GYEDC Says It Isn't Recruiting Data Centers. Here's What the Public Record Shows.

GYEDC says data centers are not a target industry

When it comes to data centers, the Greater Yuma Economic Development Corporation says it is not actively recruiting or marketing to them.

In a KYMA report published September 23, 2026, GYEDC President and CEO Greg LaVann said: “We do not actively recruit them. We do not actively market towards them.” KYMA reported that GYEDC gathers information about the data-center industry and shares it with local governments.

One caveat: KYMA did not specify the exact date of the Board meeting where LaVann made the statement, so September 23 is used here as the publication date of the report, not as the verified meeting date.

What GYEDC said earlier in the year

A February 19 Yuma County Board of Supervisors record summarized GYEDC’s mid-year report. LaVann identified data centers among four regional development areas GYEDC was tracking, alongside Opportunity Zones 2.0, major infrastructure investments and Foreign Trade Zone #219.

On data centers, the record described work to ensure appropriate siting that protects agricultural land, military operations and community resources.

It documents tracking and siting concerns. It does not say GYEDC was recruiting data-center companies.

Data centers enter broader City discussion

The topic also reached the City level.

Yuma City Council’s approved April 1 minutes document discussion of data-center power demand, possible utility-rate impacts and broader community effects. The discussion also covered possible natural-gas energy infrastructure, a planned seminar and the role of local government in deciding whether projects proceed.

The minutes described an initial seminar intended for elected officials, with later sessions planned for investor groups and eventually the broader public.

GYEDC hosts an information seminar

KAWC reported that GYEDC organized a data-center seminar in Yuma on April 10, attended by elected officials and residents. LaVann said companies were interested in Yuma County.

GYEDC said it and its board had not taken a position for or against data-center development, and described its work as gathering and sharing information and coordinating with public-sector partners.

The report documents a seminar and company interest. It does not say GYEDC solicited a project or recruited a company.

A company’s interest in Yuma is not proof that GYEDC recruited it.

Tracking is not the same as recruiting

This is where the distinction matters.

Tracking an industry is not necessarily recruiting it. Discussing infrastructure is not necessarily marketing to it. Hosting an informational seminar is not necessarily soliciting a project. And a company expressing interest in Yuma County is not the same as GYEDC recruiting that company.

These activities can overlap with economic development, but the records need to show what action was taken before a stronger label is justified.

A September 2 City of Yuma outside-agency agreement describes GYEDC’s general economic-development duties, including business recruitment, marketing the City to prospective businesses, developers and site selectors, site visits, business attraction, economic-development data, and coordination with utilities and regional partners.

Those are general duties. The agreement does not identify data centers as a target or establish that GYEDC recruited a data-center project.

What the public record establishes

The records reviewed show that GYEDC tracked data centers as a regional development area, discussed appropriate siting, participated in broader infrastructure and community-impact discussions, hosted an informational seminar, and said companies were interested in Yuma County.

In September, LaVann said GYEDC does not actively recruit or market toward data centers.

What the records reviewed do not establish

Yuma Informed did not find a public record establishing that GYEDC recruited a named data-center company, ran a marketing campaign specifically targeting data centers, entered a site-selection agreement with a data-center developer, or offered incentives to a named data-center project.

That describes the records reviewed here. It does not establish that no such records exist.

Did GYEDC contradict itself?

The documented earlier activities can coexist with the September statement if they were tracking, information-sharing, siting discussion and education rather than active marketing or recruitment.

The records show attention to the industry and a public information role. On the evidence reviewed, they do not establish the more specific act of actively recruiting data centers.