Bruce McDonald: Champion for Data Centers?

When a pawnshop owner running for county commissioner starts talking about data centers, most people's first instinct is to dismiss it as political noise. That instinct is wrong.

Bruce McDonald — candidate for county commissioner and owner of the Vault Gun & Pawn — has made a clear statement: give data centers a chance. Whether you agree with him or not, the conversation he's opening is one that every county in America needs to have right now. Because data centers don't announce themselves politely. They arrive with massive power demands, significant capital, and a community debate nobody feels prepared for.

What a Data Center Actually Is — and Why It Matters Here

Strip away the jargon: a data center is a large facility housing computer servers, networking equipment, and cooling systems that store, process, and distribute the data underpinning virtually every digital service you use. Every cloud backup, every streamed video, every banking transaction — it all runs through infrastructure housed in physical buildings, somewhere.

That "somewhere" is increasingly not just Northern Virginia or suburban Phoenix. Hyperscale operators and mid-tier colocation providers are actively scouting secondary and rural markets, driven by land costs, power availability, lower real estate taxes, and — critically — local governments willing to engage. The counties that get ahead of this trend are the ones that write the rules. The ones that don't get the rules written for them.

This is exactly why a candidate like Bruce McDonald weighing in on data center development isn't as quirky as it sounds. Local commissioners hold real cards: zoning authority, utility coordination, tax incentive structures, and permitting timelines. The decision to welcome or resist data center investment often comes down to a handful of elected officials who understand what is being asked of them.

McDonald's Position and What It Signals

McDonald's message — give data centers a chance — is short on specifics based on what's publicly available, but the signal itself is meaningful. In local races, where candidates often speak in generalities, staking out a pro-data center position is a concrete economic development stance.

A candidate willing to say that out loud is, at minimum, someone who has done enough homework to know which way the wind is blowing in infrastructure investment.

Owning a small business like a gun and pawn shop in a local community gives McDonald a particular lens: he understands cash flow, customer traffic, and how anchor businesses or institutions shape a local economy. That's not the worst starting point for thinking about what a large-scale data center campus could do to a regional economy — and what it demands in return.

The Economic Case Is Real, But Complicated

Here's what the pro-data center argument gets right: these facilities generate substantial local economic activity, often disproportionate to their physical footprint and workforce size. A single hyperscale data center can represent $1 billion or more in capital investment. Property tax revenues from these facilities have transformed county budgets in places like Loudoun County, Virginia — which now collects hundreds of millions annually from data center-related taxes, funding schools, roads, and public services.

Direct employment numbers are modest — a large data center might employ 50 to 200 full-time workers. But the indirect effects compound: construction jobs during the build phase, local vendor contracts, increased demand for housing and services, and the signal effect that attracts other businesses looking for well-connected, infrastructure-rich locations.

The economic upside is real, but it concentrates in specific ways — and communities that negotiate well capture far more of it than those that simply say yes.

Counties that have secured community benefit agreements — requiring local hiring commitments, infrastructure contributions, or renewable energy mandates — have fared measurably better than those that offered incentives with no strings attached. This is where local leadership quality matters enormously. A commissioner who understands the leverage they hold during the site selection and permitting phase can shape outcomes. One who doesn't understand that leverage gives it away for free.

The Concerns Worth Taking Seriously

Opponents of data center development aren't wrong to raise flags — they're often just raising the wrong ones, or the right ones without context.

Power consumption is a legitimate concern. A large data center can draw 50 to 100 megawatts continuously — roughly equivalent to the residential load of a small city. That load doesn't go away at night. It doesn't flex seasonally. It sits on the grid 24/7, and local utilities need to plan for it. Counties that approve data center developments without coordinating with their utility providers first end up with reliability problems and rate pressure that affects every other ratepayer.

Water usage in cooling-intensive facilities is another real issue, particularly in water-stressed regions. Modern hyperscale operators have made significant progress on water-use efficiency and are increasingly deploying air-cooled and closed-loop systems, but the baseline concern is legitimate and worth including in any local permitting conversation.

What's often overstated is the traffic and noise impact. Data centers are, paradoxically, among the quietest and lowest-traffic industrial uses a county can host. Once built, they generate minimal truck traffic and operate largely autonomously. Compared to a distribution warehouse or a manufacturing plant at the same scale, the day-to-day community footprint is remarkably small.

The environmental argument is also more nuanced than critics typically acknowledge. The largest data center operators — Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Meta — have made binding commitments to operate on 100% renewable energy, and several are already net-positive on water in some markets. That doesn't make every data center development automatically green, but it means the environmental calculus depends heavily on which operator is at the table and what commitments they're willing to make.

What Local Leadership Actually Controls

Here's the non-obvious part of this conversation: local officials have more leverage than they typically realize — but only before a project is approved. Once a data center is permitted and operating, the county's leverage drops sharply.

That asymmetry should shape how candidates like McDonald think about their role. Saying "give data centers a chance" is a starting position, not a policy. The harder, more important question is: what does the county get in exchange for its cooperation, and who's doing the negotiating?

Zoning decisions establish what types of facilities are permitted where — and thoughtful overlay districts can direct data center development toward areas with existing transmission infrastructure and away from agricultural land or residential neighborhoods. Tax abatement structures can be written to phase in over time, capturing revenue as the facility matures. Fiber and power infrastructure built to serve a data center can be leveraged for broader community connectivity, turning a private investment into a public benefit.

None of this happens automatically. It happens when county commissioners understand the ask well enough to push back intelligently, ask the right questions, and write conditions into approvals before the ink dries.

Where This Goes From Here

Data center development is not slowing down. Global data center capacity is projected to grow dramatically through the end of this decade, driven by artificial intelligence workloads that are roughly five to ten times more power-intensive than conventional cloud computing. The site selection teams at major operators are actively looking at markets that would have been off their radar five years ago.

Counties that have done the groundwork — identified suitable parcels, pre-engaged with utilities on capacity, updated zoning frameworks — are the ones capturing this investment. Counties that are still debating whether to engage are falling behind.

McDonald's instinct to open this conversation at the local level is the right one, even if the policy details remain to be filled in. The communities that benefit most from the data center buildout won't be the ones that said yes the fastest. They'll be the ones that said yes thoughtfully — with commissioners at the table who knew what they were negotiating for.

That's the bar any infrastructure-minded candidate should be measured against.

Call to Action: Ready to explore how your county can benefit from data center development? Visit InfraSale Marketplace for more insights.

[INTERNAL LINK: data center investment]

[INTERNAL LINK: local economic development]

[INTERNAL LINK: community benefit agreements]