Opinion: See You At The Polls

Lawsuit, Data Centers, and Elections Collide in Columbia County

A resident’s lawsuit challenging approvals for the White Oak Technology Park and Pumpkin Center data center campus lands in court as frustration over growth spills into the upcoming Columbia County Commission elections

Opinion | Political Analysis

Key Points

• A Harlem resident has filed lawsuits challenging Columbia County data center rezonings.

• The petition questions approvals tied to White Oak Technology Park and Pumpkin Center Data Center Park

• Legal challenges face procedural hurdles, including filed deadlines and repealed statutes.

• The controversy is spilling into the 2026 Columbia County Commission elections.

• Multiple seats will have contested primaries and Democratic challengers.

Columbia County’s rapid embrace of large-scale industrial development, particularly data centers, is no longer confined to loud public comment periods at late-night commission meetings. Now it’s in the courts.

Harlem resident Gregory P. Guido Jr. filed multiple petitions in Columbia County Superior Court seeking judicial review of recent Board of Commissioners decisions, including approvals related to the White Oak Technology Park, the Pumpkin Center data center campus, and a proposed rock quarry.

Guido is representing himself, which is a risky and bold choice. Courts operate on procedure, deadlines, and narrow standards of review. Even small mistakes in how a case is filed can determine whether a court ever reaches the underlying claims. Most people pursuing complex land-use litigation retain professional counsel. Attorneys are expensive, though, and when folks feel they have exhausted every other avenue, they sometimes turn to the courts as the last available forum, even if that means self-representation.

It would be silly to argue that data centers themselves are unlawful. Instead, Guido is challenging how they were approved in Columbia County.

In the Pumpkin Center petition, Guido alleges that the rezoning application was notarized before the County formally adopted the D-C zoning classification for data centers. He argues that the Development of Regional Impact review was incomplete, that environmental and stormwater impacts were not fully evaluated, that baseline noise testing was not conducted for nearby neighborhoods, and that the required notice to the Columbia County School District may not have been properly documented. He also contends that the Board approved the rezoning without adopting protective conditions proposed by residents and without requiring financial safeguards should a developer abandon the project.

In subsequent amendments, Guido clarified that his petitions are brought under O.C.G.A. § 5-4-3, a statute historically used for certiorari review of local zoning decisions. However, Georgia repealed the certiorari statutes in Title 5, Chapter 4 in 2023. O.C.G.A. § 5-4-3 is explicitly marked repealed in the current code. The quarry petition faces an additional hurdle: Guido acknowledges in his own amendment that the 30-day filing period for zoning appeals already passed. Courts tend to take deadlines seriously.

In the Pumpkin Center filing, Guido also submitted a motion requesting that Superior Court Judge Barry Fleming recuse himself from the case. The motion asserts that Judge Fleming’s personal and political relationship with the Prather family, established while Fleming served as a County Commissioner, creates the appearance of impropriety. A motion to recuse is an interesting chess move when the underlying petition may not survive its first procedural challenge. Judicial review of zoning decisions is narrow, and courts generally defer to local governing bodies unless a decision is clearly arbitrary, capricious, or procedurally defective. That’s a higher bar than many people realize. Still, lawsuits do not emerge in a vacuum.

For months, residents in Appling and Harlem have turned out to meetings over data center development. They raised concerns about water usage, generator noise, infrastructure strain, environmental review, and property values. Earlier phases of the White Oak project involved nondisclosure agreements and closed-door meetings that, while legal, left many residents feeling decisions were shaped long before the broader public understood the scope of the project. By the time the projects became widely known, the rezoning process was moving quickly, and many felt it was a “done deal.”

Subsequent rezonings and planning updates to the new Foundations for the Future planning document attempted to establish clearer guardrails for data center development. Whether those guardrails are sufficient depends on who you ask. Skepticism remains high among many Columbia County residents, especially those living in Harlem and Appling, who will live the closest to the developments.

The data centers were not the only controversial development approved. When the rock quarry was approved, the frustration was loud as it moved into the hallway. As commissioners voted and residents walked out, several shouted, “See you at the polls.” A few folks were less restrained and actually yelled profanity. It was raw and emotional. The message was unmistakable, though. If residents felt unheard at 630 Ronald Reagan Drive, they would respond at the ballot box. Judging by the volume and vocabulary, they are not planning to do it quietly.

The frustration in that hallway has been building for a while, though. These commissioners have operated in an environment where the outcome of most races was settled before anyone voted. In many cycles, there was no primary challenger, no general election opponent, and no real accountability at the ballot box. That kind of stability has a way of making elected officials feel like they don’t have to answer to anyone.

Remarks on February 16 put that tension on full display.

During public remarks, Joanne Murdoch, a frequent and vocal critic of data center development, noted that three Democrats had filed declarations of intent to run for District 1, District 4, and Commission Chair. She scolded the commission, arguing that those filings stemmed from dissatisfaction with the Board’s decisions. Yet she finished her remarks by urging fellow conservatives not to sit out the upcoming elections. It was a strange moment. In effect, she was saying: be frustrated, be loud, but still vote for the same people. She was so close to getting it. So close.

I have to ask: what specific local policy positions do Democrats in Columbia County supposedly hold that are so objectionable? What exactly do people think is going to happen? A campaign focused on protecting green space, building bike paths, maybe a park and ride instead of just more lanes, and sustainable growth? Oh no, the absolute horror of such a thing.

The Board is not monolithic, though. District 4 Commissioner Alison Couch, who represents Harlem, Appling, and parts of Grovetown, voted against both the Pumpkin Center data center rezoning and the rock quarry. District 2 Commissioner Jim Steed, elected in a recent special election, also voted against the quarry. In other words, dissenting votes have been recorded, but minority votes do not control outcomes. Majorities do. Some residents believe dissenting commissioners were given political cover to oppose projects that leadership already knew would pass.

On the final day of qualifying, just before the deadline, Grovetown Mayor Gary Jones entered the race for Commission Chair, setting up a Republican primary against Couch, whom he had previously endorsed. Jones has served as Grovetown’s mayor for years and is well known in the county. His entry was welcomed by some District 4 residents who grew frustrated with Couch but couldn’t see themselves voting for a Democrat. The primary is already turning contentious.

Murdoch’s dilemma is not hypothetical. Some District 4 residents were already saying before Jones entered the race that they couldn’t bring themselves to vote for Couch again, even if it meant crossing over. Jones’s entry gives them another option. Whether that option satisfies them, or whether the frustration runs deeper than any Republican primary can resolve, is an open question. The coalition that has kept Columbia County’s commission uniformly Republican is not as unified as it used to be.

Countywide primary turnout in non-presidential cycles has often hovered around 20 percent. In 2024, even though it was a presidential year, turnout in the May primary fell to just below 11 percent. This year is shaping up differently.

For the first time in many years, every Columbia County Commission seat on the ballot will have a Democratic challenger in November. Two of those seats will also feature competitive Republican primaries in May. Contested races are important because they expand the electorate beyond a narrow primary base.

Guido also qualified to run for the District 4 commission seat as an independent candidate. Independent candidates in Georgia must collect a required number of petition signatures to appear on the general election ballot. If his name actually appears on the ballot, the legal and political challenges will unfold at the same time.

The courts will decide whether the County followed the law in approving these rezonings. Voters will decide whether they approve of the commissioners who voted for them. The folks who shouted “see you at the polls” will soon get their chance.