Lancaster AI Hub
Sets contributions to the community foundation and city energy fund, tied to project milestones.
This summary uses the city’s draft. A signed copy has not been verified.
Section 8, page 14What does the community receive, after incentives and public costs?
These are questions to investigate and discuss, not adopted contract terms.
Contribute to this themeSets contributions to the community foundation and city energy fund, tied to project milestones.
This summary uses the city’s draft. A signed copy has not been verified.
Section 8, page 14The incentive depends on at least $800 million in investment. The agreement sets separate deadlines for starting and completing the development.
The city-published PDF includes separate signed counterparts: the city dated December 7, 2023 and Wurldwide dated December 5, 2023, on PDF pages 30–31.
Section 4.1, page 9Anticipates a separate tax-abatement agreement for the project.
This summary uses a draft. A signed copy has not been verified.
Section 5.1, page 12The agreement specifies $150,000 annually beginning January 15, 2026, for five years for the city’s town-agreement obligations. Tax-increment reimbursements accrue interest at 7%.
Approval verified; standalone final copy; signatures pending.
Section II.E and III.C, page 8Qualifying buildings receive a 100% property-tax abatement for 15 years. Payments in lieu of taxes start at $735,000 per qualifying building, with inflation and size adjustments. In years six through twenty of the payment schedule, a $1.47 million floor applies while the stated building trigger is met.
City reports executed; scanned counterpart/addendum review pending.
Section IV.2–IV.3, page 5The future CBA term sheet proposes $30 per square foot in community funding, estimated at $15.75 million. It also rules out local development incentives. These are proposed CBA commitments, not proof that payments have been made.
The city has approved a permit. A signed community benefits agreement has not been verified.
Section Financial contributions, page 2The proposal lists capped spending for schools, parks, recreation, solar, workforce development, fire equipment, agriculture and trails. Delivery depends on specified approvals and resolved appeals; these are proposed commitments, not payments already made.
First submission; county explicitly says unexecuted/unaccepted.
Section 1.1N and 4.4–4.6, page 6The schedule totals $9.25 million from the developer and $18.5 million from tenants. Payments begin with building permits. The developer does not guarantee the tenants’ share.
Approved; public counterpart unsigned.
Section 3–4, page 2The draft proposes annual Canadian-dollar payments based on generation, storage and AI capacity. AI-capacity payments run for 15 years. The stated 2% escalator applies once every five years, not annually.
Discussion draft, PDF pages 33–35.
Section 2–3, page 33The agreement provides $400,000 per completed building annually for up to 15 years, capped at $6 million per building and $36 million overall. Payments begin after occupancy and can be withheld in specified circumstances when city rebates are unpaid.
Approved; public execution version, signatures pending review.
Section 6.5–6.7, page 15The December 2025 approval keeps community payments at $300,000 per completed phase each year for 20 years, capped at $18 million overall. It authorizes 70% property-tax rebates, capped at $1 billion, and 75% electricity-franchise-fee rebates, subject to employment thresholds and annual appropriation.
Original 2025 version; later restatement must be read.
Section Resolution 1409-12-25, recitals, page 2Payments in lieu of taxes follow a per-square-foot schedule, starting at $0.4050 in 2026 and increasing over time. The schedule is part of the agreement’s financing arrangements.
Final redacted copy; signatures pending review.
Section 3.2(a) and Exhibit G, page 5Provides up to $10 million in reimbursement for developer-funded public works and two $50 million development incentives, issued when construction starts in each phase. Repayment comes only from available project tax increments and annual appropriations. Unpaid balances expire in 2041 for public works and phase one, and 2042 for phase two.
The public copy is effective December 9, 2024. City signatures appear on PDF page 20; Degas’s signature and attorney authentication appear on page 21.
Section 3–4, page 6The memorandum provides $15 million across completed phases: $5 million for STEM and trade-school support and $10 million for later community initiatives. Payments depend on occupancy; undeveloped portions do not trigger payments. Recipient choices remain with the developer.
Approved; public copy county signature blank.
Section 4, page 6Equipment taxes are fixed at $0.24 per $100 of assessed value, with grants offsetting increases. This is a tax arrangement, not a community donation.
