and did, say no. What makes Kansas different is water. My father, a geologist and lawyer, served on a state water commission in the 1970s and 80s; this is not a new problem, and it is the difference between prosperity and a return to the Dust Bowl. Because water is a statewide resource, the state must be at the table, for computing and for drinking water, agriculture, and industry.
On a moratorium, I do not think a simple yes or no does this issue justice. My approach is first things first: a comprehensive, funded water policy in my first year, before the state green-lights the most water-hungry projects. If protecting our water that way means some projects wait, so be it. Some may call that a moratorium; I call it putting first things first, and giving communities a framework they can rely on. On incentives, I will keep them available only where water-conservation and grid commitments are real, enforceable, and verified, not paper promises traded for a tax break, and I will not support abatements that hollow out local school revenue for a handful of jobs.
Stacy Rogers / Michael Smith (Republican)
I have called for all cities and counties to issue a moratorium as well as called for a statewide to pump the brakes on all these projects and give the planning and zoning time to update their regulations. I am for guardrails at a state level to protect our cities, counties, people and resources from these companies that are not providing accurate or complete information. The Governor can only issue up to a 30 day moratorium without legislative approval. I am also asking for a repeal of SB98, which gives 20 year sales tax abatements. In addition, they do not need tax incentives on any level, they need to pay their way and should a community decide to allow one in, it should be because the community wants it and it benefits Kansas. There are simply more negatives than positives to our state at this time and I cannot get behind data centers in their current form and purpose.
Philip Sarnecki / Joy Eakins (Republican)
Kansas has the highest income tax in the region, second highest corporate tax, and our property taxes are out of control. Kansans are getting crushed by taxes. Instead of providing tax relief to working families, Ty Masterson and the career politicians in Topeka decided to give a 20-year tax exemption to AI data centers. My data center plan is the following; 1) No undue burden on water resources 2) No energy rate increases 3) No eminent domain. If these are satisfied, then the citizens in the county will vote on whether they want to approve the data center. This follows the 2007 legislation where communities vote on allowing casinos.
Vicki Schmidt / Joe Newland (Republican)
Joe and I do not support a statewide moratorium, as these decisions should be made locally. But, as Big Tech makes its way into Kansas, we must protect our land, water and way of life. Joe and I will fight for more transparency in the local siting process, giving communities the time to assess the pros and cons. Ensure water quality and water quantity laws are being followed and establish guardrails to protect ratepayers from the increased costs of these large loads.
Scott Schwab / Ken Rahjes (Republican)
There is no good statewide solution for data centers. Nobody wants Topeka dictating to their local community that they must have these facilities while other communities may want to partner with a data center project. Topeka should also not forbid them for doing that. Additionally, any of these projects should supply their own power or pay a premium for existing power to prevent increasing Kansans’ utility bills.
Ty Masterson / Jeffrey Klemp (Republican)
Many Americans, including here in Kansas, are rightfully concerned about the quick emergence of data centers. It is critical that we win the AI “cold war” with China; but as data centers get constructed, it’s important to have protections in place that protect local communities.
I passed the law that stops data centers from shifting their electricity costs onto Kansas families and bans China and other foreign adversaries from our power grid. That’s the standard: they build here on our terms, or they don’t build here.
Local communities should decide what gets built in their backyard. And regardless of any incentives, the water and grid protections stay regardless. If a deal doesn’t work for Kansas ratepayers, it doesn’t happen.
Charlotte O’Hara / Michelle Dombrosky (Republican)
We need a moratorium until we repeal ALL of the tax incentives. An example: SB 98 (2025) 20-year sales tax exemption for data centers is what has opened wide the door for these projects. Stop putting feed in the trough and they will stop coming.
Nick Reinecker / Katy Reinecker (Republican)
Whether large or small, I prefer local control when dealing with data centers. Building on my previous answer concerning quasi-governmental economic development I do not believe the founders of our country would be a cheerleader for these policy trajectories. I will always look to the people at the county level first because representation closest to the people is the best and most easily changed when problems arise. The role of Governor, as I see it, is to foster an environment where the markets can be free and to only intervene when there is a true emergency or when proposed legislation comes to my desk.
Coming up:
Tomorrow we will publish the candidates’ responses to the following question:
Readers are tired of “party bickering,” and several asked candidates to commit to working cooperatively across the aisle. Kansans in recent years have elected governors of both parties, while Republicans have held legislative supermajorities.
-
-
- (For Democratic candidates): With Republicans able to override your vetoes, what is your realistic strategy to actually pass your agenda — where would you compromise, and where would you hold firm?
- (For Republican candidates): With your party in the majority, do you feel any obligation to work with Democratic legislators in the minority, and the Kansans they represent, or would you govern with your majority alone?
-
