4 documented items. Counts describe documentation, not harm or severity. One item can have more than one category.
Land use and zoning: 4 · Light: 1 · Noise: 2 · Other: 1 · Power and electric rates: 3 · Traffic and construction: 1 · Water use: 3 · Wildlife, wetlands and stormwater: 1
This is a bounded source collection. Missing items do not establish that no concern was raised. A case disposition does not establish facility operating status or resolve the underlying allegations.
View 4 documented items News report Land use and zoning
KIOW reported a county supervisor's account that a landowner was withdrawing from a proposed MCNI data-center land deal. Its earlier report described public opposition and an appealable agricultural-to-industrial rezoning denial. These are the outlet's accounts, not independently inspected land, zoning or appeal records, formal project withdrawal or a final environmental determination.
Record status: Unknown. The later formal application or appeal disposition is unknown in this bounded review. A reported landowner decision about a business deal is distinct from a verified project withdrawal, final agency appeal outcome or resolution of every land-use objection.
Event date Not established
Source publication date October 17, 2026
Disposition date Not established
Concern sources checked October 18, 2026 The newer report does not establish an exact executed withdrawal, filing or agency event day. The earlier relative Wednesday vote description is not converted to an unverified exact date. The original current report JSON-LD records October 17, 2026 publication and a later same-day modification. The earlier report is dated September 10, 2026. Neither substitutes for an unverified formal filing day.
Raised or recorded by KIOW.
No item-specific published company response was verified in the bounded source review. This does not establish that a company declined to respond.
Report a correction · Link to this item
News report Noise · Water use · Power and electric rates · Land use and zoning · Wildlife, wetlands and stormwater
Iowa Public Radio reported residents' concerns about noise, water and electricity use, nearby habitat and property values around Simple Mining's proposed Cedar Falls location. The article distinguishes that proposal from the utility's Viking power plant. Its announced later discussion is not proof of a final rezoning outcome, measured effects or present mine operation.
Record status: Unknown. The later disposition of the documented concerns and proposed rezoning is unknown in this bounded original-article review. An inherited title or a scheduled later discussion does not establish a final vote, current operation, measured noise or resolution of each concern.
Event date Not established
Source publication date March 26, 2026
Disposition date Not established
Concern sources checked October 18, 2026 The article reports an earlier rezoning discussion but does not establish its exact day in the bounded source. The event date stays unknown; planned April dates are not accomplished events. The original report displays March 26, 2026 publication, separate from the unknown exact discussion date and this source check.
Raised or recorded by Iowa Public Radio.
Company statement reported by an outlet. Simple Mining stated, according to Iowa Public Radio, that it had worked with the city on larger, slower fans intended to reduce noise and offered tours. This is the outlet's account of the company position, not an independently inspected design, measured sound level or verified mitigation outcome.
The original article explicitly attributes this noise-design statement to Simple Mining in the same proposed-site discussion. March 26 is the outlet publication day, not an independently verified company-original date. Utility statements about closed-loop water and no wells belong to the separate power plant and are not assigned to this mine.
Response publication: March 26, 2026. Response sources checked: October 18, 2026.
Report a correction · Link to this item
News report Noise · Water use · Power and electric rates · Light · Traffic and construction · Land use and zoning
Iowa Public Radio reported residents' questions about water, electricity, traffic, lighting and noise at a town hall concerning Google's Palo proposal. The report describes differing county and mayor positions on local review and annexation. Those positions do not establish corporate motives, the applicable final rules, completed annexation, a permit outcome or measured impacts.
Record status: Unknown. The later outcome of these documented questions is unknown in this bounded review. Mayor or county statements and requests for further detail do not resolve actual resource impacts, legal jurisdiction, permit conditions or current project status.
Event date Not established
Source publication date March 25, 2026
Disposition date Not established
Concern sources checked October 18, 2026 The March report describes a Tuesday town hall without an independently checked exact meeting day. The event date remains unknown; the publication day is not substituted. The original town-hall report displays March 25, 2026, with separate March 4 background reporting. Article updates and source checks do not establish a meeting or permit date.
Raised or recorded by Iowa Public Radio.
No item-specific published company response was verified in the bounded source review. This does not establish that a company declined to respond.
Report a correction · Link to this item
Regulator record Power and electric rates · Water use · Land use and zoning · Other
Adair County Board of Supervisors recorded concerns about water and electricity during the April 2 Applied Digital discussion and residential setbacks and project information during the April 24 ordinance hearing. The minutes contain differing Board views and a failed motion to abandon the ordinance. This is an attributed historic planning discussion, not an Atlas finding of actual utility impacts, a final project denial or proof that a proposed setback became current law.
Record status: Unknown. The historic public discussion and recorded concerns are documented. Current project phase, final ordinance, later resolution of individual concerns and measured impacts remain unknown in this bounded review.
Event date April 24, 2024
Source publication date Not established
Disposition date Not established
Concern sources checked October 23, 2026 The April 24, 2024 date is printed in the original County minutes. The earlier April 2 discussion remains separate context. Meeting days are explicit, but exact first online publication days are not established.
Raised or recorded by Adair County Board of Supervisors.
Company statement published by an agency or court. Applied Digital stated in the County published minutes that its plans were at an early stage, that it did not intend to displace residents and that it was willing to work with setbacks and the Board. These are recorded company representations, not independently verified current commitments, delivered benefits or a present operator role.
The original minutes identify the speakers as Applied Digital representatives discussing their proposal. No current operating company relationship is inferred.
Response publication: Not established. Response sources checked: October 23, 2026.
Report a correction · Link to this item
