Zoning setbacks aim to protect neighbors while allowing landowners to use their property effectively. Sadly, Mason County’s discussion has shifted from seeking balance to preventing development. The common excuse for excessive setbacks is “protecting views.” However, Kentucky law does not recognize a “view” as a protected property right. Significantly, land use rights are protected.

With the decline of tobacco, dairy, and several other industries, we can no longer afford zoning rules that, while meant to protect, have instead limited new land uses and blocked opportunities. We already have a 5,280-foot (one-mile) setback for wind turbines, a 500-foot setback for solar facilities, and now some are calling for a 1,000-foot setback for data centers. On paper, these figures seem protective.  In reality, they clearly send a message of “no” to projects that could boost our economic future.

The amount of land consumed by a 1,000-foot setback around a 100,000 sq ft data center is excessive. While the data center itself needs only 2.3 acres, the setback wastes over 120.8 more acres. This means the extreme setback consumes 52.5 times more land than the actual data center building.

Solar projects face a similar challenge. Some claim that Mason County’s current 500-foot setback is reasonable. However, when applied around a large panel array, the setback usually requires more land than the solar array — wasting valuable farmland or making feasible projects economically unviable.

Wind energy was effectively banned from the start. The one-mile setback requires a 2,010-acre buffer per turbine. A requirement so large that no developer can even consider a project in Mason County.

We must reject zoning rules primarily designed to resist change by those insulated by comfort. Their extreme setbacks and excessive regulations restrict Mason County by reducing opportunities. Renewable energy projects and data centers involve millions, possibly billions, of dollars in investments, generate long-term tax revenue that doesn’t burden homeowners, and sometimes provide lease income for local farms.

Not all new land uses are beneficial; however, banning everything destroys any hope for a stable economic future. Reasonable protections are available. Berms, fencing, landscaping, and setbacks of 50–100 feet can address concerns about noise, glare, or visual intrusion. These solutions balance neighbors’ concerns with the community’s need for growth.

If Mason County continues to adopt one-mile, 1,000-foot, and 500-foot setbacks, the message to investors is clear: this county favors those already financially secure and is closed to new opportunities. That reputation will extend beyond wind, solar, or data centers. It will affect other sectors—such as advanced agriculture, logistics, and manufacturing—all of which rely on fair, predictable zoning.

Mason County must choose balance—setbacks that protect neighbors without hindering growth. Otherwise, our effort to hold onto the past will end up costing us our future.