Government copy; handwritten date/signatures pending.
Section 1, page 1Sets an effective computer-equipment tax rate of $0.24 per $100 of assessed value. If the county raises the rate, an annual grant offsets the increase. The initial term runs until ten years after the first operational building receives its occupancy certificate; two ten-year renewals depend on completed work or progress.
The county-published copy is dated June 30, 2025 and includes signatures for Aeris Investments and the county on PDF page 6.
Section 1–2, page 1Sets an effective computer-equipment tax rate of $0.24 per $100 of assessed value. If the county raises the rate, an annual grant offsets the increase. The initial term runs until ten years after the first operational building receives its occupancy certificate; two ten-year renewals depend on completed work or progress.
The county-published copy is dated June 30, 2025 and includes signatures for Skyward Holdings and the county on PDF page 6.
Section 1–2, page 1Peanut LLC pays the engineer directly for the evaluation, capped at $1.5 million unless the company authorizes more in writing. The EDA receives the executed engineering contract and cost estimate.
Signed counterparts are dated December 18 and 19, 2025 on PDF pages 15 and 6. Exhibits A, B and C appear as title-only pages in this public copy.
Section 5, page 3The draft allocates tax revenue among the authority, developer and county. It includes refunds and developer allocations, so gross tax rates do not represent net community revenue. County minimums are addressed in the companion interlocal.
Approved in substantial form; MIDA says draft unsigned.
Section 11–14, page 9Up to $800,000 in county incentives depends on evidence of investment and employment. Repayment provisions address closure or employment reductions, with reduced recapture later in the term.
Historical draft; blank execution fields.
Section 4–5 and 11, page 2The agreement offers land in stages and grants measured at 50% of the city’s qualifying use-tax revenue, less the state collection fee. Later land transfers depend on construction, financing and customer commitments.
Registry reports effective May 9 2025; scan review pending.
Section 1.16 and 3.1.1, page 4Charges are limited to the agreement and its rate exhibit. Further capital improvements require review and a written agreement on resulting rate changes.
Redline including addenda; clean signed copy needed.
Section 9.8–9.10, page 24Annual fees are $500,000 per building below 16 MW, $1 million from 16 through 32 MW, and $1.5 million above 32 MW. Fees start one year after occupancy and rise by 2–3% annually.
The council packet contains a draft agreement. These are its proposed terms, not evidence that payments were made.
Section Section 2(a)–(b), page 7Before occupancy, preliminary payments equal the previous property-tax assessment, increasing to 150% after the first building permit. Ordinary taxes continue until the project qualifies for exemption.
The council packet contains a draft agreement. These are its proposed terms, not evidence that payments were made.
Section Section 2(c), page 8The proposed annual fee per building is $500,000 below 16 MW, $1 million in the middle capacity band and $1.5 million at 32 MW or more. Fees begin one year after occupancy and increase by 2–3% annually.
This public draft has blank execution fields. The summaries describe proposed obligations.
Section Section 3(a)–(b), page 5The first building owes $3.5 million annually starting one year after occupancy, $10 million after its permit, and five further $6 million milestone payments. Annual host fees rise 2% each year.
Historical 2023 public agreement. Payment obligations depend on occupancy, permits and other conditions; the stated amounts do not establish receipt by the town.
Section Sections 9(a) and 10, page 9The second building adds $1,312,500 in annual host fees, $3.75 million after its permit and five $2.25 million milestone payments. Annual fees rise 2%; supplemental payments do not.
Historical 2023 public agreement. Payment obligations depend on occupancy, permits and other conditions; the stated amounts do not establish receipt by the town.
Section Sections 9(b) and 10, page 9AC Trumbull continues paying municipal property taxes at the prevailing rate. It receives no municipal property-tax exemption and owes no separate host fee under this agreement.
Company signature visually checked on PDF page 18; town signature field blank. Council authorization appears on page 4. Effectiveness is tied to the state incentive agreement.
Section Section 1(a)–(c), page 15The developer must pay £42,500 for school, college and community skills engagement before occupation.
Council-published deed dated October 30, 2025. The inspected scan shows the council seal; the owner signature marks are not legible. Obligations depend on planning permission and commencement.
