Lyon County approves zoning change for Monarch Data Center

Lyon County commissioners voted 3-1 Thursday to approve a zoning change for the proposed Monarch Data Center near Yerington, advancing a 1,000-megawatt project that still requires final design approval, additional state permits and completion of the land purchase before construction can begin.

The vote moved forward a proposal from Copia Power for a 4.6 million-square-foot data center campus on roughly 505 acres in Mason Valley. The project also includes a 500-megawatt natural gas backup plant and a battery energy storage system.

The decision comes as several other Nevada jurisdictions have taken a more restrictive approach to data center development. Reno, Nye County and Humboldt County have passed moratoriums on new data center approvals this year, while Clark County, Churchill County and the cities of Sparks and Fernley are considering code changes. Lyon County, by contrast, continued processing the Monarch application while separately working on countywide rules for the industry.

Commissioner Dave Hockaday cast the lone dissenting vote. Commissioner John Cassinelli abstained, citing a potential conflict related to his role with an economic development authority.

Project still faces additional approvals

Thursday’s vote was not the final step for Monarch. Copia must return to the board with a final design before construction can start. The company also still needs approvals from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection and the State Engineer, according to the article, and it has not yet completed its land purchase. Copia did not respond to a request for comment.

The zoning change followed an earlier board vote in December to redesignate the site from "agriculture" to "specific plan", a prerequisite for seeking the zone change. Commissioners had previously tabled that issue in August 2025 over concerns about the project’s primary access road. In early July, the Lyon County Planning Commission recommended changing the zoning from rural residential to a planned unit development.

Questions over water, power and operations

During board discussion, Hockaday said county staff findings appeared to favor the project even though, in his view, they pointed the other way.

"I don’t see any positives in the other ones", he said.

Commissioner Robert Jacobson pointed to differing estimates on water use in project documents. One set of materials estimated total water consumption at under 100 acre-feet per year, while a staff report cited under 800 acre-feet per year, described as a 60 percent reduction from current agricultural use on the site. Both figures referred to the same air-cooled, closed-loop system.

Cullen McGinnis, volunteer engagement coordinator for the Sierra Club’s Toiyabe Chapter, told commissioners Copia had not clearly stated when its cooling system would become more water-intensive or what temperature threshold would trigger that shift. The staff report described the system as not being "entirely" air-cooled, without further detail.

Commissioners also questioned how the project would be powered. Hockaday asked how NV Energy could supply the full 1,000 megawatts requested for Monarch when, according to the article, other companies in the region have reportedly been told they cannot get service until 2032.

A Copia representative cited NV Energy’s integrated resource plan filed in April and said the utility had committed to supplying 2,550 megawatts to data centers over the next several years. Until Monarch is connected to that capacity, the company said it would self-supply power using its gas plant and battery storage while phasing in the campus buildout. Board Chair Scott Keller asked whether the gas plant, which had initially been described as backup power only, would run continuously after grid connection. Copia said it could run 24/7, though usually it would not.

Opposition from residents and tribes, support from labor and business

Dozens of residents spoke against the proposal at the meeting, while a smaller group of labor and business representatives supported it for the jobs and tax revenue they said it would bring.

Opposition focused heavily on tribal consultation and the project site. The Walker River Paiute and Yerington Paiute tribes have passed formal resolutions opposing Monarch, according to the Sierra Club’s Toiyabe Chapter. After the vote, the chapter said it believed Monarch may be the first data center proposed in Nevada to rely primarily on groundwater in an already over-appropriated basin. The chapter said in a statement it would "pursue every available legal avenue" to challenge the project going forward.

Other residents raised concerns about waste heat from the buildings, possible seismic and soil-liquefaction risks, construction traffic, and potential health effects from noise and air emissions. Several speakers said inconsistencies in Copia’s presentation had weakened public trust.

Supporters emphasized the project’s economic potential. Eloy Jara, business manager for Laborers’ Local 169, said the development would create substantial construction work. Kris Thompson, a former project manager at the Tahoe Reno Industrial Center in Storey County, told commissioners that comparable data center campuses there produced millions of dollars a year in property tax revenue even after abatements.

Separate county data center rules still in the works

The zoning vote came three days after Lyon County held a workshop on its first ordinance specifically aimed at data centers.

As drafted, the ordinance would cover new construction, major expansions of existing data centers and conversions of existing buildings. Local outlets have reported the ordinance would not apply to Monarch because its application was already in progress, though that had not been independently confirmed with the county as of publication, according to the source article.

Commissioners said several draft standards needed changes. At the workshop, Hockaday criticized a proposed 150-foot residential setback.

"absolutely unacceptable", Hockaday said, comparing it to the county’s solar ordinance’s half-mile requirement, and arguing data center setbacks should be doubled or tripled.

Cassinelli also objected to the draft’s language on water cooling, calling a "prohibited… but conditionally allowed" framing contradictory and suggesting an annual water-consumption cap instead.

NV Energy Vice President Jeff Brigger told commissioners at that workshop the utility has requests for about 22,000 megawatts of new demand statewide, most of it from data centers, compared with a 2025 peak demand of about 8,500 megawatts. He said a proposed cost-allocation framework would place infrastructure costs on large customers rather than existing ratepayers.

The board unanimously sent the draft ordinance back to staff for revisions, directing changes to residential setbacks, water and cooling provisions, and guidance on the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection’s role in air quality permitting. No date has been set for the revised draft to return.

Read the source