DeSoto County, FL Commissioners Approve One-Year Data Center Moratorium, Preserving Carve-Out for 800-Acre Project

DeSoto County, Florida commissioners voted July 28, 2026 — adopted as Ordinance 2026-016 (Legistar matter 26-1906), on a motion by Commissioner Jerod Gross seconded by JC Deriso — to formally approve the one-year data center moratorium the board had directed staff to draft on June 23/25 (2026-06-25–desoto-county-fl-data-center-moratorium-dcip-carve-out). (Local coverage reported the vote as occurring July 29; the county’s own Legistar record dates adoption to July 28, 2026 — treat the primary record as authoritative on the date.)

The ordinance’s own Section 5 exemption is now confirmed against the primary text: it exempts (A) Ordinance No. 2026-004 / RZNE-0077-2025 — the already-approved 34.22-acre parcel — and (B) the “Pending Applications,” defined as RZNE-0086-2026 (DCIP & 3-F Ranch, 274.26 acres) and RZNE-0087-2026 (Swisher Mildred E TR & Swisher Properties, 553.79 acres), which “shall continue to be processed pursuant to the County’s normal procedures.” The ~828-acre combined figure reconciles the “800-acre” press shorthand; DCIP’s separately stated “1,300-acre” long-term vision is a six-phase build-out plan not yet the subject of any filed rezoning application. The ordinance grounds itself in Florida’s new SB 484 (Chapter 2026-65, Laws of Florida, creating section 163.326, Fla. Stat.), which affirms local zoning authority over data centers while directing an OPPAGA study due 2027-07-01 — full detail in dcip-group.

The carve-out renders the moratorium largely symbolic for the fight that prompted it. Coverage also connects this vote to SB 484’s ratepayer-cost-shift provision (utilities must structure rates so data-center service isn’t subsidized by other ratepayers) — but DCIP’s own published architecture describes an “Islanded Micro Grid” with a “direct FGT [Florida Gas Transmission] pipeline interconnect,” i.e., on-site gas-fired generation rather than a draw on FPL’s or Duke Energy Florida’s grid. If that holds, SB 484’s ratepayer provision — which by its terms governs utility-served large loads — may not reach this project at all; no FPSC/PUC filing or interconnection request naming DCIP was located to confirm this directly, so it is reported here as the structural implication of DCIP’s own public description, not as a settled fact. See dcip-group for the full corporate, land, water, and power-architecture picture.

Open leads: DCIP Group’s Sunbiz registration (Cloudflare-blocked to automated access — requires an interactive/human session); a named hyperscaler tenant or offtaker (none found in any source reviewed); a Sunbiz filing or other primary record for 3-F Ranch and Swisher Mildred E TR/Swisher Properties as landowning co-applicants; any FL DEP air-construction-permit filing for the gas-generation component (none located; consistent with pre-construction stage); which commissioner recused from the vote and why (reported by two outlets but not named in either).