Section Schedule 2; Local Engagement Fund definition on page 6, page 17Community payments are $3 million annually for abatement years one through five and $5 million for years six through ten. They depend on receiving the specified personal-property tax abatement. The first payment is advanced within 60 days of construction starting. A separate fire-station contribution is capped at $5 million.
Posted ordinance and agreement; signature/date review pending.
Section I.B–I.C, page 6For 20 years after full energization, the city reduces the effective electricity-tax rate to $0.00045 per kWh, with at least $125,000 payable annually.
City, owner and developer signatures visually verified across the separate counterpart pages 10–11. The original agreement is recorded as document 2023007068.
Section Section 4, added Section 8.4, page 6A $9 million payment funds added water-production capacity. A $5 million infrastructure deposit must be increased so escrow covers at least 110% of estimated improvement costs. Water impact fees are waived or reimbursed after the production payment.
The city agenda includes the full fourth amendment as Exhibit 1 to Resolution 2023-2323. Its signature fields are blank; the operative text and engineering exhibits have been reviewed.
Section 6.1 and 6.4, page 10Open each record for its source, status and missing documents.
Lancaster, Pennsylvania
Draft terms covering water use, clean energy, community funding and local hiring.
View agreementEl Paso, Texas
City incentives for the Wurldwide project, with conditions for receiving grants.
View agreementEl Paso, Texas
Property-tax reductions and annual reporting requirements for the Wurldwide project.
View agreementHermantown, Minnesota
Draft terms covering water supply, road improvements and infrastructure costs.
View agreementPort Washington, Wisconsin
Public improvements, reimbursement terms and scheduled local payments.
View agreementPiqua, Ohio
Development, water, tax-increment and school-compensation agreements for one project.
View agreementSt. Louis, Missouri
City permit conditions and announced community-benefit terms for the Armory site.
View agreementFrederick County, Maryland
Proposed community investments, land conservation and development rights.
View agreementLiberty, Missouri
Scheduled community investments, public reporting and separate tenant obligations.
View agreementVulcan County, Alberta
A Canadian proposal for capacity-based community payments and local fund governance.
View agreementCedar Rapids, Iowa
Annual community-fund payments tied to completed buildings and city incentives.
View agreementCedar Rapids, Iowa
Community-fund terms with a later restatement that must be read alongside the original.
View agreementDe Soto, Kansas
Payments in lieu of taxes, infrastructure obligations and local-labor provisions.
View agreementPima County, Arizona
Cooling requirements, renewable-energy commitments and phase-based community donations.
View agreementChesterfield County, Virginia
Fixed equipment taxes, utility capacity charges and water-service conditions.
View agreementBox Elder County, Utah
Draft development and interlocal agreements covering infrastructure and tax allocations.
View agreementDurham County, North Carolina
Historical incentives tied to employment, investment and repayment conditions.
View agreementSulphur Springs, Texas
A registered land and incentive agreement for phased data center development.
View agreementQuincy, Washington
Water supply, treatment and financing responsibilities in a municipal reuse partnership.
View agreementGroton, Connecticut
A proposed fee schedule ties annual town payments to each building’s power capacity, with investment deadlines and tax recovery for default.
View agreementWallingford, Connecticut
Proposed annual host fees, neighborhood design limits and independent noise testing for potential data center sites.
View agreementWaterford, Connecticut
A historical proposal ties town payments to two data centers at Millstone, with construction deadlines, noise review and power-supply conditions.
View agreementTrumbull, Connecticut
The operator keeps paying ordinary property taxes. No separate host fee applies unless it later seeks municipal tax exemptions.
View agreementSlough, UK
Planning obligations secure local skills funding, apprenticeships, road improvements and a public footpath.
View agreementFestus, Missouri
Related infrastructure and preliminary-funding agreements for one project.
View agreementDeKalb, Illinois
A data center amendment reserves water capacity, funds utility extensions and discounts electricity tax subject to an annual minimum.
View agreementGoodyear, Arizona
Water and utility responsibilities in a later amendment to Microsoft’s infrastructure agreement.
View agreementExplain the change you would make, the community need it addresses, and any source that supports it.
Share a suggestion