JANESVILLE, Wis. – The former General Motors plant in Janesville was a cornerstone of the city’s economy for decades, peaking at more than 7,100 workers in 1977 before the main assembly line closed in 2008 during the “Great Recession.”
The factory was ultimately torn down and the 250-acre site, which was also home to Janesville Auto Transport Co., still sits idle today. It may remain unused for years longer if a referendum on the city’s Nov. 3 ballot passes.
A group called “No Janesville Data Center” was part of what persuaded members of the Janesville City Council to drop a developer’s plan for an 11-building data center campus this year. Emboldened by that victory, which was partly due to lack of public transparency, the same “No” group is now behind a referendum to limit how much could be invested to pump new life into the GM/JATCO site.
It’s a short-sighted effort that could preserve a weedy, partially contaminated site as a memorial to what happens when Wisconsin’s anti-data center populism gets out of hand.
Here’s the wording: “Should approval of proposed development agreements, development projects, sales, and leases of the GM/JATCO sites for projects exceeding $450 million in project costs be decided by a majority vote of the electors?” In this case, “electors” means voters.
The first reason for Janesville residents to vote “no” on this question is the price cap. Why $450 million versus $250 million or $750 million? Any entity that buys that much land in what is still a prime location will need to invest in cleanup, necessary infrastructure and a business plan with market-based options.
If this rule had been in place in Jefferson a few years back, that city would not have celebrated the Sept. 18 opening of a $560 million Kikkoman plant. Eli Lilly’s multi-billion-dollar investment in Kenosha County would have been another non-starter.
The GM-JATCO site cannot be rejuvenated by a coffee shop, a Costco and a Kwik Trip – although those entities and many more might be attracted by a major industrial anchor.
A second reason to reject the referendum is its lack of vision about what this southern Wisconsin city can become in the years and decades ahead.
This is not your father’s economy. The forces that led to the rise of the GM plant and the related transportation company to haul new vehicles to market were ideal for the times.
Today, an intermodal transportation hub – a mix of rail and trucking transit for a variety of goods – could still make sense for the site. It’s near the confluence at I-90, I-43 and I-39 just miles from the Illinois border. Major airports are within reach in Madison, Rockford, Chicago and Milwaukee. Wisconsin & Southern Railroad has interchanges with major freight carriers.
The innovation economy will stop for no one, even if data centers are rejected in some locations. Artificial intelligence is changing entire industries overnight, from manufacturing to finance, and from healthcare to energy. AI touches many businesses and most people every day.
Energy is one example. Although the Trump administration has spurned electric cars and most “green” energy sources, the markets generally know better. Solar energy continues to break generation and installation records. The growth of wind energy has slowed but still powers nearly 500,000 U.S. gigawatt hours.
Key to both is battery technology, which “green” advocates and the White House like for different reasons. Batteries store solar and wind energy during times when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow. Batteries are also needed to power data centers, drones and vehicles of all types. Investment in domestic battery production is soaring to counter China’s edge.
A “yes” vote on the Nov. 3 referendum could discourage such large-scale development and prevent some investors from even considering Janesville. Rapid development can be scary, but if rejected at home, it will happen elsewhere.
There’s a statewide lesson here. Some communities might welcome data centers under the right conditions; others may not. It’s unwise, however, to erect upfront barriers to prevent major development ideas from coming to light. Janesville should keep its options open for just such opportunities.
Still is past president of the Wisconsin Technology Council. He is an adviser to Competitive Wisconsin Inc., a non-profit public policy group.
