Cities and counties have discussed moratoriums and restrictions on data centers or simply saying no. In Peru, city officials signaled they’re willing to listen.

Monday, Alderman Tom Payton said at the committee of the whole he was concerned with the consumption of energy and water. Initially, he expressed opposition but said later he would “withhold judgment until we do our due diligence.”

That seemed to sum up the city’s collective view. Shaw Local News Network polled members of the Peru City Council and none expressed any support for a moratorium or blanket prohibition. Peru officials would want to see and hear specifics before admitting or rejecting a data center.

“(I would) definitely need to consider the economic benefit to our town,” Alderman Jeff Ballard said. “We would need to look at each project and decide if it is good for Peru.”

Mayor Ken Kolowski said he wants more information, too, not only about specific proposals but about whether Springfield and La Salle County will impose regulatory oversight.

“There’s so much more information needed to be gathered on this situation,” Kolowski said. “I believe the county and the state are putting regulations together. I just recently had a conversation with (state) Sen. Sue Rezin about this topic and our legislators are working on this topic.”

While those regulations are being mulled, however, there wasn’t much appetite in Peru for simply turning away data centers. Aldermen Rick O’Sadnick and Andy Moreno said they would not support a moratorium or an outright prohibition.

“Based upon the potential of significant tax revenues that could fund much needed infrastructure projects, like a new wastewater treatment plant, I would not be in favor of a proactive blanket prohibition of data centers in Peru,” O’Sadnick said. “I am more inclined to take any future inquiries for Peru to be considered on a case-by-case basis.

“Who knows? They might provide most of their own electricity and incorporate a closed-loop cooling system that would not require large amounts of water.”

Moreno said a moratorium would be “overly rigid and inconsistent with our responsibility to thoughtfully evaluate opportunities that may benefit our community.”

“Instead, I believe proposals should be considered on a case by case basis,” Moreno said, “with a clear focus on protecting residents while advancing the long term interests of the city.”

Aldermen Bob Tieman, Jim Lukosus and Jason Edgcomb said they’d all need additional research and/or specific information about the project before making any conclusions.

“If a project like that was brought to our table I would do my due diligence to educate myself as best as possible,” Tieman said, “but at this time I don’t know that I’m informed enough to formulate a solid position for or against one coming here.”

“I would be inclined to look at each individual project and weigh the merits accordingly,” Lukosus said.

“As in any venture that wants to come to Peru, I would need a lot of information on data centers,” Edgcomb said. “You hear about all the bad stuff, but yet people allow them. I would just want to be fully informed on it if one were to want to land in Peru.”

Alderman Mike Sapienza agreed it was too soon to say no. He likened the situation to the arrival of legalized cannabis. His gut response to bringing cannabis into Peru was “no,” but, on reflection, he decided to hear what cannabis companies had to say. He’s taking the same approach now.

“It doesn’t natter if it’s a data center or a grocery store, let’s see what they have to say,” Sapienza said. “You never say never.”