At the League of Women Voters’ Lunch with the League on Oct. 2, Montgomery County Commissioner Tom Klein described the county’s comprehensive plan as a roadmap for growth, land use and public investment. But the most pointed discussion centered less on the plan’s broad vision than on whether residents have a meaningful voice in shaping it — particularly as potential data centers, renewable-energy projects and fiscal pressures raise new questions about the county’s future.
Klein explained that a comprehensive plan is intended to articulate a community-wide vision and establish guiding principles for future growth and development. It addresses objectives for development, land-use policy, infrastructure and roads and promotes public health, safety, convenience and general welfare.
Montgomery County last updated its plan in 2023, after commissioners hired KSM (Katz, Sapper and Miller) and Civitas Strategies to facilitate the process. The effort included a steering committee, focus groups involving 54 participants, a community workshop with 40 attendees and a digital survey that drew 880 responses. The plan emphasizes population growth, economic opportunity, stewardship of rural character and agricultural assets, targeted growth, resource management and economic diversity.
Attendees at the luncheon repeatedly returned to a central question: How can the public influence a document that local officials cite in consequential development decisions?
One attendee asked how residents who disagree with the plan’s list of “undesirable uses” could participate in the next update. Klein said the county would likely use a process similar to the last one, with a steering committee and multiple public-input opportunities, although the exact approach could vary depending on the consultant selected. The next comprehensive-plan update is expected around 2028 or 2029.
That answer did not fully settle concerns about the quality of past engagement. Several participants said the prior survey appeared to ask respondents to endorse or reject a broad list of uses rather than allowing them to weigh in item by item. One attendee said the format left many people confused and called for a future survey that would allow residents to respond separately to individual proposals.
Others urged the county to recruit a more representative cross-section of residents for focus groups and advisory discussions — including retirees and people not already connected to county government or development interests. One participant said residents want to be involved “in that process,” not simply invited to comment after decisions have begun to take shape. Klein said the consultant typically advises the county on focus-group composition, but he acknowledged that public input on the process itself could be considered in a future update.
The first concern raised was the prospect of data-center development. Attendees noted that data centers have become a source of controversy in other Indiana communities and asked whether the comprehensive plan specifically addresses them. Klein said it does not. However, he said the county has added data-center provisions to its zoning ordinance, meaning a prospective project would require rezoning. That process would include a public hearing before the plan commission and another before the county commissioners.
Klein said county officials have received some inquiries about data-center sites, including one from JLL, a site-selection company. He stopped short of predicting whether a proposal would emerge or how commissioners would respond. Still, he said review would involve factors such as surrounding development, land character, location and the most desirable use of the property. The plan’s broader goals — including rural preservation — could also inform those discussions.
For some attendees, the concern was not simply whether the county could regulate a specific project, but whether the existing plan is equipped for a changing economic landscape. They noted that data centers are not listed among the plan’s undesirable uses, even as the scale of potential projects could substantially affect farmland, utilities and neighboring communities.
The plan’s treatment of wind and solar energy also prompted strong opinions. Several attendees questioned why renewable-energy projects were grouped with uses such as adult entertainment and landfills in the plan’s undesirable-use category. They argued that the classification conflicts with the plan’s stated support for “new ideas,” “diverse opportunities,” targeted growth and resource management.
Klein declined to provide a detailed explanation of how the undesirable-use list was developed, citing an active rezoning matter that could be appealed to court. He said the list emerged through the steering-committee process and survey work. But the exchange underscored a broader concern: Residents want greater transparency about how such categories are created and how much weight they carry when county officials consider zoning petitions.
Klein encouraged residents to monitor plan updates, public hearings and county communications through the county website, social media and local news outlets. Public input remains available through formal processes. Residents want that input to be earlier, more specific and more influential before Montgomery County’s next vision for growth is set.
The League of Women Voters, a non-partisan, multi-issue organization encourages informed and active participation in government, works to increase public understanding of major policy issues and influences public policy through education and advocacy. All men and women are invited to join the LWV where hands-on work to safeguard democracy leads to civic improvement. For information, visit the website www.lwvmontcoin.org or the League of Women Voters of Montgomery County, IN Facebook page.
